Pat Cash: "Federer not even the second greatest in his own era"

messiahrobins said:
Who does Cash think was greater than Federer in his era? I assume Hewitt and Safin? Roddick? Id love to know how he works that out though lol.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Fed did completely dominate his peers. Could have done better against two younger GOAT candidates but what can you do.

Still left quite a mark on the game, otherwise we wouldn't still be talking about him this much.

As for Pat Cash, whether one agrees with him or not, he did always had it in for Fed. Even going back to 2004 where he was attacking Mirka.
 
Fed was the GOAT but having negative h2h vs both main rivals did hurt his CV. Especially that he had negative h2h vs rafa and muzza with 10+ matches in his own era. He did better vs muzza later and rafa little beat. But not enough better vs rafa to turn around h2h and it went really ugly vs nole too.

But even when he was the GOAT he never owned some main records as YE#1 for exempel.
 
Pat Cash's dislike of Federer is hilarious. I remember him moaning about him 15 years ago.

That said, the Nadal head to head with Federer is interesting.

On one hand, there's a strong selection bias in that Nadal wasn't making non-clay finals nearly as consistently as Federer was making them on clay - Nadal was losing to the rest of the tour at a far higher rate than Federer, particularly on his weaker surfaces (where he has a negative head to head against Federer). You see this reflected in big tournament wins: the Canadian Open is the only non-clay big tournament Nadal's won more than Federer. But on the other, he didn't beat Federer off clay once after the 2014 Australian Open (and was 1-6 against him) despite being 5 years younger. The question is, why?
 
tennito said:
Pat Cash's dislike of Federer is hilarious. I remember him moaning about him 15 years ago.

That said, the Nadal head to head with Federer is interesting.

On one hand, there's a strong selection bias in that Nadal wasn't making non-clay finals nearly as consistently as Federer was making them on clay - Nadal was losing to the rest of the tour at a far higher rate than Federer, particularly on his weaker surfaces (where he has a negative head to head against Federer). You see this reflected in big tournament wins: the Canadian Open is the only non-clay big tournament Nadal's won more than Federer. But on the other, he didn't beat Federer off clay once after the 2014 Australian Open (and was 1-6 against him) despite being 5 years younger. The question is, why?
Click to expand...
Nadal won their very first encounter, which was on hardcourt. He went 3-1 in hardcourt slams against Federer. Nadal also beat Federer at his best slam, whereas Federer could not return the favor. The myth that Nadal was only ahead in clay head to head needs to stop. At their peaks or "prime" or "prime peak" or "Peak prime", Nadal had big wins on all surfaces, and was ahead on hard and clay. Federer fans, despite constantly waxing poetic about Federer's prime being from 2004 to 2009, with a reemergence in 2012, and thus losses to Djokovic from 2015 on should be discounted, now value all wins against Nadal in this same period. In fact, it seems they try to revise history to suggest this defines the rivalry. Why is that?
 
Last edited:
tennito said:
Pat Cash's dislike of Federer is hilarious. I remember him moaning about him 15 years ago.

That said, the Nadal head to head with Federer is interesting.

On one hand, there's a strong selection bias in that Nadal wasn't making non-clay finals nearly as consistently as Federer was making them on clay - Nadal was losing to the rest of the tour at a far higher rate than Federer, particularly on his weaker surfaces (where he has a negative head to head against Federer). You see this reflected in big tournament wins: the Canadian Open is the only non-clay big tournament Nadal's won more than Federer. But on the other, he didn't beat Federer off clay once after the 2014 Australian Open (and was 1-6 against him) despite being 5 years younger. The question is, why?
Click to expand...
Rafa was so in Roger’s head that the surface did not make a significant difference. Far lesser players than Roger had better chances of beating Rafa on non-clay surfaces.
 
tennito said:
On one hand, there's a strong selection bias in that Nadal wasn't making non-clay finals nearly as consistently as Federer was making them on clay - Nadal was losing to the rest of the tour at a far higher rate than Federer, particularly on his weaker surfaces (where he has a negative head to head against Federer).
Click to expand...
Nadal beat Federer at 2006 Dubai on hardcourt, and 2004 Key Biscayne on hardcourt. And then later in Wimbledon and Australian Open finals.

tennito said:
But on the other, he didn't beat Federer off clay once after the 2014 Australian Open (and was 1-6 against him) despite being 5 years younger. The question is, why? The question is, why?
Click to expand...
Because Nadal changed the way that he played. He started trying to shorten points and saving his movement for when he really needed it. That worked well against the field, but against Federer directly it didn't work as well. Nadal's old approach of high intensity, a lot of movement and mobility, targeting the backhand a lot etc. worked better against Federer.
 
jackson vile said:
He saw his records disappear before he even retired.
Click to expand...
He's the GOAT of both Wimbledon and USO and has the most consecutive weeks number one, most popular player ever and still considered the GOAT by the majority. Plus I think he's like 3x richer than both Nadal and Djokovic. I'm sure he's doing just fine lol
 
DunbeeGumbee said:
He's the GOAT of both Wimbledon and USO and has the most consecutive weeks number one, most popular player ever and still considered the GOAT by the majority. Plus I think he's like 3x richer than both Nadal and Djokovic. I'm sure he's doing just fine lol
Click to expand...
He's not the GOAT of the USO (Sampras has an extra final), his 8th Wimbledon title has a major asterisk (injured finalist opponent LOL) and history doesn't care about consecutive weeks #1, what the "majority" thinks, or how many pesos Roger has accumulated. What matters are the facts - and the facts place Roger in glory as no less than the third greatest player to grace his era.
 
Last edited:
messiahrobins said:
Not Federers era really
Click to expand...
and still, fed played clearly most matches vs nole and rafa. and that talks very much. eidher was them in the same era and played so many maches or players from feds ara was so weak that even the best came so rarely to final stages of tournaments that fed played much more with players from diferent eras than them from his own era! (50+WO vs nole, 40+WO vs rafa, 27 vs hewwit and wawa, 26 vs berdich, 25 vs muzza and del potro, 24 vs roddik, 21 vs denko and gasquet)!

fed - ´81
nole 50+WO - ´87
rafa 40+WO - ´86
hewitt 27 - ´81
wawa 27 - ´85
berdish 26 - ´85
muzza 25 - ´87
potro 25 - ´88
roddick 24 - ´82
denko 21 - ´81
gasque 21 - ´86

feds 10 biggest rivalry:

feds era (81 + - 2)
hewitt 27
roddick 24
denko 21
----
3 players, 72 matches

noles era (87 + - 2)
nole 50+WO
rafa 40+WO
wawa 27
berdich 26
muzza 25
potro 25
gasque 21
-----
7 players, 214 + 2 WO matches
 
Last edited:
DunbeeGumbee said:
He's the GOAT of both Wimbledon and USO and has the most consecutive weeks number one, most popular player ever and still considered the GOAT by the majority. Plus I think he's like 3x richer than both Nadal and Djokovic. I'm sure he's doing just fine lol
Click to expand...
Roger is not the GOAT of the USO. Nadal has as many YE at #1 and has won more slams and big titles than Roger
 
GoatNo1 said:
and still, fed played clearly most matches vs nole and rafa. and that talks very much. eidher was them in the same era and played so many maches or players from feds ara wos so weak that even the best came so rarely to final stages of tournaments that fed played much more with players from diferent eras than them from his own era! (50+WO vs nole, 40+WO vs rafa, 27 vs hewwit and wawa, 26 vs berdich, 25 vs muzza and del potro, 24 vs roddik, 21 vs denko and gasquet)!

fed - ´81
nole 50+WO - ´87
rafa 40+WO - ´86
hewitt 27 - ´81
wawa 27 - ´85
berdish 26 - ´85
muzza 25 - ´87
potro 25 - ´88
roddick 24 - ´82
denko 21 - ´81
gasque 21 - ´86

feds 10 biggest rivalry:

feds era (81 + - 2)
hewitt 27
roddick 24
denko 21
----
3 player, 72 matches

noles era (87 + - 2)
nole 50+WO
rafa 40+WO
wawa 27
berdich 26
muzza 25
potro 25
gasque 21
-----
7 players, 214 + 2 WO matches
Click to expand...
You cannot be the same era when 5 and 6 years older. Federer was always at a disadvantage in the match ups post 2008
 
messiahrobins said:
You cannot be the same era when 5 and 6 years older. Federer was always at a disadvantage in the match ups post 2008
Click to expand...
that must mean that his era was ultra weak that he played a very much more matches vs players from other eras (nole, rafa, muzza, wawa, potro, berdych, gasque) than from his own (roddick, denko, hewitt)!
and he had always negative h2h vs rafa.
i just can not see how 20-21-22 years is better than 26-27-28! nole had positive h2h vs both sinner and raz up to their 23 years. and he is 15-16 years older.
 
Last edited:
GoatNo1 said:
that must mean that his era was ultra weak that he played a very much more matches vs players from other eras (nole, rafa, muzza, wawa, potro, berdych, gasque) than from his own (roddick, denko, hewitt)!
and he had always negative h2h vs rafa.
i just can not see how 20-21-22 years is better than 26-27-28! nole had positive h2h vs both sinner and ras up to their 23 years. and he is 15-16 years older.
Click to expand...
Federer was no.1 for 5 straight years. It is mentally and physically very tiring. By the time Nadal and especially Djokovic hit their consistent peaks Federer had half a decade being the guy to be shot at non stop. He then had two ATGs come along challenging him, of course he was disadvantaged. Nadal and Djokovic had Medvedev Tsitsipas and Zverev as the up and coming challengers. Look how Djokovic now struggles with genuine ATG talent Sinner and Alcaraz, he isnt even competitive against them at the slams now when the pressure is on at semi final or finals.
You have to have played sport at a reasonable level to understand these nuances. Its not a playstation game.
 
Mustard said:
Apparently, Federer's net worth is around $450 million, Nadal's around $340 million, and Djokovic's around $240 million.
Click to expand...
Federer is at $550 million.

Consider that inflation skyrocket and prize/money in sports increase, Federer distance himself far from Nadalovic is telling
 
Last edited:
Holmes said:
He's not the GOAT of the USO (Sampras has an extra final), his 8th Wimbledon title has a major asterisk (injured finalist opponent LOL) and history doesn't care about consecutive weeks #1, what the "majority" thinks, or how many pesos Roger has accumulated. What matters are the facts - and the facts place Roger in glory as no less than the third greatest player to grace his era.
Click to expand...

Finals are for losers

The Wimbledon 2017 finals had fully completed sets as far as I recall.

Point stands.. how do we place someone who is the GOAT at 2 of 4 majors as anything other than top in terms of greatness ? Tough proposition
 
ND-13 said:
Finals are for losers

The Wimbledon 2017 finals had fully completed sets as far as I recall.

Point stands.. how do we place someone who is the GOAT at 2 of 4 majors as anything other than top in terms of greatness ? Tough proposition
Click to expand...
Your opinion is in the minority of, most likely, 1. Over in reality, an extra final carries tremendous weight as a tiebreaker between two records. Sampras is the US Open GOAT.

Of course it did since thankfully Marin was able to complete the match despite his tear inducing injury.

That would indeed be a challenge. Thankfully, not one we have to consider currently, as Sampras is the US Open GOAT, Novak is the AO GOAT, Rafa is the RG GOAT, and the Wimbledon GOAT is highly contested due to changes in the surface and technology over time.
 
Last edited:
Holmes said:
Your opinion is in the minority of, most likely, 1. Over in reality, an extra final carries tremendous weight as a tiebreaker between two records. Sampras is the US Open GOAT.

Of course it did since thankfully Marin was able to complete the match despite his tear inducing injury.

That would indeed be a challenge. Thankfully, not one we have to consider currently, as Sampras is the US Open GOAT, Novak is the AO GOAT, Rafa is the RG GOAT, and the Wimbledon GOAT is highly contested due to changes in the surface and technology over time.
Click to expand...

Tremendous weight is your opinion . Someone else may say 5 straight is far more difficult as no one achieved it .

Many people made USO finals including Ruud

The Wimb GOAT dilemma is only in your head . Hopefully you can get it cleansed ?
 
ND-13 said:
Tremendous weight is your opinion . Someone else may say 5 straight is far more difficult as no one achieved it .

Many people made USO finals including Ruud

The Wimb GOAT dilemma is only in your head . Hopefully you can get it cleansed ?
Click to expand...
No expert will say that 5 straight gives an edge over the extra final, as it is statistically untenable. Sampras is the clear GOAT.

Many people made Wimbledon finals including Roger.

World class projection there my friend.
 
messiahrobins said:
Federer was no.1 for 5 straight years. It is mentally and physically very tiring. By the time Nadal and especially Djokovic hit their consistent peaks Federer had half a decade being the guy to be shot at non stop. He then had two ATGs come along challenging him, of course he was disadvantaged. Nadal and Djokovic had Medvedev Tsitsipas and Zverev as the up and coming challengers. Look how Djokovic now struggles with genuine ATG talent Sinner and Alcaraz, he isnt even competitive against them at the slams now when the pressure is on at semi final or finals.
You have to have played sport at a reasonable level to understand these nuances. Its not a playstation game.
Click to expand...
1. nole is 38 not 28 and it is 16 not 6 years between them!
2. nole is 5-3 overall vs raz and 2-2 in slams. he lost W F in 5 sets and another W F that was just a few weeks after his knee surgery. he won RG SF in 4 and AO this year also in 4 being injured!
3. nole is 4-4 vs sinner. 2-1 in slams. and sinner fall 2 times for doping. rafa and nole never did.
 
Last edited:
Holmes said:
No expert will say that 5 straight gives an edge over the extra final, as it is statistically untenable. Sampras is the clear GOAT.

Many people made Wimbledon finals including Roger.

World class projection there my friend.
Click to expand...

No need for mental juggling. Federer defended titles more times , won more consecutive titles , double bagelled finalists , beat fellow GOAT candidate in finals and semi finals, none of which our Pete could unfortunately do.

And while you are it , think of a better reason than Cilic injury . May be Nadal was an embryo or something ?
 
ND-13 said:
No need for mental juggling. Federer defended titles more times , won more consecutive titles , double bagelled finalists , beat fellow GOAT candidate in finals and semi finals, none of which our Pete could unfortunately do.

And while you are it , think of a better reason than Cilic injury . May be Nadal was an embryo or something ?
Click to expand...
Extra finals matter at the USO, but extra finals and even extra titles don't matter at Wimbledon...
 
NatF said:
Extra finals matter at the USO, but extra finals and even extra titles don't matter at Wimbledon...
Click to expand...
Covered. It was essentially a different surface. Wimbledon was, until the 2000s, defined by a slick surface and a bad bounce due to worn out grass, all of which were almost entirely, and intentionally, eliminated by the new grass. The changes at the USO were nowhere near as extreme. Federer also played in an era where careers were 5-10 years longer than in Pete's time so he had more time to play well and rack up those extra finals and title.

Context matters.
 
Last edited:
ND-13 said:
No need for mental juggling. Federer defended titles more times , won more consecutive titles , double bagelled finalists , beat fellow GOAT candidate in finals and semi finals, none of which our Pete could unfortunately do.

And while you are it , think of a better reason than Cilic injury . May be Nadal was an embryo or something ?
Click to expand...
Federer was also defeated by a clay courter, and then thrice thrashed by a rival, none of which Pete could manage either. On top of this, Federer lived in a time where careers lasted at least 5 years longer than they did in Pete's, sometimes more. In 10 extra years, he managed just 1 extra title against an injured player without having to play his greatest rival, who also lost due to injury.

Context always matters my friend.
 
DunbeeGumbee said:
He's the GOAT of both Wimbledon and USO and has the most consecutive weeks number one, most popular player ever and still considered the GOAT by the majority. Plus I think he's like 3x richer than both Nadal and Djokovic. I'm sure he's doing just fine lol
Click to expand...
what mayoity?

if you google about tennis GOAT it is nole all the way!


www.sportingnews.com

Who is the best men's tennis player ever? GOAT ranking for Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and others | Sporting News

Novak Djokovic will try to make it three out of three Grand Slams in 2023 at Wimbledon. Has he made an iron-clad case to be considered the greatest of all time?
www.sportingnews.com www.sportingnews.com


www.racquetpoint.com

Who is the Tennis GOAT? Djokovic, Federer, or Nadal

The Tennis GOAT debate is as old as time. We crunch the data to see which tennis player of the "Big Three" holds the most impressive career statistics.
www.racquetpoint.com www.racquetpoint.com

indiacurrents.com

Who Is The Greatest Tennis Singles Player Of All Time?

Partha Sircar figures out a roadmap to identify the top tennis players of all time and how he chose the GOAT!
indiacurrents.com indiacurrents.com

www.leeabbamonte.com

Who is the greatest men’s tennis player of all time?

Who is the greatest men’s tennis player of all time? The 3 greatest players ever are all playing right now; Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal.
www.leeabbamonte.com www.leeabbamonte.com

sports.yahoo.com

10 Best tennis players of all time: From Novak Djokovic to Andre Agassi

Tennis is one of the world’s most beloved sports. And fans of it often wonder about who the best tennis
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com

www.givemesport.com

The 25 greatest male tennis players in history have been named & ranked - in order

We obviously all know who the top three are, but in what order?
www.givemesport.com www.givemesport.com


eubusiness.online

The Greatest Tennis Players of All Time (Men) – Top 10 Rankings｜Agent EU Business School Scholarship

Tennis has produced legendary champions whose records and impact on the sport are unmatched. In this article, we rank th
eubusiness.online eubusiness.online

www.radiotimes.com

Best male tennis players of all time

Our round-up of the best men's tennis players of all time.
www.radiotimes.com

spanish marca 2023

Novak Djokovic gana como un número uno y atrapa a Nadal con su décimo título en el Open de Australia

A Novak Djokovic todo le ha cambiado en un margen de 378 días. Ha pasado de ser deportado en Melbourne a levantar por décima vez en su carrera el trofeo Norman Brookes que le acred
www.marca.com www.marca.com
Fn_K2p_XoAET7WG


many other polls in the spoiler
klix 2021 11K
yrwrvtxb


index 2023 22K
yp3next5


too many rackets 2023 2,5K
https://toomanyrackets.com/who-is-the-goat-in-tennis/

Who is the GOAT in Mens Tennis?

Novak Djokovic 71.64% (1,791 votes)
Roger Federer 17.52% (438 votes)
Rafa Nadal 10.44% (261 votes)
Other: 0.4% (10 votes)

tennis productions 2023 105K
5xzuzfzh


nikolas kifer tviter 2023 6,5K
FoPQ4HiaYAIEqtZ


bwin 2023 3,1K
https://twitter.com/x/status/1668191992973492224

vecernji list 2023 28K

Tko je najbolji tenisač svijeta u povijesti?

Novak Đoković 16159 glas/ova (58%)
Roger Federer 6240 glas/ova
Rafael Nadal 957 glas/ova
Pete Sampras 1601 glas/ova
Jimmy Connors 214 glas/ova
Björn Borg 1478 glas/ova
nitko od navedenih 1351 glas/ova

net.hr 2023 8K

Tko je najveći tenisač svih vremena?

Roger Federer 23%
Rafael Nadal 3%
Novak Đoković 61%
Pete Sampras 5%
Bjorn Borg 4%
Ivan Lendl 1%
Andre Agassi 1%
Jimmy Connors 0%
John McEnroe 2%
Ukupno odgovora 7951

24 sata 2023
nole 60%
https://twitter.com/x/status/1667932915542499335

yc5bc3fv


express 2023
24a9zbcd


28K
ms46fdme


tennis legends 2024 9K
yckyfj4z


eurosport 2022 4,7K
FefeLJJXgAA6_wG
 
Last edited:
Fed, still the goat of tennis goats. Like Laver, Borg and Pistol, he changed the game, left an indelible mark that still burns. Good to see, but I still want some young stud to get the cygs and surpass him. Want it to be Alcaraz because of his delectable game…or someone with a similar style, preferably without the grunting.
 
Holmes said:
Federer was also defeated by a clay courter, and then thrice thrashed by a rival, none of which Pete could manage either. On top of this, Federer lived in a time where careers lasted at least 5 years longer than they did in Pete's, sometimes more. In 10 extra years, he managed just 1 extra title against an injured player without having to play his greatest rival, who also lost due to injury.

Context always matters my friend.
Click to expand...

It is a shame Pete lived in a time without any GOAT candidates or GOAT rivals, yet could not win more than 5.

And we always give hard time to Federer’s weak rivals, Safin, Hewitt and Roddick. Yet all of them have a winning h2h over LOL Pete ?

And this is the icing on the cake . Hewitt gave 2 breadsticks to Pete.
Fed , being the good friend of Pete, gave Hewitt 2 bagels.
 
Holmes said:
Covered. It was essentially a different surface. Wimbledon was, until the 2000s, defined by a slick surface and a bad bounce due to worn out grass, all of which were almost entirely, and intentionally, eliminated by the new grass. The changes at the USO were nowhere near as extreme. Federer also played in an era where careers were 5-10 years longer than in Pete's time so he had more time to play well and rack up those extra finals and title.

Context matters.
Click to expand...
He still had an extra final at the same age PETE retired. I would pick PETE as the USO GOAT myself, mostly because of the whatifs in 1994 and 1999 where he was injured. I think he's got at least 6 titles without those injuries and likely 7. But based on resumes I think you can make a case for each of Fed/PETE/Connors at the USO. At Wimbledon I think you can make the argument that PETE is still the GOAT but Federer's resume is obviously stronger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

5555
Pat Cash: Djokovic is better than Federer at his best
27 28 29
Replies
1K
Views
153K
Nadalgaenger
Nadalgaenger
MatsPhilander
Pat Cash: Roger Federer will be the man to beat in 2018
2 3 4
Replies
153
Views
11K
slice bh compliment
S
F
greatest female tennis players of the open era
Replies
46
Views
7K
BTURNER
B
tennisaddict
  • Poll Poll
Who is the second greatest player of all time ?
Replies
4
Views
913
LazyNinja19
LazyNinja19
R
Tennis Week Navratilova is the greatest women player of the Open Era, Evert #2
2
Replies
68
Views
6K
rogerfederer26
R
Back
Top