The problem with the whole 'GOAT' debate.

[Old Gregg]

Djok could very well get 5 slams in the next 2 years.

I think he'll pass Nadal quite easily.

Fed has one more wimby in him but it's getting a little too close for comfort as a Fed fan.

 

[Old Gregg]

Djokovic is a better clay courter than Fed. The point is context for each players level on the different surfaces.

Pretty hard to quantify now isn't it.

Fed WAS the 2nd best for a decade behind Nadal. Most people underestimate his clay court game because they were too busy looking at Rafa.

He's an excellent clay courter.

 

[Spencer Gore]

Federer must be the only player to be acclaimed as the greatest of all time in his own sport while only being the third best of his own era.

 

[vex]

Pretty hard to quantify now isn't it.

Fed WAS the 2nd best for a decade behind Nadal. Most people underestimate his clay court game because they were too busy looking at Rafa.

He's an excellent clay courter.

Definately not disputing that. Honestly Fed and Djoker could be the 2nd and 3rd best clay courters... Rafa was just that damn good.

 

[vex]

Federer must be the only player to be acclaimed as the greatest of all time in his own sport while only being the third best of his own era.

This is ridiculous.

 

[Bartelby]

Unfortunately for all three, I hereby declare myself the best tennis player of all time.

 

[Rosstour]

I think distribution matters a bit, but not all that much. Fed having 5+ at three different slams looks fantastic for instance, but I don't think Nadal has serious distribution issues compared to Fed or Djoker. All three have one slam they've only won once.

Yes but for Fed and Djoker it is the same Slam, the one that eluded Sampras his whole career.

Rafa is a freak, a clay-court specialist who constantly grew and innovated enough so that he could eventually beat anyone, anywhere, on any surface.

If Nadal had played soccer instead, we would still be seeing second-tier players winning the French, guys like Ferrer, Soderling, etc.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

while only being the third best of his own era.

This is a bad meme and people need to stop repeating it. You're not going to get much agreement on when Fed's "era" exactly was either.
In summary, it's a soundbite that doesn't change Fed's slam total or anything else about his career. Nobody cares.

 

[Spencer Gore]

This is a bad meme and people need to stop repeating it. You're not going to get much agreement on when Fed's "era" exactly was either.
In summary, it's a soundbite that doesn't change Fed's slam total or anything else about his career. Nobody cares.

You obviously care enough to try and dismiss a perfectly reasonable comment as a "meme".

Fed is third best of the big 3. The slam meetings between them don't lie.

 

[Nole_King]

Nadal's resume isn't really more lopsided than the other two.

Federer:
Hard Court -11
Grass -8
Clay -1

Djokovic
Hard Court -9
Grass -4
Clay -1

Nadal
Clay -11
Hard Court -4
Grass -2

If anything, Nadal has a more even spread-having won more than once on each surface.

ROFL at clubbing AO and USO under one HC.

Even then ..... how is 11-4-2 a better spread out than 11-8-1? Fed fans will argue that Fed has dominated two surfaces. If nothing else the way you shown numbers above distances Federer further away from Novak and Rafa; and that is exactly the opposite of what you intend.

 

[-NN-]

It's the GOAT era. The Slam-centric paradigm.

The vanquishing of the soul of humankind.

Slammers gonn' Slam. Context and Numbers gonna jam in World War 3.

 

[1H-Backhand]

The G[player]OAT debate is, and will always be, subjective.
The one thing we can probably all agree on, without any shadow of a doubt, is that we are witnessing the G[era]OAT.

 

[joekapa]

There is no GOAT. There are only the best of each generation. Federer is not of the Djoko, Nadal, Murray generation. He is of the Hewitt, Safin gen. Kudos to him though for lasting and remaining highly competitive across 2 generations.

Federer is arguably the BEST/GREATEST of his generation. (2003-2009)

Djoko and Nadal are arguably the best of their generation. (2010 - today)

Simple as that.

 

[joekapa]

The reason you cannot rely on slams as the ultimate guide to who is the greatest is that the Australian Open was seldom played by the top players during the 70's, 80's and early 90's. It was literally after the Laver arena was built, that it started becoming a world class slam, equal, if not better than all the others. Before that it was a Masters level tournament at most. In the 70's it was equivalent to a 500 level tournament today.
Imagine if Borg actually played the Aussie open during the 70's and 80's.

 

[1H-Backhand]

It's the GOAT era. .

That is weird, were you reading my mind? Posted the same concept at the same time...

 

[Deleted member 688153]

You obviously care enough to try and dismiss a perfectly reasonable comment as a "meme".

Fed is third best of the big 3. The slam meetings between them don't lie.

There is a meme that is worse.
It's "You care because you replied XD"

 

[Spencer Gore]

No

There is a meme that is worse.
It's "You care because you replied XD"

Not quite sure why you keep returning to comment on something you claim you don't care about.

 

[Red Rick]

This is just caused by young players being so terrible the same 3 old dudes keep winning everything that at the by the semi's of a big tournaments there's no new players to talk about, and if 3 obviously past their prime players keep winning, at some point you have to create some artificial suspense in the form of the GOAT race.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

No

Not quite sure why you keep returning to comment on something you claim you don't care about.

"Haha you obviously care, you replied xD ecksdee"