Nadal had the most difficult route to win his 22 slams than other rivals

[gamelovergold]

Other than clay court dominance nadal had to fight roger and djokovic in wimbeldon final us open and AO final .still he won 8 slams outside of clay is great acheivement consedring andre agassi who only has 8 slams is regarded as ATG player. If Djokovic was not here nadal would have won slam race from roger.

 

[Bartelby]

Other than clay court ... is a big exception to your thesis.

If not for Clay Court he would have ended up somewhere in the teens.

 

[Lleytonstation]

If Rafa was not there, Fed would have won it from Djoker... what's your point.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

If Rafa was not there, Fed would have won it from Djoker... what's your point.

No Rafa would mean Fred would've retired somewhere around 2013 out of pure boredom.

 

[Lleytonstation]

No Rafa would mean Fred would've retired somewhere around 2013 out of pure boredom.

lol, very true. Fed originally hated that Rafa came along, but I bet he looks back at it as one of the best things for his tennis career. I am glad that Rafa arrived even though it took wins from Fed.

 

[MichaelNadal]

No one did it in a more epic fashion.

 

[Turning Pro]

Yeah he's also had to beat either Fed or Djokovic or both en route to his slam victories more than any other player and this isn't the case vice-versa.

Nadal beat either Djoker or Fed 21 times en route to his slams and has won 22 slams.

 

[Third Serve]

yes yes yes and in an epic kit too

 

[GoatNo1]

Other than clay court dominance nadal had to fight roger and djokovic in wimbeldon final us open and AO final .still he won 8 slams outside of clay is great acheivement consedring andre agassi who only has 8 slams is regarded as ATG player. If Djokovic was not here nadal would have won slam race from roger.

rafa never played fed at USO. nole 6 times. nole played fed 4 times at W, as many as rafa. nole played rafa 10 times at RG and rafa played nole only 2 times at AO.

so
rafa played
AO GOAT 2 times (0-2)
W GOAT 4 times (1-3)
USO GOAT 0 times (0-0)
..
3rd best at RG 10 times (8-2)

nole played
RG GOAT 10 times (2-8)
W GOAT 4 times (3-1)
USO GOAT 6 times (3-3)
..
2nd best at AO 5 times (4-1)

fed played
AO GOAT 5 times (1-4)
RG GOAT 6 times (0-6)
...
next best at W 4 times (1-3)
4rd best at USO 6 times (3-3)

 

[The_Order]

Likely would've added more non clay slams if not for injuries...

AO06
WIM09
US12
AO13
US14

Would have been in top 2, top 3 at worst, favourite for each of those events...

Other slams where injury during the event cost him:

AO14 final
WIM22 semi
RG16 R3

US20 another missed opportunity due to covid scheduling.

Despite all that, he did quite well for himself. Dethroned Fed at Wimbledon, sitter bh away from beating Fed and Djok back to back at the AO, beat Djok in two US Open finals during their prime...

 

[gamelovergold]

If Rafa was not there, Fed would have won it from Djoker... what's your point.

Rafa not there means CYGS was acheivable for roger and who knows Roger would have won the slam race.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

lol, very true. Rafa originally hated that Rafa came along, but I bet he looks back at it as one of the best things for his tennis career. I am glad that Rafa arrived even though it took wins from Fed.

You meant to type Roger here.

 

[Bartelby]

Rafa never lost to Rafa!

lol, very true. Rafa originally hated that Rafa came along, but I bet he looks back at it as one of the best things for his tennis career. I am glad that Rafa arrived even though it took wins from Fed.

 

[NatF]

Nadal won 8 slams since 2017 so no

 

[Sport]

Nadal won 8 slams since 2017 so no

What's your logic behind it? You're penalizing Nadal for possessing a great longevity? Slams won in your 30s don't count?

OK, then let's substract 4 Slams from Roger's count, as he won 4 in his 30s. OK, let's only substract 2, as he beat either Novak or Rafa in 2 of them.

We got Roger with 18. Then let's substract the 9 Slams Roger won between 2003 and 2009 without facing Rafa or Novak.

We got Roger with 9 decently strong draws.

Nadal holds the record of most Slam trophies won beating a Big 3 member. So he had it the hardest.

 

[NatF]

What's your logic behind it? You're penalizing Nadal for possessing a great longevity? Slams won in your 30s don't count?

OK, then let's substract 4 Slams from Roger's count, as he won 4 in his 30s. OK, let's only substract 2, as he beat either Novak or Rafa in 2 of them.

We got Roger with 18. Then let's substract the 9 Slams Roger won between 2003 and 2009 without facing Rafa or Novak.

We got Roger with 9 decently strong draws.

Nadal holds the record of most Slam trophies won beating a Big 3 member. So he had it the hardest.

Strawman nonsense as always.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Rafa never lost to Rafa!

lol, yep, Rafa definitely thinks him existing is a positive to his career.

 

[Lleytonstation]

You meant to type Roger here.

... did I? Do you not think Rafa is glad he came along? Do you not think Rafa believes Rafa was good for his career? lol

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

... did I? Do you not think Rafa is glad he came along? Do you not think Rafa believes Rafa was good for his career? lol

You troll

 

[Mustard]

Nadal had the highest highs.

 

[Mustard]

lol, very true. Fed originally hated that Rafa came along, but I bet he looks back at it as one of the best things for his tennis career. I am glad that Rafa arrived even though it took wins from Fed.

Federer said that his rivalry with Nadal made him a better person, i.e. brought him back down to Earth a bit.

Federer denied any rivalry with Nadal before their final at 2006 Rome. Federer clearly wasn't ready for any rival at that time, and his fans even less so.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Federer said that his rivalry with Nadal made him a better person, i.e. brought him back down to Earth a bit.

Federer denied any rivalry with Nadal before their final at 2006 Rome. Federer clearly wasn't ready for any rival at that time, and his fans even less so.

Yep, Fed became better on and off the court because of Rafa. Rafa might have passed him, but Rafa actually improved Feds legacy in my opinion.

 

[MichaelNadal]

yes yes yes and in an epic kit too

You better slay

 

[TMF]

What's your logic behind it? You're penalizing Nadal for possessing a great longevity? Slams won in your 30s don't count?

OK, then let's substract 4 Slams from Roger's count, as he won 4 in his 30s. OK, let's only substract 2, as he beat either Novak or Rafa in 2 of them.

We got Roger with 18. Then let's substract the 9 Slams Roger won between 2003 and 2009 without facing Rafa or Novak.

We got Roger with 9 decently strong draws.

Nadal holds the record of most Slam trophies won beating a Big 3 member. So he had it the hardest.

Actually Roger won 3 in the CIE while Djokovic won 12 and Nadal won 8

 

[SonnyT]

Two thirds of his 22 slams were at RG. Nadal had an easy time in Paris, excepting the few times that he met Djokovic and once Federer!

 

[legcramp]

More like Novak is goat tier because he always met the Clay god on clay so many times while Nadal couldn't do the same on other surfaces. Novak would probably be 30 slams by now if it wasn't for the one trick bull.

 

[Golden-24]

Other than clay court dominance nadal had to fight roger and djokovic in wimbeldon final us open and AO final .still he won 8 slams outside of clay is great acheivement consedring andre agassi who only has 8 slams is regarded as ATG player. If Djokovic was not here nadal would have won slam race from roger.

But that could be said for Federer and Djokovic as well. Imagine how many French Opens they would have "if Nadal was not here". We can't rewrite history with "if" arguments.

 

[NatF]

Nadal had the highest highs.

On clay but certainly not on grass or HC.

 

[RS]

Who cares 22 slams is a titanic achievement. Not everything is about strongest and weakest quibbling like we always like to do.

 

[FlyingSaucer]

Rafa not there means CYGS was acheivable for roger and who knows Roger would have won the slam race.

Who is Federer in a race with in this non-Nadal scenario?

 

[TheFifthSet]

On clay but certainly not on grass or HC.

Indoors he barely even had one of the “higher” highs lol.

 

[jackson vile]

Not on clay and not when Novak was absent or when Federer was absent, otherwise possibly yes

What we need to do is to compare them when they are all closest to their peak simultaneously subtract whichever slam is their best performing slam, and then measure the number of slams.

 

[NatF]

Indoors he barely even had one of the “higher” highs lol.

Indoors is he even top 30?

 

[TheFifthSet]

Indoors is he even top 30?

Had too much time on my hands once:

Ok, most people have laughed it off but I’ll actually try to do this…setting the cut-off at OE since almost every great player from the 50s-mid 60s and earlier was more accomplished indoors…

Clearly better:

Federer
Sampras
McEnroe
Djokovic
Becker
Murray
Krajicek
Connors
Laver
Rosewall
Roche
Lendl
Nalby
Edberg
Borg
Stich
Safin
Delpo
Tsonga
Kuerten
Courier
Davydenko
Agassi
Zverev (sorry, I hate it too).
Hewitt
Rusedski
Henman
Ivanisevic
Kafelnikov
Enqvist
Nastase
Tanner
Newcombe
Smith
Medvedev
Ashe
Gerulaitis



Similar level/arguably better in some cases:

Roddick
Korda
Dimitrov
Corretja
Wilander
Mayotte
Berdych
Ferrer
Gottfried
Fibak
Gilbert
Rosset
Mayer
Soderling
Kriek
Dibbs
Haas
Grosjean
Jarryd
Chang
Ferreira
Solomon
Larsson
Stockton
Tsits
Forget (almost forgot )

-

Probably a few I’m leaving out…as it stands now, Nadal is borderline Top 50 in the OE at best.

 

[Mustard]

Yep, Fed became better on and off the court because of Rafa. Rafa might have passed him, but Rafa actually improved Feds legacy in my opinion.

They were a contrast. Federer so talented and elegant that he made tennis look easy, Nadal so intense and gritty that he made tennis look hard.

On clay but certainly not on grass or HC.

Everywhere:

Utter clay dominance
Being a very strong number 2 to Federer in 2005, to begin with
Taking it to Federer directly 2006-2009
2008 Wimbledon final and 2009 Australian Open = Dethroning Federer on other surfaces
2012-2014 = Settling the score with Djokovic on the biggest stages after a terrible record against Djokovic in 2011, and holding his own even from 2018-present against Djokovic.

Nadal has beaten Djokovic and Federer a combined 21 times out of 32 matches played in the majors.

 

[NatF]

They were a contrast. Federer so talented and elegant that he made tennis look easy, Nadal so intense and gritty that he made tennis look hard.


Everywhere:

Utter clay dominance
Being a very strong number 2 to Federer in 2005 first
Taking it to Federer directly 2006-2009
2008 Wimbledon final and 2009 Australian Open = Dethroning Federer on other surfaces
2012-2014 = Settling the score with Djokovic on the biggest stages after a terrible record against Djokovic in 2011

No way. You're crazy if you think Nadal is the best on grass or HC. He has great wins everywhere but to say he has the highest highs on those surfaces is fantasy.

 

[NatF]

Had too much time on my hands once:


-

It seems indisputable then. I remember octagon arguing that the 2019 Davis Cup was one of the greatest indoor runs ever lol.

 

[Mustard]

No way. You're crazy if you think Nadal is the best on grass or HC. He has great wins everywhere but to say he has the highest highs on those surfaces is fantasy.

Those wins are the highest highs, in a thrilling, swashbuckling, gladiatorial, historical sense.

 

[NatF]

Those wins are the highest highs, in a thrilling, swashbuckling, gladiatorial, historical sense.

Arguable at Wimbledon and the AO but his USO wins are overrated.

 

[Mustard]

Arguable at Wimbledon and the AO but his USO wins are overrated.

2010 US Open = Big serving, career Grand Slam, 1 set dropped all tournament
2013 US Open = Completing the Canadian Open, Cincinnati and US Open triple in the same year, which Federer and Djokovic never did. In the 2013 US Open final, Nadal was at 1-1 in sets, 4-4 in the third set and 0-40 down on serve. Nadal got out of that, held serve, broke Djokovic, and then rolled through the fourth set 6-1.

Those are some highs.

 

[Neptune]

Rafa on HC, only 30 top5 wins and 75 top10 wins, both below Murray and worse winrate.

Only HC​	vs Top5​	T5 Weight​	vs Top10​	T10 Weight​	vs T11+​	T11+ Weight​	vs All​
Nole​	134 (89-45) 66.42%​	16.13%​	257 (190-67) 73.93%​	30.93%​	574 (513-61) 89.37%​	69.07%​	831 (703-128) 84.60%​
Fed​	120 (75-45) 62.50%​	12.78%​	240 (162-78) 67.50%​	25.56%​	699 (621-78) 88.84%​	74.44%​	939 (783-156) 83.39%​
Rafa​	73 (30-43) 41.10%​	10.93%​	150 (75-75) 50.00%​	22.46%​	518 (443-75) 85.52%​	77.54%​	668 (518-150) 77.54%​
Murray​	92 (42-50) 45.65%​	13.53%​	148 (81-67) 54.73%​	21.76%​	532 (422-110) 79.32%​	78.24%​	680 (503-177) 73.97%​

 

[NatF]

2010 US Open = Big serving, career Grand Slam
2013 US Open = Completing the Canadian Open, Cincinnati and US Open triple in the same year, which Federer and Djokovic never did. In the 2013 US Open final, Nadal was at 1-1 in sets, 4-4 in the third set and 0-40 down on serve. Nadal got out of that, held serve, broke Djokovic, and then rolled through the fourth set 6-1.

I don't see how these are higher highs in any sense compared to others at the USO. Neither were historically great matches and he has the favourite in 2010 if not 2013.

In terms of level of play there are better, likewise in terms of story telling as well. If you think Nadal has had the biggest emotional highs then that's a fine opinion, I don't know how we'd even begin to compare those.

 

[TheFifthSet]

I remember octagon arguing that the 2019 Davis Cup was one of the greatest indoor runs ever lol.

I wish we had laugh-reacts.

 

[SonnyT]

Rafa on HC, only 30 top5 wins and 75 top10 wins, both below Murray and worse winrate.

Only HC​	vs Top5​	T5 Weight​	vs Top10​	T10 Weight​	vs T11+​	T11+ Weight​	vs All​
Nole​	134 (89-45) 66.42%​	16.13%​	257 (190-67) 73.93%​	30.93%​	574 (513-61) 89.37%​	69.07%​	831 (703-128) 84.60%​
Fed​	120 (75-45) 62.50%​	12.78%​	240 (162-78) 67.50%​	25.56%​	699 (621-78) 88.84%​	74.44%​	939 (783-156) 83.39%​
Rafa​	73 (30-43) 41.10%​	10.93%​	150 (75-75) 50.00%​	22.46%​	518 (443-75) 85.52%​	77.54%​	668 (518-150) 77.54%​
Murray​	92 (42-50) 45.65%​	13.53%​	148 (81-67) 54.73%​	21.76%​	532 (422-110) 79.32%​	78.24%​	680 (503-177) 73.97%​

I have the official stats, and I don't have the same statistics for T10 as yours. For example, for T10, the winning percentages for Djokovic, Federer and Nadal were 69.2, 64.6 and 63.9%!

 

[TheFifthSet]

Arguable at Wimbledon and the AO but his USO wins are overrated.

Also senseless to give Nadal full credit for the “epicness” of Wimby ‘08 and AO ‘09. If Federer blows that service game in the third set of Wimby it’s among the most ho-hum finals of the that decade. If he converts BP in the 5th it’s possibly the most “epic” comeback ever.

“As his fan, Nadal winning made me feel the best” would be a more honest statement lol.

 

[SonnyT]

Nadal had a lot of difficulties winning his personal slam!!! Yeah, 14 times he had difficulties!!!

 

[MichaelNadal]

Nadal had a lot of difficulties winning his personal slam!!! Yeah, 14 times he had difficulties!!!

Getting rekd so many times really messed yall up

 

[vokazu]

The high difficulty level is created by Nadal himself: he prefers moon balls and long rallies and standing 50 metres behind the baseline on return of serve. That's why he never win WTF.

 

[roysid]

Yeah he's also had to beat either Fed or Djokovic or both en route to his slam victories more than any other player and this isn't the case vice-versa.

Nadal beat either Djoker or Fed 21 times en route to his 22 slams.

Such a confident statement and so incorrect.
2010 FO
2010 W
2017 FO
2017 USO
2018 FO
2019 USO
2022 AO

Thats 7 slams won without beating either Djoker or Fed

 

[Tennfan123]

Agreed.
He had to usurp prime Federer.
And he did!