Who will be the first to win one slam 8 times?

Who will be the first player to win a slam 8 times?

  • Rafael Nadal

    Votes: 84 63.6%

  • Roger Federer

    Votes: 48 36.4%
  • Total voters
    132
joeri888 said:
Probably Rafa. He is more dominant at his particular Slam, plus his Slam is next up. What Rafa has done on clay is truly remarkable. I know you don't like to hear that from a *******, but it really is.
Click to expand...

No one argues that Rafa is more dominant on this surface and this slam than any other player ever. Take off his clay results and he is mediocre, but including clay, his resume looks like a Top 6 player of all time. Impressive.

Rafa is as likely to win RG 9 times as Fed is to win Wimbledon 8 times.
 
I doubt Rafa will ever win a title even 5 times on something other than Clay.
Nadal:

Clay: 7 FO, 7 Barcelonas, 7 Rome, 7 MC

Grass: Nowhere near 5 titles....still 2 WImbledon not far as other surfaces. I doubt he would win 3 more Wimbledons.

Indoor: Madrid.....okay. Not going to win 4 Paris titles for sure or 5 WTF.

Slow HC: 2 Indian Wells...not bad. Doubt he can do 3 more.

Fast HC: US Open......ROFL....may win another US Open.....but no way he going to have 3.


Federer:
Indoor: 6 WTF titles
Clay: Hamburg/Madrid 6 Clay titles
Grass: 7 Wimbledons, 5 Halle
Fast HC: 5 Cincinattis, 5 US Open
Slow HC: Pretty soon 5 Australians


Nadal been sucessful since 2005 and Federer sucessful since 2003. A 2 year gap since Major Sucess.

Look at how Federer consistently varied he is. While Nadal can play on all surfaces....achieving 8 on clay means nothing to Federer winning at least 5 on each surface.
 
R.Federer said:
trust me ignore his posts and he will soon relise noone will talk to him but himself and will go away the more you reply to his jibberish the more he will post nonsense
Click to expand...

He's just gonna be back with another account. Honestly, I don't think he's a Nadal fan. He's just pretending to be one and setting up impossible expectations on Nadal, which will inevitably make him look bad when he doesn't meet them.
 
For what it's worth, there's no *more impressive* once you get into the realm of winning a slam 7 times. It's ridiculous, it's the peak of extraordinary.

8 times? Favourite has to be Rafa. He's younger, his body may be in worse shape but it's a younger body, he is better on clay in a way that no-one can prove themselves better on grass, he just hoovers up EVERYTHING every year, and there are fewer top quality clay court players than other surfaces. Dangerous floaters like Tsonga, Berdych, Del Potro, these guys are not as good on clay. So I would say it's Rafa's to take. Federer's 7th Wimbledon was something of a miracle, he played incredibly, discovered his very best again, I'm not sure he could do that again though.
 
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Has already won one slam per year for 8 consecutive years, tying Federer/Borg/Sampras (can reach 9 next year).
Can win 8 Roland Garros titles next year (by winning Roland Garros 2013).
Can win a record-breaking 8th Barcelona title next year. (He already has 7, in as many attempts.)
Has won Monte Carlo a record-breaking 8 times. (Can win a 9th title next year.)
Has won Monte Carlo a record-breaking 8 CONSECUTIVE times. (Can win a 9th consecutive next year.)
Only male player in open era history to win a title 8 consecutive times. (Can win 9 consecutive times next year.)
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that he will be the only player in world history to achieve all of this?
 
I take offense to NSK using the 'go bulls' avatar. It actually is a personal insult to me that he supports a team I like.
 
It doesn't matter what major Rafa wins next year, it will be historic. He will be the only player in world history to win at least a major for 9 straight years, right 61 63 60? :D
 
Simple and silly to think otherwise: Wimbledon is a more impressive tournament (the most important tennis tournament in the world, in fact, and don't imagine Nadal thinks otherwise), thus it would be the more impressive feat, as it is at this juncture.
 
Ms Nadal said:
Rafa isn't a cheat! :confused:. How can you cheat in a tennis match? :confused:. It's not like an exam is it? where yo can go in with the answers written on your hand or something.
Click to expand...

It was a joke, dont burst a blood vessel.

Seriously though, with Nadals knee issues being more and more serious as time goes by I dont have any more faith in him winning the next FO than I do Federer winning the next Wimbledon.
 
As a hardcore Fed fan, I should also be realistic to look at various factors involved and be genuine to say, Fed will not win his 8th Wimbly.

Ya I said it. Probably he'll go for the kill in the next US because he lost early this time. He was truly hungry for Wimbly after two QF losses and he got it this time. Likewise, the US QF loss will be stinging (Again to the same guy Berdych being another reason) - so probably he'll win a US but not SW.

Nadal, inspite of his knees, is still a lock for two more FOs. I'll be surprised if he didn't get them. 10 will be a record for a century (Before which tennis will eventually die as a sport or a major change comes in like best of 3 in GS or something like that)
 
I can't see any way for Rafa to not win at least one more Roland Garros. It is possible for Fed to pick up another Wimbledon but it will be tough.
 
Nadalgaenger said:
Nadal will be a heavy favorite at the next FO. Fed will be VERY lucky to win another Wimbledon.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of Benneteaus and Malieses in the tennis world. And they all can pave the way to a Federer victory.

It took two high-percentage players to take out Fed back in 2010 and 2011. And I don't ever expect Tsonga to repeat his performance. Berdych is a different story. Other than Berdych and Murray, who exactly is going to beat Fed at Wimbledon?
 
Tony48 said:
There are plenty of Benneteaus and Malieses in the tennis world. And they all can pave the way to a Federer victory.

It took two high-percentage players to take out Fed back in 2010 and 2011. And I don't ever expect Tsonga to repeat his performance. Berdych is a different story. Other than Berdych and Murray, who exactly is going to beat Fed at Wimbledon?
Click to expand...

if Nadal is playing well enough to reach the semis or finals, which he usually does at Wimbledon, he will most likely beat Federer if Federer also makes it that far. He certainly would have in 2010 or 2011 had they played, although 2011 might have been close, 2010 would have been a royal beatodwn. Federer was down 2 sets to Bennetau and nearly lost to Fognini so there are numerous other possabilities. Federer's Wimbledon record since 2008 is overall worse than Nadal's so if Nadal can go out early to some nobody having a hot day, Federer at this stage definitely can too.
 
Tony48 said:
There are plenty of Benneteaus and Malieses in the tennis world. And they all can pave the way to a Federer victory.

It took two high-percentage players to take out Fed back in 2010 and 2011. And I don't ever expect Tsonga to repeat his performance. Berdych is a different story. Other than Berdych and Murray, who exactly is going to beat Fed at Wimbledon?
Click to expand...

Nadal and Djokovic sure as heck can. Federer had to play some of his best Tennis in years to get past Djokovic.
 
If Rafa comes back, it's pretty much over for Federer to win another GS. Djokovic and Rafa are usually unstoppable until the finals, and since Fed's older he won't be able to beat them like he did before
 
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
It doesn't disprove that, since Nadal should be leading by a far greater margin (Federer winning another Wimbledon won't happen ever again).
Click to expand...
It does actually disprove that tw is totally dominated by *******s who will vote for Fed to win anything. Seems like your viewpoint is the extremist biased one (stating prediction as fact, etc.).
 
look Fed is the man .....but have to admit that rafa can win the french forever even when he is 50 he will come over to RG and swat his opponents away like annoying flies..

however, you cannot safely say that fed will not win another slam......i remember hearing the same voices before he won this years wimby.....i believe he has another 2 slams in him as long as he wants it and trains hard for it...i get the feeling he has reached the stage where he could not be bothered to train hard.........

understandably so if you have achieved everything the game has to offer and are considered one of the greatest if not arguably the greatest of all time.......he has a family now is sick of the constant travel.......he still loves the game but for how long?....the travelling has destroyed others far earlier...

winning for consecutive years is difficult as rafa has found out and djockos miracle year of last year came crashing down around him this year.....

fed did it effortlessly for 10 years......question is does he really want to anymore?

french will always be a banker for rafa so i THINK that argument can safely be put to bed....
 
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
It doesn't disprove that, since Nadal should be leading by a far greater margin (Federer winning another Wimbledon won't happen ever again).
Click to expand...

Which is what I said exactly some posts back and I'm a Federer fan.. So this place is not exactly filled with *******s... Nadal would be having a margin narrower if not for those Nadal votes from Fed fans.
 
On the surface it looks like Nadal is a lock for winning multiple French Opens. But one more injury scare and you never know. Would anyone bet against Sampras not winning Wimbledon after he won his 7th.
 
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Yep, Decugis won 8 French Championships. Too bad it became the French Open in 1925, and Nadal is the only man in world history to win the French Open 7 times.
Click to expand...

the bigger question is: Would Nadal surpass Fed, Sampras and Borg's tally of winning at least a major 8 years in row?
 
The-Champ said:
the bigger question is: Would Nadal surpass Fed, Sampras and Borg's tally of winning at least a major 8 years in row?
Click to expand...

Easily. Nadal just has to win Roland Garros 2013, which he will certainly do. I wouldn't be surprised if Nadal won at least one slam per year for 13+ consecutive years, since Nadal is so dominant at Roland Garros, and his closest competitor (Djokovic) lost easily at Roland Garros 2012 (in the final, that's discounting their other meetings). Federer is clearly never going to win Roland Garros again (not with Nadal/Djokovic there) so that just leaves a newcomer to try and dethrone Nadal. Raonic? Nope. Tomic? Not at Roland Garros. Dolgopolov, doubt it, though he may be able to get some inspiration from Medvedev (1999).
 
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Easily. Nadal just has to win Roland Garros 2013, which he will certainly do. I wouldn't be surprised if Nadal won at least one slam per year for 13+ consecutive years, since Nadal is so dominant at Roland Garros, and his closest competitor (Djokovic) lost easily at Roland Garros 2012 (in the final, that's discounting their other meetings). Federer is clearly never going to win Roland Garros again (not with Nadal/Djokovic there) so that just leaves a newcomer to try and dethrone Nadal. Raonic? Nope. Tomic? Not at Roland Garros. Dolgopolov, doubt it, though he may be able to get some inspiration from Medvedev (1999).
Click to expand...

what about your take on Nadal winning each major at least twice? What's the probability of that happening? :D Wouldn't he become the first man in world history to do that, or did the GOAT Laver already achieve that impossibility?
 
The-Champ said:
what about your take on Nadal winning each major at least twice? What's the probability of that happening? :D Wouldn't he become the first man in world history to do that, or did the GOAT Laver already achieved that impossibility?
Click to expand...

The probability is very high, since Nadal will almost certainly win the Australian Open in 2013, and Nadal has a great chance of winning US Open 2013 (better than Federer for sure, since Federer has not won the US Open since 2008, so it's now his weakest slam). He'd be the first person in the Open Era to do it, but Nadal is already the first man ever to win slams on clay, grass and hard-court all in a calendar year, so if he won the Calendar Year Grand Slam, that'd put his 2010 year + CYGS higher than Laver's 1962 + 1969 (since Laver never had to play all his slams on clay, grass and hard-court all in a calendar year). And that would put Nadal at 15 slams, higher than Laver, and therefore better than Laver.
 
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Yep, Decugis won 8 French Championships. Too bad it became the French Open in 1925, and Nadal is the only man in world history to win the French Open 7 times.
Click to expand...

based on your logic: Too bad, French Open has became officially called "Roland Garros". So none of the accounting method were correct then. Let's throw this whole thing out of window.
 
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
The probability is very high, since Nadal will almost certainly win the Australian Open in 2013, and Nadal has a great chance of winning US Open 2013 (better than Federer for sure, since Federer has not won the US Open since 2008, so it's now his weakest slam). He'd be the first person in the Open Era to do it, but Nadal is already the first man ever to win slams on clay, grass and hard-court all in a calendar year, so if he won the Calendar Year Grand Slam, that'd put his 2010 year + CYGS higher than Laver's 1962 + 1969 (since Laver never had to play all his slams on clay, grass and hard-court all in a calendar year). And that would put Nadal at 15 slams, higher than Laver, and therefore better than Laver.
Click to expand...

Insane heights of optimism coupled with deepest levels of foolishness....!!
 
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
The probability is very high, since Nadal will almost certainly win the Australian Open in 2013, and Nadal has a great chance of winning US Open 2013 (better than Federer for sure, since Federer has not won the US Open since 2008, so it's now his weakest slam). He'd be the first person in the Open Era to do it, but Nadal is already the first man ever to win slams on clay, grass and hard-court all in a calendar year, so if he won the Calendar Year Grand Slam, that'd put his 2010 year + CYGS higher than Laver's 1962 + 1969 (since Laver never had to play all his slams on clay, grass and hard-court all in a calendar year). And that would put Nadal at 15 slams, higher than Laver, and therefore better than Laver.
Click to expand...

yes, nadal did win the AO in 2013 ........ oh wait :oops:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

6-1 6-3 6-0
  • Poll Poll
How many Titles can Nadal Win 8+ Times?
2 3
Replies
136
Views
14K
BauerAlmeida
BauerAlmeida
D
Bittersweetovic 2021
Replies
37
Views
1K
Milehigh5280
Milehigh5280
hyperwarrior
  • Poll Poll
Who will be the first to win a Grand Slam title?
Replies
3
Views
579
Tobias Fünke
Tobias Fünke
6-1 6-3 6-0
  • Poll Poll
Which period was most similar to Nadal's RG dominance: Sampras or Federer@Wimbledon?
2 3
Replies
107
Views
10K
Neptune
Neptune
6-1 6-3 6-0
  • Poll Poll
Which records do you want to see broken this year?
Replies
23
Views
2K
kOaMaster
kOaMaster
Back
Top