RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
Hallelulja
Tim Henman about Djokovic
- Thread starter RF-18
- Start date
Hallelulja
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
FWIW, I'd also rate Sampras over Nadal in this case.
I think the thing that actually hurts Nadal the most is that even with 15 slams he's not the best of this era. A lot of people remember Sampras as the best of the 90's and the numbers show it, but Nadal is linked with Federer, and he's still 2nd best (with a chance to be 1st), let's be honest.
Laver said something like that once. The best thing you can say about a tennis player is that they were the best of their era.
I think the thing that actually hurts Nadal the most is that even with 15 slams he's not the best of this era. A lot of people remember Sampras as the best of the 90's and the numbers show it, but Nadal is linked with Federer, and he's still 2nd best (with a chance to be 1st), let's be honest.
Laver said something like that once. The best thing you can say about a tennis player is that they were the best of their era.
Last edited:
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Wow wow wow The reason why Nadal gets ranked over Sampras is because he has the career slam, Sampras doesn't. Sampras is actually much more of a surface specialist than Nadal is (which is why almost all of Sampras titles came on very fast surfaces). Nadal is extremely more polyvalent. Nadal also won wayyyyyyyyyyy more master titles than Sampras (and more different ones), way more than twice as many, which easily trumps Sampras' WTF titles (which once again all came on the same indoor super fast surface while Nadal's wins have been more diversified).
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Yes. That is big. It just depends on how much emphasis one puts on that as opposed to the other things Sampras has over Nadal with a 1 slam difference.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Current decade career slam is nothing special. All players including Rafa and Novak play the same way irrespective of the surface.
Nadal would have got 0 Wimbledon if he played in the 90's.
Nadal played second fiddle to Federer and then to Novak. He never led the tour for a decent period. Compare now to Sampras, who ruled for a decade.
Are you kidding ?
Sysyphus
Talk Tennis Guru
:lol: wutnow? Fast courts isn't a surface, smh... Sampras had dual-slam domination on different surfaces. Some of us may rightly rate that highly.
And let's be real here fellas: Nadal doesn't win Wimbledon in the 90's, however deluded we want to be. The guy's so bad in the opening week now that he got pushed by guys like Kenderick, and beaten by the Rosols and Kyrgioses.
Imagine the 90's.
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
The reason why Nadal should not be ranked over Sampras is because Pistol has more AOs, 3 more USOs and 5 more wimbledons. That is three slams where samp has been better. Not to talk about his absolute domination of the sport unlike Nadal, more weeks, more year ends, more everything. By far the best player of his era. Nadal is not close to have been the best of this era.
Him and Federer are the tennis fathers. Two guys who set the standards and dominated almost in every area.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
It is a very close call but all I am saying is I would bet my house that if Nadal wins #15 and The Tennis Channel for example did another greatest of all time list, Nadal would be one above Sampras.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
16 yes, 15? Not quite, IMHO. All other things staying as they are of course. Even 15 and a WTF, I would put Nadal above Sampras. Or 15 and another YE#1. To me, it would prove a few crucial things about Nadal if he could win a WTF and/or finish another year at #1. Obviously though, winning more slams trumps both of those, but it's more the context that he would accomplish 1 or both of those under right now.
In other words, it would prove A LOT of people wrong (including myself) about Nadal when they say now that he can't get back and/or finish at #1 or win a WTF.
That's why I liked Federer's late 2011-2012 run so much. I think there's something to be said about greatness when it proves people wrong.
In other words, it would prove A LOT of people wrong (including myself) about Nadal when they say now that he can't get back and/or finish at #1 or win a WTF.
That's why I liked Federer's late 2011-2012 run so much. I think there's something to be said about greatness when it proves people wrong.
Last edited:
WhiskeyEE
G.O.A.T.
Nadal is leaving the sport the same way he entered it. A dirt baller.
His brief well-roundedness was just the result of a couple joke years. That's why his 'peak' is so scattered. He vultures the weak transition years when all of his opponents are injured. Fortunately, he isn't even good enough to do that anymore.
His brief well-roundedness was just the result of a couple joke years. That's why his 'peak' is so scattered. He vultures the weak transition years when all of his opponents are injured. Fortunately, he isn't even good enough to do that anymore.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Wait, so you are saying if Nadal gets to 16 then he will be above Sampras in your opinion?
EDIT: Forget it, I see you added to your last post and answered my question.
Last edited:
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
:lol:
Is that why Djokovic has been breaking his back to try and win one FO for the past few years?
Ask Djokovic if it is nothing special today.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
:lol:
Is that why Djokovic has been breaking his back to try and win one FO for the past few years?
Ask Djokovic if it is nothing special today.
How about you read the whole post and put that sentence in context ?
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Again, you want his address? :lol:
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
Not to mention bringing in Becker and improving his serve and volleying.
Maybe when Nadal retires he can come in and help out with the overhead... :twisted:
Novak is deserving of all the praise. But I am amused to hear the ex-pros, now 'pundits' hopping on the bandwagon. They're as bad as politicians sometimes...
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
He will prove people wrong, you'll see. As a Federer fan I have written him off way too many times. I have learned my lesson.
N
Nathaniel_Near
Guest
And what does Nadal need to surpass Federer?
The-Champ
Legend
ND-18 is a bonafide gloryhole-hunter!
WhiskeyEE
G.O.A.T.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
On pure numbers? Probably 19 slams, or 18 with a better slam distribution, but I'll be very honest, and I'll say it proudly. I said it before in another thread maybe a month ago when everybody was going on about GOATS and the like.
He'll never surpass Federer to me. And I'm not ashamed to say that it's because Federer is my favourite. Call that what you like. I really don't give a damn.
Numbers are great, but from a visual perspective, Federer will remain the greatest player that I've personally ever seen to this point whether Nadal passes him in slam count or not.
That is my bottom line.
Last edited:
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
I am not a spiteful person
That's how I feel about #KingRafa if he gets to 18. No need to be apologetic, at least we aren't REACHING like certain insane Novak fans here.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
I know he will, but I'm not counting him out of winning majors yet like some people here. I would be pretty surprised though if he could do either of the things I mentioned.
But maybe he'll have a Federer like run or better. We'll have to wait and see.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Listen, I don't care if you think Nadal is the greatest right now with 14 slams (and that cursed H2H
). Never mind 18 slams. That's fine too. There are plenty of people out there that think like that too.We can both agree that Novak is not the greatest though. :twisted:
xan
Hall of Fame
Senna won 3 titles to vettels 4, prosts 5, or shumachers 7, yet majority considers him as a best f1 racing driver in history.
If it was so easy to quantify the numbers, people would have done it ages ago and you would have official goats everywhere.
Its not, and they didnt.
Its impossible to have reasonable discussions around here when 70% of posters are so emotionally invested. Strugling to find a purpose to these forums lately.
If it was so easy to quantify the numbers, people would have done it ages ago and you would have official goats everywhere.
Its not, and they didnt.
Its impossible to have reasonable discussions around here when 70% of posters are so emotionally invested. Strugling to find a purpose to these forums lately.
xan
Hall of Fame
^eh i was thinking of fangio, my bad.
Its off topic but yeah you get the point.
People just seem content with assigning a number next to the name and be done with it. Safe to say most of them dont even play tennis.
I just dont understand all this bragging with other people achievements.
Its off topic but yeah you get the point.
People just seem content with assigning a number next to the name and be done with it. Safe to say most of them dont even play tennis.
I just dont understand all this bragging with other people achievements.
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
It might be hard for me to say this. But I don't actually believe djokovic will win the CYSG. Its possible, but I don't think he will
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Interesting statement considering Djokovic is superior at one slam as well.
Looks like you missed the last part of his post.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
I doubt he'll win RG, let alone the other two.
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
No he will definitely win RG. The other two? I don't know
You like my confidence djoko2011? :lol:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
I've honestly no idea why so many people think Djokovic will beat Nadal at the French this year. I've just watched highlights of their 2013 RG match again(yes, I do sometimes watch some of Nole's defeats too) and Nadal was just so good in that semi-final, I mean scary good and let's face it, it's become more or less impossible to beat him over 5 sets. You can bet your bottom dollar we'll see more of the same this year so unless someone pulls a Gunther Parche or slips some rat poison in his tea, expect to see him lifting the trophy yet again in June.
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
Yeah but what does 2013 have anything to do with 2015?
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Believe me, Nadal will find a way. He always does on clay.
6august
Hall of Fame
As Nole fan, I must say that right now, he's not in the same league with Roger and Rafa yet.
I'd be very happy if at the end of his career, he can reach ~14 GS and join the GOAT group with Roger and Rafa.
Even when Nole's final Slam count > Rafa, I don't think he's greater than Rafa. He lacks the aura Roger and Rafa used to have during their peaks, they scared their opponents to death the moment they walked into the court.
In the same way, Rafa wont be greater than Roger even when he gets more than 17 GS. No one is greater than Roger, he's simply the best.
I'd be very happy if at the end of his career, he can reach ~14 GS and join the GOAT group with Roger and Rafa.
Even when Nole's final Slam count > Rafa, I don't think he's greater than Rafa. He lacks the aura Roger and Rafa used to have during their peaks, they scared their opponents to death the moment they walked into the court.
In the same way, Rafa wont be greater than Roger even when he gets more than 17 GS. No one is greater than Roger, he's simply the best.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
The reason why Nadal is ranked above Sampras is because he has won the 4 slams (while having same # total). Sampras didn't win 1 of the 4. (and there is no "would have", "should have", he plain didn't, end of story). Nadal also did 3 consecutive slams in a season (on all surfaces: clay, grass and hard), Sampras didn't.
Nadal has won 3 slams multiple times just like Sampras but he has more titles at his best slam, he has the record actually: 9 vs 7
Nadal also won 16 more masters than Sampras. Even if you counted WTF as worth 2 masters (the ATP doesn't), it would still be advantage Nadal.
The only argument in favor of Sampras would be weeks at #1 but imo titles won is more important.
Last edited:
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Being in the same group doesn't mean he would be ranked above Federer or Nadal but his stats demonstrate he is in the same group. (As well as Sampras and other open era greats). A "group" or "league" is more than 1 or 2 players and it's determined by several criteria (not just # of slams won)As Nole fan, I must say that right now, he's not in the same league with Roger and Rafa yet.
I'd be very happy if at the end of his career, he can reach ~14 GS and join the GOAT group with Roger and Rafa.
Even when Nole's final Slam count > Rafa, I don't think he's greater than Rafa. He lacks the aura Roger and Rafa used to have during their peaks, they scared their opponents to death the moment they walked into the court.
In the same way, Rafa wont be greater than Roger even when he gets more than 17 GS. No one is greater than Roger, he's simply the best.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
Gonna lay down my prediction now, even if I end up looking foolish.
Nadal will not win Roland Garros in 2015.
I don't know if Novak will (although I hope he does to be honest, if only because I want to see his celebration :lol: )
I would like Nadal to win the most (after Federer ofc) but I don't think it will happen.
So there we go.
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
But how do you argue´against the fact that Sampras has far more titles at three slams? I mean, he has been better than nadal at 3/4 slams.
CGS is an argument for Nadal of course, but it's not enough. Sampras is still far more versatile than Nadal without the CGS.
Sampras dominated his era, double more weeks at number one than nadal, double more year ends (achieved for 6 consecutive year), 6 WTFs. And so on.
Btw, you really are gonna prop up Nadals 9 vs 7? So what about winning 5 or more titles at two different majors? How in the world is that not more impressive?
Masters in Sampras time was not mandatory. It was not the same then as it is now.
As I said before, Nadal even with two slams more, would not have the career of sampras. Almost everything is in Sampras favour. And right now we are gonna talk about who is greater, when they are tied at the slams, please.
Last edited:
vanioMan
Legend
Where did I take away his 6 slams
All I'm saying is Nadal has the 6 slams over him and 4 masters... It's not such huge gap between them. The gap lies in RG.
In my view, djoko is very close to Nadal. But not quite there yet.
Six Slams is not a huge gap? SIX SLAMS IS NOT A HUGE GAP?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8xV27cWXnA
Mate, my colleagues near me jumped and were left shocked for a bit after my burst of laughter after reading this :lol:
Last edited:
Six Slams is not a huge gap? SIX SLAMS IS NOT A HUGE GAP?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8xV27cWXnA
Mate, my colleagues near me jumped and were left shocked for a bit after my burst of laughter after reading this :lol:
6 slams isn't a big gap when the guy trailing can round of 2 a year for the foreseeable future.
vanioMan
Legend
The bolded word right here. Read it several times.
We are talking about right now, not after 2 or 3 years. Yes, he can, but will he? We don't know.
That's the thing about certain Djokovic fans. They talk as if he's already won 15 Slams, 6 WTFs, 35 Masters and has 270 weeks at #1. He probably could achieve some of these achievements, but until he does it, you use only his current stats when doing comparisons.
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
Six Slams is not a huge gap? SIX SLAMS IS NOT A HUGE GAP?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8xV27cWXnA
Mate, my colleagues near me jumped and were left shocked for a bit after my burst of laughter after reading this :lol:
Good way of twisting of what I said. Why did you leave the part after?
This is the original quote:
''All I'm saying is Nadal has the 6 slams over him and 4 masters, but they are pretty much equal everywhere else or Djoko is better and is getting better at more (like year ends, masters e.g. already infront of him in weeks #1)''.
Anymore quotes you'd like to change and twist, so you can make yourself look better and have a reason to jump on me? What a waste
vanioMan
Legend
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
I agree. You left out the fact that Nadal's career win percentage is the greatest ever (by a significant margin) and that he competed against the GOAT (and consistently beat the GOAT) whereas Sampras never beat a player better than Agassi.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
I think it will be difficult for Djokovik to equal Nadal's Slam count but he should be able to reduce the gap.
On the other hand he already beats Nadal on weeks as #1 and is well placed to beat him in YE #1 as well. He's (arguably) his equal already on non Slam tournaments. So all in all Djokovik may end his career with roughly similar level of accomplishments as Nadal. Will be fun to watch.
On the other hand he already beats Nadal on weeks as #1 and is well placed to beat him in YE #1 as well. He's (arguably) his equal already on non Slam tournaments. So all in all Djokovik may end his career with roughly similar level of accomplishments as Nadal. Will be fun to watch.
Similar threads
