TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
Based on number of occurrences, Nadal's (alleged) injuries >> Federer's surgeries.
Nadal has a greater longevity than Fed
- Thread starter aman92
- Start date
MadariKatu
Hall of Fame
How about 2004 Miami where he beat #1 Federer?Nadal first top level performance was at the AO in 2005
Also, for Federer, the first one might have been Wimbledon 2001 when he beat Sampras.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Davis Cup 2004 could count as well tbh. I guess you could say that for Miami 2004 it wasn't really a breakout moment as he didn't back it up throughout the rest of the year.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Mythical King
T
TheNachoMan
Guest
I can see him breaking Fed’s oldest #1 record too. Poor Fed’s records will be out quicker than PETE’s
Sunny014
Legend
I can see him breaking Fed’s oldest #1 record too. Poor Fed’s records will be out quicker than PETE’s
Naa, Federer held all the records for more than a decade.
Pete's was erased by Federer in just 7 years, Pete retired in 02 and in 2009 Federer broke his slam record and also held multiple records with Pete never held.
MadariKatu
Hall of Fame
Also better strategist than the rest. In his younger years he might have won by chasing and retrieving every single ball. He can't do that anymore. He's more an aggressive player than a defensive one nowadays.Nadal is just a superior Athlete to everyone, thats why nobody can beat him at the French.
Yet Nadal has as many slams as Roger with 3 less years on the ATP tour. Also, as Aman stated is that Rafa has won slams over a longer period of years from his first slam to his last, so far
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Wouldn't Federer's first top level performance be beating PETE in the 2001 Wimbledon?
MadariKatu
Hall of Fame
So, if Federer would have won Wimbledon 2019, he'd have more longevity? How is having a championship point not count when measuring this? I can understand the argument of not being at the top etc, as in Murray for example, who is still active, but not really a force on the tour, making deep runs at big tournaments etc.
But putting the end on Roger's longevity at AO2018 seems absurd to me. If anything, W2019 should be it, unless he comes back at the top again, in which case, he'd still be going.
I don't think this is very relevant, though. It just shows that Federer, Nadal, and also Djokovic are freaks. I don't think that what these guys have achieved will be equaled. Not in our lifetime at least.
But putting the end on Roger's longevity at AO2018 seems absurd to me. If anything, W2019 should be it, unless he comes back at the top again, in which case, he'd still be going.
I don't think this is very relevant, though. It just shows that Federer, Nadal, and also Djokovic are freaks. I don't think that what these guys have achieved will be equaled. Not in our lifetime at least.
D
Deleted member 771911
Guest
You're right that's not hard at all! No wonder so many players have managed it!Actually not that hard since all it takes is about 2700 points to be in the top 10, so one slam, one 500, and a few more points.
A far more significant achievement is being in the Top 3 for a long time. Course as a Djokovic fan I especially love that he is the all time leader with weeks as No. 2.
Is Djokovic the all time leader at No.2?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Kinda goes agaibst the idea of Nadal so unlucky with injuries huh.
Having said that, Fed almost won a slam at 38, so he's still the one for me for now.
edberg volleys
Hall of Fame
Nadal won more slams in his thirties because of useless next generations. Fed had to deal with 5 and 6 years younger Nad and Nole.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Nadal has been ranked top 3 for nearly 80% of that duration, so it's not like he's been taking "half the year off" like you've stated...
He did that only a couple of times due to injury, not because he felt like taking a vacation...
Also, you said it's "not even top 10" now you say it's "8-12" of course you're entitled to your opinion but you seem to be dismissive of its significance without thinking it through...
Think about what it takes to stay in the top 10 for 16 and soon to be 17 consecutive years. Now add the fact that he's been top 3 for 80% of that....
Not top 10 is right, it should be top 5.
TMF
Talk Tennis Guru
Only 1 out of the 4 slam tournaments that he has more than Roger.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
I did rethink it and said top 10 is possible, but not top 5.
duaneeo
Legend
Federer:
Won his first AO in 2004 and his last in 2018: 14 year gap
Won his first RG in 2009 and his last in 2009: 0 year gap
Won his first WB in 2003 and his last in 2017: 14 year gap
Won his first US in 2004 and his last in 2008: 4 year gap
Total year gap: 32
Nadal:
Won his first AO in 2009 and his last in 2009: 0 year gap
Won his first RG in 2005 and his last in 2020: 15 year gap
Won his first WB in 2008 and his last in 2010: 2 year gap
Won his first US in 2010 and his last in 2019: 9 year gap
Total year gap: 26
So far, no.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Federer has been near the top of the game for 20 years.
Nadal for a mere 16 thus far.
At present, Federer remains greater in longevity terms.
Nadal for a mere 16 thus far.
At present, Federer remains greater in longevity terms.
Sunny014
Legend
Nice comparison.
Indeed Fed is ahead overall in all slams combined.
I wish Fed would have done better at the USO after 09, it is surprising that he has not won it for more than a decade, considering the fact that he is a HC ATG this is surprising, even Novak hasn't done as well at the USO as he should have, Nadal winning so many titles does make USO look like clay.
So much disparity between AO and USO, why so?
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Was just wondering today if Nadal could win a FO in 2025, marking a 20-year gap between GS titles. Doubt he still can but you never know with these guys. You run out of superlatives...
duaneeo
Legend
For Federer, continually slower/bouncier courts at the USO, heavier conditions in humid NY compared to dry AO, and the tournaments being on the opposite ends of the year. He also had a 4-year battle with slamidous from 2013 - 2016, and some injuries. But in terms of wins, little disparity between the AO and USO. And, 5 consecutive wins in the 2000s make up for no wins in the 2010s.
It's more of a surprise and mystery why so much disparity between AO and USO for Djokovic.
Sunny014
Legend
For Federer, continually slower/bouncier courts at the USO, heavier conditions in humid NY compared to dry AO, and the tournaments being on the opposite ends of the year. He also had a 4-year battle with slamidous from 2013 - 2016, and some injuries. But in terms of wins, little disparity between the AO and USO. And, 5 consecutive wins in the 2000s make up for no wins in the 2010s.
It's more of a surprise and mystery why so much disparity between AO and USO for Djokovic.
I guess the same rules apply to Djokovic too, he too relishes the dry conditions than the humid plus the extra bounce favors Nadal.
Djokovic is more similar to Fed in liking conditions that Fed like than to what Nadal likes, Nadal is just an anomaly, totally different from everyone on tour.
duaneeo
Legend
Totally disagree with this.
Sunny014
Legend
But stats say so.
Djoker is the guy chasing Fed's wimbledons, leads in HC slams, has WTF wins close in number.
Nadal is miles behind.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Ok, what's your top 5?
aman92
Legend
Nadal now has an insane 17 year gap between his first and latest slam.
Federer's corresponding gap is 14.5 years.. Even accounting for his last slam final, he has a 16 year gap.
So now it's factually irrefutable that Nadal’s longevity as a top player has surpassed that of Fed.
Federer's corresponding gap is 14.5 years.. Even accounting for his last slam final, he has a 16 year gap.
So now it's factually irrefutable that Nadal’s longevity as a top player has surpassed that of Fed.
Last edited:
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
The old results = performance equivalence ever-present in the mugzeit.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
I can't even recall how many times it was said that Nadal (and Djokovic too) would be finished way, way before Federer.
It was an article of faith on here and other similar places for a long, long time. It turns out, it didn't really work out that way.
Rafael and Novak both have twice as many slams won after age 30 as Roger and they could well pick up some more (8 slams compared to 4).
Of course instead of conceding the point, Roger ultras on here tend to say 'weak era' even while claiming for years that there was no such thing as a weak era when it was applied to the first part of the 2000s.
It was an article of faith on here and other similar places for a long, long time. It turns out, it didn't really work out that way.
Rafael and Novak both have twice as many slams won after age 30 as Roger and they could well pick up some more (8 slams compared to 4).
Of course instead of conceding the point, Roger ultras on here tend to say 'weak era' even while claiming for years that there was no such thing as a weak era when it was applied to the first part of the 2000s.
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
Arguably so indeed, sad but true. The wonders of modern medicine cannot be overstated. It is however poignant that Federer's injuries ultimately proved to be more significant than Nadal's. Some lack of humility on the latter's part, it would seem?
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Nah, it wouldn't seem that at all.
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
Think again.
DSH
G.O.A.T.
In 2023 that record will be broken, I think that if Nadal arrives as number 1 in Barcelona in that year, he will achieve it.I can see him breaking Fed’s oldest #1 record too. Poor Fed’s records will be out quicker than PETE’s
Bud
Bionic Poster
What is it now?
Who weee the competitors of Federer in his 30s?
Prime Nadal
Peak Djokovic
Prime murray.
Prime stan
Delpotro
Berdych
Cillic
Who were Nadals opponent in His 30s ??
Past prime Djokovic
Old Federer.
Zverev
Thiem
Medvedev.
Semi retired Stan.
Longetivity also depends on Field strength.
Both Djoker and Nadal are lucky to face Next Gen mugs in their 30s. They didn't had any Younger GOAT to chase them and deny slams like Federer lost 5 slams to peak Djokodal in his 30s. Countless no of SFs.
How many weeks Nadal spent on top. By that logic djokovic had more longetivity
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Nadal also holds the record for most amount of accumulated time off from the tour, most number of majors skipped, and most number of times quitting during a match in a major.
The Fedfather
Legend
Right. But then we also have convos about 30+ year old Nadal somehow being disadvantaged when he was playing against 35+ year old Federer.
vernonbc
Legend
Djokovic is the one that has been the luckiest. Fed might be five calendar years older than Rafa but in tennis competition there was only 2-3 years between those two since Rafa started shining so early. Fed and Rafa are the ones whose competition was most similar.
Djokovic's toughest competitors were older than him and there's never been a top player who has had such awful competition, or even complete lack of competition, coming right behind him. No supposed legend has ever been lucky enough to be missing two generations of guys to push him from behind. Djoker's been able to coast for the past ten years so it's not surprising he's racked up big statistical numbers.
And then on top of it he got lucky enough to be in the middle of a pandemic when the ATP decided they should mess around with the rankings and Djokovic and some other players carried the same points for THREE years. No wonder he stayed at the top for so long. Luckiest player ever.
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
If only Nadal was even healthier than he is part 9000.
ADuck
Legend
As opposed to, if only Federer was the same age as Djokodal part 9999
Similar threads
- Poll
