Top streaks: Nadal nowhere to be seen

[Lew II]

Longest winning streak

Djokovic 43 (Davis 2010 - RG 2011)
Federer 41 (UO 2006 - Dubai 2007)
Federer 35 (Halle 2005 - YEC 2005)

Big Tournaments

Djokovic 43 (Paris 2014 - RG 2015)
Djokovic 33 (AO 2011 - RG 2011)

Grand Slam

Djokovic 30 (WI 2015 - WI 2016)
Federer 27 (WI 2005 - RG 2006)
Federer 27 (WI 2006 - RG 2007)
Djokovic 27 (WI 2011 - RG 2012)
Djokovic 26 (WI 2018 - RG 2019)

Against top-10

Federer 24 (YEC 2003 - AO 2005)
Federer 17 (WI 2006 - Dubai 2007)
Djokovic 17 (YEC 2015 - Rome 2016)

Titles won

Federer 7 (UO 2006 - Dubai 2007)
Djokovic 7 (AO 2011 - Rome 2011)
Djokovic 7 (UO 2015 - AO 2016)

GS Titles

Djokovic 4 (WI 2015 - RG 2016)

Big Titles

Djokovic 7 (Paris 2014 - Rome 2015)
Djokovic 7 (UO 2015 - Miami 2016)

Finals reached

Federer 17 (2005 Halle - 2006 Canada)
Djokovic 17 (2015 AO - 2016 AO)

Slam finals

Federer 10 (2005 WI - 2007 UO)
Federer 8 (2008 RG - 2010 AO)
Djokovic 6 (2015 AO - 2016 RG)

Big finals

Djokovic 18 (Paris 2014 - Miami 2016)
Federer 12 (WI 2005 - Canada 2006)

Slam semifinals

Federer 23 (Wimbledon 2004 - Australian Open 2010)
Djokovic 14 (Wimbledon 2010 - US Open 2013)
Djokovic 9 (RG 2014 - RG 2016)

Slam quarterfinals

Federer 36 (Wimbledon 2004 - RG 2013)
Djokovic 28 (Wimbledon 2009 - RG 2016)

 

[Lew II]

Nadal cannot be the GOAT without dominating the whole season like his two contemporaries Djokovic and Federer did.

Only if he wins a ridicolous number of Slams we could forget about this big flaw.

 

[Backspin1183]

Nadal cannot be the GOAT without dominating the whole season like his two contemporaries Djokovic and Federer did.

Only if he wins a ridicolous number of Slams we could forget about this big flaw.

Are you flipping high?
Nadal is a 5 time Year End #1. He's been the best player on the tour in not 1 but 5 seasons. Highest career winning percentage in tennis history, record 35 Masters 1000s and also 19 Slams, three more than Djokovic. The numbers don't lie. 20 > 19 >>> 16.

 

[zuluzazu]

Nadal cannot be the GOAT without dominating the whole season like his two contemporaries Djokovic and Federer did.

Only if he wins a ridicolous number of Slams we could forget about this big flaw.

Nadal may not have dominated a season like roger or djokovic but in the last 15 years nadal has had only 2 slamless seasons. That is insane consistency and please dont start the non clay nonsense. In your eyes who would be a better player, one who wins all the 4 slams in a season or the one who wins one slam every season for 8 consecutive years? Your stat cherrypicking is ridiculous.

 

[weakera]

Someone post Nadal's win vs participation rate at slams vs. the other two so we can end this thread.

 

[Fiero425]

Nadal cannot be the GOAT without dominating the whole season like his two contemporaries Djokovic and Federer did.

Only if he wins a ridicolous number of Slams we could forget about this big flaw.

Even as formidable as Nadal's supposed to be, he has tons of holes in his resume! No YEC's or Miami Masters, just the 1 AO, and it took until this season to defend a title other than clay! It's hard for me to ever think of him as the GOAT when we compare the records of Nole and Roger to his! They've done so much more! The only thing Nadal's been consistent in is on the dirt and owning Paris! That's great, but still limited! Roger and Nole have a much more balanced career; esp. Nole who's taken over their H2H matches the last several years! It seems like Nadal's only haven is on clay! Djokovic doesn't have to shy away from any surface or challenge and has proved his mantle in taking over eventually from Fedal!

 

[aldeayeah]

This thread is cherry picking on a level not seen since George Washington

Only player who won a Slam in 10 consecutive years
Only player who won a MS in 10 consecutive years
Highest surface match streak with 81 consecutive clay wins
etc

We get it, Fed and especially Djokovic are more dominant on hard courts, which are 2/3 of the tour.

That's what most of your statistics boil down to, for the very transparent reason that it suits your personal bias

 

[Lew II]

This thread is cherry picking on a level not seen since George Washington

Only player who won a Slam in 10 consecutive years
Only player who won a MS in 10 consecutive years
Highest surface match streak with 81 consecutive clay wins
etc

We get it, Fed and especially Djokovic are more dominant on hard courts, which are 2/3 of the tour.

That's what most of your statistics boil down to, for the very transparent reason that it suits your personal bias

It's just clay, bro.

 

[junior74]

Someone post Nadal's win vs participation rate at slams vs. the other two so we can end this thread.

Why would that be relevant? Not participating does not improve anything in tennis.

 

[octogon]

Awful Thread.

 

[Lew II]

Someone post Nadal's win vs participation rate at slams vs. the other two so we can end this thread.

Nope, winning RG every year is not dominating all year.

 

[weakera]

Nope, winning RG every year is not dominating all year.

Another "Nadal is too good on clay so it doesn't count" post lol

 

[weakera]

If Nadal wins AO (a tourney he has made the F in 4 of his last 7 participations) he will make it 6 out of the last 12 slams with Roland Garros on deck. The fear is palpable.

 

[killerboss]

Nadal has never had this kind of freakish, unhealthy levels of consistency that Djokovic and Federer have that you are talking about. This isn't really what his GOAT campaign is all about. What he does have is a high slam count and winning slam head to heads against both his main rivals (a pretty one sided head to head in Federer's case) and great mental strength.

Weirdly his campaign has been more consistent in recent times and his head to head against the top players seems to have taken a hit. Anyway 5 year-end no 1s is still impressive and equal to Djokovic and Federer. Whatever other generic consistency that Federer and Djokovic have over him is meaningless to GOAT discussion. It's all about slams and slam head to head against your rivals.

 

[Lew II]

Another "Nadal is too good on clay so it doesn't count" post lol

No the problem is not that he's too good on clay, it's that he's not good enough on other surfaces.

 

[weakera]

No the problem is not that he's too good on clay, it's that he's not good enough on other surfaces.

That's your problem buddy, not anyone else's. He will likely end with 8-10 non-clay slams and has a good chance at a share of the USO record or outright USO record, which will be more than enough for him to be crowned.

 

[Lew II]

Nadal has never had this kind of freakish, unhealthy levels of consistency that Djokovic and Federer have that you are talking about. This isn't really what his GOAT campaign is all about. What he does have is a high slam count and winning slam head to heads against both his main rivals (a pretty one sided head to head in Federer's case) and great mental strength.

Weirdly his campaign has been more consistent in recent times and his head to head against the top players seems to have taken a hit. Anyway 5 year-end no 1s is still impressive and equal to Djokovic and Federer. Whatever other generic consistency that Federer and Djokovic have over him is meaningless to GOAT discussion. It's all about slams and slam head to head against your rivals.

Meetings with other Big3 split by Slam:

AO - 5
RG - 13
WI - 7
UO - 3

And you know why the h2h are so clay skewed? Because he was not consistent on all surfaces as much as Djokovic and Federer, which is the matter of the thread and wich affects his greatness a lot IMO.

 

[Lew II]

That's your problem buddy, not anyone else's. He will likely end with 8-10 non-clay slams and has a good chance at a share of the USO record or outright USO record, which will be more than enough for him to be crowned.

Am I allowed to express my opinion?

 

[Antonio Puente]

Only if he wins a ridicolous number of Slams we could forget about this big flaw.

He's already won a ridiculous number of slams, three more than Djoker.

 

[weakera]

Am I allowed to express my opinion?

No

 

[ADuck]

No the problem is not that he's too good on clay, it's that he's not good enough on other surfaces.

If he's not good enough on other surfaces then why does he have 3 slams more than Djokovic? He's as good as he needs to be on non-clay surfaces to be better than Djokovic.

 

[Lew II]

If he's not good enough on other surfaces then why does he have 3 slams more than Djokovic? He's as good as he needs to be on non-clay surfaces to be better than Djokovic.

more slams ≠ better

 

[Lew II]

No

I will still write it.

 

[ADuck]

Meetings with other Big3 split by Slam:

AO - 5
RG - 13
WI - 7
UO - 3

And you know why the h2h are so clay skewed? Because he was not consistent on all surfaces as much as Djokovic and Federer, which is the matter of the thread and wich affects his greatness a lot IMO.

It's true that whilst they met less relatively on non-clay surfaces because Nadal gets to the latter stages of those tournaments less often, what's less talked about is that it's also because Federer/Djokovic are less consistent on HC/Grass than Nadal is on clay. Nadal has been to the final of AO,Wimbledon and USO 5x each. Where were Djokovic/Federer then? Well they were there some of the time, but not enough to correct the imbalance.

 

[Lew II]

He's already won a ridiculous number of slams, three more than Djoker.

19 is not ridicolous when your contemporaries have 20 and 16.

 

[Lew II]

It's true that whilst they met less relatively on non-clay surfaces because Nadal gets to the latter stages of those tournaments less often, what's less talked about is that it's also because Federer/Djokovic are less consistent on HC/Grass than Nadal is on clay. Nadal has been to the final of AO,Wimbledon and USO 5x each. Where were Djokovic/Federer then? Well they were there some of the time, but not enough to correct the imbalance.

So at the end of the day we're always talking of how great Nadal is on clay.

 

[ADuck]

more slams ≠ better

More slams are better than less slams. The fact of the matter is that Federer/Djokovic have the advantage in this race because they are naturally more suited to HC/Grass, and that's where 3/4 of the slams are comprised. Basically Djokovic is behind Nadal even with such a natural advantage. Not such a good look for Djokovic.

 

[pedro94]

more slams ≠ better

 

[ADuck]

So at the end of the day we're always talking of how great Nadal is on clay.

At the end of the day, Nadal's slam count points towards his combined skills on HC/Grass/Clay being above that of Djokovic's. The "not good enough on HC/Grass" argument is just an nuanced form of cherry-picking.

 

[Lew II]

At the end of the day, Nadal's slam count points towards his combined skills on HC/Grass/Clay being above that of Djokovic's. The "not good enough on HC/Grass" argument is just an nuanced form of cherry-picking.

Convenient to call "cherry-pick" an opinion that you don't like.

 

[Antonio Puente]

After reading how much more dominant Djoker is than Nadal, someone new to tennis would probably be surprised to learn Djoker has fewer slams, Masters and tournaments won than Nadal.

 

[Lew II]

More slams are better than less slams. The fact of the matter is that Federer/Djokovic have the advantage in this race because they are naturally more suited to HC/Grass, and that's where 3/4 of the slams are comprised. Basically Djokovic is behind Nadal even with such a natural advantage. Not such a good look for Djokovic.

If Djokovic and Federer are more suited than Nadal for 2/3 surfaces aren't they more suited for tennis?

 

[ADuck]

Convenient to call "cherry-pick" an opinion that you don't like.

And what is your opinion exactly? That Nadal is worse than Djokovic because he's worse on HC/Grass? Because that's just basic cherrypicking.

It's like if I argued Nadal is better than Federer because he's better on HC/Clay. Nadal has 17 slams on HC/Clay and Federer only 12. Nadal > Federer

 

[Fiero425]

It's true that whilst they met less relatively on non-clay surfaces because Nadal gets to the latter stages of those tournaments less often, what's less talked about is that it's also because Federer/Djokovic are less consistent on HC/Grass than Nadal is on clay. Nadal has been to the final of AO,Wimbledon and USO 5x each. Where were Djokovic/Federer then? Well they were there some of the time, but not enough to correct the imbalance.

Excuse me? The main problem with Nole at times is his consistency and getting to finals again and again; esp. in Majors! HELLO? I don't understand why you even made that statement about Fed & Nole not being consistent enough! What record are you looking at? Both have even made the FO final multiple times! You goofing me I guess because you can't be anymore wrong; esp. about Nole! He's probably been the most vulnerable in major finals making so many and being taken out by not only Fedal early on, he had to contend with Sir Andy and Stanimal! I'll take Nole's record though since he has so much time to improve it! He's doing great for someone who came along years after Federer, surpassing many of his records! Come on!

 

[Antonio Puente]

19 is not ridicolous when your contemporaries have 20 and 16.

It is when Nadal reached 19 in 12 fewer slam appearances than Fed and has 3 more slams than Djoker, appearing in one less slam.

 

[Fiero425]

And what is your opinion exactly? That Nadal is worse than Djokovic because he's worse on HC/Grass? Because that's just basic cherrypicking.

It's like if I argued Nadal is better than Federer because he's better on HC/Clay. Nadal has 17 slams on HC/Clay and Federer only 12. Nadal > Federer

Each owns a slam; Nadal more so with the FO, but Federer and Nole are neck and neck at the AO with Dokovic up by one! Roger has serious streaks in the 2 top majors that neither Rafa or Nole will ever match even if they leap past him in the next year or so! Five straight Wimbledons and USO is something more you'd see in the past in the pre-Open era! This is why he's the GOAT at this time! He owned the tour more so than Nadal will ever, but Nole's challenging that!

 

[ADuck]

If Djokovic and Federer are more suited than Nadal for 2/3 surfaces aren't they more suited for tennis?

You would think
So McEnroe, Sampras, Connors all better than Nadal yeah?

 

[ADuck]

Excuse me? The main problem with Nole at times is his consistency and getting to finals again and again; esp. in Majors! HELLO? I don't understand why you even made that statement about Fed & Nole not being consistent enough! What record are you looking at? Both have even made the FO final multiple times! You goofing me I guess because you can't be anymore wrong; esp. about Nole! He's probably been the most vulnerable in major finals making so many and being taken out by not only Fedal early on, he had to contend with Sir Andy and Stanimal! I'll take Nole's record though since he has so much time to improve it! He's doing great for someone who came along years after Federer, surpassing many of his records! Come on!

I think you lost me. What exactly is your point here? Because Nadal has made more major finals than Djokovic. Nadal was there most of the time when Djokovic got far at the FO, Djokovic wasn't there the majority of the time Nadal made slam finals on non-clay.

 

[junior74]

It is when Nadal reached 19 in 12 fewer slam appearances than Fed and has 3 more slams than Djoker, appearing in one less slam.

Not participating is not better than participating.

 

[Antonio Puente]

If Djokovic and Federer are more suited than Nadal for 2/3 surfaces aren't they more suited for tennis?

If Djoker is better suited for hardcourts, better suited for tennis, and there are twice as many hardcourt slams than clay slams, twice as many hardcourt Masters than clay Masters, how does it add up that the player better suited for tennis, enjoying this competitive advantage has fewer slams, Masters and tournaments won than Nadal?

 

[Antonio Puente]

Not participating is not better than participating.

That's what Fed says to himself every clay season.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Funny to hear Loo advance the consistency argument when Fedr is the consistency champ in Slams+YEC so I guess fedr goat 4evah.

 

[ADuck]

Each owns a slam; Nadal more so with the FO, but Federer and Nole are neck and neck at the AO with Dokovic up by one! Roger has serious streaks in the 2 top majors that neither Rafa or Nole will ever match even if they leap past him in the next year or so! Five straight Wimbledons and USO is something more you'd see in the past in the pre-Open era! This is why he's the GOAT at this time! He owned the tour more so than Nadal will ever, but Nole's challenging that!

Djokovic results-wise is behind Federer in almost every metric. What I find impressive about Federer is that he has 3 years winning 3+ slams, and 6 years winning 2+ slams. I put that above YE#1 or weeks at no.1

 

[MichaelNadal]

Lol Djokovic losing YE#1 from 4-1 up in a TB against Thiem is killing Ultronians minds

 

[Fiero425]

Djokovic results-wise is behind Federer in almost every metric. What I find impressive about Federer is that he has 3 years winning 3+ slams, and 6 years winning 2+ slams. I put that above YE#1 or weeks at no.1

Almost is the key word and being on the tour 5+ years more, but even with that, Nole's passed Fed in Masters by a lot already! Being able to beat Nadal in those clay finals helped put him ahead of Roger for good!

 

[Backspin1183]

Lol Djokovic losing YE#1 from 4-1 up in a TB against Thiem is killing Ultronians minds

True dat. Nadal wrecking the minds of the Maestronians and Ultronians.

 

[aldeayeah]

i propose the term "Bulltronians" to complete the trifecta

 

[Backspin1183]

The reason Lew the second made this thread:

 

[Fiero425]

True dat. Nadal wrecking the minds of the Maestronians and Ultronians.

I didn't watch it and it was a major, but I just watched Nadal up breaks & several MP's against Kyrgios in Acapulco this year and lost! It happens even to the greats!

 

[MichaelNadal]

The reason Lew the second made this thread:

This is definitely the sweetest year as a Rafa fan for me (not in absolute terms for obvious reasons, I've had more fun as a fan) but bc I didn't expect the things he got out of this year at all.