No more than Novak, Roger, or Pete- IMO.
You said "en route to winning slams". That means beating them and winning slams.Wait, i meant he's beaten Them 21 times in slams and he's won 22 slams!!!!!! Yes i am CORRECT NOW!!!!!!!!!
"How you like me now, when my pinky's valued over three hundred thouuuuuuuuuuusand"
Clay skew.
Hardcourt skew for the others.
Not true.
You can't say "Clay skew" to Nadal and expect no objection, and then object to me saying "hardcourt skew" for Federer and Djokovic. LOL.
Of course, I can.
Wins are wins.
Yes, it is just that Nadal has 2/3s of his slam wins on clay and 70% of his other wins on clay.
Something that makes up more than 50% of the tour is not skew.
All majors are equal. That's been the case in the rankings since 1995, when the Australian Open was given equal ranking points with the other 3 majors for the first time.
The "clay skew" argument is ridiculous. The argument is that Nadal should have lost more at the French Open to have "less of a skew". Laughable.
I don’t think anybody is suggesting he should have won less on clay, just more on the other surfaces
And he would have if he didn’t face the grass GOAT and HC GOAT at the same time, yet he still has a DCGS. The same reason Fed only has 1 FO he didn’t face Rafa for, and he has the same amount of USO titles as Novak who basically got a coupon in 2023 for his 4th.
He wasn’t stopped all the time by them
And thats why he’s won everywhere multiple times.
True, not hating here. But I keep hearing how he’s by far the best big match player of the 3 so you can’t have it both ways
He is though lol and the stats support it. And we need to stop acting like he hasn’t won enough everywhere it’s ridiculous. The ONLY place we can say he failed is the WTF and even there he made 2 finals and only lost them to Novak and Fed who are as comfortable indoors as me eating a 90’s whopper w cheese
No. It is a mathematical certainty. The skew is there. The question is does it matter. Nadal should have won more at other locations. He probably could have changed his game to be better for clay and grass, but he realized if he did, he would not be as good at clay. It is why he is 3rd of the Big 3 by almost all surveys.
LOL. You make it sound like it was some grand plan by Nadal all along.
I agree they are equal. But Federer leads Nadal at 3 out of 4 of the slams. Why is this statistic ignored and 22 > 20 substituted. That what I mean when Nadal fans have convinced others that totals matter more than 3 >> 1.
Because Nadal was a thorn in Federer's side for years, eventually beating him in major finals on all surfaces in 2008-2009, and then Nadal responded to Djokovic after 2011.
Of course it was. He made choices in what he improved, how much time he spent on certain shots, and how he played. He could have chosen to hit the ball flatter and spend more time developing a better serve so he would be more competitive on hardcourt and grass.
Nadal hit the ball flatter in 2003-2004 (see the first match against Federer, for example). There were some hardcourt tournaments, like the 2005 Canadian Open and 2007 Indian Wells, when Nadal did look untouchable.
Nah Rafa is a mug bro
How about Nadal in 2013 doing the Canadian Open, Cincinnati and US Open triple? Federer and Djokovic never did it.
Yes, a great accomplishment.
What kind of logic is it that penalizes a tennis player for doing his job, which is winning matches, and in this case, in the most important tournaments, such as the Grand Slam events?
Federer hadn't lost on hardcourt, to anyone, in over a year before the 2006 Dubai final. Federer then largely outplayed Nadal in the final, but lost, after Nadal did a Rumble in the Jungle style rope-a-dope (i.e. when Ali beat a seemingly unbeatable Foreman).
My memory is that Federer didn't look especially good, by his very high standards, at the 2006 Australian Open. Similar to Nadal at the 2006 French Open.
Please read the message to which i replied. It was just stating fact how many slams Nadal won while beating djoker or Fed on the way.
Rafa was just too good. So we don't count clay lol. Weirdest argument ever is "off clay"Getting rekd so many times really messed yall up
Literally. They can't even begin to fathom trying to come at the king without removing it first, too much W
He has DCGS because of his 2 friends in australia who plotted and schemed to rig things in his favor.
Bolded... this make no sense... where was Rafa when Novak won his 24 slams? Mostly, he was out of tournament, and how you expect Novak to beat him on his way to the title?
