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

Heliath

New User
No, they are not insane, just mentally destroyed now that Nadal is universally accepted as GOAT. No ifs no buts now. FO2019 was the decider, before the event everyone accepted it so its too late to now use weak arguments such as distribution, which fails any way as Nadal only one with multiple majors on multiple surfaces. Nadal has all bases covered.
Nadal has still some way to go to claim GOAT, but he is closer than ever so I guess his haters are pretty nervous.
 

Pantera

Banned
Nadal has still some way to go to claim GOAT, but he is closer than ever so I guess his haters are pretty nervous.
What more does nadal need to do. Only player with more than one major on all surfaces, only ever player to win Majors on 3 surfaces in one calendar season, a Career Golden Slam, two channel slams, 12 Majors at the hardest Major to win, a winning h2h against fellow ATGS at the majors....only if Djokovic or Federer had won FO this year would either have been greater.
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
No, they are not insane, just mentally destroyed now that Nadal is universally accepted as GOAT. No ifs no buts now. FO2019 was the decider, before the event everyone accepted it so its too late to now use weak arguments such as distribution, which fails any way as Nadal only one with multiple majors on multiple surfaces. Nadal has all bases covered.
Steve Darcis agrees with you.
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
What more does nadal need to do. Only player with more than one major on all surfaces, only ever player to win Majors on 3 surfaces in one calendar season, a Career Golden Slam, two channel slams, 12 Majors at the hardest Major to win, a winning h2h against fellow ATGS at the majors....only if Djokovic or Federer had won FO this year would either have been greater.
No WTF lack of achievements on anyhing else than clay.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I'll post this again to remind you - slams since Rafa won 2005 RG (i.e. since actual competition showed up for Fed):

Rafa 18
Fed 16

just plain bull. 2004 was a pretty good year.
Fed beat at the AO -- Hewitt, Nalbandian, Ferrero and Safin
at Wimbledon - Roddick, Hewitt
at USO - Agassi, Henman, Hewitt

2003 Wimbledon wasn't the strongest, but he beat Roddick and Phillippoussis there - 2 pretty good grass courters in form.
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
We can also make the argument had it not been for Nadal, Federer would dominate RG just as much the US Open back in 2004-2008 and so would Djokovic from 2012-2016 (bar Stan).
As far as 1st part goes, that would mean the clay field would be very weak. and Fed lost to Kuerten in RG 2004. So it doesn't even begin to compare.
Put in good competition instead of Nadal and Fed would win probably 2 of 4 RGs from 2005-08.

As far as bold part goes, err, what ?
Djokovic lost to Murray in 2012, Nishi in 14 and Stan in 16.
And if he faced good competition (say in-form Murray) instead of Nadal in USO 13, he might have lost that as well. He was playing worse than in 2012.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

mtommer

Hall of Fame
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?
If one only dominates one surface, then how can one be considered GOAT? Then, Fed pretty much did dominate clay save for when he played Rafa. Rafa = clay domination. Fed = well, domination period. That is why Rafa is not considered GOAT but "only" Clay GOAT. In other words, Fed is GOAT. BECAUSE Rafa has won the FO so many times and it's such an outlier or success, that earns him the title clay GOAT. Take away the FO success, and Rafa would not be considered GOAT at all. You can't "take" away any one specific Slam from Fed's success without taking all of them away because they are so evenly distributed (hence the lack of being able to justify taking away one particular Slam.) You could probably take away the lone FO but then you have 19. Take away the "lone" FO title, of which there are 12, and you have 6. 19 is phenomenal, 6 is great but not phenomenal.
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
“He’s a complete player”....who’s behind Agassi and Sampras outside of clay and has won 70% of all slams at RG.

You’re hilarious. Nadal is basically third behind Djokovic for GOAT
Why remove clay? Federer is behind
just plain bull. 2004 was a pretty good year.
Fed beat at the AO -- Hewitt, Nalbandian, Ferrero and Safin
at Wimbledon - Roddick, Hewitt
at USO - Agassi, Henman, Hewitt

2003 Wimbledon wasn't the strongest, but he beat Roddick and Phillippoussis there - 2 pretty good grass courters in form.
I said actual competition. None of the names you listed are ATG's.
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
True.

And since 2008 AO (i.e. since actual competition showed up for Nadal/Federer):

Djokovic 15
Nadal 15
Federer 8

:p
Outside FO

Djokovic 14+5 WTF
Nadal 6+0 WTF+ losses 1st round AO 2016 3rd round FO 2016 1st round Wimbledon 2013 2nd round us open 2015+RR at WTF
Federer 8+2 WTF

A bit unfair only taking into account Nadal's and Novak's best years. Especially Nadal was already playing his best as soon as 2005 as he won 11 titles that ear including 1st GS 1 MS1000 on HC and 1 MS1000 indoors.
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
What matters the most is the level of play, not name recognition.
non-ATG stan was 3-1 vs Djoko in slams in 14-16 as compared to ATG , albeit old Fed, who was 0-4.
Oh and Agassi was an ATG.
Of course Agassi is a better tennis player than Nadal. Lacks mental strength and physical abilities but he had better tennis shots.
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
Outside FO

Djokovic 14+5 WTF
Nadal 6+0 WTF+ losses 1st round AO 2016 3rd round FO 2016 1st round Wimbledon 2013 2nd round us open 2015+RR at WTF
Federer 8+2 WTF

A bit unfair only taking into account Nadal's and Novak's best years. Especially Nadal was already playing his best as soon as 2005 as he won 11 titles that ear including 1st GS 1 MS1000 on HC and 1 MS1000 indoors.
Slams the year that they turned 33 (taking all of their best years into account):

Rafa 18
Fed 17
Djoker 15 (6 slams still to play to close the gap)
 
True.

And since 2008 AO (i.e. since actual competition showed up for Fed/Ned):

Djokovic 15
Nadal 15
Federer 8

:p
Federer had already been playing 5 years of high level tennis by 2008. You guys keep posting these stats as if they were of the same generation, ignoring the 5/6 year age gap. Oh, and in 2007, Federer beat both Nadal and Djokovic in slam finals, but Federer won 3 slams that year, so of course you'd discount it.
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
Federer had already been playing 5 years of high level tennis by 2008. You guys keep posting these stats as if they were of the same generation, ignoring the 5/6 year age gap. Oh, and in 2007, Federer beat both Nadal and Djokovic in slam finals, but Federer won 3 slams that year, so of course you'd discount it.
And that's heavily taking into account clay results. When you loses RR in WTF and early for many years at GS how can you considered the GOAT?
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
You can't be ATG when you can't win WTF and loses early to random players in GS. Clay GOAT Nothing more nothing less.
Can you be GOAT if you M1000 count is 6 (and growing)? Can you be GOAT when all of your major 'untouchable' records are about to fall?

Exits before round 4 in slams:
Fed: 12
Djoker: 10
Rafa: 9

Exits before round 3 in slams:
Fed: 7
Djoker: 5
Rafa: 5

1st Round Exits in slams:
Fed: 6
Djoker: 2
Rafa: 2
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
So only ATG's count as actual competition? In that case, 90% of all slams won in tennis' history were won against weak competition.

I'm surprised at your posts following Rafa's victory. I thought you respected Federer more than that.
I do respect him and his achievements and he is great for tennis. I just don't agree with the narrative that he is the greatest of all time. I also never understood why it was never to be challenged when Rafa and Djoker were coming up behind him posing some serious questions.

To answer your question, no, of course not only ATG's count as competition but the level that Fed had to beat two win his slams up until the emergence of Djokodal was much lower. Once these guys showed up they started causing him a lot of problems and the winning rate slowed dramatically. At that was when he was still only 27.
 

Lew II

Hall of Fame
Federer had already been playing 5 years of high level tennis by 2008. You guys keep posting these stats as if they were of the same generation, ignoring the 5/6 year age gap. Oh, and in 2007, Federer beat both Nadal and Djokovic in slam finals, but Federer won 3 slams that year, so of course you'd discount it.
Not being part of the greatest gen ever (1986-87) is exactly what affects his greatness.

2007 should be included, I know. Big3 lost only to each other in 10 slams out of 12.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I do respect him and his achievements and he is great for tennis. I just don't agree with the narrative that he is the greatest of all time. I also never understood why it was never to be challenged when Rafa and Djoker were coming up behind him posing some serious questions.

To answer your question, no, of course not only ATG's count as competition but the level that Fed had to beat two win his slams up until the emergence of Djokodal was much lower. Once these guys showed up they started causing him a lot of problems and the winning rate slowed dramatically. At that was when he was still only 27.
Federer from 2008 to 2012 --- 5 slams -- 2 Wimbledons, 1 RG, 1 AO, 1 USO (+5 slam finals+6 slam semis)
Nadal from 2011 to 2015 -- 5 slams -- 4 RGs, 1 USO (+4 slam finals)

you were saying ?

@ the bold part : oh and nadal had a clearly weaker federer in 2008-09 than fed in 04-07 and djokovic from 2011 onwards of course had past his prime Federer only.
oh and Roddick, Hewitt, Safin etc on their best surfaces/slams ~ Federer/Djokovic on clay, level wise.
 
Can you be GOAT if you M1000 count is 6 (and growing)? Can you be GOAT when all of your major 'untouchable' records are about to fall?

Exits before round 4 in slams:
Fed: 12
Djoker: 10
Rafa: 9

Exits before round 3 in slams:
Fed: 7
Djoker: 5
Rafa: 5

1st Round Exits in slams:
Fed: 6
Djoker: 2
Rafa: 2
That's quite an unfair comparison when Federer has played many more slams than they have. You're not taking into account the age gap. Percentages would give a better comparison.

Exits before QF:
Fed: 22/76 - 28.95%
Djoker: 13/57 - 22.81%
Rafa: 18/56 - 32.14%

Exits before R4:
Fed: 12/76 - 15.79%
Djoker: 10/57 - 17.54%
Rafa: 13/56 - 23.21%

Exits before R3:
Fed: 7/76 - 9.21%
Djoker: 5/57 - 8.80%
Rafa: 7/56 - 12.50%

Exits before R2:
Fed: 6/76 - 7.89%
Djoker: 2/57 - 3.51%
Rafa: 2/56 - 3.57%

The only stat where Fed doesn't compare well is the 1R exits, and that's because he was a much worse player than Nadal and Djokovic from the ages of 19-21. All of his 1R exits happened before 2004. Nadal had one as recently as 2016. Nadal is actually the worst among them placing last in 3/4 early exit categories.

If we take the stats from the moment all 3 won their 1st slam, Fed might blow the others out of the water.

Edited: initial stats for Nadal were understated.
 
Last edited:
People a bit bitter Federer is still ahead. Also, a reaction to Federers 5 consecutive wins against Nadal had to come when Nadal got a win. Btw., I like/love both and wish them the best.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
To answer your question, no, of course not only ATG's count as competition but the level that Fed had to beat two win his slams up until the emergence of Djokodal was much lower.
Nadal won half his slams (5-2-1-1) before the emergence of Djokovic.
Djokovic won 14 of his slams past the emergence of Federer.
Djokodal met zero times at the Australian Open, Wimbledon, and the US Open in 2014, 2015, and 2016.
Djokodal's young-guns were the LostGens.
 
I do respect him and his achievements and he is great for tennis. I just don't agree with the narrative that he is the greatest of all time. I also never understood why it was never to be challenged when Rafa and Djoker were coming up behind him posing some serious questions.

To answer your question, no, of course not only ATG's count as competition but the level that Fed had to beat two win his slams up until the emergence of Djokodal was much lower. Once these guys showed up they started causing him a lot of problems and the winning rate slowed dramatically. At that was when he was still only 27.
I don't believe he's the GOAT, but he is the most successful singles player to date because of his 20 GS, and he's earned that. As things stand, the GS rankings are still 20-18-15 - if that's still the widely accepted main metric for people to consider someone as GOAT, I don't see why it's unreasonable for people to argue that he's the GOAT, or that he has the best claim to be GOAT, at least currently. Should Nadal and Djokovic get to 20, things get muddier, as they should. If they get beyond 20, then they should have the better claim to GOAT.

His winning rate slowed dramatically, because not only are Djokovic and Nadal tier 1 ATG's themselves, they're significantly younger too. I don't think Federer could have done much better than he did, considering how strong Djokovic and Nadal were and still are. If Federer's position was reversed, with Nadal or Djokovic being older, I don't think they would have done any better. That's of course an untestable claim, and therefore irrelevant.

Federer always had issues with Nadal, but I don't think it was because Nadal was a completely superior tennis player. He had matchup issues, and that he never overcame them until much later is to his discredit. Nadal, after all, beat peak Fed in Wimbledon 2008 and AO 2009, and was beating him on hard courts from the start. With Djokovic, I think the age gap really played into his advantage. Fed led the Slam h2h with Djokovic until their 2014 Wimbledon match, when Fed was already 33. He went 2-3 in slams vs a beastly Djokovic from 2011-2012. I think Djokovic and Nadal make him look a lot worse than he really is because they've had the opportunity to abuse the age gap, especially since Fed ended up playing for so long. IMO, the 3 of them are very VERY close in overall ability, and it's too difficult at this point to claim one as clearly superior.
 
Not being part of the greatest gen ever (1986-87) is exactly what affects his greatness.

2007 should be included, I know. Big3 lost only to each other in 10 slams out of 12.
But that's completely out of his control. I think Djokovic and Nadal had it tougher overall, but if we consider 2007 as the cutoff point, which you have just agreed with, then Fed still won 11/20 slams with tougher competition in the draws.

If Nadal and Djokovic were around and peak from 2004-2006, how do you know Federer wouldn't have handled them and gotten a decent record? We don't.
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
Can you be GOAT if you M1000 count is 6 (and growing)? Can you be GOAT when all of your major 'untouchable' records are about to fall?

Exits before round 4 in slams:
Fed: 12
Djoker: 10
Rafa: 9

Exits before round 3 in slams:
Fed: 7
Djoker: 5
Rafa: 5

1st Round Exits in slams:
Fed: 6
Djoker: 2
Rafa: 2
Of course......


You are telling me that Nadal is better than the guy who has played all GS finals in one year; 237 weeks in a row world number one; reached 18 GS finals out 19 between 2005 and 2008 played 23 consecutive GS semi finals:D:D

You forgot to take into account how many Round robins?
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
That's quite an unfair comparison when Federer has played many more slams than they have. You're not taking into account the age gap. Percentages would give a better comparison.

Exits before QF:
Fed: 22/76 - 28.95%
Djoker: 13/57 - 22.81%
Rafa: 18/56 - 32.14%

Exits before R4:
Fed: 12/76 - 15.79%
Djoker: 10/57 - 17.54%
Rafa: 9/56 - 16.07%

Exits before R3:
Fed: 7/76 - 9.21%
Djoker: 5/57 - 8.8%
Rafa: 5/56 - 8.93%

Exits before R2:
Fed: 6/76 - 7.89%
Djoker: 2/57 - 3.51%
Rafa: 2/56 - 3.57%

The only stat where Fed doesn't compare well is the 1R exits, and that's because he was a much worse player than Nadal and Djokovic from the ages of 19-21. All of his 1R exits happened before 2004. Nadal had one as recently as 2016.

If we take the stats from the moment all 3 won their 1st slam, Fed might blow the others out of the water.
You forgot that match in your stats.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=nadal+darcis+wimbledon+2013+highlights
 
I double-checked and while this was included in the 1R exits, the other early exits for Nadal were understated. I just copied most of the figures of @titoelcolombiano and added the percentages. I've edited the post now, and the figures should be accurate. Nadal definitely has a higher % of early exits out of total Slam participations than Djokovic and Federer.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Can you be GOAT if you M1000 count is 6 (and growing)? Can you be GOAT when all of your major 'untouchable' records are about to fall?

Exits before round 4 in slams:
Fed: 12
Djoker: 10
Rafa: 9

Exits before round 3 in slams:
Fed: 7
Djoker: 5
Rafa: 5

1st Round Exits in slams:
Fed: 6
Djoker: 2
Rafa: 2
Yes we know that Nadal is an avid supporter of the "can't lose when you don't play" philosophy.
 

Pantera

Banned
Nadal won half his slams (5-2-1-1) before the emergence of Djokovic.
Djokovic won 14 of his slams past the emergence of Federer.
Djokodal met zero times at the Australian Open, Wimbledon, and the US Open in 2014, 2015, and 2016.
Djokodal's young-guns were the LostGens.
Nadal and Djokovic are same age basically. It is easy to compare them..nadal is better straight out comparison.
 
Top