Nadal non clay slam wish list

Which Slam would u choose as Nadals last non-clay slam


  • Total voters
    57
  • This poll will close: .

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
I assume you are just trolling. 1 slam worth more than 5?
Obviously an exaggeration, but Rafa has nothing left to prove on clay. Whether he won 13 or 14 RG's won't make a difference to his GOAT standing. His statistical Achilles Heel is versatility, so beefing up on fast-court titles would elevate him much more. 1 AO title would give him the 2nd CGS, 1 more Wimbledon would give him the trifecta on all surfaces (standalone in history), and 1 WTF would give him the full big title set.
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
And Djokovic can win 5 more AO and it will not do anything to his legacy compared to 1 more FO or 1 more US Open.
That's true, but a 10th AO would feel more special than any other Slam (except another RG, but he doesn't have great odds there now)
 

StrongRule

G.O.A.T.
Obviously an exaggeration, but Rafa has nothing left to prove on clay. Whether he won 13 or 14 RG's won't make a difference to his GOAT standing. His statistical Achilles Heel is versatility, so beefing up on fast-court titles would elevate him much more. 1 AO title would give him the 2nd CGS, 1 more Wimbledon would give him the trifecta on all surfaces (standalone in history), and 1 WTF would give him the full big title set.
Yes, it would. Given that I don't see anyone beating Djokovic in AO in the next 10 years at the least, Nadal's record in his best slam is anything but safe.
 

duaneeo

Legend
AO - double career slam
Wim- first person open era 3 surface champ
US - tied for open era record
All three are great accomplishments. I think having the stand-alone most-wins record at RG along with the shared record at the USO would most enhance Rafa's resume. Yes, Nadal's been blessed with great draws and LostGens at the USO, but still, the thought that he might share a most-wins record at a HC slam (with Federer and Sampras!) is still unheard of.
 

Winner

Semi-Pro
I hope he wins 21 at FO. To break the all-time-slam-record at his slam would be great. Obviously every Nadal fan hopes he will win more, but if it ends 1-13(14)-2-4 I will be more than happy.

But to answer the thread question, I'd take another Wimbledon. Just to see him win it again, more than 12 years after his greatest win.
 

MadariKatu

Semi-Pro
Imagine Nadal winning USO this year; TTW would go nuts lol
Imagine Nadal beating Djokovic at AO final next year to become the only man in the open era to achieve the dcgs. That would make people nuts! Not than I'm saying it's likely to happen, but I think it would be the biggest achievement by far.
Yes, it would. Given that I don't see anyone beating Djokovic in AO in the next 10 years at the least, Nadal's record in his best slam is anything but safe.
In 10 years??? hahaha thanks, I just finished my shift and needed that!
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
If you could choose only 1 non clay slam to win before Nadal ends his career which would it be?

AO - double career slam
Wim- first person open era 3 surface champ
US - tied for open era record
All of those potential wins would be his NEXT win at the respective venue. Who says it would also be the last one apart from RG then?
 

DIMI_D

Semi-Pro
All of those potential wins would be his NEXT win at the respective venue. Who says it would also be the last one apart from RG then?
Just hypothetical if it was his last win, I hope he can keep winning slams in general, he isn’t getting any younger..
 

DIMI_D

Semi-Pro
Obviously an exaggeration, but Rafa has nothing left to prove on clay. Whether he won 13 or 14 RG's won't make a difference to his GOAT standing. His statistical Achilles Heel is versatility, so beefing up on fast-court titles would elevate him much more. 1 AO title would give him the 2nd CGS, 1 more Wimbledon would give him the trifecta on all surfaces (standalone in history), and 1 WTF would give him the full big title set.
Yes Nadal gets bagged a lot for versatility I think one more non clay slam will help his cause immensely in the GOAT debate.
Fed has 9 slams off hard his most successful surface not his best surface.
novak has 6 off hard
Nadal 7 considering most of the tour is on faster surfaces prob needs one more non clay slam to cement his claim..
 

Enceladus

Legend
Because if he wins 1 more USO he will tie the all time record there. On the other hand, what big records can he beat in Wimbledon? No difference between 2 titles and 3 titles there.
You're wrong. The all-time record at USO belongs to Sears, Larned and Tilden, who won 7 titles. Connors, Sampras and Fed share an open era record.

If Deco Turf stayed at the USO, Nadal would have a great opportunity to equalize an open era record at the USO, but with Laykold I don't think he will win another USO title.
 

BGod

Legend
Reality is a 2nd AO title does nothing for him. The Double Career Slam garbage is made up novelty. It's like winning at least 1 Slam for x amount of seasons. Oh well.

A 3rd Wimbledon title on the other hand does quite a bit. It puts him on par with Becker, McEnroe and ahead of Connors/Edberg. It's like looking at his 4 USO titles and trading one of those for an AO, because what does that actually do?
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Reality is a 2nd AO title does nothing for him. The Double Career Slam garbage is made up novelty. It's like winning at least 1 Slam for x amount of seasons. Oh well.

A 3rd Wimbledon title on the other hand does quite a bit. It puts him on par with Becker, McEnroe and ahead of Connors/Edberg. It's like looking at his 4 USO titles and trading one of those for an AO, because what does that actually do?
Exactly. Yeah an AO would be nice since he let 2 winnable finals go, but id rather him have 3 Wimbys than 2AO's.
 

DIMI_D

Semi-Pro
You're wrong. The all-time record at USO belongs to Sears, Larned and Tilden, who won 7 titles. Connors, Sampras and Fed share an open era record.

If Deco Turf stayed at the USO, Nadal would have a great opportunity to equalize an open era record at the USO, but with Laykold I don't think he will win another USO title.
Yes that’s correct we are talking about open era here! Can’t compare tilden’s days and the depth of field logistics and travel to today.
fair call on deco-turf for sure will be more difficult for him not to mention competing on hard now their is a deeper field I would even take a non big 3 to win US open this yr to be honest
 

DIMI_D

Semi-Pro
Reality is a 2nd AO title does nothing for him. The Double Career Slam garbage is made up novelty. It's like winning at least 1 Slam for x amount of seasons. Oh well.

A 3rd Wimbledon title on the other hand does quite a bit. It puts him on par with Becker, McEnroe and ahead of Connors/Edberg. It's like looking at his 4 USO titles and trading one of those for an AO, because what does that actually do?
I mean at the end of the day yes it’s still a HC slam but you never know in the future if they play around with surfaces at AO or US I think no way we see a 2nd grass court slam again. I think the maintenance of having HC economically makes sense as well as the pace of play for viewership. But it would be interesting to see carpet come back or even green clay ( again wouldn’t bet on it) 20 yrs things will definitely be different in the game. I think in the short term we will see a grass masters 1000 added to the tour
 
Last edited:

MadariKatu

Semi-Pro
Reality is a 2nd AO title does nothing for him. The Double Career Slam garbage is made up novelty. It's like winning at least 1 Slam for x amount of seasons. Oh well.

A 3rd Wimbledon title on the other hand does quite a bit. It puts him on par with Becker, McEnroe and ahead of Connors/Edberg. It's like looking at his 4 USO titles and trading one of those for an AO, because what does that actually do?
The Double Career Slam might be made up novelty. But I'd say it's related to no man achieving this (while winning slams individually still the biggest goal of the players), and hence becoming a great challenge.

After all, if versatility is praised, and that's one of the reasons use as an argument against Nadal's career, what better achievement would there be than that? The more different slams you win, the more versatile you are. If you can repeat those wins, that versatility gets reaffirmed. And since, so far, no man has achieved it, I'd say it does add to his overall resume.

Not disputing your claims of what a 3rd Wimbledon would add; which as the only man to win slams 3x on 3 different surfaces would also be a statement about his versatility.
 

DIMI_D

Semi-Pro
The Double Career Slam might be made up novelty. But I'd say it's related to no man achieving this (while winning slams individually still the biggest goal of the players), and hence becoming a great challenge.

After all, if versatility is praised, and that's one of the reasons use as an argument against Nadal's career, what better achievement would there be than that? The more different slams you win, the more versatile you are. If you can repeat those wins, that versatility gets reaffirmed. And since, so far, no man has achieved it, I'd say it does add to his overall resume.

Not disputing your claims of what a 3rd Wimbledon would add; which as the only man to win slams 3x on 3 different surfaces would also be a statement about his versatility.
Yes for sure!!
 

Nadal_Django

Hall of Fame
Any non clay slam will improve his GOAT standing immensely and add to his versatility
Non clay slam!? :oops: What non clay slam!? The last time he had won a non clay slam outside the Berrettini Open, electricity wasn't invented yet!? You guys are living in a strong state of delusion. Lol :-D You should stick to RG and just be happy about it!;)
 

DIMI_D

Semi-Pro
Non clay slam!? :oops: What non clay slam!? The last time he had won a non clay slam outside the Berrettini Open, electricity wasn't invented yet!? You guys are living in a strong state of delusion. Lol :-D You should stick to RG and just be happy about it!;)
Nadal is unleashed out of the chains, mate your fav player last won a slam in 18 AO so that must be in the Stone Age according to u! Ignorant fool
 
Last edited:

Winner

Semi-Pro
Non clay slam!? :oops: What non clay slam!? The last time he had won a non clay slam outside the Berrettini Open, electricity wasn't invented yet!? You guys are living in a strong state of delusion. Lol :-D You should stick to RG and just be happy about it!;)
"Non clay slam"
"Outside of"

Seems like you need to exclude a lot of Nadal's success to make an argument against him.

Funny thing is, Nadal won USO more recently than Hardcourt GOATs Fedovic.
 

Beckerserve

Legend
T

That player poll is interesting 1 Wimby and 4 AO is obvious but between FO and US is razor thin, back in the early 90s easily the US due to the American dominance - Agassi, Sampras, courier etc
Yes i have always thought FO and USO is a tough call. I tend to go for the oldest event so im not sure which is oldest of the two.
The decline of american tennis has hurt the USO and Miami and cincinatti i feel massively. Only IW has gained in importance.
 

DIMI_D

Semi-Pro
Yes i have always thought FO and USO is a tough call. I tend to go for the oldest event so im not sure which is oldest of the two.
The decline of american tennis has hurt the USO and Miami and cincinatti i feel massively. Only IW has gained in importance.
Yes that’s true! The US open is an older tournament it’s pretty razor thin between them which is more prestigious possibly the US edges it out..
 

Apollo17

Semi-Pro
Nadal is unleashed out of the chains, mate your fav player last won a slam in 18 AO so that must be in the Stone Age according to u! Ignorant fool
Nadal_Django doesn't like Federer either lol. Actually, I think he doesn't even like Djokovic tbh, he's probably just a troll that wants attention.
 

BGod

Legend
The Double Career Slam might be made up novelty. But I'd say it's related to no man achieving this (while winning slams individually still the biggest goal of the players), and hence becoming a great challenge.

After all, if versatility is praised, and that's one of the reasons use as an argument against Nadal's career, what better achievement would there be than that? The more different slams you win, the more versatile you are. If you can repeat those wins, that versatility gets reaffirmed. And since, so far, no man has achieved it, I'd say it does add to his overall resume.

Not disputing your claims of what a 3rd Wimbledon would add; which as the only man to win slams 3x on 3 different surfaces would also be a statement about his versatility.
I think dominance on multiple surfaces is a bigger deal. Despite half of Nadal's USO draws being laughable him having 4 there is a big deal. Would only be better if there were some defenses.

So honestly for ke it goes Wimbledon 3x3, USO to have the most at 2 Slams and then lastly AO as some novelty.
 

Winner

Semi-Pro
him having 4 there is a big deal. Would only be better if there were some defenses.
Why do so many think 4 titles with defenses are better than 4 titles without. I mean, why is someone who wins 4 USOs in his career in 4 consecutive years (thus meaning he afterwards doesn't win it in 10+ consecutive years) "better" than someone who wins it 4 times in a 10-year-span with no defenses? They both have 4 titles, and the argument "the-4-consecutive dominated the tournament" could be countered with "well he didn't win it 10+years with is not very good". For me, if someone wins 4 titles, they are equally impressive with no defenses as if they were with defenses.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Why do so many think 4 titles with defenses are better than 4 titles without. I mean, why is someone who wins 4 USOs in his career in 4 consecutive years (thus meaning he afterwards doesn't win it in 10+ consecutive years) "better" than someone who wins it 4 times in a 10-year-span with no defenses? They both have 4 titles, and the argument "the-4-consecutive dominated the tournament" could be countered with "well he didn't win it 10+years with is not very good". For me, if someone wins 4 titles, they are equally impressive with no defenses as if they were with defenses.
It's a matter of perspective really. The eternal dominance vs longevity argument.

Personally, Federer winning 5 straight titles and 40 matches in a row at the USO is super impressive because it doesn't happen often. Not even Nadal at RG has done it yet and Nadal at RG is pretty much the standard for absolute dominance. And Nadal's clay reign is being lauded to this day because of his dominance, since he's won RG year after year, so dominance does have a huge significance.
 

Nadal_King

Hall of Fame
Ao- makes him only guy with 2+ everywhere
Uo- Makes him tied leader and 2 Slams where he has 5+ which matches djokovic
Wimbledon- Atleast 3 in 3 slams again matches djokovic federer (fed has 5 at 3)
Overall I feel Ao gives him completely unique record unless djokovic wins Rg, Uo also makes co leader there, wimbledon doesn't give him any of the above but that would just blow everyone mind even rafa would be happiest winning that I feel.
Overall I pick Wimbledon for the sheer Euphoria it will create among Rafa fans
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Ao- makes him only guy with 2+ everywhere
Uo- Makes him tied leader and 2 Slams where he has 5+ which matches djokovic
Wimbledon- Atleast 3 in 3 slams again matches djokovic federer (fed has 5 at 3)
Overall I feel Ao gives him completely unique record unless djokovic wins Rg, Uo also makes co leader there, wimbledon doesn't give him any of the above but that would just blow everyone mind even rafa would be happiest winning that I feel.
Overall I pick Wimbledon for the sheer Euphoria it will create among Rafa fans
Doesn't he match Federer though?
 

Winner

Semi-Pro
It's a matter of perspective really. The eternal dominance vs longevity argument.
This.

Personally, Federer winning 5 straight titles and 40 matches in a row at the USO is super impressive because it doesn't happen often. Not even Nadal at RG has done it yet and Nadal at RG is pretty much the standard for absolute dominance. And Nadal's clay reign is being lauded to this day because of his dominance, since he's won RG year after year, so dominance does have a huge significance.
Federer is the perfect example for pro/con of this topic. He won it 5 times, but he hasn't won it in 12 years now (with only 1 final). Of course Federer is a USO legend and maybe even USO GOAT, but 5 titles in consecutive years wouldn't necessarily be better than Nadal's 5 if Rafa wins it this year.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
This.


Federer is the perfect example for pro/con of this topic. He won it 5 times, but he hasn't won it in 12 years now (with only 1 final). Of course Federer is a USO legend and maybe even USO GOAT, but 5 titles in consecutive years wouldn't necessarily be better than Nadal's 5 if Rafa wins it this year.
Perhaps not, but what he did was still impressive because of the rarity of the achievement.

And like I said with Rafa at RG, dominance is also important because that's how Rafa built his RG reputation.
 

BGod

Legend
Why do so many think 4 titles with defenses are better than 4 titles without. I mean, why is someone who wins 4 USOs in his career in 4 consecutive years (thus meaning he afterwards doesn't win it in 10+ consecutive years) "better" than someone who wins it 4 times in a 10-year-span with no defenses? They both have 4 titles, and the argument "the-4-consecutive dominated the tournament" could be countered with "well he didn't win it 10+years with is not very good". For me, if someone wins 4 titles, they are equally impressive with no defenses as if they were with defenses.
Federer is the perfect example for pro/con of this topic. He won it 5 times, but he hasn't won it in 12 years now (with only 1 final). Of course Federer is a USO legend and maybe even USO GOAT, but 5 titles in consecutive years wouldn't necessarily be better than Nadal's 5 if Rafa wins it this year.
It is about dominance though. Here's a gambler's way of looking at this. Winning 4 or 5 in a row is rare because it requires consistency and a testament to being unbeatable. While longevity can be seen as waiting out the odds to drop in your favour, like a weak draw.

If you play in 20 regional tournaments from like bowling to tracks, you'll have a variety of different fields including weakened ones due to factors outside your control. But if you are so good it doesn't matter then you dominate and are simply past your prime.

Nadal won 3 Slams in a season only once. Suffered embarrassing early round defeats at Wimbledon several times. Won twice same number as Edberg and one shy of Becker. Is he in their ballpark?
 
Top