Nadal is one of the most balanced (all surface) player of all time

1. Nadal has won the most grand slams on clay in the open era
2. Nadal has won the sixth most hard court grand slams in open era
3. Nadal has won the seventh most grand slams on grass in the open era

He is one of the two men in the open era to have won multiple slams on all surfaces.

Slams are the universally (most common) accepted metric of comparison in tennis. Most impressive is that despite being the undisputed record holder on clay (no one has even half of his slam tally), he has the sixth most slams on hard court. Most greats in tennis have not achieved in their entire career (on all surfaces), the number of slams that Nadal has only won on hard court.

He is an all surface phenomenon.
 
Last edited:
Your post will cause renewed headaches, fits, and even harakiris from certain users...

Yes, he is a balanced player. Him winning 13 FOs would be considered a monumental achievement by ALL tennis fans - in an intelligent parallel universe, but in our universe his FO track-record is used by certain humanoids to call him a "clay specialist".

I.e. the more FOs he wins the LESS balanced he is.

Coz some tennis fans don't understand what balance means.

This universe is hilarious.
 

Lorenn

Professional
1. Nadal has won the most grand slams on clay in the open era
2. Nadal has won the third most hard court grand slams in open era
3. Nadal has won the seventh most grand slams on grass in the open era
What the data shows to me is that French Clay is the most difficult surface. That is is easier to pick up the other surfaces. Not saying that I am not impressed that Rafa won Wimbledon twice. Grass is almost the exact opposite of clay. Hardcourt oddly in the middle. My guess on why only one AO is simply where it falls in the season.
 

FrontHeadlock

Hall of Fame
0 Tour Final titles.

2 indoor titles in entire career.

He sucks indoors, hate to tell ya.

Didn't he just win the RG final indoors?

As I've stated before, if being "indoors" is such a difference, then the Majors shouldn't have a roof because it alters conditions too drastically in the same way it would if you opened up the WTF because it was 72 and sunny outside.
 

FrontHeadlock

Hall of Fame
And if Wilander is in this category then we have to seriously wonder how much it's worth...

(AO wasn't a proper slam until the early 90s)
Well, you can denigrate Wilander, but at the 83 AO on grass he beat McEnroe and Lendl back to back to win. And in the 84 AO he beat Edberg, Kriek and Kevin Curren back to back to back to win. Those are all players with good grass results -- it's not like it was all no-names.
 

Start da Game

Hall of Fame
wilander's feat is not legit since he never won wimbledon, the proper grass slam.........nobody cared about australian open when it was played on grass.........
 
Well, you can denigrate Wilander, but at the 83 AO on grass he beat McEnroe and Lendl back to back to win. And in the 84 AO he beat Edberg, Kriek and Kevin Curren back to back to back to win. Those are all players with good grass results -- it's not like it was all no-names.
Sure, but there MUST be a logical explanation...
 

Marfrilau

Rookie
What does balance have to do with what others have achieved? Imagine a player winning 20 grass slams, 5 HC and 5 clay. He'd be one of the greatest on all the surfaces but his distribution can hardly be called balanced.
 
What does balance have to do with what others have achieved? Imagine a player winning 20 grass slams, 5 HC and 5 clay. He'd be one of the greatest on all the surfaces but his distribution can hardly be called balanced.
It's the kind of anti-logic haters of all three players use.

Spinning facts, the easiest but also silliest sport ever.

SSOAT.
 

zuluzazu

Professional
He may be 'one of' the most balanced but GOAT needs to be 'the most' balanced.
Then no one is GOAT as Fed, Djoker, Pete all have abysmal clay slam records. Nobody can be equally great on all surfaces. Just like Nadal is a competent player on hard and grass but does not have "extraordinary"(according to some haters), Fed, Djoker are also competent on clay but do not have good results. So going after nadal is not very good.
 

clout

Hall of Fame
I’ve been a Fed guy since the mid 2000s but yeah I gotta give full props to Rafa. I never thought he’d make it this far on other surfaces besides clay when he first came onto the scene.

Also, another thing that I feel like doesn’t get brought up enough is that he consistently went up against Federer (Co-goat on HC and grass) and Djokovic (Co-goat on HC and a multi-time WI champ himself) on his least preferred surfaces for essentially his entire career. A lot of people bring up what Fed and Novak would’ve done on clay had it not been Rafa but not many seem to bring up the increased damage Rafa would’ve done on hard/grass without his two main rivals.

He lost classics to them such as AO 2012/2017 and WI 2007/2018, he had one of his peak seasons go into shambles when he went up against 2011 Djokovic (arguably the greatest season in history) in 7 different big finals across all three surfaces, and even at the WTF (where he’s never won before), in his 8 appearances there, 6 of them ended at the hands of Fedovic.
 

FrontHeadlock

Hall of Fame
Are you still talking about when Wilander played, or now?
For Wilander I am talking about when he played. No chance Mac peaked as much for the AO as for W.

But even today, the AO is the "PGA Championship" of tennis. Nobody in the abstract would go AO heavy on a resume.
 

Swingmaster

Hall of Fame
The reason he’s so balanced is because of his superior balance. Incredible upright sitting posture. Looks ridiculous, but oh well.
 

duaneeo

Legend
More detailed percentage of slams won over different surfaces:

Plexicushion
Roger 15%, Rafa 5%, Nole 47%

Rebound Ace
Roger 15%, Rafa 0%, Nole 0%

Deco Turf
Roger 25%, Rafa 20%, Nole 18%

Clay
Roger 5%, Rafa 65%, Nole 6%

Grass
Roger 40%, Rafa 10%, Nole 29%
 
1. Nadal has won the most grand slams on clay in the open era
2. Nadal has won the sixth most hard court grand slams in open era
3. Nadal has won the seventh most grand slams on grass in the open era
Yep - Federer is equal 10th in the open era when it comes to clay slams. Much lower than Nadal's 6th on hard and 7th on grass
 

fundrazer

Legend
how much can it possibly impact things if the majors are willing to switch to indoors during rain delays?
It's hard to say. But I think the other posters are talking about traditional indoor tournaments which are often played on a faster surface.

At the slams, it really depends on how the roofs and stadiums are built I guess. Arthur Ashe stadium seems to turn into a bowl of soup with the humidity for example.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
If 13-4-2-1 is balanced how would you call 5-5-5-5? :unsure:

Anyway he just needs weeks at #1. No one cares about slam distribution.
 

Odinn21

Rookie
The title says "one of the most balance", not the most balanced. I don't see what's to argue against.

Are Federer and Djokovic more balanced? Sure. Doesn't mean Nadal is not one of the top all-courters.
 

The_Order

G.O.A.T.
The title says "one of the most balance", not the most balanced. I don't see what's to argue against.

Are Federer and Djokovic more balanced? Sure. Doesn't mean Nadal is not one of the top all-courters.
How are they more balanced with only 1 RG title each? I'd say it's about equal.
 
Top