Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
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.
Remember: 4 sets in 6 tries, +15 years
- Thread starter terribleIVAN
- Start date
Why does it have to be all or nothing?
Weirdos.
clayqueen
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.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
He is so sweet though. By far the most genuine at times. He rarely changes his tones or stance. Very likable even if your not a fan. I wish I could have disliked him. Not possible for me though. It sure would have helped on this site...
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Can't do that now. It is slam count or nothing. If you believe "tiger" then slams is the goal.
Breakpointerer
Legend
Why do you use "tiger" btw?
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Breakpointerer
Legend
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
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.”
'Roger Federer surpasses tennis' - legend explains why Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic can't be GOAT - Tennis365
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.
www.tennis365.com
Based on what?
Breakpointerer
Legend
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.”
'Roger Federer surpasses tennis' - legend explains why Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic can't be GOAT - Tennis365
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.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
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.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.”
'Roger Federer surpasses tennis' - legend explains why Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic can't be GOAT - Tennis365
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.
victorcruz
Hall of Fame
Rafa on clay is as unbeatable as can be. Can someone draw blood? Absolutely. But at what cost?
He is inevitable.
He is inevitable.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Won't believe it till I see it.
victorcruz
Hall of Fame
Thiem drew blood in the 2nd set this year at RG. Rafa said OK and then curbstomped the poor fella after that.
terribleIVAN
Hall of Fame
Death, taxes, and Rafa winning RG.
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
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.
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.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
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...
No one anticipated the current weak career inflation era.
helterskelter
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.
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
Fedr won 13 slams in the weakest era ever when his biggest rival until 2007 was a teenager - 21 years old, named Rafael Nadal.
Federer won 13 slams from 2014 to present? I don’t recall.
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
You obviously deliberately got the wrong end of the stick.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
It's unreal to think that if Rafa wins 2 more RG, he will have equaled Sampras' entire major haul at just a single slam event
terribleIVAN
Hall of Fame
Should he win even more RG titles, that should place it top spot of sporting records impossible of ever being broken.
Probably already is.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Yeah it's really hard to fathom that a player might win 13 of the same major in the future.
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.
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
Bionic Poster
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!
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
They were complaining about Fed's "mileage" when he was 27...
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Hahahaha you fool.
The only reason Fed has had success against Nadal is because Nadal's speed has declined.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
26, actually.
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
Oh, you idiot. Federer is 5 years older and you think Federer has declined less than Nadal?
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
What? Fed is in his prime, better than ever. For him, 38 is like 27. He is faster, stronger, healthier, better fh, better serve, quicker, more stamina. I mean he was in a 5th set with Djoker. He is at his absolute peak...
...or this is what TTW trolls believe...
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
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.”
'Roger Federer surpasses tennis' - legend explains why Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic can't be GOAT - Tennis365
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.
Based on what?
titoelcolombiano
Legend
Rafa - legend!
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.
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 plateBut 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.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
LMAO not even what I said.
I said Nadal's speed has declined. Simple as that, he's not the running machine he used to be...
Last edited:
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
not only this but Fed has never burnt his fingers on a banana or choked on a hot plate
But he did twist his knee turning a tap in the bathtub
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.”
'Roger Federer surpasses tennis' - legend explains why Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic can't be GOAT - Tennis365
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.
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...
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
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.
an Australian rugby union international broke his collar bone ironing a shirt believe it or not,it was probably on the brink but when it did let go he was ironing! true story
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Still don't buy that.
Krish0608
G.O.A.T.
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.
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
Irrelevant
LETitBE
I'm sure that Dustin would give all that up to have career stats like this
Rafael Nadal
instead of
Dustin Brown
OldschoolKIaus
Hall of Fame
For a clay court pusher, 7 majors is a nice resume for the Nadal.
Rafa24
Hall of Fame
haha so true!
Similar threads
