NADAL to cement his GOAT status by winning #19 in 2019 and #20 in 2020

sbengte

G.O.A.T.
Rafa's success really bothers you doesn't it... I am happy for you that Federer won their Wimbledon matchup otherwise you may have melted down completely.
Are you equating gamesmanship and violation of rules with success ?

It is like someone tops an exam and when you point out they openly cheated, you say that the person is bothered by their success. That is a ridiculous argument.
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
Are you equating gamesmanship and violation of rules with success ?

It is like someone tops an exam and when you point out they openly cheated, you say that the person is bothered by their success. That is a ridiculous argument.
Do you have any evidence of him openly cheating his way to 18 slams? I'd like to see it if you do
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
Maybe banned instead of retiring in that case.

Nadal has always been a number 2 and a clay court specialist compared to Novak and Fed.

He has never dominated the tour the way Novak and Fed have with shocking losses to random players.

1st round AO 2016
3rd round FO 2016
1st round Wimb 2013
2nd round Us open 2015
WTF RR

He's never dominated the way Novak and Fed have (2006 season 2015 season) never defended a GS or MS1000 outside of clay etc etc
As I said, all of the 'more domination' from Fed and Djoker so far adds up to them being one measly YE # 1 in front - lol

BTW here are the stats on early exits at the slams:

Before round 4:
Fed 12
Djoker 10
Rafa 9

Before round 3:
Fed 7
Djoker 5
Rafa 5

First round exits:
Fed 6
Djoker 2
Rafa 2

Fed has exited RG in the first round three times, Rafa never
Fed has exited Wimbledon in the first round three times, Rafa once.
Neither of them have exited the US Open in the first round
AO is the only one that Fed has the jump on Rafa, he's never exited the AO in the first round whereas Rafa has once

See Fed is an amazing legend of the sport and it happens to him too. Stop being rediculous with your anti-Rafa bias. I'm not claiming he is the GOAT but your assertions that a guy that has won every single slam at least once, has won on every slam surface more than once and has 18 slams total is not consistent or is somehow a one-trick-clay-pony is absurd.
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
That is beside the point . Rafa specifically stated that he wouldn't be back if Ion Tiriac wouldn't revert the clay back to the usual. So my point is , that it has been proven that not all clay can be lumped together. Same with things like .

Djoker 7 AOs vs 3 USOs. Delpos 1 USO + Final , then maybe a QF or 2 @ AO. Sampras 2 AO vs 5 USO. They're different slams that play differently despite them being both HardCourt surfaces , the results even show this.

Be honest , if RG was changed to the 2012 blue clay , do you honestly think Nadal would have won 12 of those also?

& You conveniently say that 'distribution' never was mentioned. That is b.s , the channel slam? for example , winning on clay then grass back to back was never talked about? hmmm ..

I'm an honest Fed fan , if i could take my pick of Fed's next slam it would be the french without question .It's not hard to be unbiased . Well for me anyway.
Ok if you think the colour of the clay and not the altitude had more to do with Rafa's Madrid loss then we can't continue to have a serious conversation. Rafa has had less success at Madrid than any other clay tournament and it was only played on blue clay once. You'd have a point if he dominated there every year except 2009.

On the hard-courts, sure, there is a speed difference between USO and AO but you make out like it is a completely different sport when played on hard courts with slight speed variations.
 

Benjamin Rio

Professional
As I said, all of the 'more domination' from Fed and Djoker so far adds up to them being one measly YE # 1 in front - lol

BTW here are the stats on early exits at the slams:

Before round 4:
Fed 12
Djoker 10
Rafa 9

Before round 3:
Fed 7
Djoker 5
Rafa 5

First round exits:
Fed 6
Djoker 2
Rafa 2

Fed has exited RG in the first round three times, Rafa never
Fed has exited Wimbledon in the first round three times, Rafa once.
Neither of them have exited the US Open in the first round
AO is the only one that Fed has the jump on Rafa, he's never exited the AO in the first round whereas Rafa has once

See Fed is an amazing legend of the sport and it happens to him too. Stop being rediculous with your anti-Rafa bias. I'm not claiming he is the GOAT but your assertions that a guy that has won every single slam at least once, has won on every slam surface more than once and has 18 slams total is not consistent or is somehow a one-trick-clay-pony is absurd.
Of course we all know that Nadal has played 23 consecutive SF 36 Qf in Gs and won WTF.
 

mr tonyz

Semi-Pro
Ok if you think the colour of the clay and not the altitude had more to do with Rafa's Madrid loss then we can't continue to have a serious conversation. Rafa has had less success at Madrid than any other clay tournament and it was only played on blue clay once. You'd have a point if he dominated there every year except 2009.

On the hard-courts, sure, there is a speed difference between USO and AO but you make out like it is a completely different sport when played on hard courts with slight speed variations.
You don't seem to understand , my point was , was that the blue clay was indeed different & not just because of the colour. It was different in that it was slippery making it different to play on.

Furthermore your constant rehashing of the altitude & conditions in Madrid (as Nadals primary cause of lack of dominance there) making it more difficult for Nadal actually goes against your own methodology of lumping AO & USO together as there are vastly different conditions @ play there also. Not just the HC surfaces there , but the heat of AO vs the wind of USO , & Arthur Ashe stadium (prior to the roof) making the wind spiral down like a vortex due to the shape of the stadium added to the different conditions of playing there .

Madrid has altude
Australian Open , has heat (condition) as the main condition of contention.

U.S Open wind as it's main condition especially in the past without the roof . Even now with the roof installed yet not utilized narrows the space on the top of the stadium changing (neutralizing the wind) the way the wind flows down from the top thus changing the specific conditions of the U.S Open.

So on one hand to downplay 'Blue Clay' by using Madrids altitude as a reason for Nadal's lack of success there just further illustrates my point that AO & USO are indeed different slams despite being both HC Slams due to not only different hardcourt surfaces (3 main in Rebound Ace/Plexicushio/DecoTurf) but different conditions on top of that due to not only the main conditional differences in being heat vs wind , but also a multitude of other factors that we as viewers are unaware of that come into play when playing on the opposite ends of the globe. Hence my frustration when both slams are lumped together so conveniently. I'm not saying they're as different as French Open vs Wimbly , but in my opinion they're different enough to have their own seat @ the table , that being distribution .

& furthermore , Nadal played only 1 blue clay Madrid & he refused to play there again . Yet he was ok with playing there all the other times? Which again they were all played under the same conditions yet he was adamant on not returning there. Why? Because of the clay , the blue clay specifically was the reason why . We do not know how many blue clay Madrid titles Nadal would've won , but it's very safe to say that based on his 1 performance there & his reaction to that experience that Nadal would have struggled a lot more than he already did . & this is with both types of clay (red & blue) being played under the same altitude . So it's all about the surface here , not only the colour of it but the way it made the players play differently on it .

Your altitude argument doesn't fit here as Nadal again was vehemently opposed to the surface that he played on in 2012 irrespective of the fact that it was played @ the same venue with the same altitude.
 
Last edited:

mr tonyz

Semi-Pro
It's titles that count my friend. Rafa has done enough over the last 15 years to prove his consistency.
Titles do count , that's why distribution here matters in terms of variety & strengths across various surfaces & conditions that each slam beings to the table. Number of titles per slam tournament

Fed/Nad
6/1
1/12
8/2
5/3

Fed has more variety , Nadal has more dominance @ a single slam.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
Some people believe that Federer has had it a bit easier.
Nadal has had to face Federer and/or Djokovic his entire career. But Federer was able to win many grand slams before Nadal/Djokovic came.

Not saying I necessarily agree with that, but I do think there is some merit to it.
What do you mean? Federer won many of his Slams when Nadal and Djokovic were there. Federer beat Nadal in 3 Slam finals and a semi-final, and beat Djokovic in 5 Slams when Djokovic was ranked in the top 3 or higher. And Federer probably should've won 3 other Slams against Djokovic if not for his chokes.
 

King No1e

Legend
Nadal won't pass the Slam count by winning only RG. Without a Wimbledon title (or a HC Slam if he can somehow do it) he'll be stuck behind the Maestro.

It's a Wimb or lose situation for Nadal
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
Titles do count , that's why distribution here matters in terms of variety & strengths across various surfaces & conditions that each slam beings to the table. Number of titles per slam tournament

Fed/Nad
6/1
1/12
8/2
5/3

Fed has more variety , Nadal has more dominance @ a single slam.
Yes titles count, variety (other than winning all of the slams - which Rafa has done) is a made-up metric that has only ever been a thing in the last 10 years.
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
As I said, all of the 'more domination' from Fed and Djoker so far adds up to them being one measly YE # 1 in front - lol

BTW here are the stats on early exits at the slams:

Before round 4:
Fed 12
Djoker 10
Rafa 9

Before round 3:
Fed 7
Djoker 5
Rafa 5

First round exits:
Fed 6
Djoker 2
Rafa 2

Fed has exited RG in the first round three times, Rafa never
Fed has exited Wimbledon in the first round three times, Rafa once.
Neither of them have exited the US Open in the first round
AO is the only one that Fed has the jump on Rafa, he's never exited the AO in the first round whereas Rafa has once

See Fed is an amazing legend of the sport and it happens to him too. Stop being rediculous with your anti-Rafa bias. I'm not claiming he is the GOAT but your assertions that a guy that has won every single slam at least once, has won on every slam surface more than once and has 18 slams total is not consistent or is somehow a one-trick-clay-pony is absurd.
Pre 2003/04 Fed is easy to fall back on to try and make a point. Fortunately, most seasoned posters don't fall for this tactic ;)
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
Goat race is between Nole and Fed.

Nadal has a big fat zero at the WTF and way too unbalanced resume.

Being the clay goat doesn't make you overall goat.

Think of it this way: if someone was playing for your life but you didnt know the surface/playing condition, you'd be insane to pick Nadal. If it happened to be fast grass or indoors you're done. He can lose to any journeyman there. Fed or Nole can win on anything.
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
You don't seem to understand , my point was , was that the blue clay was indeed different & not just because of the colour. It was different in that it was slippery making it different to play on.

Furthermore your constant rehashing of the altitude & conditions in Madrid (as Nadals primary cause of lack of dominance there) making it more difficult for Nadal actually goes against your own methodology of lumping AO & USO together as there are vastly different conditions @ play there also. Not just the HC surfaces there , but the heat of AO vs the wind of USO , & Arthur Ashe stadium (prior to the roof) making the wind spiral down like a vortex due to the shape of the stadium added to the different conditions of playing there .

Madrid has altude
Australian Open , has heat (condition) as the main condition of contention.

U.S Open wind as it's main condition especially in the past without the roof . Even now with the roof installed yet not utilized narrows the space on the top of the stadium changing (neutralizing the wind) the way the wind flows down from the top thus changing the specific conditions of the U.S Open.

So on one hand to downplay 'Blue Clay' by using Madrids altitude as a reason for Nadal's lack of success there just further illustrates my point that AO & USO are indeed different slams despite being both HC Slams due to not only different hardcourt surfaces (3 main in Rebound Ace/Plexicushio/DecoTurf) but different conditions on top of that due to not only the main conditional differences in being heat vs wind , but also a multitude of other factors that we as viewers are unaware of that come into play when playing on the opposite ends of the globe. Hence my frustration when both slams are lumped together so conveniently. I'm not saying they're as different as French Open vs Wimbly , but in my opinion they're different enough to have their own seat @ the table , that being distribution .

& furthermore , Nadal played only 1 blue clay Madrid & he refused to play there again . Yet he was ok with playing there all the other times? Which again they were all played under the same conditions yet he was adamant on not returning there. Why? Because of the clay , the blue clay specifically was the reason why . We do not know how many blue clay Madrid titles Nadal would've won , but it's very safe to say that based on his 1 performance there & his reaction to that experience that Nadal would have struggled a lot more than he already did . & this is with both types of clay (red & blue) being played under the same altitude . So it's all about the surface here , not only the colour of it but the way it made the players play differently on it .

Your altitude argument doesn't fit here as Nadal again was vehemently opposed to the surface that he played on in 2012 irrespective of the fact that it was played @ the same venue with the same altitude.
Let's just get something straight here. There is no 'lack of success at Madrid for Nadal. He has won there five times including once when it was on indoor hard courts. That is an astonishing level of success at one tournament. It's just that his achievements at other clay tournaments are even better.

No argument about the blue clay and everything you've said about the speed differences between AO & USO but at the end of the day it is overblown quite a bit on here. It is still tennis. Yes, Rafa prefers RG, Djoker prefers AO and Fed prefers Wimby but these guys go deep everywhere and have won everywhere.
 

mr tonyz

Semi-Pro
Yes titles count, variety (other than winning all of the slams - which Rafa has done) is a made-up metric that has only ever been a thing in the last 10 years.
Well to be fair , during the last 10 years we've had the top 3 all-time slam leaders in history playing . & They've all hit the career slam which is important , they've achieved the career slam . Djoker has his ncygs & then from there we have distribution of slams , because these 3 have such big slam numbers & all have the career slam in the bag , they all own they're own slam (Djoker OE AO , Nad's FO all-time , Fed WB all-time g.o.a.t-hood) so it's only natural for everyone to then see the numbers @ all 4 slams .

I know as a Nadal fan you may be personally against slam distribution , but it is there & it is important . Statisticians , reporters & former pro's will all be talking about the big-3's slam counts & where they did their most damage throughout their careers. It may not be that important to you , but however recent slam distribution has become mainly because as dominant as Sampras was , his distribution had a terrible imbalance as he had 14 slams yet 12 of his 14 were WB & USO. Furthermore , Agassi was too far behind in the slam count for it to matter.

With the Big-3 this all changed as they've won everywhere & won so much hence distribution of slams comes into play.

It's like me saying Fed is more dominant @ Wimbly & Djoker is more dominant @ AO than Nadal is @ The French . It's simply not true .

Nadal is far more dominant @ his slam & is far weaker @ his next 2 slams than his rivals & that's just the way it is. It took the grass-court g.o.a.t & the top 2 HC g.o.a.ts to prevent him from having a better distribution , that's how versatile Nadal is . It took the 2 most versatile tennis players (slam distribution #s) to stop Nadal from having more dominance on the next 3 slams for him.

It's like me crying wolf that Fed only has 1 French Open , well it took the best ever to stop him there too.

Fed & Djoker 'only' have 1 FO each & Nadal 'only' has 6 combined slams @ the other 3 . All 3 have their weaknesses , Nad's is distribution & with Fed & Djoker it's their lack of dominance one 1 'surfrace' in comparison . Pros & cons on both sides of the fence.
 

mr tonyz

Semi-Pro
Let's just get something straight here. There is no 'lack of success at Madrid for Nadal. He has won there five times including once when it was on indoor hard courts. That is an astonishing level of success at one tournament. It's just that his achievements at other clay tournaments are even better.

No argument about the blue clay and everything you've said about the speed differences between AO & USO but at the end of the day it is overblown quite a bit on here. It is still tennis. Yes, Rafa prefers RG, Djoker prefers AO and Fed prefers Wimby but these guys go deep everywhere and have won everywhere.
His Madrid red clay achievements pale in comparison to his Rome & Monte-Carlo achievements by quite a margin. I could throw Barcelona in the mix too.

4 is fantastic for anyone not named Nadal.
Monte-Carlo - 11
Barcelona - 11
Rome - 9
Madrid Clay - 4
 

itrium84

Semi-Pro
Well to be fair , during the last 10 years we've had the top 3 all-time slam leaders in history playing . & They've all hit the career slam which is important , they've achieved the career slam . Djoker has his ncygs & then from there we have distribution of slams , because these 3 have such big slam numbers & all have the career slam in the bag , they all own they're own slam (Djoker OE AO , Nad's FO all-time , Fed WB all-time g.o.a.t-hood) so it's only natural for everyone to then see the numbers @ all 4 slams .

I know as a Nadal fan you may be personally against slam distribution , but it is there & it is important . Statisticians , reporters & former pro's will all be talking about the big-3's slam counts & where they did their most damage throughout their careers. It may not be that important to you , but however recent slam distribution has become mainly because as dominant as Sampras was , his distribution had a terrible imbalance as he had 14 slams yet 12 of his 14 were WB & USO. Furthermore , Agassi was too far behind in the slam count for it to matter.

With the Big-3 this all changed as they've won everywhere & won so much hence distribution of slams comes into play.

It's like me saying Fed is more dominant @ Wimbly & Djoker is more dominant @ AO than Nadal is @ The French . It's simply not true .

Nadal is far more dominant @ his slam & is far weaker @ his next 2 slams than his rivals & that's just the way it is. It took the grass-court g.o.a.t & the top 2 HC g.o.a.ts to prevent him from having a better distribution , that's how versatile Nadal is . It took the 2 most versatile tennis players (slam distribution #s) to stop Nadal from having more dominance on the next 3 slams for him.

It's like me crying wolf that Fed only has 1 French Open , well it took the best ever to stop him there too.

Fed & Djoker 'only' have 1 FO each & Nadal 'only' has 6 combined slams @ the other 3 . All 3 have their weaknesses , Nad's is distribution & with Fed & Djoker it's their lack of dominance one 1 'surfrace' in comparison . Pros & cons on both sides of the fence.
Great post. In general, this is my opinion too. I reject slam distribution arguments against Nadal for the reasons you've listed here. Only thing that puts Novak above other two is his NCY Grand Slam. Not by too much, but I see it as an edge he has, when talking about their GS records. Fed (still) owns the total number advantage, Novak the NCYGS advantage.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
 

Pantera

Hall of Fame
If Nadal has more slams than Fed, then Nadal > Fed. But Fed will be remembered as the most gracious player on court, the most elegant, the most skilled. However, in history books Nadal will be No.1.
Federer is a serve and FH. His BH has let him down his whole career v Nadal and Djokovic and he is not a great volleyer in the mould of Edberg or Sampras.

If he was Spanish or eastern European rather than Swiss I doubt he would have such reverence.
 
Some people believe that Federer has had it a bit easier.
Nadal has had to face Federer and/or Djokovic his entire career. But Federer was able to win many grand slams before Nadal/Djokovic came.

Not saying I necessarily agree with that, but I do think there is some merit to it.
Nadal won his slams by beating finalists:
Anderson
Peurta
Ferrer
Berdych
Soderling
Wawrinka
No clay ATGs

By those Nadal own argument Djokovic is a far better player as he has less of those mug slams than Nadal
 

Pantera

Hall of Fame
Nadal won his slams by beating finalists:
Anderson
Peurta
Ferrer
Berdych
Soderling
Wawrinka

By those Nadal own argument Djokovic is a far better player as he has less of those mug slams than Nadal
have you not run out of salt yet lmao. Nadal is GOAT, deal with it. The stats are there for all to see...I only need one though...Multiple Slams Multiple surfaces....
 

mr tonyz

Semi-Pro
have you not run out of salt yet lmao. Nadal is GOAT, deal with it. The stats are there for all to see...I only need one though...Multiple Slams Multiple surfaces....
No the stats aren't on Nadal's side. Or rather the stats that don't involve Fed going through DjokerDal .

I'm sorry , does the tennis world revolve around beating DjokerDal for the stats to matter? I'll answer that for you , yes they do *for you*

Go check on Ultimate Tennis Statistics & use the g.o.a.t calculator , i'm sure you can skew H2H & Clay stats & boost those to the max to help Nadal get to the summit.
 
have you not run out of salt yet lmao. Nadal is GOAT, deal with it. The stats are there for all to see...I only need one though...Multiple Slams Multiple surfaces....
Nadal GOAT :laughing::laughing: He is third best in his own era. Worry about catching Djokovic and distancing himself even more from Murray first :laughing::laughing::laughing:
 

Pantera

Hall of Fame
No the stats aren't on Nadal's side. Or rather the stats that don't involve Fed going through DjokerDal .

I'm sorry , does the tennis world revolve around beating DjokerDal for the stats to matter? I'll answer that for you , yes they do *for you*

Go check on Ultimate Tennis Statistics & use the g.o.a.t calculator , i'm sure you can skew H2H & Clay stats & boost those to the max to help Nadal get to the summit.
Sorry you lose the argument as soon as you say clay skewed. There are almost half the clay events than hard court events so Nadal does not have the luxury Federer and Djokovic have of playing most of the year on their best surface. Federer is a better hard court player than grass court player btw. 0-3 v Djokovic in finals on grass must mean its his 2nd best surface, if it is his best then he automatically is 3rd wheel at best.

Fact is Nadal has the best resume of the 3 (marginally from Djokovic) when all 3 at their peak at same time. I can guarantee that if Nadal was 23 years of age in 2003 and had no Federer or Djokovic up to 2008 at their peak he would have had at least one calendar slam, and ditto Djokovic.

The stats are clear, Nadal and Djokovic the best ever, Nadal very marginally ahead of Djokovic but its so close now I expect that title to keep swapping between them for next few years.
 

Pantera

Hall of Fame
Nadal GOAT :laughing::laughing: He is third best in his own era. Worry about catching Djokovic and distancing himself from Murray first :laughing::laughing::laughing:
Dude, you keep embarrassing yourself lol. Next you will say Berdych better than Nadal lmao.

When you get a like on a post, let me know so we can toast the achievement lol.
 
Dude, you keep embarrassing yourself lol. Next you will say Berdych better than Nadal lmao.

When you get a like on a post, let me know so we can toast the achievement lol.
Lass what you on about obviously Nadal is 1000x better than berdymug... Nadal is tier 1 clay (although extremely weak era), tier 2 grass, tier 3 outdoor hard and tier 5 indoors.... Like any player even berdymug he can zone / redline
 

Pantera

Hall of Fame
Lass what you on about obviously Nadal is 1000x better than berdymug... Nadal is tier 1 clay (although extremely weak era), tier 2 grass, tier 3 outdoor hard and tier 5 indoors.... Like any player even berdymug he can zone / redline
I'll get you some salt for Christmas haha
 

AceSalvo

Legend
Nadal can never be GOAT with his current resume. He will be firmly secured behind Fed, Djoko.

Not sure if anyone checked the news, but it’s filled with Djoko surpassing Fed. Nadal is not even in the talk. Sorry folks.

Nadal was supposed to be the “chosen one” after Wimb 2008. 10 years running it’s still a ?.

So glad Djoko is eating up all the slams.
 
Last edited:

NBP

Hall of Fame
Nadal can never be GOAT with his current resume. He will be firmly secured behind Fed, Djoko.

Not sure if anyone checked the news, but it’s filled with Djoko surpassing Fed. Nadal is not even in the talk. Sorry folks.

Nadal was supposed to be the “chosen one” after Wimb 2008. 10 years running it’s still a ?.

So glad Djoko is eating up all the slams.
You’ve got to be kidding me
 

DjokoLand

Rookie
While I prefer Fed to Nadal. I remember years ago all Fed fans saying you can’t be GOAT till you have the slam record. Now that Djokodal are catching up Fed fans are changing their tone and saying they can’t be GOAT because of this and that
 

mr tonyz

Semi-Pro
Sorry you lose the argument as soon as you say clay skewed. There are almost half the clay events than hard court events so Nadal does not have the luxury Federer and Djokovic have of playing most of the year on their best surface. Federer is a better hard court player than grass court player btw. 0-3 v Djokovic in finals on grass must mean its his 2nd best surface, if it is his best then he automatically is 3rd wheel at best.

Fact is Nadal has the best resume of the 3 (marginally from Djokovic) when all 3 at their peak at same time. I can guarantee that if Nadal was 23 years of age in 2003 and had no Federer or Djokovic up to 2008 at their peak he would have had at least one calendar slam, and ditto Djokovic.

The stats are clear, Nadal and Djokovic the best ever, Nadal very marginally ahead of Djokovic but its so close now I expect that title to keep swapping between them for next few years.
You keep mentioning stats , yet all you ever do is complain that Fed won his slams prior to DjokerDal. Well Fed was there , they weren't . I really don't see what stats you ever use apart from H2H vs rivals . If Fed is worse than Djoker due to 1-3 (yeah you forgot 2012 semi-final , semi-final count don't they?) @ Wimbly then Murray is 1-0 @ Wimbly & 1-1 @ USO (1-0 in finals) vs Djoker , Theim is 2-1 vs Djoker @ RG . Thomas Berdych is 2-1 vs Djoker @ Wimbly Ouch!

If H2H @ slams is your thing , well it's a double edged sword .
 

Mike Sams

Legend
Goat race is between Nole and Fed.

Nadal has a big fat zero at the WTF and way too unbalanced resume.

Being the clay goat doesn't make you overall goat.
How can either Federer or Djokovic have an argument for being the GOAT when neither had any answers for stopping one of their biggest rivals in Nadal at the French over the past 14 or so years? Federer's 0-6 and Djokovic is 1-6. And since Djokovic won it in 2016, he hasn't even sniffed a final there over the past 3 years, losing twice to a guy that Nadal bludgeons time and time again with relative ease in Thiem. And Nadal was thrashing both Federer and Djokovic at the peak of their powers at the French. So how can either of them be considered GOAT if they both only have 1 French Open title to Nadal's 12?
It's probably easier to say "Djokovic is the GOAT in Australia, Federer is the GOAT at Wimbledon, Nadal is the GOAT in Paris and Federer and Sampras are both the GOAT in New York. LOL
 

AceSalvo

Legend
How can either Federer or Djokovic have an argument for being the GOAT when neither had any answers for stopping one of their biggest rivals in Nadal at the French over the past 14 or so years? Federer's 0-6 and Djokovic is 1-6. And since Djokovic won it in 2016, he hasn't even sniffed a final there over the past 3 years, losing twice to a guy that Nadal bludgeons time and time again with relative ease in Thiem.
Because when you have 3 ATG specializing in 3 different court types, GOAThood cannot be determined by performance on one type of court alone. Pretty simple logic.

Nadal did nothing in 15 years at the main indoor court event as well. Kind of beats the same point you were trying to make.
 
My dudes, this is one of the longest-tenured GOAT threads I've seen yet!

What makes this one so special? :unsure:

At this point, is it fair to call this the GOATliest of them all?

 

Mike Sams

Legend
Because when you have 3 ATG specializing in 3 different court types, GOAThood cannot be determined by performance on one type of court alone. Pretty simple logic.

Nadal did nothing in 15 years at the main indoor court event as well. Kind of beats the same point you were trying to make.
What's the main indoor court event? I don't think anyone really cares about the WTF Finals honestly.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
I don't think anyone really cares about the WTF Finals honestly.
What you think does not matter. As long as it mattered to Sampras, Agassi, Federer, Djokovic it will be included in the GOAT debate.

Nadal cared about it just enough to whine that it was not on clay.

FYI.

“The ATP Finals is the second highest tier of annual men's tennis tournament after the four Grand Slam tournaments.”
 

Mike Sams

Legend
What you think does not matter. As long as it mattered to Sampras, Agassi, Federer, Djokovic it will be included in the GOAT debate.

Nadal cared about it just enough to whine that it was not on clay.

FYI.

“The ATP Finals is the second highest tier of annual men's tennis tournament after the four Grand Slam tournaments.”
LOL! Nobody cares, man. It's a nothing event. Even Alexander Zverev won it and did anyone care? Nope. They're waiting for him to do something at the Slams.
 
Top