Roger Federer set to surrender lead to Rafael Nadal in GOAT race after US Open slip

Pantera

Banned
I love how the discussion has completely changed in a span of a week. First it was "Novak Djokovic will be the Slam leader" after he won Wimbledon. Now it's "Nadal will win the Slam race" after Federer and Djokovic are out of the US Open. LOL
You're only as good as your last match.
Dude...you are way too sensible to post on here.

This is a pub banter type place.
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
I love how the discussion has completely changed in a span of a week. First it was "Novak Djokovic will be the Slam leader" after he won Wimbledon. Now it's "Nadal will win the Slam race" after Federer and Djokovic are out of the US Open. LOL
You're only as good as your last match.
Short vision span from the posters around here.
:)
 

DSH

Hall of Fame
Not just on here. It's everywhere else too. All over the tennis forums and sports news and polls. People are suddenly forgetting that Novak even exists despite him having won 4 of the past 6 majors. LOL!!!
If Nadal wins the Open, he will probably beat Federer's record.
If he doesn't, he can win another Major, but that's it. His confidence will be shaken if he doesn't win against Berrettini and the winner of Medvedev or Dimitrov.
The pressure that the Spaniard has is immense.
Could Nadal withstand this tension where everyone sees him as the big favorite to win his fourth US Open title?
:cautious:
 

Sport

Legend
I love how the discussion has completely changed in a span of a week. First it was "Novak Djokovic will be the Slam leader" after he won Wimbledon. Now it's "Nadal will win the Slam race" after Federer and Djokovic are out of the US Open. LOL
You're only as good as your last match.
Before Wimbledon 2019, when Nadal won #18 at RG 2019, people also assumed Nadal would surpass Federer's Slam count. And before RG 2019, after Djokovic won #15 at the AO 2019, people talked about how Djokovic would surpass Federer's Slam count.

All of those remarks have something in common: people no longer consider Federer's GS record safe.
 

alexio88

Hall of Fame
I love how the discussion has completely changed in a span of a week. First it was "Novak Djokovic will be the Slam leader" after he won Wimbledon. Now it's "Nadal will win the Slam race" after Federer and Djokovic are out of the US Open. LOL
You're only as good as your last match.
it's always like this , if somehow nadal gonna lose in the next two days it will turn everything back the way it was heh
 

Imperator

Professional
Before Wimbledon 2019, when Nadal won #18 at RG 2019, people also assumed Nadal would surpass Federer's Slam count. And before RG 2019, after Djokovic won #15 at the AO 2019, people talked about how Djokovic would surpass Federer's Slam count.

All of those remarks have something in common: people no longer consider Federer's GS record safe.
But if he happens to win a 21st GS title, they will say his record is safe. It's all about the most recent events, apparently it determines everything else.
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
Before Wimbledon 2019, when Nadal won #18 at RG 2019, people also assumed Nadal would surpass Federer's Slam count. And before RG 2019, after Djokovic won #15 at the AO 2019, people talked about how Djokovic would surpass Federer's Slam count.

All of those remarks have something in common: people no longer consider Federer's GS record safe.
Was it ever considered safe by a majority? I mean, the lead wasn’t bigger than 3 for years now, and since there are 4 Slams per year, with 3 of them being played in a span of 4 months, everything can always change in a hurry.
 

Sport

Legend
But if he happens to win a 21st GS title, they will say his record is safe. It's all about the most recent events, apparently it determines everything else.
True that.
Was it ever considered safe by a majority? I mean, the lead wasn’t bigger than 3 for years now, and since there are 4 Slams per year, with 3 of them being played in a span of 4 months, everything can always change in a hurry.
Yes. At least with regard to Jokovic. When Nole was sitting in 12 and with his elbow/Pepe Imaz crisis, and Roger won #20 in Australia, most Fed fans assumed Jokovic would never surpass Federer's Slam count. There exist threads from 2018 which prove it.
 

alexio88

Hall of Fame
But if he happens to win a 21st GS title, they will say his record is safe. It's all about the most recent events, apparently it determines everything else.
i thought his last chance to win a slam was after that moment at wimby 18 vs sweet sugar candyman, but this year he, by some miracle. let the trophy slipped away, and now it's gonna be much harder for him to do it
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Not just on here. It's everywhere else too. All over the tennis forums and sports news and polls. People are suddenly forgetting that Novak even exists despite him having won 4 of the past 6 majors. LOL!!!
That's quite a stretch especially since Djokovic just exited the tournament 4 days ago. The debate over the last few months was not about who would catch the Slam record between Novak and Rafa. The question was who would catch it first. Considering that since RG of last year Djokovic has won 4 majors to Rafa's 2, it's not surprising that most thought he would do it 1st. The consensus was if Rafa won any non-RG major that would all but assure he would catch 20 pretty quickly since he is just 2 behind. Now that he is on the verge of doing it, it's a no brainer that that's what everyone is talking about.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
Before Wimbledon 2019, when Nadal won #18 at RG 2019, people also assumed Nadal would surpass Federer's Slam count. And before RG 2019, after Djokovic won #15 at the AO 2019, people talked about how Djokovic would surpass Federer's Slam count.

All of those remarks have something in common: people no longer consider Federer's GS record safe.
People didn't consider Federer's Slam record safe all the way back to 2010 when Nadal won 3 straight slams that year, going from 6 to 9 while Federer was at 16. With the rate Nadal was going and his incredible form, people were starting to wonder. But then RoboDjok emerged completely out of the blue in 2011 and started smashing everyone in his wake. LOL
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
Yes. At least with regard to Jokovic. When Nole was sitting in 12 and with his elbow/Pepe Imaz crisis, and Roger won #20 in Australia, most Fed fans assumed Jokovic would never surpass Federer's Slam count. There exist threads from 2018 which prove it.
Okay, concerning Djokovic I agree and I admit that I didn't see a threat in him as well. Now he has his chances, but Rafa clearly is the main candidate to overtake Roger.
 

Mike Sams

Legend
If Nadal wins the Open, he will probably beat Federer's record.
If he doesn't, he can win another Major, but that's it. His confidence will be shaken if he doesn't win against Berrettini and the winner of Medvedev or Dimitrov.
The pressure that the Spaniard has is immense.
Could Nadal withstand this tension where everyone sees him as the big favorite to win his fourth US Open title?
:cautious:
If Nadal plays another 3-4 years, he should be in a good position to win more Slams. At the very least, he should get another RG title. If his health and physical fitness stays as it is. I'd say another 2 RG titles. And he should be able to reach the business end in the other 3 Slams. I don't think Federer will go away quietly though. If Federer is back to full health next season, he should be in a position to get another crack at Wimbledon and perhaps a deep run in the other 2 hardcourt Slams with a good draw. Then there's the Djokovic factor who I would expect will be the one to beat next season. But again, all depends on the health of the big 3 as I believe we might see some real resistance from the young guys including Medvedev, Tsitsipas, Dimitrov, Thiem....and hopefully Zverev and Khachanov will make some inroads in the Slams.
 

Lebsta

Rookie
As I've stated on other threads, people really should wait to see if Nadal is lifting the trophy on Sunday. If that happens and there's no guarantee it will, only then can we start speculating about him catching Roger next year.

Need to focus on the present and Bettterini could be a lot tougher than what we think, especially if he serves out of his mind. And the final will be an even tougher with either Dimitrov or Medvedev. I'm still fearing an injury pull out but we will see.
 

zvelf

Semi-Pro
I love how the discussion has completely changed in a span of a week. First it was "Novak Djokovic will be the Slam leader" after he won Wimbledon. Now it's "Nadal will win the Slam race" after Federer and Djokovic are out of the US Open. LOL
You're only as good as your last match.
Yeah, whoever wins the AO in 2020 will then be considered the most likely slam leader among the B3.
 

AceSalvo

Legend
Even if Nadal wins USO19 expect Fed to bring the rabbit out of the hat. :sneaky:

In any case, Djoko remains the third wheel just like 7 years ago when Fed got his 17th.
 

Wrecker

New User
I love how the discussion has completely changed in a span of a week. First it was "Novak Djokovic will be the Slam leader" after he won Wimbledon. Now it's "Nadal will win the Slam race" after Federer and Djokovic are out of the US Open. LOL
You're only as good as your last match.
I am waiting for when Big 3 retire and some guy wins 2 Slams in a year after which he will proclaimed as GOAT while Big 3 will be termed frauds
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
I am waiting for when Big 3 retire and some guy wins 2 Slams in a year after which he will proclaimed as GOAT while Big 3 will be termed frauds
This is what happened to Sampras. Federer was proclaimed GOAT in 2004.
 

S'in-net

Semi-Pro
Before Wimbledon 2019, when Nadal won #18 at RG 2019, people also assumed Nadal would surpass Federer's Slam count. And before RG 2019, after Djokovic won #15 at the AO 2019, people talked about how Djokovic would surpass Federer's Slam count.
All of those remarks have something in common: people no longer consider Federer's GS record safe.



40-15 changed everything.
It all could have been safe.
It isn't safe, now
 
Last edited:

Mike Sams

Legend
This is what happened to Sampras. Federer was proclaimed GOAT in 2004.
I remember that fully. Federer was hailed as the GOAT in mid 2005 despite having only 4 Slams at the time. This was even before he played Agassin at USO 2005. The accolades of GOATness for Federer were coming in fast and furious because of him running roughshod over the competition with relative ease. And then in 2006, discussions turned to how many Slams he might end up winning. Some were saying 25 or something in that range. I think Sampras claimed Federer would win around 23-24 or so. But nobody ever thought for a minute that Nadal let alone Djokovic would be surpassing Sampras' GS haul either. That in itself was incredible. Although truthfully speaking, the Sampras era was vastly different to today's era due to the speed of surfaces, racquet technology, balls, etc.
That's probably why I don't take much heed in this whole discussion of who is the greatest due to the very different eras of how tennis was played. Borg and Laver with the wooden racquets, Sampras and Agassi playing in their day on varied courts where big servers and aggressors were rewarded a lot more, etc.
And I'm thinking we might see one or two phenomenal talents on the Djokovic level in the next 2-3 generations who will rack up numerous Slams while playing up into their late 30s or even 40s seeing the evolution of physiology and endurance nowadays. Athletes getting better, faster, stronger, fitter, etc. We're not seeing anything much these past 2 generations but it's inevitable that somebody phenomenal will come along in the next decade or so and will be near unstoppable. And that player might be lucky to not have anyone to stop him from winning tens of Slams over a decade+ period which is entirely possible.
Plus with the way things are looking regarding the ATP wanting to speed up the game, we may soon not even have sets going to 6-all and into tiebreakers. They might end up changing to 4-all and tiebreakers and matches would become a lot shorter which would benefit the players in terms of durability. So the likelihood of players having 20+ years on the tour at a high level could be the norm.
 

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
I remember that fully. Federer was hailed as the GOAT in mid 2005 despite having only 4 Slams at the time. This was even before he played Agassin at USO 2005. The accolades of GOATness for Federer were coming in fast and furious because of him running roughshod over the competition with relative ease. And then in 2006, discussions turned to how many Slams he might end up winning. Some were saying 25 or something in that range. I think Sampras claimed Federer would win around 23-24 or so. But nobody ever thought for a minute that Nadal let alone Djokovic would be surpassing Sampras' GS haul either. That in itself was incredible. Although truthfully speaking, the Sampras era was vastly different to today's era due to the speed of surfaces, racquet technology, balls, etc.
That's probably why I don't take much heed in this whole discussion of who is the greatest due to the very different eras of how tennis was played. Borg and Laver with the wooden racquets, Sampras and Agassi playing in their day on varied courts where big servers and aggressors were rewarded a lot more, etc.
And I'm thinking we might see one or two phenomenal talents on the Djokovic level in the next 2-3 generations who will rack up numerous Slams while playing up into their late 30s or even 40s seeing the evolution of physiology and endurance nowadays. Athletes getting better, faster, stronger, fitter, etc. We're not seeing anything much these past 2 generations but it's inevitable that somebody phenomenal will come along in the next decade or so and will be near unstoppable. And that player might be lucky to not have anyone to stop him from winning tens of Slams over a decade+ period which is entirely possible.
Plus with the way things are looking regarding the ATP wanting to speed up the game, we may soon not even have sets going to 6-all and into tiebreakers. They might end up changing to 4-all and tiebreakers and matches would become a lot shorter which would benefit the players in terms of durability. So the likelihood of players having 20+ years on the tour at a high level could be the norm.
I've typed these kinds of paragraphs(lack thereof) here before.

 
Top