Only 3 players in history have won more Slams off-clay than the "Clay-Courter" Rafael Nadal.

Leandro2045

Rookie
So i've seen countless amount of post here saying how Rafa Slam resume is somehow "worse" than Roger's and Novak because he has won so much on Clay.

It should in fact be the opposite when you look at the numbers..


Tennis players with more Slams than Rafael Nadal off-clay in Open Era history :

1) Federer
2) Djokovic
3) Sampras

Tennis players with more Slams than Federer & Djokovic on-clay in Open Era history :

1) Nadal
2) Borg
3) Lendl
4) Wilander
5) Kuerten
6) Kodes
7) Vilas
8) Courier
9) Bruguera

How the hell have people turned Nadal off clay resume into an advantage for Roger & Novak and a mark against Nadal...
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
So i've seen countless amount of post here saying how Rafa Slam resume is somehow "worse" than Roger's and Novak because he has won so much on Clay.

It should in fact be the opposite when you look at the numbers..


Tennis players with more Slams than Rafael Nadal off-clay in Open Era history :

1) Federer
2) Djokovic
3) Sampras

Tennis players with more Slams than Federer & Djokovic on-clay in Open Era history :

1) Nadal
2) Borg
3) Lendl
4) Wilander
5) Kuerten
6) Kodes
7) Vilas
8) Courier
9) Bruguera

How the hell have people turned Nadal off clay resume into an advantage for Roger & Novak and a mark against Nadal...
It is crazy. You know damn sure that if Federer has 13 Wimbledons and 1 Australian Open there would be none of this rubbish from either Federer fans nor Nadal fans.
Yall better come through and NUKE!!! :D

 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
It's all a matter for the history books IMO! Nothing's going to be settled within the next couple years! The reason Federer will probably remain the GOAT in most people's eyes is because he won a number of Wimbledons and USO's! Back in the day, most top players didn't go "down under" and many avoided the clay of the Paris! It hurts Nadal that most of his majors comes at that one site; Sorry! It was barely above the status of the AO even when Borg played it! Novak might have suffered the same fate with 8 wins in Australia, but he's balanced his resume out nicely with 5 YEC's to go along with those other majors at Wimbledon and the USO totally 9! The majors outside of the FO for Nadal is only 7 with no YEC's! IMO he can never be the GOAT due to that imbalance! :sneaky:
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
It was barely above the status of the AO even when Borg played it! Novak might have suffered the same fate with 8 wins in Australia, but he's balanced his resume out nicely with 5 YEC's to go along with those other majors at Wimbledon and the USO totally 9! The majors outside of the FO for Nadal is only 7 with no YEC's! IMO he can never be the GOAT due to that imbalance! :sneaky:

 

weakera

Legend
It's all a matter for the history books IMO! Nothing's going to be settled within the next couple years! The reason Federer will probably remain the GOAT in most people's eyes is because he won a number of Wimbledons and USO's! Back in the day, most top players didn't go "down under" and many avoided the clay of the Paris! It hurts Nadal that most of his majors comes at that one site; Sorry! It was barely above the status of the AO even when Borg played it! Novak might have suffered the same fate with 8 wins in Australia, but he's balanced his resume out nicely with 5 YEC's to go along with those other majors at Wimbledon and the USO totally 9! The majors outside of the FO for Nadal is only 7 with no YEC's! IMO he can never be the GOAT due to that imbalance! :sneaky:
Rambling nonsense
 

PeoplesChamp

Hall of Fame
How many players does Nadal trail at every slam individually outside of RG?

The answer will be quite painful.

Maybe there should be a thread....
 

brc444

Rookie
If you go outside the open era, you add Emerson and Laver. McEnroe has 7 also so I think he is tied for 6th all time. Not sure about Connors numbers with the changing US open surfaces.
 

Rosstour

Hall of Fame
It is crazy. You know damn sure that if Federer has 13 Wimbledons and 1 Australian Open there would be none of this rubbish from either Federer fans nor Nadal fans.
if Federer had won 2/3rds of his Slams at Wimbledon, he'd be considered the greatest grass court player of all time but not GOAT. And there wouldn't be any argument about it.
 
Last edited:

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
if Federer had won 2/3rds of his Slams at Wimbledon, he'd be considered the greatest grass court player of all time but not GOAT. And there wouldn't be any argument about it.
13 W

3 RG won vs Rafa

2 USO won vs Rafa and Novak

2 AO won vs Rafa and Novak

Is there ANY argument for Fed not being GOAT in this scenario ??
 

Flint

Hall of Fame
If Nadal had not had his clay career but someone like Murrays he would have

AO: 1 win
FO: 1 final
WIM: 2 wins
USO: 4 wins

Everyone would call that player an ATG!
 

Lew II

Legend
What's the point of comparing Nadal to McEnroe and Connors?

He must be compared to other GOAT contenders like Federer and Djokovic. They've been more consistent than Nadal across all surfaces, it's undeniable, or they wouldn't have 100 weeks at #1 more than him.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
So i've seen countless amount of post here saying how Rafa Slam resume is somehow "worse" than Roger's and Novak because he has won so much on Clay.

It should in fact be the opposite when you look at the numbers..


Tennis players with more Slams than Rafael Nadal off-clay in Open Era history :

1) Federer
2) Djokovic
3) Sampras

Tennis players with more Slams than Federer & Djokovic on-clay in Open Era history :


1) Nadal
2) Borg
3) Lendl
4) Wilander
5) Kuerten
6) Kodes
7) Vilas
8) Courier
9) Bruguera

How the hell have people turned Nadal off clay resume into an advantage for Roger & Novak and a mark against Nadal...
You forgot about Andre Agassi and some will make a case even for Lendl or Mac.
 
Last edited:

Bender

G.O.A.T.
How the hell have people turned Nadal off clay resume into an advantage for Roger & Novak and a mark against Nadal...
Here, I'll show you by isolating parts of your OP so that you can see how you've answered your own question:
how Rafa Slam resume is somehow "worse" than Roger's and Novak:

Tennis players with more Slams than Rafael Nadal off-clay in Open Era history :

1) Federer
2) Djokovic

3) Sampras
 

Thriller

Semi-Pro
The GOATs win at Wimbledon. 2 isnt enough I’m afraid, as much as I like Rafa.
Ridiculous. The guy has been in 5 Wimbledon finals. That's the same number as John McEnroe. It is 2 more than Edberg. Not bad for a claycourter who lacks versatility? SMH
And pushed arguably the best grasscourt player of all time at his peak to two 5 set final matches, winning one of them.
Rafa doesn't even need to play another Wimbledon to be regarded as one of the best players of all time on that surface.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
Ridiculous. The guy has been in 5 Wimbledon finals. That's the same number as John McEnroe. It is 2 more than Edberg. Not bad for a claycourter who lacks versatility? SMH
And pushed arguably the best grasscourt player of all time at his peak to two 5 set final matches, winning one of them.
Rafa doesn't even need to play another Wimbledon to be regarded as one of the best players of all time on that surface.
The question is, how much that has to do with the matchup and how much that has to do with Nadal's grass court game ?
 

blablavla

Legend
It is crazy. You know damn sure that if Federer has 13 Wimbledons and 1 Australian Open there would be none of this rubbish from either Federer fans nor Nadal fans.
how can you know this?
fans are not rational by the very definition, this is why you see all this non-sense debate, and why the goalpost is always moving
 

blablavla

Legend
What's the point of comparing Nadal to McEnroe and Connors?

He must be compared to other GOAT contenders like Federer and Djokovic. They've been more consistent than Nadal across all surfaces, it's undeniable, or they wouldn't have 100 weeks at #1 more than him.
perhaps because GOAT stands for ALL Times? and All times are not limited to 2011 - present, All times includes as well Sampras, Borg, Laver, etc.
 

Xavier G

Hall of Fame
Faster tennis looks better on the eye than slower tennis to many people and more dynamic. Grass courts were historically faster. Clay has suffered from this comparison. In life, speed is often prized, in cars, air and train travel, technology and in sports.
 
So i've seen countless amount of post here saying how Rafa Slam resume is somehow "worse" than Roger's and Novak because he has won so much on Clay.

It should in fact be the opposite when you look at the numbers..


Tennis players with more Slams than Rafael Nadal off-clay in Open Era history :

1) Federer
2) Djokovic
3) Sampras

Tennis players with more Slams than Federer & Djokovic on-clay in Open Era history :

1) Nadal
2) Borg
3) Lendl
4) Wilander
5) Kuerten
6) Kodes
7) Vilas
8) Courier
9) Bruguera

How the hell have people turned Nadal off clay resume into an advantage for Roger & Novak and a mark against Nadal...
I agree. I think this could be seen as an argument pro nadal. People say he is not as balanced as fed and nole but to have the most impressive feat of dominance in tennis history on one surface and still be top5 all time outside of clay is super impressive.

Of course having 5 at each other slam is also quite impressive so it is about what you prefer, being extremely dominant at 3 slams and very good at one or being off the charts super dominant at one and very good at the other 3.

You could say, doing it at 3 is better than doing it at 1 but then again nadal essentially doubled what nole and fed did at their best slam on his best so the level of dominance is not quite comparable.

Both his its merits but I wouldn't necessarily discount nadals "one sidedness" because that nadal feat is clearly the number 1 achievement in tennis history.

But of course what the other two did is also super impressive, you can't really say either is better.

But yeah discounting nadals FO is stupid that would be like not counting Usain bolts world Championship titles.

Also don't forget that federer and novak both would have 5-6 FO titles without nadal so the weak clay Era argument is a bit futile.
 

Thriller

Semi-Pro
The question is, how much that has to do with the matchup and how much that has to do with Nadal's grass court game ?
What matchup? talk about match up when the No. 1 keeps inexplicably losing to the world No. 40 because of the latter's style. Santoro was a match up problem for Safin.
Nadal is a match up problem with the entire field, his career win percentage is the GOAT at 83%.

You don't get to 7 Wimbledon Semi finals, 5 finals and win 2 of them as well as win the title on the fastest grasscourt Queens with the tiniest run off area, without knowing your way around a grasscourt.
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
I agree. I think this could be seen as an argument pro nadal. People say he is not as balanced as fed and nole but to have the most impressive feat of dominance in tennis history on one surface and still be top5 all time outside of clay is super impressive.

Of course having 5 at each other slam is also quite impressive so it is about what you prefer, being extremely dominant at 3 slams and very good at one or being off the charts super dominant at one and very good at the other 3.

You could say, doing it at 3 is better than doing it at 1 but then again nadal essentially doubled what nole and fed did at their best slam on his best so the level of dominance is not quite comparable.

Both his its merits but I wouldn't necessarily discount nadals "one sidedness" because that nadal feat is clearly the number 1 achievement in tennis history.

But of course what the other two did is also super impressive, you can't really say either is better.

But yeah discounting nadals FO is stupid that would be like not counting Usain bolts world Championship titles.

Also don't forget that federer and novak both would have 5-6 FO titles without nadal so the weak clay Era argument is a bit futile.
Excellent poast.

 

Lew II

Legend
Pete, Fed and Nole all have a higher win percentage than Nadal at AO, WI, UO and YEC.
AO: Djokovic 90.4 > Federer 87.2 > Sampras 83.3 > Nadal 82.3
WI: Sampras 90.0 > Federer 88.6 > Djokovic 87.8 > Nadal 81.5
UO: Sampras 87.5 > Federer 86.4 > Djokovic 86.2 > Nadal 85.3
YEC: Federer 77.6 > Djokovic 72.0 > Sampras 71.4 > Nadal 56.2
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
What matchup? talk about match up when the No. 1 keeps inexplicably losing to the world No. 40 because of the latter's style. Santoro was a match up problem for Safin.
Nadal is a match up problem with the entire field, his career win percentage is the GOAT at 83%.

You don't get to 7 Wimbledon Semi finals, 5 finals and win 2 of them as well as win the title on the fastest grasscourt Queens with the tiniest run off area, without knowing your way around a grasscourt.
That's not the point.Nadal applied the same strategy as he did on clay, forehand to the backhand, and it was effective, but not as effective as on clay do to difference in court speed and bounce.That's why it's hard to make the difference between the matchup and his grass court capabilities.Nadal did faced a better version of Federer compared to Djokovic, but it's hard to judje if he had a higher peak level on grass than the Serb, given these things I adressed above.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
AO: Djokovic 90.4 > Federer 87.2 > Sampras 83.3 > Nadal 82.3
WI: Sampras 90.0 > Federer 88.6 > Djokovic 87.8 > Nadal 81.5
UO: Sampras 87.5 > Federer 86.4 > Djokovic 86.2 > Nadal 85.3
YEC: Federer 77.6 > Djokovic 72.0 > Sampras 71.4 > Nadal 56.2
Given Fed's longevity, it's remarcable that he has winning percentages close to Pete's, given that the latter retired at a much younger age.
Nadal's indoor record, at the YEC, is mediocre.
 
Top