SHANGHAI - If Federer wins the final?

[Bavaria]

Its the consensus among almost every current and former pro ive heard discuss the matter and also common sense looking at the numbers and distribution of titles, longevitiy, etc.

Most ex pros I've heard give it Nadal at moment, Agassi, courier, Navratilova, connors, pat cash have all said Nadal. Others say federer although they tend not to elaborate on why unlike those named above.

As I keep saying this debate is ongoing and won't be solved tomorrow whoever wins. In some ways this season has been like a bottled up version of their illustrious careers. Brilliance, but the difference being Nadal has done better in conditions that don't suit him at all. I.e won Beijing finalist in shanghai and r/u in Ao all of which click low bouncing courts. Whereas federer did not play on clay.

Widen that out and Nadal has done better at Wimbledon than Federer has at FO. And then turn it round the other way Nadal was more dominant on his best surface.

Federer has millions who consider him goat, and he has obviously a justifiable claim. But Nadal also has millions who consider him goat and has a claim. The argument will be never ending.

Tomorrow there will be those from both fanbases who will declare goathood for whoever wins which will be obvious nonsense. And I'm pretty confident Nadal will win. But legacy wise tomorrow wont matter hugely but for the prestige of a shanghai title and bragging rights. I'll stand by that if Nadal wins.

The goat debate will never end.

 

[Bavaria]

That would fall under argument 2 see the original post - Objectively (actual results obtained) in which nadal falls outside of top 5 And top 10 and even more for WTF. You could argue highest level all day (does Djokovic, wawrinka have the highest peak, does soderling, does Del Potro, does fed etc) but bottom line in actual results obtained he is not top 10 on any of those surfaces. Fed is top 1 or top 2 even in clay he would not be outside top 10. FO is a slam with few multi slam winners.

You would have to point to the actual quotes re: what fed said. And fed and nadal say lot of things in a very politically correct manner. How many times has nadal called a mug who he is a over 10-0 h2h “for sure it’s going to be very tough match no, I have to bring my best no?” Or called mugs “he has very tough game no, he play st high level no” you get the point.

Sorry Nadal is one of the best ever on hard courts. Three USO ends any argument. He also has three Indian wells which is the biggest masters 1000 and Olympic gold on hard court. It's fanboyism to say Nadal isn't in top 10 and frankly nonsense. Nadal has always peaked for certain events. Much like Sampras who is well down masters 1000 league table.

As I've said before federer has been more consistent. But Nadal has three USO in last decade to federers 0 which has to be examined. Nadal is better and more dominant on his best surface than federer. Nadal is better on his weakest surface than federer. I explained to you before that when it comes to the absolute crunch Nadal has the more impressive resume. His is the career I'd have.

Federer is definitely more consistent. But your own fellow federer fans kind of make the point. Consistency doesn't equate to the best. Many have said if federer wins tomorrow they don't care that he ends year no.2. At a stroke that essentially strikes out the consistency argument.

All the arguments about finals reached, semi finals etc are not relevant to greatness. It's about winning and more pertinently who you beat. Nadal has beat everyone everywhere, so has Djokovic as it happens. Federer has yet to beat Nadal at the FO and that makes his decision to skip the clay this season bewildering. It's like he accepts defeat. Nadal turns up everywhere and will fight to the death.

As I say if consistency is your measure of greatness that's fine it's your opinion. It isn't mine though.

 

[Bavaria]

Highly doubt it. If nadal loses to a mug he is in poor form and would also lose to fed if they met. However as he has artificially got a number 2 seed on hard and grass from his clay performances he will lose to the 4th round mug instead of reaching fed in the final and losing to him. This never happened to fed as in peak years he would never lose to a mug and would always reach the finals where nadal would usually not be. E.g. 18 our of 19 slam finals. Every final you can think of on clay etc. Nadal doesn’t even make hard court finals consistently even in absolute utter peak years.

That’s why the start of the year was so great that fed and nadal had such poor rankings and he met nadal at IW and absolutely destroyed him. Nadal looked shell shocked. However, normally with their 1 and 2 seeding that match would never happen. I was hoping they stayed low on the rankings so they would meet more but it didn’t happen.

So using your argument it's effectively 3-0 Nadal at USO? I mean Nadal three times beat the guy in the next round (Djokovic twice I believe) and del Porto once who beat federer. It may be twice but still the point is from when Nadal peaked in 2008 and we have to talk about peak level not protege level, Nadal has got the keys to flushing meadows the last decade.

I don't think you can say who would have won if they had met hypothetically as match ups are different.

 

[peakin11mugs]

Most ex pros I've heard give it Nadal at moment, Agassi, courier, Navratilova, connors, pat cash have all said Nadal. Others say federer although they tend not to elaborate on why unlike those named above.

As I keep saying this debate is ongoing and won't be solved tomorrow whoever wins. In some ways this season has been like a bottled up version of their illustrious careers. Brilliance, but the difference being Nadal has done better in conditions that don't suit him at all. I.e won Beijing finalist in shanghai and r/u in Ao all of which click low bouncing courts. Whereas federer did not play on clay.

Widen that out and Nadal has done better at Wimbledon than Federer has at FO. And then turn it round the other way Nadal was more dominant on his best surface.

Federer has millions who consider him goat, and he has obviously a justifiable claim. But Nadal also has millions who consider him goat and has a claim. The argument will be never ending.

Tomorrow there will be those from both fanbases who will declare goathood for whoever wins which will be obvious nonsense. And I'm pretty confident Nadal will win. But legacy wise tomorrow wont matter hugely but for the prestige of a shanghai title and bragging rights. I'll stand by that if Nadal wins.

The goat debate will never end.

I think you’re quoting people out of contexts or at different times. I.e. right after last decima or something e.g. here is Agassi saying fed is the GOAT:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/tenni...ndre-agassi/story-p1ZbtWAZoN75Cpgp5GGTbJ.html

Normally I’d say nadal has two slams to feds one grass slam so it’s no contest. However you clearly think people can be better deliste having 3 less slams (which when you get those numbers is an ernmrous gulf) so in that case it opens up the possibility that is nadal really better than fed at grass then fed is at clay?

Logically you’re argument he is better would fall apart for several reasons. Firstly, nadal beat federer by the absolute skin of his teeth. Secondly you’re saying that nadal is the greatest on clay by a huge margin more than fed is on grass. So fed losing on clay is less of a downside to nadal losing to a grass great who isn’t as great as nadal is on a surface. Nadal has a weaker opponent than fed has in nadal but still only won 1 title and the other against berdych.

Now this is a big point. It was literally only nadal that fed couldn’t beat. He could even beat the GOAT version of 2011 Djokovic who could actually beat nadal. Fed was not vulnerable to anyone else on clay. Nadal on the other hand has problems on grass against literally anyone.

As a final point let’s say even if federer is weak on clay, he is GOAT in 3 surfaces grass, hard, indoor. Nadal is GOAT at one surface and very poor at indoors. Federer has no surface he is very poor at. Not even close. He even has more carpet titles a now defunct surface for 10 years than nadal has indoor titles

 

[Bavaria]

Highly doubt it. If nadal loses to a mug he is in poor form and would also lose to fed if they met. However as he has artificially got a number 2 seed on hard and grass from his clay performances he will lose to the 4th round mug instead of reaching fed in the final and losing to him. This never happened to fed as in peak years he would never lose to a mug and would always reach the finals where nadal would usually not be. E.g. 18 our of 19 slam finals. Every final you can think of on clay etc. Nadal doesn’t even make hard court finals consistently even in absolute utter peak years.

That’s why the start of the year was so great that fed and nadal had such poor rankings and he met nadal at IW and absolutely destroyed him. Nadal looked shell shocked. However, normally with their 1 and 2 seeding that match would never happen. I was hoping they stayed low on the rankings so they would meet more but it didn’t happen.

It's not about making finals at their level...it's about winning.

 

[peakin11mugs]

Sorry Nadal is one of the best ever on hard courts. Three USO ends any argument. He also has three Indian wells which is the biggest masters 1000 and Olympic gold on hard court. It's fanboyism to say Nadal isn't in top 10 and frankly nonsense. Nadal has always peaked for certain events. Much like Sampras who is well down masters 1000 league table.

As I've said before federer has been more consistent. But Nadal has three USO in last decade to federers 0 which has to be examined. Nadal is better and more dominant on his best surface than federer. Nadal is better on his weakest surface than federer. I explained to you before that when it comes to the absolute crunch Nadal has the more impressive resume. His is the career I'd have.

Federer is definitely more consistent. But your own fellow federer fans kind of make the point. Consistency doesn't equate to the best. Many have said if federer wins tomorrow they don't care that he ends year no.2. At a stroke that essentially strikes out the consistency argument.

All the arguments about finals reached, semi finals etc are not relevant to greatness. It's about winning and more pertinently who you beat. Nadal has beat everyone everywhere, so has Djokovic as it happens. Federer has yet to beat Nadal at the FO and that makes his decision to skip the clay this season bewildering. It's like he accepts defeat. Nadal turns up everywhere and will fight to the death.

As I say if consistency is your measure of greatness that's fine it's your opinion. It isn't mine though.

I don’t think you read the post correctly. I said objectively in terms of actual number of titles won not finals etc (and not subjective peak level etc). This concessions hugely favours nadal as he has such few finals comparison to federer

In this front of actual titles won nadal only has 1 AO, 3 US, 2 WIMB, 0 WTF. I’m talking about actual titles won forget finals etc. These results are either not in top 5, top 10 top 20 or top anything in all time. Fed in all of these mentioned is top 1 and 2 only in AO.

Yes nadal has beaten fed at wimbedlon and AO hardcourts. This does not make up for a 3 slam deficiency. If it does to you then i wonder how you can reconcile that Djokovic is not a better player than nadal? He beat him at the AO, FO, WIMB, US open, WTF, basically every masters they have played together in. Has same masters, more number 1s and WTFs has also beat peak federer as well. Has gone 7-0 against nadal twice including 7 straight matches without nadal W jining a single set. Clearly he has absolutely and utterly dominated a maximum peak nadal. Is that not exactly what you said makes nadal GOAT? Well Djokovic has don’t it to a max peak nadal and a pretty damn good versio of federer. How is he not the GOAT then and better than nadal but a huge margin? He has undisputed numbers at his AO slam to boot as well

 

[Bavaria]

I think you’re quoting people out of contexts or at different times. I.e. right after last decima or something e.g. here is Agassi saying fed is the GOAT:

http://www.hindustantimes.com/tenni...ndre-agassi/story-p1ZbtWAZoN75Cpgp5GGTbJ.html

Normally I’d say nadal has two slams to feds one grass slam so it’s no contest. However you clearly think people can be better deliste having 3 less slams (which when you get those numbers is an ernmrous gulf) so in that case it opens up the possibility that is nadal really better than fed at grass then fed is at clay?

Logically you’re argument he is better would fall apart for several reasons. Firstly, nadal beat federer by the absolute skin of his teeth. Secondly you’re saying that nadal is the greatest on clay by a huge margin more than fed is on grass. So fed losing on clay is less of a downside to nadal losing to a grass great who isn’t as great as nadal is on a surface. Nadal has a weaker opponent than fed has in nadal but still only won 1 title and the other against berdych.

Now this is a big point. It was literally only nadal that fed couldn’t beat. He could even beat the GOAT version of 2011 Djokovic who could actually beat nadal. Fed was not vulnerable to anyone else on clay. Nadal on the other hand has problems on grass against literally anyone.

As a final point let’s say even if federer is weak on clay, he is GOAT in 3 surfaces grass, hard, indoor. Nadal is GOAT at one surface and very poor at indoors. Federer has no surface he is very poor at. Not even close. He even has more carpet titles a now defunct surface for 10 years than nadal has indoor titles

Federer isn't goat on three surfaces. Firstly indoors isn't a surface. It's a condition. And as you seem to measure solely on statistics hasnt Sampras got more WTF than federer? And Djokovic the same? Djokovic only one HC major behind so if he won say two more AOs is he HC goat?

The only definitive points are Nadal is clay goat and federer is grass goat.

 

[Bavaria]

I don’t think you read the post correctly. I said objectively in terms of actual number of titles won not finals etc (and not subjective peak level etc). This concessions hugely favours nadal as he has such few finals comparison to federer

In this front of actual titles won nadal only has 1 AO, 3 US, 2 WIMB, 0 WTF. I’m talking about actual titles won forget finals etc. These results are either not in top 5, top 10 top 20 or top anything in all time. Fed in all of these mentioned is top 1 and 2 only in AO.

Yes nadal has beaten fed at wimbedlon and AO hardcourts. This does not make up for a 3 slam deficiency. If it does to you then i wonder how you can reconcile that Djokovic is not a better player than nadal? He beat him at the AO, FO, WIMB, US open, WTF, basically every masters they have played together in. Has same masters, more number 1s and WTFs has also beat peak federer as well. Has gone 7-0 against nadal twice including 7 straight matches without nadal W jining a single set. Clearly he has absolutely and utterly dominated a maximum peak nadal. Is that not exactly what you said makes nadal GOAT? Well Djokovic has don’t it to a max peak nadal and a pretty damn good versio of federer. How is he not the GOAT then and better than nadal but a huge margin? He has undisputed numbers at his AO slam to boot as well

3 slam deficiency is because of a Five year age gap! As federer said he has been on tour almost a decade longer! He said that today!

Djokovic and Nadal are a lot easier to compare as almost same age. Again the issue is Nadal is so close on grass and hard but so far ahead on clay.

The WTF I'm afraid is not really relevant. Players are ultimately judged in terms of greatness at the majors. For one thing it's best of five sets at the majors. Wtf is best of three.

Consistency I've said is between federer and Djokovic.

 

[peakin11mugs]

Federer isn't goat on three surfaces. Firstly indoors isn't a surface. It's a condition. And as you seem to measure solely on statistics hasnt Sampras got more WTF than federer? And Djokovic the same? Djokovic only one HC major behind so if he won say two more AOs is he HC goat?

The only definitive points are Nadal is clay goat and federer is grass goat.

No federer has the most WTF titles of all time. Sampras djoker have 5. Djokovic would need two more to overtake fed and all that would mean mean that federer is 2nd all time. For reference nadal has 1 title on indoors and famously 0 WTF and also fed is the only player in history to have more than ten titles on four surfaces. He is also the only man to have it on 3 surfaces. I’m not sure about 2 surfaces but I bet less than 20 players have even done that.

 

[Bavaria]

I don’t think you read the post correctly. I said objectively in terms of actual number of titles won not finals etc (and not subjective peak level etc). This concessions hugely favours nadal as he has such few finals comparison to federer

In this front of actual titles won nadal only has 1 AO, 3 US, 2 WIMB, 0 WTF. I’m talking about actual titles won forget finals etc. These results are either not in top 5, top 10 top 20 or top anything in all time. Fed in all of these mentioned is top 1 and 2 only in AO.

Yes nadal has beaten fed at wimbedlon and AO hardcourts. This does not make up for a 3 slam deficiency. If it does to you then i wonder how you can reconcile that Djokovic is not a better player than nadal? He beat him at the AO, FO, WIMB, US open, WTF, basically every masters they have played together in. Has same masters, more number 1s and WTFs has also beat peak federer as well. Has gone 7-0 against nadal twice including 7 straight matches without nadal W jining a single set. Clearly he has absolutely and utterly dominated a maximum peak nadal. Is that not exactly what you said makes nadal GOAT? Well Djokovic has don’t it to a max peak nadal and a pretty damn good versio of federer. How is he not the GOAT then and better than nadal but a huge margin? He has undisputed numbers at his AO slam to boot as well

You left out Nadal winning six out of seven against Djokovic. When Djokovic at his peak.

All we have done here is prove there is a three way discussion for goat as clearly Djokovic is right up there.

That's my whole point. There is no definitive goat. Arguments can be made for three of them. After all Djokovic has a winning record over both Nadal and federer and a NOle slam. Some may say those are important. I still have him third but given all three haven't yet finished the whole debate is a bit redundant really.

 

[peakin11mugs]

3 slam deficiency is because of a Five year age gap! As federer said he has been on tour almost a decade longer! He said that today!

Djokovic and Nadal are a lot easier to compare as almost same age. Again the issue is Nadal is so close on grass and hard but so far ahead on clay.

The WTF I'm afraid is not really relevant. Players are ultimately judged in terms of greatness at the majors. For one thing it's best of five sets at the majors. Wtf is best of three.

Consistency I've said is between federer and Djokovic.

You haven really answered the point. How is Djokovic not better than nadal if he has beaten him at AO, FO, WIMB, US, WTF, all masters that have competed in. Has beaten him 7-0 twice including 7 finals in a row and 7 matches in a row without nadal winning a SET. Yes a set. This stretch included the French open, clay, hard, everything and 3 consecutive slams. How is he not the greater player when nadal is supposed to better with only 1 Wimbledon win against fed and 1 AO final win?

 

[Antonio Puente]

No federer has the most WTF titles of all time. Sampras djoker have 5. Djokovic would need two more to overtake fed and all that would mean mean that federer is 2nd all time. For reference nadal has 1 title on indoors and famously 0 WTF and also fed is the only player in history to have more than ten titles on four surfaces. He is also the only man to have it on 3 surfaces. I’m not sure about 2 surfaces but I bet less than 20 players have even done that.

It's cool regardless, but are you a Fed or Djoker fan? Both?

 

[TennisSprout]

On other websites Nadal is considered goat, the most neutral is atp one. Even here on a federer fan website federer only gets 55 per cent of the goat vote so overall I think most people think Nadal.

Tomorrow is a big match but will mean not a huge amount of Nadal ends the year no.1. That's the beauty of the race, and why it was invented, to determine the years best player. I'm not clear why federer fans, or some of them are saying if federer wins tomorrow it makes no difference if he is no.2. That logic escapes me as he missed the clay so Nadal will deserve to be no.1 for being the only player to excel on two surfaces and do reasonably well on a third (grass). Federer has excelled on two surfaces but done nothing on a third.

I will tell you that for every Nadal fan, there is at least 3 Federer fans in China and you know how many people China has, right? Yesterday, had Federer lost to Del Petro, you would pick up a final ticket from tout at less than $100. Now he is in, you have to pay at least $600.

At their current achievements, Nadal is trailing behind Federer in the GOAT race and it is not even close. Until Nadal catches up with Federer in slam counts, he doesn't have a case yet.

 

[Bavaria]

No federer has the most WTF titles of all time. Sampras djoker have 5. Djokovic would need two more to overtake fed and all that would mean mean that federer is 2nd all time. For reference nadal has 1 title on indoors and famously 0 WTF and also fed is the only player in history to have more than ten titles on four surfaces. He is also the only man to have it on 3 surfaces. I’m not sure about 2 surfaces but I bet less than 20 players have even done that.

You say famously. I have rarely heard it mentioned about Nadal having 0 WTF. Not until they actually come around. Compare to Djokovic when he has 0 FO and it's all anyone mentioned all year. The WTF is not a huge event it really isn't. Please read a few of the players books.

Federers record is massively impressive but you again are bringing all tournaments into it which is a consistency point. I keep saying that isn't wrong but a lot of people focus on the biggest events. And that's the four majors. I personally think that will change however as the smaller tournaments are now more important I think than they used to be. I've never seen players this motivated after the USO. Not just Nadal and federer but the likes of Simon and gasquet and cilic.

The game evolves.

 

[Bavaria]

I will tell you that for every Nadal fan, there is at least 3 Federer fans in China and you know how many people China has, right? Yesterday, had Federer lost to Del Petro, you would pick up a final ticket from tout at less than $100. Now he is in, you have to pay at least $600.

At their current achievements, Nadal is trailing behind Federer in the GOAT race and it is not even close. Until Nadal catches up with Federer in slam counts, he doesn't have a case yet.

Five year age cap makes it very close. Djokovic is said to be close to Nadal so why the double standards?

 

[peakin11mugs]

It's cool regardless, but are you a Fed or Djoker fan? Both?

Seriously I am a fed, djoker and nadal fan. Yes they exist. Because fed is right handed and has a one handed back hand like me I would favour him the most as I can watch him and learn the from him the most. If nadal was right handed he could overtake fed for me especially when I was younger less so as I get older and don’t want such a physical style of play and if Djokovic had normal levels of flexibility I would possibly favour him.

Due to this forum I usually don’t really root nadal anymore results wise

 

[Bavaria]

You haven really answered the point. How is Djokovic not better than nadal if he has beaten him at AO, FO, WIMB, US, WTF, all masters that have competed in. Has beaten him 7-0 twice including 7 finals in a row and 7 matches in a row without nadal winning a SET. Yes a set. This stretch included the French open, clay, hard, everything and 3 consecutive slams. How is he not the greater player when nadal is supposed to better with only 1 Wimbledon win against fed and 1 AO final win?

Because the WTF is not a major. At the majors Nadal has a better record at two. Djokovic at the other two. Marginally at Wimbledon. By a fair distance at AO. However at the FO it's a 10-1 difference and they are exactly same era. And Nadal has a vastly superior h2h at the majors

So when it really matters Nadal comes out on top just. Masters 1000 wins doesn't come into greatness debates because if it does then federer is third on that list despite being a lot older!

 

[peakin11mugs]

You say famously. I have rarely heard it mentioned about Nadal having 0 WTF. Not until they actually come around. Compare to Djokovic when he has 0 FO and it's all anyone mentioned all year. The WTF is not a huge event it really isn't. Please read a few of the players books.

Federers record is massively impressive but you again are bringing all tournaments into it which is a consistency point. I keep saying that isn't wrong but a lot of people focus on the biggest events. And that's the four majors. I personally think that will change however as the smaller tournaments are now more important I think than they used to be. I've never seen players this motivated after the USO. Not just Nadal and federer but the likes of Simon and gasquet and cilic.

The game evolves.

I’ve mentioed the four majors. Titles won no finals, no masters, no WTF. Forget anything else. Fed is all time leader or 2nd in 3 of them. Nadal is not top 5 or top 10 in three of them

As for level of play or domination I do not understand how with your logic you could say Djokovic is not greater when he has beaten peak nadal at all four slams and got 7 final THRASHINGS of nadal in a row, 3 slams in a row, 7 matches without losing set. He also has 3 separate years a peak nadal didn’t win a match.

You mentioned 6\7 for nadal v Djokovic when was this? The only stretch I can think of is a one which involved a Davis Cup match and you said only slams count, and retirements and a pre peak Djokovic.

I’d only slams matter Djokovic beat nadal 3 times in a row. His domination was 7 finals in a row. Nadal has never come close to that. We are taking about an absolute peak, uninjured mid twenties nadal being blown away 7 straight finals against Djokovic. If that’s not greater than I don’t know what is.

In my book he still isn’t btter than nadal without more slams but with your logic of nadal being better than fed with less slams it doesn’t make sense how that logic would not apply to jokvic who has dominated a peak nadal in a way nadal never has.

Finals point re masters. They are third tier. However when fed was peak they were best of 5 and players would tank then to focus on majors but still met obligatory attendance at them. That aside fed leads nadal in most individual masters apart from I think 2 or 3 clay ones

 

[TennisSprout]

Five year age cap makes it very close. Djokovic is said to be close to Nadal so why the double standards?

You really should make your case until Nadal reaches 19 or more. From what I read of you comments, you seem convinced that right now the number of people who think Nadal is GOAT is about the same as the number of people who think Federer is GOAT. Well, trust me and it is not even close. In China alone, probably Federer will have 20 millions more supporters than Nadal has.

 

[BeatlesFan]

I still think federer made a massive error not playing on clay at all.

He doesn't think so and few others do either. He skipped clay to maximize his chances to win Wimbledon and that worked out pretty well. Had Fed skipped clay and then lost in the third round of Wimbledon, we might question his decision. But who could possibly think it was an error to strategically eliminate clay when he achieved his goal? He won the biggest title of the year.

 

[Antonio Puente]

Seriously I am a fed, djoker and nadal fan. Yes they exist. Because fed is right handed and has a one handed back hand like me I would favour him the most as I can watch him and learn the from him the most. If nadal was right handed he could overtake fed for me especially when I was younger less so as I get older and don’t want such a physical style of play and if Djokovic had normal levels of flexibility I would possibly favour him.

Due to this forum I usually don’t really root nadal anymore results wise

That's understandable. Generally speaking, Nadal fans are @ssholes. Everyone knows that.

Not being entirely serious, but it seems, as a player, you have chosen to emulate Fed. Good choice. All things considered, possibly the best choice.

 

[Kozzy]

You haven really answered the point. How is Djokovic not better than nadal if he has beaten him at AO, FO, WIMB, US, WTF, all masters that have competed in. Has beaten him 7-0 twice including 7 finals in a row and 7 matches in a row without nadal winning a SET. Yes a set. This stretch included the French open, clay, hard, everything and 3 consecutive slams. How is he not the greater player when nadal is supposed to better with only 1 Wimbledon win against fed and 1 AO final win?

2011 was the most impressive streak against Nadal, because Nadal was playing well during that time - in 2015/16, that's like if Nadal were to beat the Djokovic of 2017 (game gone awol) seven times in a row - that's not nearly as impressive. Rafa was a mess in 15/16 - probably the worst stretch of play in his whole career. Also, I think the two matches where we can say that we got "peak" performances from both players are probably the 2012 AO final and the 2013 RG final - they split those, and unsurprisingly, they each won the match played on their best surface.
Anyway, I'm definitely more of a Rafa fan than anyone else, but still think you have to put Fed at the top, overall, with Rafa at #2. But Djokovic has surpassed them both on a couple occasions in terms of sheer sustained brilliant play - in 2011 and then again in 2015/16. The guy won the grand slam, for all intents and purposes, and that's huge and doesn't really get enough credit in my opinion.
It's going to be interesting to see what happens in 2018 when Djokovic comes back. I have to think Rafa will dip in form, and Roger probably too.

 

[Kozzy]

That's understandable. Generally speaking, Nadal fans are @ssholes. Everyone knows that

Not being entirely serious, but it seems, as a player, you have chosen to emulate Fed. Good choice. All considered, possibly the best choice.

Rabid fans of any player tend to be @ssholes in these forums...

 

[Bobby Jr]

It's not about making finals at their level...it's about winning.

You're challenging to be the worst troll on this board since the Breakpoint and Datacipher era.

Seriously. 24 posts in this thread today alone! Please crawl back into you cave.

 

[Noelan]

On other websites Nadal is considered goat, the most neutral is atp one. Even here on a federer fan website federer only gets 55 per cent of the goat vote so overall I think most people think Nadal.

Tomorrow is a big match but will mean not a huge amount of Nadal ends the year no.1. That's the beauty of the race, and why it was invented, to determine the years best player. I'm not clear why federer fans, or some of them are saying if federer wins tomorrow it makes no difference if he is no.2. That logic escapes me as he missed the clay so Nadal will deserve to be no.1 for being the only player to excel on two surfaces and do reasonably well on a third (grass). Federer has excelled on two surfaces but done nothing on a third.

Goat doesn't exist ,except in fans imagination. Both tremendous players, titans of the game,as for now Federer accomplished more.
Who is the better player is subjective category.

 

[Tiki-Taka]

Highly doubt it. If nadal loses to a mug he is in poor form and would also lose to fed if they met. However as he has artificially got a number 2 seed on hard and grass from his clay performances he will lose to the 4th round mug instead of reaching fed in the final and losing to him. This never happened to fed as in peak years he would never lose to a mug and would always reach the finals where nadal would usually not be. E.g. 18 our of 19 slam finals. Every final you can think of on clay etc. Nadal doesn’t even make hard court finals consistently even in absolute utter peak years.

That’s why the start of the year was so great that fed and nadal had such poor rankings and he met nadal at IW and absolutely destroyed him. Nadal looked shell shocked. However, normally with their 1 and 2 seeding that match would never happen. I was hoping they stayed low on the rankings so they would meet more but it didn’t happen.

If Nadal made some more hard court finals, most of us would assume he is in very good form at those tournaments. In no scenario does Federer have an advantage of 11+ wins on hard courts+grass over Nadal. He was actually trailing on hard courts until this year. To suggest Nadal's lead exists only because they didn't meet more on hard courts is a massive exaggeration.

 

[Kozzy]

No question about who was the better player tonight - all I can say is wow - Federer was unreal there. the GOAT!

 

[guanzishou]

Fedr GOAT.

World number one hit overhead into the net. What a weak era.

 

[KG1965]

AND NOW?

 

[KG1965]

ATP CENTER

 

[Jackuar]

Like many other here, for me Fed will be the ye1 for me, which yet doesn't make Nadal ye2. I think it's a mathematical anomaly, a software exception, a literal conundrum and an optical illusion.

 

[Antonio Puente]

Like many other here, for me Fed will be the ye1 for me, which yet doesn't make Nadal ye2. I think it's a mathematical anomaly, a software exception, a literal conundrum and an optical illusion.

Every Nadal fan should line up and agree to this.

If Nadal can't be a simple YE#1 after losing 4 straight to Fed, once Nadal gets to 19, how could Fed possibly be the GOAT after failing to beat Nadal in a slam for a decade?

 

[Bavaria]

You're challenging to be the worst troll on this board since the Breakpoint and Datacipher era.

Seriously. 24 posts in this thread today alone! Please crawl back into you cave.

Why? Because I make a reasoned argument? It's called adult conversation.

 

[Bavaria]

He doesn't think so and few others do either. He skipped clay to maximize his chances to win Wimbledon and that worked out pretty well. Had Fed skipped clay and then lost in the third round of Wimbledon, we might question his decision. But who could possibly think it was an error to strategically eliminate clay when he achieved his goal? He won the biggest title of the year.

Because clay is a masssive part of the season and he all but surrendered the no.1 ranking to Nadal.

 

[Bobby Jr]

Why? Because I make a reasoned argument? It's called adult conversation.

The thing is, you don't. You just think you do. You're the same as 100 other tools who've been and gone from the board over the years who just post crap day after day for a few months, get banned and then rejoin under a new user name.

 

[chjtennis]

Federer skipped the whole clay and missed out on a lot of points there. Also, that back injury in Montreal basically ruined his US Open series. I think it is clear why Federer is far behind Nadal in points now.

 

[Bukmeikara]

Nadal playing more shouldnt be held against him, Federer in 2017 is choosing his fights, the same way Rafa did in 2005-2016.

 

[Sudacafan]

Just relax. Federer is not winning this match.

The jinx worked!!

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

Bump...

Moot point...Bull is going to eviscerate Federer tomorrow

Not happening bro....bull annihilated by goat...

AO on,y 1 man,

Even that is cancelled now... Roger being the only man to win 3-3 AOs on each rebound ace and plexicushion

Nadal can achieve the Double Career Grand Slam in the Australian Open. Double Career Grand Slam >>> Career Grand Slam

Never in a million years that is gonna happen..
Cilic goat outplayed rafa bull so he had to fake an injury as usual and save himself for clay

Just relax. Federer is not winning this match.

Surely... He didn't win, he just bury fake winning streak of nadal deep into ground

What if he loses?

But he did not

And I'm pretty confident Nadal will win.

Where did your confidence go??

 

[Plamen1234]

Moot point...Bull is going to eviscerate Federer tomorrow

You had a lot of confidence for this match.I wonder why you had it though.Shanghai court suits Federer plus their last 2 matches before Shanghai Nadal couldnt do anything against Federer

 

[aman92]

You had a lot of confidence for this match.I wonder why you had it though.Shanghai court suits Federer plus their last 2 matches before Shanghai Nadal couldnt do anything against Federer

Nadal was playing extremely well since the US Open and had come through several tough matches. Probably fatigue caught up with him in the final

 

[Backspin1183]

Nadal was playing extremely well since the US Open and had come through several tough matches. Probably fatigue caught up with him in the final

Federer served extremely well and fully exploited Nadal's return position which was way behind the baseline. Nadal didn't get a single break point iirc. This allowed Federer to play aggressively on Nadal's service games and got the necessary breaks to win in straights. Nadal won't beat Federer on fast courts if he doesn't stand closer to the baselines while returning Federer's serves.