"Nadal piling more RG titles only cements more and more his Clay GOAT status"

#1
Can someone with this view elaborate why this doesn’t apply to Roger or Novak?

When Roger adds another Wimbledon, why does it cement his overall GOAT status but this is not the case with Nadal and RG? Wouldn’t another Wimbledon only cement Roger’s grass and hard court GOAT, instead of the overall GOAT?

In my understanding of the word - overall GOAT would indicate the greatest on all three surfaces.

If 333 more RG titles would only further cement Nadal’s status of a Clay GOAT, why would more Wimbledon’s cement Roger’s status as the overall GOAT, and not grass and hard court GOAT, as he has the most GSs on those surface of any player?

Plus, if Novak adds just one more HC GS, he would tie Roger in the number of hard court slams won, thus Roger could then only call himself the grass court GOAT and not hardcourt and grass GOAT based on this thinking, cause he wouldn’t have the lead in the HC department anymore.

I expect the "better distribution" argument, but both Roger and Novak have only one RG each, so further non-clay slams cannot cement Roger’s status as the overall GOAT, but only as the grass and hardcourt GOAT.
 
Last edited:
F

FRV

Guest
#4
I don't have this view, but I do have an argument for it:

The difference in play between Nadal on clay and Nadal on hard courts or grass is enormous

The difference in play between Fed/Djokovic on grass/hardcourt and Fed/Djokovic on clay is not nearly as large
 
#5
Can someone with this view elaborate why this doesn’t apply to Roger or Novak?

When Roger adds another Wimbledon, why does it cement his overall GOAT status but this is not the case with Nadal and RG? Wouldn’t another Wimbledon only cement Roger’s grass and hard court GOAT, instead of the overall GOAT?

In my understanding of the word - overall GOAT would indicate the greatest on all three surfaces.

If 333 more RG titles would only further cement Nadal’s status of a Clay GOAT, why would more Wimbledon’s cement Roger’s status as the overall GOAT, and not grass and hard court GOAT, as he has the most GSs on those surface of any player?

Plus, if Novak adds just one more HC GS, he would tie Roger in the number of hard court slams won, thus Roger could then only call himself the grass court GOAT based on this thinking, cause he wouldn’t have the lead in the HC department anymore.

I expect the "better distribution" argument, but both Roger and Novak have only one RG each, so further non-clay slams cannot cement Roger’s status as the hardcourt and grass GOAT, but only as the grass GOAT.
Slam count and distribution matters

The variance / standard deviations tells whether the distribution is normal or skewed
 
#6
I don't have this view, but I do have an argument for it:

The difference in play between Nadal on clay and Nadal on hard courts or grass is enormous

The difference in play between Fed/Djokovic on grass/hardcourt and Fed/Djokovic on clay is not nearly as large
Slam count and distribution matters

The variance / standard deviations tells whether the distribution is normal or skewed
This really doesn’t answer my point about the overall GOAT.
 

octogon

Professional
#7
It's called salt.

Do you really think anyone would try to pull this nonsense if Federer had 14 Wimbledon' s, and 6 other slams that included a career grand slam? Of course not. He's have the slam record and have won on every surface. Therefore the GOAT. And 14 Wimbledons would be hailed as the most impressive tennis feat ever and further proof of GOAT-ness

A lot of rival fanbases are just salty that their guy doesn't dominate a single slam like Nadal does the French and want to denigrate the achievement.

As long as he has the career grand slam, Nadal has nothing to prove on other surfaces. Djokovic will likely win most of his slams on hardcourt, but if he gets to 21, who cares?
 
#9
Federer will be a better GOAT with a clay major instead of a grass major

But even with a grass major his distribution is more normal than Rafa’s skew
dude

You’re really not answering the premise of the thread.

of course if they’re both at 20 slams, Roger has the more even distribution, I’m not denying that here.
 
F

FRV

Guest
#10
This really doesn’t answer my point about the overall GOAT.
Well it is hard to make an argument on a viewpoint of which I am not a proponent, but I will give it a shot.

Some may make this argument based on Rafa's skewed slam distribution:

He is the greatest ever on clay, good on hard courts, and good on grass

Federer is the greatest ever on grass, great on hard courts, and good on clay

Djokovic is greatest ever on hard courts (I don't know if this is true, but just for the sake of the argument let's pretend it is), great on grass, and good on clay


Rafa is really only great on one surface. He's actually better than good on the other two surfaces, but this is not an argument I necessarily believe in so I gave you my best attempt.
 
#11
Well it is hard to make an argument on a viewpoint of which I am not a proponent, but I will give it a shot.

Some may make this argument based on Rafa's skewed slam distribution:

He is the greatest ever on clay, good on hard courts, and good on grass

Federer is the greatest ever on grass, great on hard courts, and good on clay

Djokovic is greatest ever on hard courts (I don't know if this is true, but just for the sake of the argument let's pretend it is), great on grass, and good on clay


Rafa is really only great on one surface. He's actually better than good on the other two surfaces, but this is not an argument I necessarily believe in so I gave you my best attempt.
I don’t know if you’re doing Rafa a justice there, if you say he’s "good" on hard with 4 GSs the same way Roger and Djokovic are "good" on clay with one GS each. And those are vague terms at best anyway.
 
#12
Overall GOAT you say, then GS count it is. However, when two players are close enough then what they achieved in each of the slams matter. Also, there is no one so far who excelled in all 3 surfaces equally.

Its not called "Salt", its called analyzing who among those with close enough slam count has a case to be greater.

Fed leads at Wimbledon (5 consecutive)
Fed co-leads the USO (5 consecutive)
Fed is in 2nd lead at the AO

Hence Fedr GOAT, even if Nadal gets to 20.

People wana call it "Salt" on either side of the argument as how it suits their favorite.
 
Last edited:
#13
Overall GOAT you say, then GS count it is. However, when two players are close enough then what they achieved in each of the slams matter.

Its not called "Salt", its called analyzing who among those with close enough slam count has a case to be greater.

Fed leads at Wimbledon (5 consecutive)
Fed co-leads the USO (5 consecutive)
Fed is in 2nd lead at the AO

Hence Fedr GOAT, even if Nadal gets to 20.

People wana call it "Salt" on either side of the argument as how it suits their favorite.
That’s all true, but this is not that this thread is about.

Federer indeed does have a better statistical GS distribution than Nadal, and would have even if they’re tied at 20.

Not what I asked though.
 
F

FRV

Guest
#14
I don’t know if you’re doing Rafa a justice there, if you say he’s "good" on hard with 4 GSs the same way Roger and Djokovic are "good" on clay with one GS each. And those are vague terms at best anyway.
I would say that it is actually true that Nadal on hard courts is about even in level with Federer and Djokovic on clay, it is just that Nadal's level on clay is the highest level on a surface the sport has witnessed and prevented Fed and Djoker from garnering more FO titles. Also there are 2 hard court slams per year.
 
#15
That’s all true, but this is not that this thread is about.

Federer indeed does have a better statistical GS distribution than Nadal, and would have even if they’re tied at 20.

Not what I asked though.
Then what did you ask? I added another comment in bold after you replied.
 
#16
I would say that it is actually true that Nadal on hard courts is about even in level with Federer and Djokovic on clay, it is just that Nadal's level on clay is the highest level on a surface the sport has witnessed and prevented Fed and Djoker from garnering more FO titles.
This argument doesn’t really hold if you have to excuse Fed and Novak that they had it tough and couldn’t win more on clay.
 
#19
Let me just give you the answer you were hoping for: "Salt". Have a nice day.
I was hoping for a better explanation. I’m open to having my mind changed. I’m not here to start more fan wars. I’m a Fed fan, I just wanted to understand the logic of some poasters, if there’s any.
 
#20
Why would Federer be the overall GOAT at 20 slams, and not just the HC and grass GOAT, if Nadal would (according to people this thread is aimed at) be only considered the Clay GOAT at.. even 22-23 Slams, assuming the rest would only be FOs.
From my earlier post - "there is no one so far who excelled in all 3 surfaces equally."

The closest to an Overall GOAT in the Open Era is Fedr.
 
#21
Can someone with this view elaborate why this doesn’t apply to Roger or Novak?

When Roger adds another Wimbledon, why does it cement his overall GOAT status but this is not the case with Nadal and RG? Wouldn’t another Wimbledon only cement Roger’s grass and hard court GOAT, instead of the overall GOAT?

In my understanding of the word - overall GOAT would indicate the greatest on all three surfaces.

If 333 more RG titles would only further cement Nadal’s status of a Clay GOAT, why would more Wimbledon’s cement Roger’s status as the overall GOAT, and not grass and hard court GOAT, as he has the most GSs on those surface of any player?

Plus, if Novak adds just one more HC GS, he would tie Roger in the number of hard court slams won, thus Roger could then only call himself the grass court GOAT and not hardcourt and grass GOAT based on this thinking, cause he wouldn’t have the lead in the HC department anymore.

I expect the "better distribution" argument, but both Roger and Novak have only one RG each, so further non-clay slams cannot cement Roger’s status as the overall GOAT, but only as the grass and hardcourt GOAT.
Nadal doesnt have the luxury of two Majors on clay . Federer and Djokovic across two Hard court Majors have less than Nadal on one clay court Major.

By contrast Nadal has at least 2 Majors on his worse surface. Now Nadal keep winning the FO is massively adding to his legacy.

Basically off clay he has the career of Becker and edberg...plus 12 Roland Garros.

Add to that a Golden career slam...the only player ever to win 3 Majors on 3 surfaces in one calendar year within 6 months of each other...and leading the Masters 1000 table...and at Majors a H2H v Federovic of 19-9.

I fail to see how Nadal now is not adding to his legacy...this FO probably is greatest triumph.
 
#22
I think it has a lot to do with the lack of surface diversity. No titles outside of clay defended. Fred on the other hand, has defended titles on all surfaces.
 
#23
Then what did you ask? I added another comment in bold after you replied.
Yes, and that was my point.

No one is saying more Wimbledons or HC slams would only further cement Roger’s status as the HC and grass GOAT. They just use the term GOAT. But they wouldn’t do the same in Nadal’s case with the French Open titles.
 
#27
It doesn't apply to Federer and Djokovic because they regularly win on 2/3 surfaces instead of 1. Yeah they can have the individual titles of Grass and HC Goat at the same time, but overall GOAT doesn't apply to Nadal since he has no chance of being the GOAT of any surface but clay.
 
#28
Yes, and that was my point.

No one is saying more Wimbledons or HC slams would only further cement Roger’s status as the HC and grass GOAT. They just use the term GOAT. But they wouldn’t do the same in Nadal’s case with the French Open titles.
From what im reading most people consider Nadal GOAT now...headlines in papers across the world suggest this.
 
#31
Multiple Majors on Multiple Surfaces is surely criteria for overall GOAT...and that is Nadal.
Not really, each slam has its own distinct surface. So performance in all four slams matter. Hence Fedr GOAT.

Nadal cannot be GOAT with 0 Tennis Masters Cup which is another surface.
 
F

FRV

Guest
#33
I was hoping for a better explanation. I’m open to having my mind changed. I’m not here to start more fan wars. I’m a Fed fan, I just wanted to understand the logic of some poasters, if there’s any.
That's what I gave you. The logic. You don't agree with the argument so you keep shooting down my posts, but the logic of my argument is likely a decent enough estimation of the logic others with this viewpoint have.
 
#34
It doesn't apply to Federer and Djokovic because they regularly win on 2/3 surfaces instead of 1. Yeah they can have the individual titles of Grass and HC Goat at the same time, but this doesn't apply to Nadal since he has no chance of being the GOAT of any surface but clay.
But if Djokovic wins one more HC slam and equals Federer in the HC slam count, Federer would only lead in the grass GSs. Tell me, how would that keep him the overall GOAT and not just the grass GOAT, since he wouldn’t be leading the Slam count on any other surface?
 
#35
Not really, each slam has its own distinct surface. So performance in all four slams matter. Hence Fedr GOAT.
Hard court is a hard court lol. Nadal clearly GOAT now. Federer cannot be GOAT with a 3-10 losing record to his main rival at the biggest events. Sorry but even Federer now accepts he will never be GOAT.
 
#36
That's what I gave you. The logic. You don't agree with the argument so you keep shooting down my posts, but the logic of my argument is likely a decent enough estimation of the logic others with this viewpoint have.
Vague terms like "good" "great" on surfaces doesn’t really work for me, sorry.
 
#37
But if Djokovic wins one more HC slam and equals Federer in the HC slam count, Federer would only lead in the grass GSs. Tell me, how would that keep him the overall GOAT and not just the grass GOAT, since he wouldn’t be leading the Slam count on any other surface?
Because he's still 2nd overall on HC or tied.
 
#38
Hard court is a hard court lol. Nadal clearly GOAT now. Federer cannot be GOAT with a 3-10 losing record to his main rival at the biggest events. Sorry but even Federer now accepts he will never be GOAT.
Hard court laid at AO is different from USO. Its two different surfaces/playing conditions. Just ask the organizers and they will explain the difference in the surface. Its well documented if you care to check. But you already knew that.
 
#42
All Slams increase a player's status among the greats, though some would do that more than others, depending on what the player has already won. A non-French Open Slam would be even better for Nadal than #13 next year.

Novak and Roger have a clearly better distribution in the moment so they won't get as much "criticism" about any surface/tournament skew. It might sound like Nadal is being penalized for being brutal at RG, but the thing is, he is 3rd best at each of the other three Slams. The other two guys are very good at all three of them. If Novak wins another USO, both he and Roger would have at least 4 titles at 3/4 Slams. That's amazing adaptability to different places (not that they haven't shown that already).

Federer is the Slam record holder now so obviously stretching his record would primarily mean cementing his GOAT status.
 
#43
Hard court laid at AO is different from USO. Its two different surfaces/playing conditions. Just ask the organizers and they will explain the difference in the surface. Its well documented if you care to check. But you already knew that.
No...they are listed as hard court. Only Nadal has multiple majors on 3 surfaces. Thats simply fact not an opinion.
 
#45
I edited the post. It would be up for debate with a tie. It doesn't matter. Nadal is not 2nd on any other surface or even third or 4th etc.
I ask again, if Nadal won 5 more RGs and was at 23 slams, why would that only make him a Clay GOAT, but Roger leading with 20 slams is not considered only the hard court and grass GOAT?
 
Top