Who's greater: Nole or Rafa?

Who is greater - Nole or Rafa?


  • Total voters
    118

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
As the boisterous Balkan draws within two slams of the supreme Spaniard, the question must once again be asked.

Who is currently the greater of these two champions?
 

Terenigma

G.O.A.T.
This forum is like Nadal's fingers tho, constantly stuck up his behind. They won't accept Djokovic is so obviously the better player unless he takes over the slam lead or at the very least equals it. He will tho, i don't think Nadal is the fave for any slam but the French these days unless he gets a cakewalk draw like he did in 2019 at the US open and even then he was so very close to losing to the only top player inside the top 20 he faced.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
366 weeks at #2 baby

For me they're basically equal right now, but I'll accept most people will say Capy for now.

With only one Slam less I'd 100% take Schmovak Schmokovic.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic

18 Slams
5 YECs
6 YE #1s
309+ weeks at #1 (breaking the record soon)

Nadal

20 Slams
0 YECs
5 YE #1s
209 weeks at #1

20>18

Deal with it.
What about the Olympics? The Olympics are equally relevant as the ATP finals and you strategically forgot to mention them.
 

Sport

G.O.A.T.
20 is more than 18. Plus one has OG. Not that close at this point tbh.
What you stated here is so obviously true that it is surprising you have to repeat it.

Some unobjective Nadal detractors here are defending inverse mathematics (19> 20). What?

The number of Slams is the most relevant all-time great criterion, with other criteria being just tie-breakers in case two players are tied in the Slam count. If Djokovic isn't talented enough to win as many Slams as Nadal he ain't better than him.
 

Beckerserve

Hall of Fame
King Rafa :D and getting #21 at the next slam
Last year before USO every single Djokovic fan, posted Djokovic had to be at least 1 behind Federer by end of 2020 to have a chamce of surpassing Federer , largely because they all thought with no Nadal the USO was in the bag, on the basis everyone thought he would bag the AO this year.
After the AO he is two behind with his pet slam gone for 12 months. What changed the narrative? How is one player routinely winning his pet slam elevating him to GOAT when behind in the slam race when for another player routinely winning his pet slam and actually leadimg the slam race apparently hurting his legacy if he ever wins said pet slam again. My friend, what am i missing?
 
Last edited:

Beckerserve

Hall of Fame
What you stated here is so obviously true that it is surprising you have to repeat it.

Some unobjective Nadal detractors here are defending inverse mathematics (19> 20). What?

The number of Slams is the most relevant all-time great criterion, with other criteria being just tie-breakers in case two players are tied in the Slam count. If Djokovic isn't talented enough to win as many Slams as Nadal he ain't better than him.
What we are seeing is months of pent up frustration coming out as many of these detractors disappeared off this site after the FO 2020 result and now see Djokovic winning his pet slam 9 times more career enhancing than the guy who has more slams and more at his own pet slam.
I knew FO 2020 was big, brad gilbert called it match of the century. Had no idea how much it affected the detractors.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
The number of Slams is the most relevant all-time great criterion, with other criteria being just tie-breakers in case two players are tied in the Slam count. If Djokovic isn't talented enough to win as many Slams as Nadal he ain't better than him.
Bit in bold = yes.

However, what about when another player is well ahead in things like wks at No 1 and YECs? Are you saying that is completely irrelevant and can't bridge the gap?
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
It depends how people look at achievements. If everything is just about the overall slam count, then Nadal is ahead. But if people look at their careers as a whole without just focusing on one number (20-18), I think people will be more in favour of Djokovic as the more successfull tennis player cause he has mastered the game in a broader and wider way, probably like none other.

So it depends really.
 

Beckerserve

Hall of Fame
Bit in bold = yes.

However, what about when another player is well ahead in things like wks at No 1 and YECs? Are you saying that is completely irrelevant and can't bridge the gap?
Neither is relevant. Off hand most people if they are honest have no clue how many weeks at no.1 or yec Serena and Graf have. Everyone knows their slam count within 2 seconds.
 

Beckerserve

Hall of Fame
It depends how people look at achievements. If everything is just about the overall slam count, then Nadal is ahead. But if people look at their careers as a whole without just focusing on one number (20-18), I think people will be more in favour of Djokovic as the more successfull tennis player cause he has mastered the game in a broader and wider way, probably like none other.

So it depends really.
Has not Nadal mastered the game more than any other? If as many are arguing all hardcourts are the same then Nadal is the only one with more than one Major on each surface. Alternatively if it is about overall spread surely Federer is the master. Over 100 titles and the only player with more than 10 titles on the 3 surfaces (assuming there are but 3 surfaces as many seek to argue) plus a bonus on blue clay.
I just cannot see how Djokovic is in the debate.
 

Winner

Rookie
i don't think Nadal is the fave for any slam but the French these days unless he gets a cakewalk draw like he did in 2019 at the US open and even then he was so very close to losing to the only top player inside the top 20 he faced.
Nadal at USO19 - SF Berrettini (seeded), F Medvedev (No.5) - cakewalk
Djokovic at AO21 - SF Karatsev (qualifier, No.114, never won a slam match), F Medvedev (No.4) - GOAT

Interesting.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Has not Nadal mastered the game more than any other? If as many are arguing all hardcourts are the same then Nadal is the only one with more than one Major on each surface. Alternatively if it is about overall spread surely Federer is the master. Over 100 titles and the only player with more than 10 titles on the 3 surfaces (assuming there are but 3 surfaces as many seek to argue) plus a bonus on blue clay.
I just cannot see how Djokovic is in the debate.
Well I'd definitely put Federer in the conversation, that's why I said probably.

Nadal has been playing 2nd fiddle too much and he hasn't dominated the game like Djokovic aswell as Federer.

But as I said, it's up to each and every one what they believe makes a more successfull player.
 

MeatTornado

G.O.A.T.
Better and greater are synonyms according to dictionary definitions. Rafa is greater/better, would but Djokovic ahead if he ties the Slam count.

The Slam count is the #1 GOAT criterion. Other criteria are just tie-breakers un case two players are tied in Slams.
Synonym doesn't have to mean they're literally the same thing.

Clearly my personal criterion for how good/skilled a player is isn't based solely on slam count. Was Nadal worse at playing tennis than Roger was until he won his 20th last year? I don't think so. He's still the same ballstriker he was before he won it.
 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
If Djokovic gets within one of Nadal then I think this becomes a serious debate and he arguably would be greater. Right now, I would still say Nadal.
 

Beckerserve

Hall of Fame
Well I'd definitely put Federer in the conversation, that's why I said probably.

Nadal has been playing 2nd fiddle too much and he hasn't dominated the game like Djokovic aswell as Federer.

But as I said, it's up to each and every one what they believe makes a more successfull player.
Has he though? YE1 same as Federer. I would love some journalist to ask players which is valued more weeks at no.1 or YE1 and why. Djokovic would be best to ask really. Id love to know what he values the most.
 

PETEhammer

Professional
It's about leading the Slam count, not leading in most of the particular Slams.

Sampras is greater than Nadal in 3 of the 4 Slams, yet Nadal is greater because 20 Slams > 14 Slams without RG.
Unfortunately, things have never been this clear cut. Emerson for example, had 12 majors and was not considered the GOAT by anyone. Laver has 2 Calendar Slams, but only one is really vaunted (Open Era one) etc. Pete being ahead of Rafa at 3 of 4 slams definitely says something. Remember, prior to the big 3 there were a few detractors who considered Pete's resume unbalanced because half his majors came at one event. Imagine what this means for Rafa.

Overall, what is more pressing for Djokodal is who ends up greatest of this generation, because in order to be eligible for the greatest of all time you must be the greatest of your time. From there, the discussion with the other GOAT contenders may be had.
 

Atennisone

Hall of Fame
At the moment 20 beats 18, Nadal is though finished, so he won't be adding anymore Grand Slam Titles or finals to him. But Djokovic just has to show up for the next few years, and he is secured all the trophies he want to have as
 

Beckerserve

Hall of Fame
Unfortunately, things have never been this clear cut. Emerson for example, had 12 majors and was not considered the GOAT by anyone. Laver has 2 Calendar Slams, but only one is really vaunted (Open Era one) etc. Pete being ahead of Rafa at 3 of 4 slams definitely says something. Remember, prior to the big 3 there were a few detractors who considered Pete's resume unbalanced because half his majors came at one event. Imagine what this means for Rafa.

Overall, what is more pressing for Djokodal is who ends up greatest of this generation, because in order to be eligible for the greatest of all time you must be the greatest of your time. From there, the discussion with the other GOAT contenders may be had.
As of today i have Sampras ahead of Djokovic and behind Nadal Federer and Borg (not by much only because of lack of clay court success) . You are spot on. One has to be the best of their era.
Laver , Borg, sampras, Federer and nadal have been the best of their eras. Hard to compare Laver per se as the game was very differently run back then but as of today they have to be the big 5.
And yes Federer and Nadal are actually different eras. Anyone who thinks Federer post 2009 was peak Federer is new to the sport.
 
Top