MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
This forum is like AI lol, Ultronians trying to get us to forget what’s actually realI mean, yeah, Djokovic had an easier task ahead of him, so of course he did better.
This forum is like AI lol, Ultronians trying to get us to forget what’s actually realI mean, yeah, Djokovic had an easier task ahead of him, so of course he did better.
And the way he phrased it: Nadal beat Fed at Wimb only once LOL. Good luck to Djokovic even winning vs 2006-2008 Fed.This forum is like AI lol, Ultronians trying to get us to forget what’s actually real![]()
Exactly. He was unbeatable then. It took the performance of a lifetime for Rafa to beat him, and then even the next year Roddick played maybe the best match of his career and got sent packing. Novak isn’t beating any version of peak Fed at Wimbledon.And the way he phrased it: Nadal beat Fed at Wimb only once LOL. Good luck to Djokovic even winning vs 2006-2008 Fed.
He is more versatile than Ned but this is not the reason he is greater. Completely dominating one slam is a special feat in its own right so in the end it evens out (versatility can maybe serve as a tiebreaker but nothing else). The reason Djoko is ahead of Nad is first and foremost because he leads him in slams, if that was done with a 12-1-1-10 distribution it would be the same. Of course being ahead in most other relevant metrics also helps.He is simply the best of these three and now by a large margin. The gap will keep growing.
More versatile than Nadal and more dominant than fed.
Heck, Fed won half of the slams played in 2003-2010 LOL.He is more versatile than Ned but this is not the reason he is greater. Completely dominating one slam is a special feat in its own right so in the end it evens out (versatility can maybe serve as a tiebreaker but nothing else). The reason Djoko is ahead of Nad is first and foremost because he leads him in slams, if that was done with a 12-1-1-10 distribution it would be the same. Of course being ahead in most other relevant metrics also helps.
Being more dominant than Fed is also not a clear cut. He shows more dominance at older age but as for concentrated dominance over consecutive years, Fed's 2004-07 is still the benchmark.
You are right. But those are corollary to my statements. More dominant than fed and more versatile than Nadal.He is more versatile than Ned but this is not the reason he is greater. Completely dominating one slam is a special feat in its own right so in the end it evens out (versatility can maybe serve as a tiebreaker but nothing else). The reason Djoko is ahead of Nad is first and foremost because he leads him in slams, if that was done with a 12-1-1-10 distribution it would be the same. Of course being ahead in most other relevant metrics also helps.
Being more dominant than Fed is also not a clear cut. He shows more dominance at older age but as for concentrated dominance over consecutive years, Fed's 2004-07 is still the benchmark.
Fed is the best fast court player of the three. Let the big three play their careers under 90s conditions and he wins the most slams (if you throw them into the 90s itself, Nadal will come out the winner though as he would least be impacted by Sampras' presence).Exactly. He was unbeatable then. It took the performance of a lifetime for Rafa to beat him, and then even the next year Roddick played maybe the best match of his career and got sent packing. Novak isn’t beating any version of peak Fed at Wimbledon.
Second one yes, first one debatable.You are right. But those are corollary to my statements. More dominant than fed and more versatile than Nadal.
Fed is the best fast court player of the three. Let the big three play their careers under 90s conditions and he wins the most slams (if you throw them into the 90s itself, Nadal will come out the winner though as he would least be impacted by Sampras' presence).
Nadal did well to beat Fed once at Wimblie, incredible achievement but still it went as close as it could get.
Exactly. And that was when Fed had a huge mental block against Nadal coming off the FO demolition. In spite of that and Nadal being a difficult match-up, he still came within inches of winning.Fed is the best fast court player of the three. Let the big three play their careers under 90s conditions and he wins the most slams (if you throw them into the 90s itself, Nadal will come out the winner though as he would least be impacted by Sampras' presence).
Nadal did well to beat Fed once at Wimblie, incredible achievement but still it went as close as it could get.
Also, that Nadal victory pretty much killed Fed mentally for the rest of his career hence all the choking we've seen from him since. He lost all belief after that match.Fed is the best fast court player of the three. Let the big three play their careers under 90s conditions and he wins the most slams (if you throw them into the 90s itself, Nadal will come out the winner though as he would least be impacted by Sampras' presence).
Nadal did well to beat Fed once at Wimblie, incredible achievement but still it went as close as it could get.
While Djokovic is the best by a clear margin, Nadal beating Federer at 08 Wimbledon is more impressive then any of those victories by Djokovic(Federer had like 65 match grass win streak? As well as 5 Wimbledons in a row)
I’d agree with you guys. I think Peak Fed would beat peak Djokovic grass. The only version of Djokovic that would have a good chance is 2015.Exactly. And that was when Fed had a huge mental block against Nadal coming off the FO demolition. In spite of that and Nadal being a difficult match-up, he still came within inches of winning.
It's why I don't think Djokovic beats that Fed.
Did you forget to mention the rain delay that allowed Fed to regroup, kill Nadal's momentum and make a come back.Fed is the best fast court player of the three. Let the big three play their careers under 90s conditions and he wins the most slams (if you throw them into the 90s itself, Nadal will come out the winner though as he would least be impacted by Sampras' presence).
Nadal did well to beat Fed once at Wimblie, incredible achievement but still it went as close as it could get.
Fed came back from a 0-40 hole before the raon delayDid you forget to mention the rain delay that allowed Fed to regroup, kill Nadal's momentum and make a come back.
I as a tennis fan am glad it turned out the way it did, it allowed Fed to escape a straight set defeat and turn the match into undeniably the best tennis match of all time.
I am thankful for that.
Well so far I wouldn't go maybe. Can't see how the choking against Djoko was really affected by the earlier losses against Ned. When going into the crunch-time I think it is clear that Fed is weaker against the other two than vice versa. I also do think that this is at least partially because he was the first and it is typically easier mentally to chase than being chased (did not help ofc that in his peak it was too easy for him and before Nadal he did not have to go through tough fights).Also, that Nadal victory pretty much killed Fed mentally for the rest of his career hence all the choking we've seen from him since. He lost all belief after that match.
He wins that match and he'd never suffer from mental issues against anyone for the rest of his career.
What are you talking about? it was 4-5 Nadal about to serve in the third set when the first rain delay came.Fed came back from a 0-40 hole before the raon delay
Personally think Fed was fighting back regardless of the rain delay. He started to get on top and there was no way Fed was going to surrender his crown easily with or without the rain.Did you forget to mention the rain delay that allowed Fed to regroup, kill Nadal's momentum and make a come back.
I as a tennis fan am glad it turned out the way it did, it allowed Fed to escape a straight set defeat and turn the match into undeniably the best tennis match of all time.
I am thankful for that.
Agreed. Fed was turning the tide regardless of the rain delay. I think he was getting back in the match regardless of the weather.Fed came back from a 0-40 hole before the raon delay
ThisContext absolutely matters, but only in the head of impartial true tennis fans who can be mature enough to take their fanboy hats off for a minute.
Playing longer doesnt make a player greater. If slams are where greatness is measured, nadal probably has the edge if context is added. Where djokovic has an advnatage is on the atp regular tour which is why i think the big 3 all have claims to be goat as they each have strong arguments. Had Sampras got one FO i think he had a great argument tbh.It doesn't, because how good a player is, is subjective. "weak era's" and all this nonsense, it's all just invented in your heads. The only factual information is Djokovic has 24, Nadal has 22.
Federer was past it all 3 times. Still a great player but nowhere near the player he was.Djokovic beat Federer 3 times at Wimbledon and Nadal 2 times at Roland Garros. Nadal beat Federer at Wimbledon only once and ZERO times Djokovic at the AO. Federer beat 1 time Djokovic at the AO and ZERO times Nadal at RG. Looks like Djokovic did it best.
That's what trolls say to shut down meaningful conversations.Its nice to see the evolution from 20>19 bud, own it and move on, to how important context has become.
That's what trolls say to shut down meaningful conversations.
The big 3 era is full of nuances worth discussing, yet it's overshadowed by fangirls foaming at the mouth yelling at each other.
lol … did you expect your thread to devolve into this?Its nice to see the evolution from 20>19 bud, own it and move on, to how important context has become.
He doesn’t. 24 slams over 22 slams is the only context needed.If slams are where greatness is measured, nadal probably has the edge if context is added.
lol … did you expect your thread to devolve into this?
But he also has more masters atp finals total titles weeks at number 1 and total match wins over Nadal now.He doesn’t. 24 slams over 22 slams is the only context needed.
Court isnt goat on the womens side and serena v graf is a debate.He doesn’t. 24 slams over 22 slams is the only context needed.
Politics on wta side plus court winning many slams in small draws.Court isnt goat on the womens side and serena v graf is a debate.
Court has 11 slams, she’s far away from GOAThood. Williams Graf shouldn’t be a debate. Williams clears.Court isnt goat on the womens side and serena v graf is a debate.
Nadal beat Djokovic at w and queens in that period. Federer obviously is far superior to Rafa on grass so your point is absolute.And the way he phrased it: Nadal beat Fed at Wimb only once LOL. Good luck to Djokovic even winning vs 2006-2008 Fed.
I don't think I will even remove court from the discussion. She doesn't have 11 slams this is a new lie I am hearing today. She has 24 and 11 of them are in AO with smaller draws but probably not all of them.Court has 11 slams, she’s far away from GOAThood. Williams Graf shouldn’t be a debate. Williams clears.
After astersiked slams became a thing context became talked about. You have just added context btw on the womens side in your very first sentence.Politics on wta side plus court winning many slams in small draws.
Not at all compared to ATP. And YOU know it.
Its not at all important if I know it but YOU know it. You rafans used only slam counts when he went ahead. We are using every criteria and he is still FAR ahead.
Not at all related to court but she is possibly goat female player anyway.
Politics TODAY. Not those days. Some left wing nutjobs don't like what she says. And that's why they try to deny her goathood.After astersiked slams became a thing context became talked about. You have just added context btw on the womens side in your very first sentence.
Graf had a golden calendar slam. Is that not the absolute pinnacle of tennis? Did Graf and Serena ever play at the slams? I know graf and venus did i think.Court has 11 slams, she’s far away from GOAThood. Williams Graf shouldn’t be a debate. Williams clears.
I like Court and i agree about your left wing point. However even in the 80s she was never hailed as goat. Navratilova was. I was never clear why navratilova was placed ahead of evertPolitics TODAY. Not those days. Some left wing nutjobs don't like what she says. And that's why they try to deny her goathood.
They played out of slams. And shared results 1-1.Graf had a golden calendar slam. Is that not the absolute pinnacle of tennis? Did Graf and Serena ever play at the slams? I know graf and venus did i think.
Which events? I assume can get clips on you tube. How old were they respectively? I love both ladies.They played out of slams. And shared results 1-1.
The irony of your post is that Nadal only got the slam record in the first place due to the deportation of Djokovic and Federer injury. You say Djokovic went ahead of Nadal without his main rivals present or playing. That is exactly what Rafa did at Australia 2022 to take the lead! lolPlaying longer doesnt make a player greater. If slams are where greatness is measured, nadal probably has the edge if context is added. Where djokovic has an advnatage is on the atp regular tour which is why i think the big 3 all have claims to be goat as they each have strong arguments. Had Sampras got one FO i think he had a great argument tbh.
weak era stuff as annoying as it is does matter as we see it in other sports all the time, notably boxing and f1.
RAfa won his 22nd slam at the time a record at roland garros 2022.The irony of your post is that Nadal only got the slam record in the first place due to the deportation of Djokovic and Federer injury. You say Djokovic went ahead of Nadal without his main rivals present or playing. That is exactly what Rafa did at Australia 2022 to take the lead! lol
Both statements completely wrong.Court has 11 slams, she’s far away from GOAThood. Williams Graf shouldn’t be a debate. Williams clears.
Court has 11 OE slams but 24 in total. If the poster wants to quibble about OE and pre-OE: Court won six in a row and a CYGS in the OE and has the best slam winning record of all players in the OE (despite the OE starting when she was post-prime).I don't think I will even remove court from the discussion. She doesn't have 11 slams this is a new lie I am hearing today. She has 24 and 11 of them are in AO with smaller draws but probably not all of them.
She has absolute records as CYGS and dominated the women's field for a decade. 93 % of some match wins. She and laver are absolute top 3 in respective genders. But Nole now is above both.
Court should be a legitimate GWOAT contender but this aside, comparing between eras is a completely different scenario. Djokovic and Nadal played in the same era so they can be compared. If you compare them to Borg or even Sampras, then context is needed.Court isnt goat on the womens side and serena v graf is a debate.
Court should be a legitimate GWOAT contender but this aside, comparing between eras is a completely different scenario. Djokovic and Nadal played in the same era so they can be compared. If you compare them to Borg or even Sampras, then context is needed.
Yes that is my view. Comparing among eras is only possible to some extent but we can decide who the best of an era was. Therefore my GWOAT contenders are Court, Nav and Graf.I agree, but aren't you basically saying that there is no GOAT and we cannot compare eras? That's kind of how I see it.
Yes and before that Fed had come back from a 0-40 hole on his serve. Fed created some momentum for himself even before the rain delay.What are you talking about? it was 4-5 Nadal about to serve in the third set when the first rain delay came.
Well so how are we comparing Nadal v Djokovic as Nsdal hasnt played for almost 2 years now. I dont think there is a definitive answer tbh. Both have arguments.Court should be a legitimate GWOAT contender but this aside, comparing between eras is a completely different scenario. Djokovic and Nadal played in the same era so they can be compared. If you compare them to Borg or even Sampras, then context is needed.