The GOAT can't be beaten by his main rival 70% of the time

[Forehand Of Doom]

Laver and Gonzalez have a better case for GOAT than Federer. They were truly dominant against everybody, not just players 2 tiers below them.

Nadal might be a candidate too if he reaches the 17 slam count.

But for Federer that opportunity is gone. He could remain as the most accomplished player ever for some time, but never the GOAT.

 

[ubi1]

Laver and Gonzalez have a better case for GOAT than Federer. They were truly dominant against everybody, not just players 2 tiers below them.

Nadal might be a candidate too if he reaches the 17 slam count.

But for Federer that opportunity is gone. He could remain as the most accomplished player ever for some time, but never the GOAT.

I agree with you 100%

 

[ScottleeSV]

Errrrrrr no

 

[90's Clay]

Laver,Gonzales,Rosewall, Tilden all with better GOAT credentials than FederWUSS

I'll also probably take Pete over Federer at this point because he would never bow to his main rival 70 percent of the time either. (Can't use the clay excuse either because Fed has a losing record to Nadal in slams OFF clay)

Fed's resume is overinflated anyways due to the weak 2004-2007 era

 

[kiki]

That... and playing a weak field until 2007 or so is what I have posted thrillion times before.100 posts afterwards, my opinion is shared by almost every poster here.

 

[Steve0904]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh, the butthurt! :lol:

 

[RF20Lennon]

IMO and I stress again, IMO the only thing that matters are records, stats and overall accomplishments and consistency. Federer has all of that. In 50 years no one will remember H2H but people will still remember titles won.

 

[RF20Lennon]

Laver,Gonzales,Rosewall, Tilden all with better GOAT credentials than FederWUSS

I'll also probably take Pete over Federer at this point because he would never bow to his main rival 70 percent of the time either. (Can't use the clay excuse either because Fed has a losing record to Nadal in slams OFF clay)

Fed's resume is overinflated anyways due to the weak 2004-2007 era

I thought you put Fed above Pete in the GOAT debate? Federer has better numbers. Numbers are what remain in history.

 

[90's Clay]

I thought you put Fed above Pete in the GOAT debate? Federer has better numbers. Numbers are what remain in history.

Numbers wise, Fed has the better resume but thinking about it, the crater in Fed's resume in the h2h. vs. Nadal is greater than Pete's with no RG

Pete was at least man enough to stand up to his rivals.

 

[SLD76]

yawn.

come back with better material kid.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

Federer was also very fortunate because of his 5 year age difference with Nadal and Djokovic, winning most of his hardcourt slams before they entered their prime in that surface. Nadal would have still won all those French Opens even if Fed had been his same age, but no way Federer would have won as many hardcourt slams against prime Nadal and Djokovic.

It's time for those who complain about the age difference as a negative for Federer to wake up.

 

[Dark Magician]

oh the insecurity of some fans!!

 

[ScottleeSV]

Disclaimer - how many of the 70 percent were when fed was over the hill?

This rivalry ended at 18-10 realistically, and don't get me started on the clay heavy emphasis of their early meetings or the fact that fed's legs have always been 5 years older

 

[SLD76]

Federer was also very fortunate because of his 5 year age difference with Nadal and Djokovic, winning most of his hardcourt slams before they entered their prime in that surface. Nadal would have still won all those French Opens even if Fed had been his same age, but no way Federer would have won as many hardcourt slams against prime Nadal and Djokovic.

It's time for those who complain about the age difference as a negative for Federer to wake up.

hmm..thats why Fed regained world number one in 2012 at age 30, a year after djoker's dominance, and did it by beating Rafa at Indian Wells, and Djoker at the wimbledon semi, and murray in the final. And he had won the WTF in 2011.

but cool story bro.

 

[monfed]

 

[RF20Lennon]

Numbers wise, Fed has the better resume but thinking about it, the crater in Fed's resume in the h2h. vs. Nadal is greater than Pete's with no RG

Pete was at least man enough to stand up to his rivals.

Yeah but he never faced a rival like Nadal in today's slow conditions. If he had he would have a losing record as well. Federer won all 4 slams and more slams than Pete, with more masters, more WTF's and more weeks at number 1. And thats what will remain throughout history. Weak era is simply an opinion. Records and stats are FACT.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

yawn.

come back with better material kid.

It's not "material", it's solid facts. You yawn because you have nothing else. You would make a great lawyer with that type of reasoning.

No GOAT can lose 70% of his professional matches to his main rival.

 

[Sarzy]

I still think Fed is the best. And he is in terms of success and IMO his beautiful gameplay/shot making.

 

[mistik]

Federer is the Margeret Court of men tennis. When all the dust settles down he isnt going to be admired as he is today.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

hmm..thats why Fed regained world number one in 2012, a year after djoker's dominance, and did it by beating Rafa at Indian Wells, and Djoker at the wimbledon semi, and murray in the final.

but cool story bro.

Yes, and he would have done that consistently (beating Nadal) because that's what he does. An incredible 30% of times.

What other GOAT candidate has ever been manhandled by his main rival like Federer?

Nobody, that's who.

 

[mike danny]

You are just ****ed because Nadal's GOAThood has been delayed by losing the AO

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

I still think Fed is the best. And he is in terms of success and IMO his beautiful gameplay/shot making.

I can't disagree with this. I respect your opinion.

 

[SLD76]

It's not "material", it's solid facts. You yawn because you have nothing else. You would make a great lawyer with that type of reasoning.

No GOAT can lose 70% of his professional matches to his main rival.

uh huh, but I guess fed will have to console himself with dominating 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 of the tour and owning nearly every tennis record worth having.

also, not losing to his rival 7 finals in a row, 6 in one year. 3 in slams.

its sad but, thems the breaks I guess.

slow down kid, you are fairly new here, you have ease yourself into these dead horse debates.

 

[ScottleeSV]

It's not "material", it's solid facts. You yawn because you have nothing else. You would make a great lawyer with that type of reasoning.

No GOAT can lose 70% of his professional matches to his main rival.

They can when he leads his rivals in so many other key stats. Please refer also to my previous post.

 

[Manus Domini]

Just pulling a FOD and copy/pasting the exact same image another poster used in this thread without giving credit.
I lie about credit. It goes to Monfed.

 

[SLD76]

Yes, and he would have done that consistently (beating Nadal) because that's what he does. An incredible 30% of times.

What other GOAT candidate has ever been manhandled by his main rival like Federer?

Nobody, that's who.

LMAO, I notice you make it about nadal when I was addressing the fact that old fed is still beating prime djoker and murray

but whatever. cool story.

 

[sarmpas]

Laver,Gonzales,Rosewall, Tilden all with better GOAT credentials than FederWUSS

I'll also probably take Pete over Federer at this point because he would never bow to his main rival 70 percent of the time either. (Can't use the clay excuse either because Fed has a losing record to Nadal in slams OFF clay)

Fed's resume is overinflated anyways due to the weak 2004-2007 era

I like the contradiction here regarding Federer's competition. If Laver's prime was during the prime of Federer, Nadal or Sampras, I doubt he'd have any calendar slams. Oh right he played 'Muscles' Rosewall. A very nice man I'm sure but a 'shrimp' compared to the very best clay court players from the 90s onward. His rep is over flated by the nostalgists.

Doubt worry, Nadal has the FO to put the smile back on people's faces.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

You are just ****ed because Nadal's GOAThood has been delayed by losing the AO

No, honestly I'm ****ed because of all the threads accusing Nadal of faking injury, doping, etc.

That doesn't mean that anything about my thesis is incorrect though.

 

[SLD76]

No, honestly I'm ****ed because of all the threads accusing Nadal of faking injury, doping, etc.

That doesn't mean that anything about my thesis is incorrect though.

the epitome of butthurt.

 

[Dark Magician]

What if Fed never faced Rafa in any FO final. his slam finals record would be 17/20 and even better h2h. So u see that being great and reaching every final despite not being the best on the surface is actually spoiling fed nos. even if it makes him better as a player? Rafa never reached those finals during 05-08. otherwise his nos wudnt have been like this.

 

[mistik]

Federer is Margeret Court of men tennis.Not even his die hard fans believe he is the best anymore thats why they are angry.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

uh huh, but I guess fed will have to console himself with dominating 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 of the tour and owning nearly every tennis record worth having.

also, not losing to his rival 7 finals in a row, 6 in one year. 3 in slams.

its sad but, thems the breaks I guess.

slow down kid, you are fairly new here, you have ease yourself into these dead horse debates.

The difference between Rafa and Fed is that Rafa turned his rivalry with Djokovic around. Federer has always been second to Nadal in the rivalry from the very beginning.

And losing to 0.01% of the tour is damaging when it's your main rival and you lose 70% of the time.

Laver didn't do that. Gonzalez didn't do that. Why should Federer get a free pass? Being your main rival's doormat disqualifies you immediately.

 

[kiki]

Federer is Margeret Court of men tennis.Not even his die hard fans believe he is the best anymore thats why they are angry.

Who says that Margaret is not the greatest anymore? you?

well, nowadays, Wavrinka is the number one swiss player, no doubt.

 

[Russeljones]

Laver and Gonzalez have a better case for GOAT than Federer. They were truly dominant against everybody, not just players 2 tiers below them.

Nadal might be a candidate too if he reaches the 17 slam count.

But for Federer that opportunity is gone. He could remain as the most accomplished player ever for some time, but never the GOAT.

perhaps an example of civility to follow in the forum.

To quote myself, a GOAT candidate can't get dumped out of the most prestigious Slam tournament by nobodies two years in a row when in his absolute prime.

 

[TMF]

Federer is Margeret Court of men tennis.Not even his die hard fans believe he is the best anymore thats why they are angry.

Court was playing in the 60s, before the establishment of the WTA.

You failed !

 

[AM95]

Numbers wise, Fed has the better resume but thinking about it, the crater in Fed's resume in the h2h. vs. Nadal is greater than Pete's with no RG

Pete was at least man enough to stand up to his rivals.

Clearly not because even with the "crater" he was able to win 17 slams

 

[Brett UK]

Laver and Gonzalez have a better case for GOAT than Federer. They were truly dominant against everybody, not just players 2 tiers below them.

Nadal might be a candidate too if he reaches the 17 slam count.

But for Federer that opportunity is gone. He could remain as the most accomplished player ever for some time, but never the GOAT.

Writing this to cheer yourself up are you. hope it works for you. Hahahaha

 

[kiki]

a GOAT candidate doesn´t lose a final to a mere good player like Wavrinka, and is trashed away by geniouses such as Darcy and Rosol.

Borg never had a bad loss other than Ismael el Shaffei in 1974.

That said, I agree that the HtH hurts enormously Federer´s chances to be considered the GOAT.

Also the weak era, although many won´t agree on that.

 

[90's Clay]

Clearly not because even with the "crater" he was able to win 17 slams

And everyone won of them (besides 2 early in Nadal's career) he had to sidestep Nadal to win.

 

[jelle v]

Laver,Gonzales,Rosewall, Tilden all with better GOAT credentials than FederWUSS

I'll also probably take Pete over Federer at this point because he would never bow to his main rival 70 percent of the time either. (Can't use the clay excuse either because Fed has a losing record to Nadal in slams OFF clay)

Fed's resume is overinflated anyways due to the weak 2004-2007 era

Pete never had a main rival like Nadal.. :lol:

 

[sarmpas]

Numbers wise, Fed has the better resume but thinking about it, the crater in Fed's resume in the h2h. vs. Nadal is greater than Pete's with no RG

Pete was at least man enough to stand up to his rivals.

Pete has trouble standing up to foot-notes on clay.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

the epitome of butthurt.

You are? Federer can't be a GOAT. Most accomplished player ever perhaps, just not Greatest ever.

 

[SLD76]

The difference between Rafa and Fed is that Rafa turned his rivalry with Djokovic around. Federer has always been second to Nadal in the rivalry from the very beginning.

And losing to 0.01% of the tour is damaging when it's your main rival and you lose 70% of the time.

Laver didn't do that. Gonzalez didn't do that. Why should Federer get a free pass? Being your main rival's doormat disqualifies you immediately.

sigh, rookies.

the roger rafa head to head was fairly close from 05-08, despite the fact they played most often on clay.

after 09 is when it began to go lopsided. I wonder why. Maybe because fed is 5 years older and declining while rafa was coming into his physical prime?

Also, arent djoker and rafa like a year apart in age?? gives one alot more time to even the score against a rival than if you are significantly older.

See, this is what I mean by you need more seasoning before starting these threads.

slow down, rook.

 

[GoaLaSSo]

Statistics and facts > Speculation

These thread pop up over and over again, and they are all successful at rustling peoples' jimmies.

Federer is the closest thing we have to a GOAT based on statistics. Trying to measure GOATness is really unfair to the older players because they didn't have all the same opportunities players have now.

Everyone can keep speculating all they want about Federer's age this and this era is weaker than that one, but these arguments are subjective and biased.

Head to head has never mattered before Fed-Nadal and nobody can name h2h off the top of their head of any other pairing before.

The only "major" (haha) blemish on Fed's resume is an unfavorable head, while every other candidate has far bigger flaws. Every sport, especially individual ones, has specific matchups that favor certain people. If you don't believe or have experienced this with your own tennis then I don't know what more I can say. I don't want to argue this for long periods of time, so I'll assume people can figure these flaws out easy enough.

If and/or when nadal reaches 17 slams, it becomes a debate on masters vs time at #1 (unless nadal catches up to that as well.) If nadal reaches 18, then BAM we have a new best GOAT candidate. Some of the older guys (I personally thing Laver and Borg are the two best older guys) deserve to be in tier 1 at least, but their resumes are not as strong as Federer (debatable.)

 

[SLD76]

You are? Federer can't be a GOAT. Most accomplished player ever perhaps, just not Greatest ever.

.........

the mental gymnastics of butthurt nadal fans never ceases to amaze me.

 

[sarmpas]

You are? Federer can't be a GOAT. Most accomplished player ever perhaps, just not Greatest ever.

You started this thread 'dissing' Federer when it it was Stan who beat Nadal thereby denying Nadal the chance to close the slam count gap on Federer. Look in the mirror and pick who's really the 'butthurt' party.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

Disclaimer - how many of the 70 percent were when fed was over the hill?

This rivalry ended at 18-10 realistically, and don't get me started on the clay heavy emphasis of their early meetings or the fact that fed's legs have always been 5 years older

It works both ways. Nadal was 17 and Federer was 22 when they first played. Many of Federer's victories outside clay wouldn't have happened if they both had been the same age.

And Gonzalez was much more competitive than Federer when he was over 5 years older. Why is Federer entitled to excuses and a free pass? A GOAT shouldn't have to qualify his resume and look for excuses. Gonzalez didn't and Laver certainly didn't either.

Imagine if Nadal and Djokovic had been prime in 2004-2007.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

You started this thread 'dissing' Federer when it it was Stan who beat Nadal thereby denying Nadal the chance to close the slam count gap on Federer. Look in the mirror and pick who's really the 'butthurt' party.

Don't shoot the messenger if you don't like the thread. If you are going to challenge my thesis don't do it via ad hominem arguments.

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

LMAO, I notice you make it about nadal when I was addressing the fact that old fed is still beating prime djoker and murray

but whatever. cool story.

So he beat them once. My point is imagine 2004-2007 with these guys the same as Federer. Was Safin better than Djokovic? Roddick?

 

[SLD76]

It works both ways. Nadal was 17 and Federer was 22 when they first played. Many of Federer's victories outside clay wouldn't have happened if they both had been the same age.

And Gonzalez was much more competitive than Federer when he was over 5 years older. Why is Federer entitled to excuses and a free pass? A GOAT shouldn't have to qualify his resume and look for excuses. Gonzalez didn't and Laver certainly didn't either.

Imagine if Nadal and Djokovic had been prime in 2004-2007.

are you sure about that?
sigh, rookies.

you do realize fed was coming off injury in that miami final, yes? good? ok

rafa won his first slam at 18, so dont give me that baby nonsense.

if djoker and rafa had been prime in 04-07, fed still would win, except perhaps on clay against rafa. Everywhere else, I take fed. shoot, Nadal has been declining at WB since 2011. And fed almost beat djoker again in the uso semi in 2011. Yeah so, given that, and old fed regaining number one in 2012. Im thinking even if they were all the same age and prime at the same time, I still take Fed anywhere except perhaps rafa on clay.

hmm..wasnt old fed the guy who finally beat djoker in 2011?

LMAO. you make it so easy!