Nadal has the most Dominant Slam Runs of the BIG 3, and also the highest performances of SLams he reached the final (but didnt win)

[The_Mental_Giant]

Interesting to Note is that out of the active players.. of the top 10 most dominant slam win performances 8 out of 10 are of Rafa (including all the top 5) and 11 out of the top 15.
And even more surprising is that Nadal had the most dominant US open run of all the active players, and the most Dominant US open since Ivan Lendl in 1987.

Nadal has 8 slams being more dominant than the most dominant slam of Federer, and it includes 7x Roland garros and 1x US open, all being more dominant than Federer Wimbledon run in 2006.





Least Games Lost Winning Grand Slam Title

Rank	Country	Name	Games	Matches	Season	Tournament
1	ESP	Rafael Nadal	35	7	2017	Roland Garros
2	ESP	Rafael Nadal	41	7	2008	Roland Garros
3	ESP	Rafael Nadal	53	7	2012	Roland Garros
3	ESP	Rafael Nadal	53	7	2020	Roland Garros
5	ESP	Rafael Nadal	57	7	2014	Roland Garros
6	SRB	Novak Djokovic	59	7	2011	Australian Open
7	ESP	Rafael Nadal	60	7	2019	Roland Garros
8	SRB	Novak Djokovic	61	7	2019	Australian Open
9	ESP	Rafael Nadal	64	7	2013	US Open
9	ESP	Rafael Nadal	64	7	2018	Roland Garros
11	SUI	Roger Federer	67	7	2006	Wimbledon
11	ESP	Rafael Nadal	67	7	2007	Roland Garros
13	RUS	Daniil Medvedev	69	7	2021	US Open
14	ESP	Rafael Nadal	70	7	2017	US Open
15	ESP	Rafael Nadal	71	7	2010	Roland Garros
15	SRB	Novak Djokovic	71	7	2011	US Open
17	SUI	Roger Federer	72	7	2007	Australian Open
17	SRB	Novak Djokovic	72	7	2008	Australian Open
19	SUI	Roger Federer	73	7	2004	Australian Open
19	SRB	Novak Djokovic	73	7	2016	Roland Garros

 

[ghostofMecir]

Dominance ratio would be a better metric here.

 

[RelentlessAttack]

Dominance ratio would be a better metric here.

That would be a more interesting chart for sure

 

[Lleytonstation]

Confusion

 

[Backspin1183]

Nice to you see back, Alan.

 

[aldeayeah]

Dominance ratio would be a better metric here.

game win % is where the money is, and that would yield almost the same result as the OP's table

Anyway mixing GPW% in different surfaces is tricky. In grass in particular, it's relatively easy to hold serve, so the numbers are very different from clay or even slow-medium HC. I don't think Fed's 2006 Wimby is less impressive than some of the others that are above it.

Of course, even taking that into account, it's hard to argue against 2008 RG and 2017 RG being the most dominant GS runs of the era.

 

[junior74]

Losing set is more dominant than losing games?

 

[aldeayeah]

For the sake of completeness

Least Sets Lost Winning Grand Slam Title

Rank	Country	Name	Sets	Matches	Season	Tournament
1	SUI	Roger Federer	0	7	2007	Australian Open
1	ESP	Rafael Nadal	0	7	2008	Roland Garros
1	ESP	Rafael Nadal	0	7	2010	Roland Garros
1	ESP	Rafael Nadal	0	7	2017	Roland Garros
1	SUI	Roger Federer	0	7	2017	Wimbledon
1	ESP	Rafael Nadal	0	7	2020	Roland Garros
7	SUI	Roger Federer	1	7	2003	Wimbledon
7	SUI	Roger Federer	1	7	2005	Wimbledon
7	SUI	Roger Federer	1	7	2006	Wimbledon
7	ESP	Rafael Nadal	1	7	2007	Roland Garros
7	SRB	Novak Djokovic	1	7	2008	Australian Open
7	ESP	Rafael Nadal	1	7	2010	US Open
7	SRB	Novak Djokovic	1	7	2011	Australian Open
7	ESP	Rafael Nadal	1	7	2012	Roland Garros
7	ESP	Rafael Nadal	1	7	2018	Roland Garros
7	RUS	Daniil Medvedev	1	7	2021	US Open
17	SUI	Roger Federer	2	7	2004	Australian Open
17	SUI	Roger Federer	2	7	2004	Wimbledon
17	SUI	Roger Federer	2	7	2006	US Open
17	SUI	Roger Federer	2	7	2007	US Open

 

[ibbi]

You're always going to lose fewer games on clay than grass, comparing the different majors is pointless.

It's also worth noting that the way Djokovic, and certainly Nadal play tennis is basically designed to make the opponent play worse, while Federer's style is more focused on doing his own thing rather than breaking the opponent down, so again, opponent more likely to win games.

Sets dropped definitely the much more meaningful metric.

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

You're always going to lose fewer games on clay than grass, comparing the different majors is pointless.

It's also worth noting that the way Djokovic, and certainly Nadal play tennis is basically designed to make the opponent play worse, while Federer's style is more focused on doing his own thing rather than breaking the opponent down, so again, opponent more likely to win games.

Sets dropped definitely the much more meaningful metric.

Even in that metric Rafa is ahead

4 slams without dropping a set and 4 slams drooping only 1 set, Compared to Federer 2 slams without dropping sets and 3 slams dropping 1 set, and Djokovic with no slams without dropping sets and 2 slams dropping only 1 set.

And Federer also played many times Roland Garros, so your argument isn't valid.. unless Roger could not play there..

 

[Biotic]

Weak clay era + MUG uso draws.

 

[ibbi]

Even in that metric Rafa is ahead

4 slams without dropping a set and 4 slams drooping only 1 set, Compared to Federer 2 slams without dropping sets and 3 slams dropping 1 set, and Djokovic with no slams without dropping sets and 2 slams dropping only 1 set.

And Federer also played many times Roland Garros, so your argument isn't valid.. unless Roger could not play there..

What argument? I'm not trying to discredit one player or the other, I'm simply pointing out the obvious fallacy in comparing results across different surfaces by completely different kinds of players.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

The fact that Fed 'only managed' to straight set Wimbledangle in 2017 speaks hilarious volumes.

 

[aldeayeah]

I'm not a Djokovic fan - but to me, his ability to drop a bunch of sets, and still consistently win titles, speaks highly of both his resilience and his ability to dosify effort.

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

Weak clay era + MUG uso draws.

The same "mugs" who only allowed Djokovic to only win 2 slams dropping a set and no slam without dropping set ..

 

[Biotic]

The same "mugs" who only allowed Djokovic to only win 2 slams dropping a set and no slam without dropping set ..

Nadal's USO draws were obviously MUG af. What's the problem?

 

[MichaelNadal]

Nadal's USO draws were obviously MUG af. What's the problem?

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

Nadal's USO draws were obviously MUG af. What's the problem?

Yes he also had to beat a MUG in the final to score his USO slam where he dropped the least sets (USO 2013). And his USO slam where he dropped the least amount of games (USO 2010) lol

Djokovic USO draws have been even worse.. check at USO 2016 (where more than half of players retired or W/O lol) were he couldnt even take advantage and win it.....and USO 2018 which was a joke aswell... but nobody talks about it..

Also Federer, his 3 slams when he just dropped 1 set were still in the period everybody was a mental midget bending over him, except for Nadal.. (Wimbledon 2003, 2005 and 2006..)

 

[Biotic]

Yes he also had to beat a MUG in the final to score his USO slam where he dropped the least sets (USO 2013). And his USO slam where he dropped the least amount of games (USO 2010) lol

Djokovic USO draws have been even worse.. check at USO 2016 (where more than half of players retired or W/O lol) were he couldnt even take advantage and win it.....and USO 2018 which was a joke aswell... but nobody talks about it..

The other mug didn't have such luck with the draws unfortunately, including 2010 and 2013. He couldn't take advantage in 2016 cuz he was in bad shape. Unlike Nadal... I have no doubt he would miraculously heal his injuries and win it. He's too much of a hyena not to.

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

Nice to you see back, Alan.

Oh, Sorry Charlie, did you say something?

 

[mike danny]

Oh, Sorry Charlie, did you say something?

Even Two and a Half Men was more restrictive than what you see today LOL.

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

Even Two and a Half Men was more restrictive than what you see today LOL.

And what are you supposed to see today?

 

[mike danny]

And what are you supposed to see today?

Many things today seemed designed to amplify sexual desires. Music, TV, you name it.

Kinda sad, IMO.,

 

[ghostofMecir]

That would be a more interesting chart for sure

Nadal, 2017 RG, 1.95 dominance ratio
Sampras, 1997 Wimbledon, 1.91
Djokovic, 2019 AO, 1.79
Federer, 2017 Wimbledon, 1.76
Agassi, 1995 AO, 1.74
Sampras, 1995 Wimbledon, 1.73
Nadal, 2014 RG, 1.73
Medvedev, 2021 USO, 1.71
Federer, 2006 Wimbledon, 1.69
Sampras, 1999 Wimbledon, 1.68
Nadal, 2008 RG, 1.66
Federer, 2007 AO, 1.65
Nadal, 2010 USO, 1.65
Nadal, 2019 RG, 1.65
Sampras, 1993 USO, 1.64
Nadal, 2017 USO, 1.64
Edberg, 1991 USO, 1.62
Nadal, 2012 RG, 1.62
Krajicek, 1996 Wimbledon, 1.61
Djokovic, 2013 AO, 1.60
Nadal, 2013 USO, 1.60
Nadal, 2020 RG, 1.60
Federer, 2006 USO, 1.59
Federer, 2009 Wimbledon, 1.58
Agassi, 2003 AO, 1.57
Roddick, 2003 USO, 1.57
Djokovic, 2021 Wimbledon, 1.57
Federer, 2005 Wimbledon, 1.55
Federer, 2007 USO, 1.54
Agassi, 2001 AO, 1.54
Djokovic, 2020 AO, 1.54
Federer, 2012 Wimbledon, 1.51
Nadal, 2018 RG, 1.51
Djokovic, 2015 AO, 1.51
Federer, 2018 AO, 1.50
Djokovic, 2018 Wimbledon, 1.50
Nadal, 2007 RG, 1.50

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

Nadal, 2017 RG, 1.95 dominance ratio
Sampras, 1997 Wimbledon, 1.91
Djokovic, 2019 AO, 1.79
Federer, 2017 Wimbledon, 1.76
Agassi, 1995 AO, 1.74
Sampras, 1995 Wimbledon, 1.73
Nadal, 2014 RG, 1.73
Medvedev, 2021 USO, 1.71
Federer, 2006 Wimbledon, 1.69
Sampras, 1999 Wimbledon, 1.68
Nadal, 2008 RG, 1.66
Federer, 2007 AO, 1.65
Nadal, 2010 USO, 1.65
Nadal, 2019 RG, 1.65
Sampras, 1993 USO, 1.64
Nadal, 2017 USO, 1.64
Edberg, 1991 USO, 1.62
Nadal, 2012 RG, 1.62
Krajicek, 1996 Wimbledon, 1.61
Djokovic, 2013 AO, 1.60
Nadal, 2013 USO, 1.60
Nadal, 2020 RG, 1.60
Federer, 2006 USO, 1.59
Federer, 2009 Wimbledon, 1.58
Agassi, 2003 AO, 1.57
Roddick, 2003 AO, 1.57
Djokovic, 2021 Wimbledon, 1.57
Federer, 2005 Wimbledon, 1.55
Federer, 2007 USO, 1.54
Agassi, 2001 AO, 1.54
Djokovic, 2020 AO, 1.54
Federer, 2012 Wimbledon, 1.51
Nadal, 2018 RG, 1.51
Djokovic, 2015 AO, 1.51
Federer, 2018 AO, 1.50
Djokovic, 2018 Wimbledon, 1.50
Nadal, 2007 RG, 1.50

Which shows again Nadal being by far the most Dominant. Sampras is also impressive in Wimbledon