Remember: 4 sets in 6 tries, +15 years

Cheating (during a match), drugs, cheating on wives, bad fathers/bfs/husbands, dishonest, arrogant, insinuating connections to criminals, match fixing, etc.

To name a few off the top of my head.
Those would be ridiculous. I will give you that. I just don't get it. Never will I guess. I love Fed, like Rafa a lot, and respect Djoker.

Why does it have to be all or nothing?

Weirdos.
 

clayqueen

G.O.A.T.
Nope. If we are going to do this "tiger" thing, then if Rafa gets 20, they are equals in the "tiger" debate. If Rafa gets 21, he is the "tiger."
Are we? The goalpost is being moved as we speak. The closer Rafa got to winning the USO final taking him to 19 slams, the more commentators started questioning the validity of making the number of slam titles the criteria for the GOAT.
 
Are we? The goalpost is being moved as we speak. The closer Rafa got to winning the USO final taking him to 19 slams, the more commentators started questioning the validity of making the number of slam titles the criteria for the GOAT.
Can't do that now. It is slam count or nothing. If you believe "tiger" then slams is the goal.
 

clayqueen

G.O.A.T.
Are we? The goalpost is being moved as we speak. The closer Rafa got to winning the USO final taking him to 19 slams, the more commentators started questioning the validity of making the number of slam titles the criteria for the GOAT.
Here is one example:

Legend Rod Laver believes that Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic will never surpass Roger Federer’s legacy, even if they win more Grand Slams than him.

Both Nadal and Djokovic have won two Grand Slams this season, leaving them just one and four titles respectively short of Federer’s record haul of 20.

Both are younger too, meaning they are well-positioned to finish up with more major titles to their name than Federer.

Laver, though, says that number of Grand Slam titles is an inaccurate method of measuring legacy, and he thinks the fact Federer is even still playing is testament to his

“He seems to be fine and that’s what counts,” Laver told Swiss newspaper Aargauer.

“If you love the game as much as you do, that’s fine.

“I also give Roger a very good chance of winning the Australian Open again in Melbourne in January.”

“Nadal, Djokovic and Federer are all big champions.

“But Roger surpasses tennis, the world of sport, and sports in general in a way that no one in history has done before him.

“He is the most recognized athlete in the world and a figurehead for this great game.”


Based on what?
 

Breakpointerer

Hall of Fame
Here is one example:

Legend Rod Laver believes that Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic will never surpass Roger Federer’s legacy, even if they win more Grand Slams than him.

Both Nadal and Djokovic have won two Grand Slams this season, leaving them just one and four titles respectively short of Federer’s record haul of 20.

Both are younger too, meaning they are well-positioned to finish up with more major titles to their name than Federer.

Laver, though, says that number of Grand Slam titles is an inaccurate method of measuring legacy, and he thinks the fact Federer is even still playing is testament to his

“He seems to be fine and that’s what counts,” Laver told Swiss newspaper Aargauer.

“If you love the game as much as you do, that’s fine.

“I also give Roger a very good chance of winning the Australian Open again in Melbourne in January.”

“Nadal, Djokovic and Federer are all big champions.

“But Roger surpasses tennis, the world of sport, and sports in general in a way that no one in history has done before him.

“He is the most recognized athlete in the world and a figurehead for this great game.”

Yeah I'd have to disagree with this.
 
Here is one example:

Legend Rod Laver believes that Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic will never surpass Roger Federer’s legacy, even if they win more Grand Slams than him.

Both Nadal and Djokovic have won two Grand Slams this season, leaving them just one and four titles respectively short of Federer’s record haul of 20.

Both are younger too, meaning they are well-positioned to finish up with more major titles to their name than Federer.

Laver, though, says that number of Grand Slam titles is an inaccurate method of measuring legacy, and he thinks the fact Federer is even still playing is testament to his

“He seems to be fine and that’s what counts,” Laver told Swiss newspaper Aargauer.

“If you love the game as much as you do, that’s fine.

“I also give Roger a very good chance of winning the Australian Open again in Melbourne in January.”

“Nadal, Djokovic and Federer are all big champions.

“But Roger surpasses tennis, the world of sport, and sports in general in a way that no one in history has done before him.

“He is the most recognized athlete in the world and a figurehead for this great game.”

Legacy is different from greatest ever. But no worries, Rafa's legacy is on par with Fed, especially if Rafa has the most slams to go with everything.
 

clayqueen

G.O.A.T.
In 2008, Federer had 13 slams, aspiring to match Sampras at 14. Rafa had 5; 4 of them the FO and Djokovic had 1, the AO. So the establishment felt safe in the knowledge that Federer could only add quite a few more and the other 2 would never be in contention. So slam count was the thing that separated Federer from the rest. He was unassailable. They thought, no matter how many RG titles Rafa won, it could always be dismissed as one dimensional and in any case Federer would start winning the FO as is his right.

Fast forward to 2019 when Djokovic has won 15 more slams, Rafa won 14 more and Federer 7, with Rafa within 1 title of tying Federer at 20. What to do now? This was never in the plan. Federer was going to win the majority of slams he entered and even if Rafa continued to dominate the FO, Federer would always sweep the board at the AO, Wimbledon and the USO. This has not happened so his friends in high places are working on another Federer benchmark.

Good luck to them.
 
In 2008, Federer had 13 slams, aspiring to match Sampras at 14. Rafa had 5; 4 of them the FO and Djokovic had 1, the AO. So the establishment felt safe in the knowledge that Federer could only add quite a few more and the other 2 would never be in contention. So slam count was the thing that separated Federer from the rest. He was unassailable. They thought, no matter how many RG titles Rafa won, it could always be dismissed as one dimensional and in any case Federer would start winning the FO as is his right.

Fast forward to 2019 when Djokovic has won 15 more slams, Rafa won 14 more and Federer 7, with Rafa within 1 title of tying Federer at 20. What to do now? This was never in the plan. Federer was going to win the majority of slams he entered and even if Rafa continued to dominate the FO, Federer would always sweep the board at the AO, Wimbledon and the USO. This has not happened so his friends in high places are working on another Federer benchmark.

Good luck to them.
I think the big difference is many thought Fed had put a stamp on it by winning 3 slams in his twilight. But like I was afraid of, and it looks to be a reality now, is that Rafa and Djoker will do it too. That will end up being the difference. Fed got 3 late in his career. Rafa already has 2-3, and Djoker will add many more than likely as well.

But this is not a terrible thing. It is good for tennis, as long as the young players challenge them. We want great tennis regardless of who is providing it. The rest is simply fandom, and that is okay too, as long as we do not take it too far. For me, Rafa catching Fed is bitter sweet, but I am cool with Rafa staying at 20. ;)

But if he does pass Fed... (y)
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
In 2008, Federer had 13 slams, aspiring to match Sampras at 14. Rafa had 5; 4 of them the FO and Djokovic had 1, the AO. So the establishment felt safe in the knowledge that Federer could only add quite a few more and the other 2 would never be in contention. So slam count was the thing that separated Federer from the rest. He was unassailable. They thought, no matter how many RG titles Rafa won, it could always be dismissed as one dimensional and in any case Federer would start winning the FO as is his right.

Fast forward to 2019 when Djokovic has won 15 more slams, Rafa won 14 more and Federer 7, with Rafa within 1 title of tying Federer at 20. What to do now? This was never in the plan. Federer was going to win the majority of slams he entered and even if Rafa continued to dominate the FO, Federer would always sweep the board at the AO, Wimbledon and the USO. This has not happened so his friends in high places are working on another Federer benchmark.

Good luck to them.
No one anticipated the current weak career inflation era.
 
No one anticipated the current weak career inflation era.
In 2008, perhaps not. But many people on these boards have been saying for at least five years that Nadal and Djokovic are a threat to Federer's Slam count because players can keep winning much longer now than they used to be able to. I was one of those people, and I was pretty reluctant to say it, because Nadal is the last person on tour whom I want to end up with the most slam titles. Many Federer fans insisted that there was very little chance and quoted the ages of past players as "proof." It wasn't proof, unfortunately. Federer might still end up ahead, but not by much, if at all, and he will likely not end up ahead.
 

Thetouch

Semi-Pro
H2H is irrelevant for many reasons. It’s about matchups anyway, and also it would be an invalid double count as the H2H wins over Federer already brought Nadal/Djokovic forward in the Slam race. If they are that much better in H2H and still behind in the Slam race, the difference against the rest of the field must be even bigger in Federer’s favour. And with the same right one could ask: "How can someone with so many more problems against the lesser field be GOAT?"
Can you elaborate further on this? I don't get your point and would like to understand it and I am not making a case for either Rafa or Novak being more GOATS than Roger, I just don't get the thinking behind it.

Rafa has almost won the same amount of Slams that Federer has, while even being younger at less Slam attempts. He has beaten Federer and Djokovic in like what, 9 or 10 Slam finals? That's half his slam victories. Djokovic has at least 8 Slam final victories over both. Federer has probably much less in comparisson, like maybe 4. The interesting part is actually this, had Nadal and Djokovic beat Federer when they lost against him in any Slam final, their Slam count would be just a little higher, for Nadal 22 and Djokovic 17. Had Federer beat Novak in the finals he lost, he would be at 24 Slams and had he beat Nadal in the slam finals he lost, he would be at 26 slams already. And I am not even counting their overall h2h in Slams. Since all 3 of them are very close in Slams counts now and Nadal and Djokovic both own Fed in overall slam h2h and in h2h Slam finals, I don't see your point at all.


GOAT arguments require such circular logic.

Player A is best because he beat Player B who is the GOAT!

So wait, who's the GOAT?

If Player B is not the GOAT because player A beat him, then player A must be GOAT!

But wait, if player B isn't the GOAT, it's not that impressive that player A beat him.
This example is too simple and takes away player B's acomplishments in your final sentence, imo. If player B is the GOAT because of his success, then there was never a case for player A to be the GOAT to begin with, even if he beat player B, UNLESS he has had similar success. When you compare Nadal to Federer, we have 2 players at almost the same level of success (actually Djokovic too), with 19:20 slams and other stats that are similar yet probably in Fed's favour, due to the age difference. But we have a h2h advantage on Nadal's side too. We are not comparing Del Potro to Roger Federer, who is 1:0 in Slam finals and only has won this one slam.
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
Are we? The goalpost is being moved as we speak. The closer Rafa got to winning the USO final taking him to 19 slams, the more commentators started questioning the validity of making the number of slam titles the criteria for the GOAT.
You've moved from second grade level to at least fourth grade level since you didn't mention Federer in this post! (95.6% of your total posts do this, incidentally). You get a well-deserved "like." Still, your entire post revolves around Fed, which is to be expected, but still amazing progress. Next time you post, try at least a 4% ratio where "Fed" or "Fed devotee" isn't your default content. We're pullin' for you!
 

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
With 97 sq inch frame, Fed probably could have taken twice as many sets off Nadal in his 20s. And probably no losses at Wimbledon and AO.
 

The_Order

G.O.A.T.
In 2008, perhaps not. But many people on these boards have been saying for at least five years that Nadal and Djokovic are a threat to Federer's Slam count because players can keep winning much longer now than they used to be able to. I was one of those people, and I was pretty reluctant to say it, because Nadal is the last person on tour whom I want to end up with the most slam titles. Many Federer fans insisted that there was very little chance and quoted the ages of past players as "proof." It wasn't proof, unfortunately. Federer might still end up ahead, but not by much, if at all, and he will likely not end up ahead.
They were complaining about Fed's "mileage" when he was 27...
 

Third Serve

Hall of Fame
Wimby 2007 and 2008 had the same feel by the middle of the fifth. In 2007, baby Rafa just wasn’t in good enough condution yet to take it all the way. Fed played much better in 2008 than in 2007.
Hard disagree, but regardless Federer was much better in 2003-2006 than in 2007-2009.
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Here is one example:

Legend Rod Laver believes that Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic will never surpass Roger Federer’s legacy, even if they win more Grand Slams than him.

Both Nadal and Djokovic have won two Grand Slams this season, leaving them just one and four titles respectively short of Federer’s record haul of 20.

Both are younger too, meaning they are well-positioned to finish up with more major titles to their name than Federer.

Laver, though, says that number of Grand Slam titles is an inaccurate method of measuring legacy, and he thinks the fact Federer is even still playing is testament to his

“He seems to be fine and that’s what counts,” Laver told Swiss newspaper Aargauer.

“If you love the game as much as you do, that’s fine.

“I also give Roger a very good chance of winning the Australian Open again in Melbourne in January.”

“Nadal, Djokovic and Federer are all big champions.

“But Roger surpasses tennis, the world of sport, and sports in general in a way that no one in history has done before him.

“He is the most recognized athlete in the world and a figurehead for this great game.”


Based on what?
 

Rhino

Legend
But he's won more slams, more titles, and more Wimbledons (the most important slam). And more WTF. And he's held the #1 ranking for way longer. And most people in the world see Fed as the GOAT. Plus even Nadal himself sees Fed as the greater player. As do the majority of pros.
Plus he was the best player in the world on clay in 2009, right in the middle of Nadals peak. :)
 

LETitBE

Hall of Fame
But he's won more slams, more titles, and more Wimbledons (the most important slam). And more WTF. And he's held the #1 ranking for way longer. And most people in the world see Fed as the GOAT. Plus even Nadal himself sees Fed as the greater player. As do the majority of pros.
Plus he was the best player in the world on clay in 2009, right in the middle of Nadals peak. :)
not only this but Fed has never burnt his fingers on a banana or choked on a hot plate :-D
 

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
Here is one example:

Legend Rod Laver believes that Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic will never surpass Roger Federer’s legacy, even if they win more Grand Slams than him.

Both Nadal and Djokovic have won two Grand Slams this season, leaving them just one and four titles respectively short of Federer’s record haul of 20.

Both are younger too, meaning they are well-positioned to finish up with more major titles to their name than Federer.

Laver, though, says that number of Grand Slam titles is an inaccurate method of measuring legacy, and he thinks the fact Federer is even still playing is testament to his

“He seems to be fine and that’s what counts,” Laver told Swiss newspaper Aargauer.

“If you love the game as much as you do, that’s fine.

“I also give Roger a very good chance of winning the Australian Open again in Melbourne in January.”

“Nadal, Djokovic and Federer are all big champions.

“But Roger surpasses tennis, the world of sport, and sports in general in a way that no one in history has done before him.

“He is the most recognized athlete in the world and a figurehead for this great game.”


Based on what?
Just because you have the prettiest game doesn't make you the GOAT.

The nerves have to come with it, and Roger falls a little bit short in that department, compared to Rafa and Novak.

Not to mention demeanor in the face of adversity, which is the true test of a champion...
 
Just because you have the prettiest game doesn't make you the GOAT.

The nerves have to come with it, and Roger falls a little bit short in that department, compared to Rafa and Novak.

Not to mention demeanor in the face of adversity, which is the true test of a champion...
So let's throw out AO17? And not winning for 5 years and coming back to win 3 slams. Yes, let's throw out that Roddick WC and Rafa 5 set victory.
 

Krish0608

Hall of Fame
Hahahaha you fool.

The only reason Fed has had success against Nadal is because Nadal's speed has declined.
Ya that explains the confused look on Rafa's face these days when he goes to the Federer backhand and gets BH DTL and CC rippers instead of the usual weak, short lollipops Fed used to offer up in his 90 sq in phase.
 

Rafa24

Hall of Fame
The best part is Fed only has a 11-7 set lead on Rafa at his best slam. :-D

Rafa leads fed 11-6 at the only hard court slam they have met at.


The false goat about to be overthrown by rafa and djoker. Really hope rafa can get 20 and 21 this year.
 
Top