The reason why Federer would be in discussion without being generally accepted GOAT if he wins 9+4+1 is because he never held all 4GS at the same time. If he is 9+4+1 plus wins 4 GS in a row (I don't make distinction between CYGS and NCYGS) I would consider him GOAT (pending that Djokovic and Nadal stay as they are). With 9+4+1 alone he would be in discussion, which is great accomplishment.
The problem with Roger Federer G.O.A.T. claims: Nadal and Djokovic rivalries
The reason why Federer would be in discussion without being generally accepted GOAT if he wins 9+4+1 is because he never held all 4GS at the same time. If he is 9+4+1 plus wins 4 GS in a row (I don't make distinction between CYGS and NCYGS) I would consider him GOAT (pending that Djokovic and Nadal stay as they are). With 9+4+1 alone he would be in discussion, which is great accomplishment.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
I heard Father i a great villain. So maybe I'll give it a go
Pheasant
Legend
What’s funny about Fed at a Cincinnati this year is that he was so bad, that I though that a rusty and gassed Stan was finally going to beat Fed away from clay for the first time in 17 tries. I was actually pulling for Stan for the first time ever. But it really looked like both players got into a tanking match.
Anyway, your point is quite valid.
How do we factor in matches on carpet? Fed won two titles on carpet, including a best of 5 in Basel one year. Why hasn’t anybody said anything about that since people are getting picky?
Pheasant
Legend
I will agree that Novak’s NCYGS is the best one year span since Laver’s 1969 season.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
He could just win MC or Rome and the deal is done imo. He's done it all really. We can pick and choose things Djokovic hasn't accomplished and put a label on it because Federer has. Your mention of carpet might as well be valid too. Where is Djokovic's Hamburg title or the fact he never won a major grass court event outside of Wimbledon??? Hmmm??? Eastbourne LOL.
I will tell you this confidentially just between you and me. The others would not understand. GOAT is in your heart and only you can tell who he is. Nobody else.
I wonder do you know what is "The St Crispin's Day speech"?
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Vaguely. Henry V if I recall. What's your point?
Federev
G.O.A.T.
SO true.
You're only as good as who you can beat.
It's too bad Nadal will never reach that Davydenko ring either.
And Novak - he's amazing, but sadly owned by Roddick in Andy's peak.
OF course we know: All those peak Fed years when he beat Dull at Wimby and YEC and various places, his favorable H2H off clay - FLUKE!!! And when Fed trashed Novak all those years in his peak and then during Novak's peak when Fed took him out at RG and WB while Fed was starting his oldererer years... And then in his geratric years taking Nad out everywhere since 2014 including 4-0 in 2017. It's all total flukes! He's such a MUUUUUUUG!!!!
You're only as good as who you can beat.
It really is too bad Nadal will never reach that Davydenko ring. But no crime in that cause it's GOATdenko.
And Novak - well - RoddGOAT is a well known nickname for a reason.
Geeee: I wonder what would have happened if Fed had had his peak during Djokdal's peak??
Federev
G.O.A.T.
GO AWAY AND BE BANNED INTELLIGENT AND ARTICULATE POSTER.
Federev
G.O.A.T.
SO misleading. The whole argument hides the fact that Fed's been no.1 consecutively and longer far far FAR longer than any of the big 4. He couldn't very well play himself!
When he wasn't number one its only because 2 all time greats were #1, who were always and only #1 way past Fed's end peak of 2007.
ADD the fact that the big 4 only became the BIG FOUR long after Fed ended his peak as well.
Of course they SHOULD be able to beat him in his decline. It's expected. Whats not expected is how competitive he's remained so long after his peak.
Just another set of stats that ignores age - as a billion posters have pointed out already in refutation of this article.
Here's a good stat: Nadal H2H v Davydenko 0-4 to Denko. DenkGOAT. Better than Nadal.
Stats can do anything if you ignore important context.
Last edited:
Ann
Hall of Fame
This boards troll game is expansive but the quality is weak. Proving again that quantity does not equal quality.
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
Other players I mentioned were of the same era and played against the same exact number ones: Federer, Djokovic and Nadal. Except once Wawrinka who played Murray.
Hell he couldn't do better than Berdych, Ferrer and Nishikori.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
"it is normal a 27-34 years old gets owned by 22-28 years old"
27-34 years old win all slams in the last 4 years.
"muh weak era"
27-34 years old win all slams in the last 4 years.
"muh weak era"
Objective observer
Semi-Pro
What was Federer's record against Nadal from 2004 to 2009 despite having age advantage?
Objective observer
Semi-Pro
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Lol, so many people mad at Federer.
Dance to the music.
Dance to the music.
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
He won 15 of the first 38 matches against Big4 (39.5%), and 15 of the last 25 (60%).
Objective observer
Semi-Pro
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
2008 RG - 2008 WI - 2008 UO - 2009 AO
vs the field: 25-0 (75 sets to 8)
vs top10: 4-0 (12 sets to 1)
vs Nadal 0-3
2015 WI - 2015 UO - 2015 YEC - 2016 AO
vs the field: 22-0 (59 sets to 3)
vs top10: 7-0 (17 sets to 1)
vs Djokovic 0-4
vs the field: 25-0 (75 sets to 8)
vs top10: 4-0 (12 sets to 1)
vs Nadal 0-3
2015 WI - 2015 UO - 2015 YEC - 2016 AO
vs the field: 22-0 (59 sets to 3)
vs top10: 7-0 (17 sets to 1)
vs Djokovic 0-4
Towny
Hall of Fame
2007 AO - 2007 FO - 2007 WI - 2007 UO - 2008 AO - 2008 FO
vs the field 31-0 (91 sets to 14)
vs top 10 2-0 (6 sets to 0)
vs Fedal 1-5
See how easily the results can be twisted?
And LOL at deliberately excluding YEC from 2008, given Federer was eliminated by the field in the round robin
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
LOL you have to include Nadal and a 4th round match. Past 4th round he was 1-1 vs Federer.
Fed has nothing to do with this, it's more like Djoko vs Nadal.
And 91 sets to 14 meeting only 2 top10 is far from being domination
Last edited by a moderator:
Towny
Hall of Fame
My point is Novak was completely shut out of slams by these guys except for AO08. It doesn't matter that he beat everyone else though - he obviously wasn't at prime level (except AO08). Federer was at prime level in 08 (albeit about the lowest point of his prime), but very clearly wasn't in 2015, though there's clearly no point arguing with you about that
Tennis_Hands
Banned
So rest of big 4 had age advantage which is why they beat Federer even though they lost more against Federer as he got older
Is there anything else that happened except for Federer getting older?
In your objective opinion, I mean.
The best version of Federer is post-2015 version. He said it and that can't be argued.
Objective observer
Semi-Pro
Is there anything else that happened except for Federer getting older?
In your objective opinion, I mean.
What is your opinion on why that happened?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
That is not very elegant, is it now?
Asking about the answers of questions you are supposed to answer yourself.
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
RG07-RG08 Djokovic was 0-4 vs Nadal and 1-1 vs Federer.
So it's a Djokovic vs Nadal thing, which is not in the discussion now.
Last edited by a moderator:
Eren
Professional
He has made a lot of assessments, including "I did not play at my best" after the Wimbledon 2015 final.
Otherwise, Fedr is the best because Nadal and Djokovic say so and their assessment is worth much more than yours and mine.
Let's not forget tennis players are just humans and can talk crap (this isn't limited to Djoker and nadl only).
Tennis_Hands
Banned
How do you explain that Federer significantly improved H2H with Nadal and Murray from 2015?
Eren
Professional
Ducking Nadal on clay LOL????????????
But Fedr is the best because Djokovic and Nadal say so and that can't be argued.
"If anyone thinks I am better than Fed then they know nothing about tennis" Nadal (or something along those lines lol)
Tennis_Hands
Banned
CYGS
Legend
Third Wheeler confirmed.The problem with Roger Federer G.O.A.T. claims: Nadal and Djokovic rivalries
By Tim Elbra
So ends another season in which we were graced by the tennis genius of Roger Federer.
The Swiss maestro, 37, fell just short of adding his 100th career title when he lost in the semis of the ATP Finals to Alexander Zverev.
Yet he finished 2018 with another Grand Slam: his sixth Australian Open title, Slam No.20. That’s three in the past two years, having won the Aus Open and Wimbledon in 2017 to end a four-year Slam drought.
He also returned to world No.1 this year, setting records for being the oldest player to do so (36 years, 195 days); the longest gap between stints at No.1 (five years, 106 days); the longest gap since first becoming No.1 (14 years, 17 days); and extending his record of weeks spent at No.1 to 310.
His record of 20 Slams remains his crowning glory; the thing always pointed to when he is named as the greatest male tennis player of all time. He may yet overtake Jimmy Connors’ record of career singles titles (109).
He is still in extraordinary form when the logic of mere mortals says he should be retired. But another year closer to the end, there remains one problem his legacy.
How can a man be the greatest of all time when, arguably, he is only the third-best player of his generation?
The two men with legitimate arguments as his superiors are, of course, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic.
Interestingly, Djokovic referred to Federer as “arguably the best player ever” during this year’s ATP Finals. Nadal has always insisted that Federer is the greatest.
Yet head-to-head with the Swiss, both men have proven themselves better than Federer; as the stats clearly show.
Roger Federer at the 2018 ATP Finals. (AP)
Federer has a 6-9 record against current world No.1 Djokovic in Grand Slams (40 per cent win rate) and has beaten the Serb just once in four Slam finals (25 per cent win rate). Federer trails Djokovic 22-25 in their career head-to-head (46.8 per cent win rate); trails 9-11 in Masters 1000 matches (45 per cent win rate); and trails 6-13 in all finals matches (31.6 per cent win rate).
Against his great rival Nadal, Federer fares worse on some counts.
The Swiss has a 3-9 record against the Spaniard in Grand Slams (25 per cent win rate) and a 3-6 record in Slam finals (33.3 per cent win rate). Federer trails Nadal 15-23 in career head-to-head (39.4 per cent win rate); trails 6-11 in Masters 1000 matches (35.3 per cent win rate); and trails 10-14 in all finals matches (41.7 per cent win rate).
Moving beyond head-to-head, Nadal also has a superior win rate across all Grand Slam finals to Federer; largely thanks, of course, to his absurd tally of 11 French Open titles. Nadal has a 17-7 record in Slam finals (70.8 per cent win rate), against Federer’s 20-10 (66.7 per cent win rate), and Djokovic’s 14-9 (60.9 per cent win rate).
It remains to be seen if Nadal, 32, or Djokovic, 31, are capable of overhauling Federer’s Slams tally. It could be argued, given they have existed entirely within the Federer era, that they have had to work harder for their Slams. Federer had won seven Slams before he met either man in a Slam final, with his first encounter a loss to Nadal at Roland Garros in 2006; which he responded to by beating his rival in that year’s Wimbledon final.
Roger Federer's first Grand Slam final win: Wimbledon 2003, over Aussie Mark Philippoussis. (AAP)
Make of these lists what you will.
PLAYERS FACED IN GRAND SLAM FINALS
Federer W: Mark Philippoussis, Marat Safin, Andy Roddick (4), Lleyton Hewitt, Andre Agassi, Marcos Baghdatis, Rafael Nadal (3), Fernando Gonzalez, Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray (3), Robin Soderling, Marin Cilic (2).
Federer L: Rafael Nadal (6), Juan Martin del Potro, Novak Djokovic (3).
Nadal W: Mariano Puerta, Roger Federer (6), Robin Soderling, Tomas Berdych, Novak Djokovic (4), David Ferrer, Stan Wawrinka, Kevin Anderson, Dominic Thiem.
Nadal L: Roger Federer (3), Novak Djokovic (3), Stan Wawrinka.
Djokovic W: Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Andy Murray (5), Rafael Nadal (3), Roger Federer (3), Kevin Anderson, Juan Martin del Potro.
Djokovic L: Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal (4), Andy Murray (2), Stan Wawrinka (2).
Novak Djokovic took consecutive Wimbledon finals from Roger Federer in 2014-15. (AAP)
There have been periods in which Nadal and Djokovic have clearly had Federer’s measure.
In 2008-09, Nadal beat Federer in the French Open, Wimbledon and Australian Open finals, and all were significant victories. He trounced Federer 6-1 6-3 6-0 at Roland Garros, a beating so bad that it affected Federer mentally against Nadal for years; he won an epic All England Club final 9-7 in the fifth set on Federer’s preferred surface; then he bounced back from a tournament record five-hour, 14-minutes long semi-final against Fernando Verdasco to beat Federer in five sets at Melbourne Park, leaving his rival crying on the presentation stage. Federer, at least, won the 2008 US Open amid the wreckage.
The 2008 French Open final, a humiliation inside two hours, was a true turning point in Nadal vs Federer.
Before that match, Federer was 6-9 (40 per cent) versus Nadal, 2-3 (40 per cent) in Grand Slams and 2-2 (50 per cent) in Grand Slam finals. He played out the French-Wimbledon final double in the two previous years (2006-07) against Nadal with no ill-effect, winning at the All England Club after a pair of solid-four-set losses at Roland Garros.
Starting with his loss in that year’s Wimbledon final, Federer’s record against Nadal after Roland Garros ‘08 was terrible. Before the 2017 Australian Open final, when he beat Nadal in a Grand Slam final for the first time in nearly a decade and also ended a six-year run with no Slam titles, it read 4-12 (25 per cent), 0-5 in Slams and 0-3 in Slam finals.
Djokovic, though is the only player to beat Federer in three consecutive Grand Slam final appearances, winning Wimbledon 2014-15 and the 2015 US Open. Unlike Nadal, he has caught Federer in his later years and past his true prime, majestic though he remains.
Federer’s extraordinary consistency and longevity are his trademarks, along with that divine one-handed backhand. He has played 43 Grand Slams semis, contesting a record 23 in a row from 2004-2010. He will finish this year as world No.3, the 14th time he’s been ranked inside the top three at years’ end. He even began this season with a career-best start, an inspired 17-0 run before losing in the BNP Paribas Open final.
Roger Federer hadn't beaten Rafael Nadal at a Grand Slam for a decade until the 2017 Australian Open. (AAP)
In wonderful news for Aussie fans, he has confirmed (not that there was any doubt) that he will be back at Melbourne Park next year to defend his Australian Open title.
“[Pete] Sampras once upon a time said, ‘If you win a Slam, it's a good season’,” Federer said after his ATP Finals exit, which put his season record at 48-10.
“So [my season] started great. I played super well in Australia again. So obviously I can't wait to go back there in a couple of months.
“The second half of the season could have been better maybe. I also have high hopes to always do well. So I'm happy I gave myself opportunities again in that second half of the season. I maybe lost a couple of too-close matches that could have changed things around for me a little bit.
“Five years ago, where was I? I was probably fighting with back pain in '13, not sure if I was ever going to figure that back pain out again because I had it for almost probably four or five months of the season. It really rocked my tennis for a bit.
“Here I am having actually a pretty good season physically, as well, won another Slam, got back to World No.1. So yes, you can see it as a very, very positive season. That's probably how I will look back on it as well.”
However long Federer plays, he won’t square his ledger with Nadal and Djokovic. He didn’t play Nadal at all this season and lost both matches he played against Djokovic.
With 99 career titles, he leads both men comfortable on that score; Nadal has 80, Djokovic 72. And who knows – perhaps he will add to his record Grand Slam tally, pushing it farther from the reach of his rivals.
Though one thing is clear: if he meets Nadal or Djokovic in a Grand Slam final, the man referred to as the Greatest Of All Time is actually the underdog. The best we’ve ever seen … yet at the same time, third on the podium in this incredible era for men’s tennis.
jonnyhomeboy9851
Rookie
While essentially true, that is still an offensive term for novak
CYGS
Legend
Djesus takes the wheel, no?
jonnyhomeboy9851
Rookie
While essentially true, that is still an offensive term for novak. It looks like with Zverev and Kachinov, novak will be 5th best player of his own era and 12th by peak level
CYGS
Legend
You are contradicting yourself. If he were to be the fifth greatest, why would he be offended by being call the third wheel. Go home to your mummy, boy.
jonnyhomeboy9851
Rookie
Because he is the third wheel of big three. But now he is pushed to 5th place. You know what though that is a good point, considering Novak will not hold any of the following records he isnt a third wheel:
Total Slam count
AO
FO
WIMB
USO
WTF count
Masters 1000 count
Atp 500
Atp 250
Olympics
Ye no 1
Weeks at no 1
Consec weeks at no 1
Any finals, semis etc records at slams
No consistency records e.g. 1 slam for 10 years, no 1 or 2 for 15 years etc
No unique trailblazing achievements e.g. la decima, 20 slams etc only me too records
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Rogfan
Professional
Such misguiding stats. As someone already pointed out, it completely ignores the fact that Fed was the #1 for so long in his peak. If you want to use this stat to prove Nadal’s greatness in slams, let me ask, if he is/was so good at beating the #1, why isn’t he the #1 himself, or #1 for more weeks? Hmmm let me guess, because he isn’t good or consistent enough to be the #1? To me this slam winning % doesn’t prove anything other depicting a picture of a Mr Nadal who hibernates half of the year and comes back stronger than anyone in selected part of the season, generally speaking over his career. Greatness? No. A great opportunist? Oh yes!
jonnyhomeboy9851
Rookie
He is a djokovic troll not a nadal fan, but same applies to djokovic, who is apparently GOAT worthy but for some mysterious reason doesn;t hold the record in any of:
Total Slam count
AO
FO
WIMB
USO
WTF count
Masters 1000 count
Atp 500
Atp 250
Olympics
Ye no 1
Weeks at no 1
Consec weeks at no 1
Any finals, semis etc records at slams
No consistency records e.g. 1 slam for 10 years, no 1 or 2 for 15 years etc
No unique trailblazing achievements e.g. la decima, 20 slams etc only me too records
the funniest one is Novak has highest peak level even on clay, but for some reason despite having a higher clay peak than nadal he only has 1 RG titile lolololol
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
Best streak in Grand Slams against ATGs:
FEDERER
vs Nadal 1-0
vs Djokovic 2-0
vs Sampras 1-0
vs Agassi 3-0
vs Murray 3-0
vs any of them 2-0
NADAL
vs Federer 6-0
vs Djokovic 5-0
vs Agassi 1-0
vs Murray 5-0
vs any of them 6-0
DJOKOVIC
vs Federer 4-0
vs Nadal 3-0
vs Murray 5-0
vs any of them 11-0
FEDERER
vs Nadal 1-0
vs Djokovic 2-0
vs Sampras 1-0
vs Agassi 3-0
vs Murray 3-0
vs any of them 2-0
NADAL
vs Federer 6-0
vs Djokovic 5-0
vs Agassi 1-0
vs Murray 5-0
vs any of them 6-0
DJOKOVIC
vs Federer 4-0
vs Nadal 3-0
vs Murray 5-0
vs any of them 11-0
D
Deleted member 757377
Guest
You're basically saying he was not peak because he was not no.1.
Well, I have to tell you something: to meet the no.1 you have to be not no.1
Mindblowing, no?Something relevant now: Federer had an average ranking of no.3 when he met no.1. Lower, slightly, only than Nadal's (2.7) among players of that list.
Similar threads
