Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer not on Rafael Nadal’s level
- Thread starter clayqueen
- Start date
UnforcedTerror
Hall of Fame
It's true. They're not on Bull's level on clay.
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
simple, coz stupid and junk clay compensated for other important titles/achievements
Rattie
Legend
Not in 2022
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
simple, coz stupid and junk clay compensated for other important titles/achievements
What's 'junk clay'?
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Nadal is great enough at playing tennis in general that even if he's not as good on hard or grass as he is on clay, he's still pretty great and his clay level is so exceptional that the whole package makes even guys who were fans of Roger like Kyrgios or Tiriac say that Roger isn't in the conversation anymore.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Who cares what Kyrgios or Tiriac say. Anyone with a tennis knowledge only in his little pinky believes Nadal is inferior to Fed/Novak everywhere except clay
Too bad for them, there are 4 distinct slams in a year
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
I think Nick and Tiriac both have more knowledge about tennis than you and they were both fans of Roger previously. Even Wawrinka has been making statements like these recently.
Stan on the topic with #21:
"Whatever happens we cannot compare Nadal with other tennis players, that's for sure. "
"It was brilliant to watch his win. I wasn't surprised but I admire that he is still able to do it and as I say I am not surprised because we know that he is well above everyone else. He's proved that he's able to do things throughout his career that others can't. "
:focal(944x504:946x502)/origin-imgresizer.tntsports.io/2022/02/17/3320403-67888328-2560-1440.jpg)
'He has written history' - Wawrinka says Nadal is incomparable after Australian Open triumph
Stan Wawrinka says Rafael Nadal cannot be compared to other tennis players after the Spaniard claimed a record-setting 21st Grand Slam at the Australian Open.
www.eurosport.com
And now with #22:
"For Wawrinka, no doubt, the GOAT is Nadal!"
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
'Junk clay' is the surface that 99% of the players cannot fathom.
Tennfan123
Legend
But Federer was the one who liked blue Clay!
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
2-3 HC slams vs Novak.
2-2 vs Novak on grass. All matches competitive.
3-1 HC slams vs RF.
1-3 vs RF on grass. All matches competitive.
That's not inferior. That's marginally or somewhat weaker.
Not to mention how underrepresented clay is compared to HC on the tour, despite world-wide being on par as surfaces...
I don't agree with the thread title but you seem to go into the extreme opposite to "prove" something that has no real basis in facts.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
You can call me what you want, just call Nadal the GOAT
Such heresy.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
I didn't say very much myself personally, unlike you who insult anyone who disagrees with you as ignorant. What I DID do was reference pros who are fans of Roger who have changed their tune in recent years. Like Kyrgios, Tiriac and Stan who are all causing you cognitive dissidence.
Stan on the topic with #21:
"Whatever happens we cannot compare Nadal with other tennis players, that's for sure."
"It was brilliant to watch his win. I wasn't surprised but I admire that he is still able to do it and as I say I am not surprised because we know that he is well above everyone else. He's proved that he's able to do things throughout his career that others can't. "
'He has written history' - Wawrinka says Nadal is incomparable after Australian Open triumph
Stan Wawrinka says Rafael Nadal cannot be compared to other tennis players after the Spaniard claimed a record-setting 21st Grand Slam at the Australian Open.
www.eurosport.com
And #22:
"For Wawrinka, no doubt, the GOAT is Nadal!"
Rattie
Legend
22 slams. Not too shabby eh?!
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
It’s not. But why are we grouping them all together as if they were the same slam?
Fed remains ahead in 3 of the 4 slams and Novak ahead in 2 of the 4.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Nadal has won 6 Slams on hard, the 4th most in the Open Era tied with Agassi and only behind Sampras, Federer and Djokovic. It means Nadal is a solid top 5 player on hard courts in the Open Era.
Nadal is also a top 10 in the Open Era on grass (can't say the same about Federer on clay).
As for "indoor", indoor is a condition, not a surface. Indoor condition can be played on any surface (hard, clay or grass).
Nadal is undoubtedly the greatest indoor clay player, as he is the only man to win 2 RG titles playing on indoor conditions (he won the RG 2020 final beatng Djokovic indoor, and he also won the RG 2022 SF beating Zverev indoor).
Davydenko is vasty superior than Nadal on hard court because he has a positive H2H against Nadal. That makes a lot of sense. No?
H2H against an individual doesn't determines who's better and greater player? It's about titles, win/loss against the playing field, streaks/records.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
It’s not. But why are we grouping them all together as if they were the same slam?
Do you recall people subdividing Sampras' 14 slams and dissecting their composition this way? Yeah, that's not how this works.
You missed the point
Sport
G.O.A.T.
So? What matters is the total Slam count, we cannot strategically exclude RG from the Slam count.It’s not. But why are we grouping them all together as if they were the same slam?
Mr. Sampras was ahead of Nadal in 3 out of 4 Majors in 2021, yet Nadal had clearly surpassed him by 2021 because 20 > 14.
If we consider 100% of the Slams (not excluding RG), Nadal leads 22 > 20 and thus leads the Grand Slam race.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
I don’t think the debate is whether Nadal can win outside of clay. He obviously can. The debate is whether we should lump all his slam results together and ignore the very different results by surface.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Why are we even dividing them up, as if some slams are worth more than others.It’s not. But why are we grouping them all together as if they were the same slam?
22-20-20. All of them BO5, all of them two weeks, all of them 7 rounds, all of them with the whole elite playing.
Nadal won less of the other three, but is completely above the other two in his favourite slam. What was preventing RF from winning 14 Wimbys or 14 USOs, or Djokovic from having 14 AOs?
Just as you argue "RF has a better spread", you omit to argue "why is RF not as dominant on grass as Nadal is on clay?"
The logic goes both ways.
Rattie
Legend
And why are people tying themselves in knots trying to diminish one of the big 3 over the other two? ALL our favourites impress and have their place in history. None of us know who will win the slam race in truth. In my view Rafa is the stand out tennis player of all time. I imagine you feel the same about yours. C’est la vie.It’s not. But why are we grouping them all together as if they were the same slam?
Sport
G.O.A.T.
No one has denied it.Why is it so difficult to accept that there are very real differences in tennis results depending on the surface you play in?
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
didn't know that that word looks like almost the same in our language, thanks
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Um...Nadal has 22 of the titles which matter most. He has other things too but there's no way around this. Even Fed fans like Kyrgios get it:
Kyrgios: 'Roger’s done as GOAT & he’s got really bad records against Nadal & Djokovic'
"Roger Federer is done for me in the GOAT talks" Nick Kyrgios believes the Swiss Maestro is no more worthy of the title
From thrilling match highlights to behind-the-court stories, we bring you the latest from the tennis world. Stay ahead of the game with FirstSportz Tennis!
firstsportz.com
"Nadal is the best of the big three"
Nick Kyrgios: «Nadal es el mejor del ‘Big Three', tiene 22 Grand Slams»
Tenista número 78 de la ATP estará en el 250 Mallorca Championships. El ATP 250 Mallorca Championships activa su cuenta atrás para devolver a la Isla al circuito mundial del tenis profesional. Será del 18 al 25 de junio y en el espectacular marco de Santa Ponça y en el Mallorca Country Club y...
www.ultimahora.es
Kyrgios: 'Nadal is the greatest of all time...my career's 1/40th of his'
News
Experience Tennis Paradise at the BNP Paribas Open - Indian Wells, California
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Who says that “what matters is total slam count”? Matters for what?
and why do Nadal fans always bring up “4-3, 2-1 bud” when comparing HC results with Novak? So for some measures you look at the totality but for others you do a tournament-level analysis? And strangely enough which one you use happens to be the one that makes your fav player look best?
Just because you post someone's opinion about your idol doesn't necessary it's a general consensus(SIGH...)
There are over 7 billion people on this planet, you know?
The Fedfather
Legend
But it's the respective governments' decisions that affected Djokovic. The tournaments themselves had/have no say in him being allowed to play.
Last edited:
Already said that Nadal is better and greater on clay, that's it. Fedovic is ahead everywhere
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
A rule is never made irrelevant just because there are exceptions in it.
If you actually believe top pros don't care about their H2H against their biggest rivals, you'd better reconsider... "Who cares that I am down 6-15 vs this guy when I have better results overall". That's a fairy-tale. They do care. And for a reason. In a one-on-one sport especially.
Nor did I ever claim H2H determines "who is better", I merely showed you that in H2H your claim of inferiority is completely false.
Even in terms of slams. Nadal winning 6 slams on HC compared to Djokovic's 12 is far less "inferior" than Djokovic's 2 clay slams compared to Nadal's 14.
Nadal won 14 clay slams despite there being just one on clay, whereas Djokovic and Federer won 11 and 12 respectively, despite there being two of them.
It goes both ways, nor can you pretend that clay is some ancient third-rate surface. It is the most demanding in terms of fitness, endurance and strategy. Unless you believe these three are irrelevant to sports...
Last edited:
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
I didn't just post 'someone's opinion' I posted the opinion of noted tennis figures who were also Federer fans and who have spoken very positively about him in the past as opposed to you making personal assertions and claiming that anyone who doesn't agree is an idiot who knows nothing about tennis which is your usual line.
Obviously things are changing when Kyrgrios says 'Roger’s done as GOAT & he’s got really bad records against Nadal & Djokovic' or "Nadal is the best of the big three."
Or when we see articles with "For Wawrinka, no doubt, the GOAT is Nadal!" and Stan says "I am not surprised because we know that he is well above everyone else. He's proved that he's able to do things throughout his career that others can't."
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Can only speak for myself. The issue for me is not to deny that Nadal is ahead in the slam race or what an incredible accomplishment that is. the issue for me is to push back against those that talk of GOATness and don’t accept that Nadal in clay and outside of clay are two different animals.
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
Lol
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
That's not how this works. Sampras didn't lead in slams won only to find the next day that it didn't really mean anything because it had to be subjected to TMF's personal interpretation.
There's no such thing as a GOAT but you Federer fans tried to stuff it down everyone's throats for years when he was ahead in the slam count and now that he isn't it's a totally different storyline.
And now, even his longtime fans like Kyrgrios says 'Roger’s done as GOAT & he’s got really bad records against Nadal & Djokovic' or "Nadal is the best of the big three."
Or we see articles with "For Wawrinka, no doubt, the GOAT is Nadal!" and Stan says "I am not surprised because we know that he is well above everyone else. He's proved that he's able to do things throughout his career that others can't."
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Of course they are, overall, but when we use "inferior" to describe the difference, I have to wonder if some people understand this word.
Rosstour
Talk Tennis Guru
Of course he is. He beat Djokovic ar
And all that domination took place from 2008-14. Before and after that period, which can obviously be called Rafa's peak, he does not dominate Djokovic or Federer.
Fedal have never met at USO, and the last matches between them at AO and Wimbledon were Federer victories.
Yet we cling to this narrative that Fed always was and always will be Rafa's pigeon.
