Yes it is the most extended tennis surface but that doesn't make it the most important but only more prevalent.
Nole > Sampras but Nadal < Nole: Why the double standard ?
- Thread starter TMF
- Start date
Yes it is the most extended tennis surface but that doesn't make it the most important but only more prevalent.
So, Nadal should have more, no?
It is what it is, mate.But then I have to adjust how I judge the career of the tennis players.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Adjust from what?
For example I don't say Federer is the greatest because he has won the most slams, instead I say Federer is the greatest because he is the best in 2 out of 3 surfaces.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
I don't even understand what that is supposed to mean.
That the total of slams isn't the ultimate criteria for me.Check out the top 5 I gave earlier in this same thread.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
I saw that list.
It doesn't make any sense.
It makes perfect sense for me.Remember all these kind of debates are subjective.
Last edited:
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Zhilady
Professional
It’s more important because it’s more prevalent.
The three surfaces are equally important to me despite their uneven distribution on tour.
So, there is nothing to debate.
I would agree with that but after all we are on internet and on TT.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
So, then, what is the point of telling me that these things are subjective?
To not fight each other due to different opinions.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Tennisgods
Hall of Fame
It’s interesting how not having a dog in the fight can affect how you see things. Instinctively, I feel that Nadal has had the more impressive career. He had to face peak Fed and Djokovic and, but for a couple of draws on the weaker side, his Slams were hard earned. Pretty much anything Djokovic wins from now is against a declined field, I don’t think it’ll be possible for Djoker fans to argue with that whilst still maintaining that pre 07 was a weak era.
Having said all that, Djokovic deserves immense credit for getting the beating of Nadal so frequently at Slams. He’s the main reason Nadal hasn’t overtaken Fed on Slams yet. I’m thinking 2011 Wimbledon, 2012 AO. Any other opponent in those finals and Nadal wins them.
But I still come back to thinking that things like weeks at number 1 etc feel a bit inflated, like maybe a few twists of fate (injuries at the wrong times for Nadal maybe) can create anomalies in the rankings here and there. Djokovic is certainly making hay right now, Fed’s too old to challenge for it and Rafa can’t stay fit enough. And as we all know, with Murray gone, there’s no one else...
Ultimately, both great players and both now ahead of Pete, great player that he was! We’ve been spoiled.
Having said all that, Djokovic deserves immense credit for getting the beating of Nadal so frequently at Slams. He’s the main reason Nadal hasn’t overtaken Fed on Slams yet. I’m thinking 2011 Wimbledon, 2012 AO. Any other opponent in those finals and Nadal wins them.
But I still come back to thinking that things like weeks at number 1 etc feel a bit inflated, like maybe a few twists of fate (injuries at the wrong times for Nadal maybe) can create anomalies in the rankings here and there. Djokovic is certainly making hay right now, Fed’s too old to challenge for it and Rafa can’t stay fit enough. And as we all know, with Murray gone, there’s no one else...
Ultimately, both great players and both now ahead of Pete, great player that he was! We’ve been spoiled.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Tennisgods
Hall of Fame
Couldn’t disagree more with your coach friend and that’s why the debate will rumble on and on! To me, nobody has looked more like the GOAT than Fed. Djokovic, relentless modern all court style, yes. But I want some beauty in my GOAT. Someone who wins without necessarily playing the percentages. Attack minded. Single handed backhand. And won plenty while he was at it.
All depends on what you look for in a GOAT doesn’t it!
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Djokovic is also the main reason why Federer hasn't distanced himself even further from Nadal.
Tennisgods
Hall of Fame
True. Very true.
But I know this has been argued on other occasions, it just feels like Djokovic hurt Nadal more than he hurt Fed. Could be wrong, I haven’t totted things up. Gets a bit mind boggling trying to think of all the ups and downs these guys have had...
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
WhiskeyEE
G.O.A.T.
The reason why people thought Nadal would "burn out" by his late 20s was because he always claimed to be injured. Took a while for people to wise up to the lies coming from the Nadal camp.
Four-ever
Rookie
Nadal 11 RG > Djokovic 7 AO (+4)
Nadal 3 USO = Djokovic 3 USO (0)
Nadal 1 AO = Djokovic 1 RG (0)
Nadal 2 WIM < Djokovic 4 WIM (-2)
So basically, apart from their 2 equivalent slams, Djokovic beats him at 1, but gets trounced at the other. Nadal's slam count outside RG could be better, but his slams at RG aren't there to be taken away. Nadal > Djokovic.
Nadal 3 USO = Djokovic 3 USO (0)
Nadal 1 AO = Djokovic 1 RG (0)
Nadal 2 WIM < Djokovic 4 WIM (-2)
So basically, apart from their 2 equivalent slams, Djokovic beats him at 1, but gets trounced at the other. Nadal's slam count outside RG could be better, but his slams at RG aren't there to be taken away. Nadal > Djokovic.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
It's Nadal, however I would pause if Djokovic got within 1 slam. Not sure then although maybe still Nadal.
If they were tied, I wouldn't pause in giving it to Djokovic though
If they were tied, I wouldn't pause in giving it to Djokovic though
RaulRamirez
Legend
There's really no one agreed-upon way to rank players' careers; I respect those who at least try to get it right, and try to avoid bias and double standards.
But, its not always that simple.
I have heard/read so many ways to rank careers. Some are flimsy ways to support their favorite, or downgrade their favorite's rival(s) - while others are just honest differences of opinions in what aspects should be valued the most.
To me, the most compelling arguments are made by true fans of the game who - while they may have their rooting interests - are open to different ways of looking at things - by others and by themselves.
Djokovic2015
Semi-Pro
Nadal is ahead in single titles, and MS1000.
Sampras is ahead in weeks at #1 and YE #1.
There's nothing clear as black and white between these player's achievements outside of the slams.
I'm not interested in who's should be place above the other, but the debate should be consistent when applying the criteria in evaluating their status rather playing the double-standard to suit one's favorite player.
Obviously its based on a weighted average of what those additional criteria are worth in relation to each other. Your notion that "Novak has more MS1000 than Sampras, but Nadal has more than Novak" as a cancellation metric for example is ridiculous, when Nadal's edge on Novak is 33-32 and Novak's edge on Sampras is 32-11.
You have not mentioned Novak's 5-0 edge at YEC over Nadal, where Sampras is only equal to Novak.
You have also not mentioned the career slam which Novak has over Sampras, but Nadal does not have over Novak.
You have also not mentioned criteria like slam SFs and slam QFs which Novak has over both Sampras and Nadal.
There are many logically consistent arguments for Novak>Sampras + Novak>Nadal coexisting.
For a rigorously holistic numerical analysis: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/goatList
Djokovic2015
Semi-Pro
An interesting parallel I hadn't considered before. I still see the most parallels between Federer/Gonzales, Nadal/Rosewall, and Djokovic/Laver though.
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
Nadal
Djokovic
Sampras
Djokovic overtakes Nads with one more slam (so Djokovic 16, Nadal 17) in my view as he has 5 Tour Finals vs 0, plus more time at #1.
Djoker having won all nine Masters events cancels out with Nadal's Olympics win. Anyone being intellectually honest agrees that the Olympics are at best in between a Masters and the Tour Finals in terms of their importance to tennis specifically. In some sports they're much more important of course, and some individual players do treat it as a special honour to play for their country, as they do in the Davis Cup.
I give Nadal some career credit points for his very impressive dominance of one surface, but Djokovic gets points for better versatility. As Nadal fans often say, neither is better than the other here, so I'll say this cancels out too.
If Nadal had even one Tour Finals trophy I'd probably say that they'd have to tie in slams for Novak to be ahead though.
Sampras has been left behind by both now IMO.
Djokovic
Sampras
Djokovic overtakes Nads with one more slam (so Djokovic 16, Nadal 17) in my view as he has 5 Tour Finals vs 0, plus more time at #1.
Djoker having won all nine Masters events cancels out with Nadal's Olympics win. Anyone being intellectually honest agrees that the Olympics are at best in between a Masters and the Tour Finals in terms of their importance to tennis specifically. In some sports they're much more important of course, and some individual players do treat it as a special honour to play for their country, as they do in the Davis Cup.
I give Nadal some career credit points for his very impressive dominance of one surface, but Djokovic gets points for better versatility. As Nadal fans often say, neither is better than the other here, so I'll say this cancels out too.
If Nadal had even one Tour Finals trophy I'd probably say that they'd have to tie in slams for Novak to be ahead though.
Sampras has been left behind by both now IMO.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
DJO-NAD
AO 7 > AO 1
RG 1 < RG 11
WIM 4 > WIM 2
USO 3 = USO 3
Djokovic leads in two Majors, Nadal leads in one with a bigger margin than any of Djokovic's. Tied in one.
I can tell that you and Lew are from the same breed, even if from different fanbases.
byealmeens
Semi-Pro
Exactly! I was surprised myself, as almost everyone I had ever approached on the topic had given Roger the "aesthetic" vote (most visually pleasing game), whether they thought he was GOAT or not. And even though I personally agree with you, I also have a lot of respect for his expertise and understanding of the game. So when he told me something "looked" better in Novak, I had to respect that. It just proves that perspectives truly vary, and may or may not correlate with all of the evidence.
I'm not sure which fans you are referring to. If you actually found one that claimed both of these things, then I would suggest you show their two posts and call them out directly. As for me, I do not agree that Djokovic is better than Sampras simply because 15 > 14...he has far surpassed Sampras in many other metrics as well and was much more dominant. In my opinion he was superior to Sampras when he won 4 slams in a row and was sitting at 12.
As for Djokovic and Nadal, I don't agree that Djokovic is better than Nadal yet, but he is very close and in my opinion does not need to match Nadal's total number of majors to surpass him.
djokovic - nadal - sampras
best worst
GS: 15 - 17 - 14
WTF: 5 - 0 - 5
masters: 32 - 33 - 11
YE#1 (ITF champ): 5(6) - 4(3) - 6(6)
weeks as no1: 242+ - 196 - 286
best year: nole W2015-RG2016
best season: nole 2015
most complete: nole, all big (1000+) tournaments > rafa, all slams + 7 masters > sampras, 3 slams + WTF + 5 masters
point records: nole, 16,950p
most slams in a row: nole 4
most titles in a row: nole 2, 7 + DC finals and 7
longest victory streak: nole, 43
h2h: nole > rafa
W/L%: 82,7% - 82,9% - 77,4%
W/L% vs top10: 68,8% - 65,3% - 63,6%
best worst
GS: 15 - 17 - 14
WTF: 5 - 0 - 5
masters: 32 - 33 - 11
YE#1 (ITF champ): 5(6) - 4(3) - 6(6)
weeks as no1: 242+ - 196 - 286
best year: nole W2015-RG2016
best season: nole 2015
most complete: nole, all big (1000+) tournaments > rafa, all slams + 7 masters > sampras, 3 slams + WTF + 5 masters
point records: nole, 16,950p
most slams in a row: nole 4
most titles in a row: nole 2, 7 + DC finals and 7
longest victory streak: nole, 43
h2h: nole > rafa
W/L%: 82,7% - 82,9% - 77,4%
W/L% vs top10: 68,8% - 65,3% - 63,6%
Last edited:
