Why Nadal winning 21 Slams won't make him greater than Fed

Max consecutive weeks at No. 1

Federer: 237
Nadal: 56

That would be all.
In this case "all" isn't nearly enough.

This new "all" is just 5% of the debate, and even that argument is flawed. I don't have a high opinion of this new "all", I prefer the old "all" which actually means what it says.

For example, your "all" doesn't take into account the weak era. It was much tougher to be consecutive in anything when all of the Big 3 became top players. Because (warning: basic logic coming up) when a pie is split into three parts there is LESS to go around per player than when the pie is just one player.

RF was the pie owner for a while because of the age difference. Yes, Fedfans, RF actually BENEFITED from the age gap, not the other way round.
 

JasonG2019

Rookie
Max consecutive weeks at No. 1

Federer: 237
Nadal: 56

That would be all.
Judging by various commentators and current players remarks many already consider Nadal as GOAT as i have read many times that Nadal has been the dominant player the past decade or so in terms of Majors won when the Big 3 have been peak at the same time.

If Nadal gets to 21 i think he will be unanimously considered GOAT. If he wins French Open he will be unanimous GOAT.

Weeks at no.1 is largely irrelevant. Nobody would place Connors above Borg or Courier above Becker. Or Rios ahead of Rafter. Many other examples.

Year End No.1 clearly is a factor which is why Sampras is so highly regarded.
 
D

Deleted member 763691

Guest
Max consecutive weeks at No. 1

Federer: 237
Nadal: 56

That would be all.
Hardly anyone in the world knows those stats, even tennis commentators don't know those stats.
Plus I think Rafa will win at least 23 slams anyway, and maybe a lot more, as he gets better and better at the US Open and maintains his Roland Garros domination in addition to a revival on grass :)
Also, Rafa and Federer are tied at FIVE year-end-#1s, and I think we can safely say Federer will never make it to SIX, whereas Rafa has a very good chance at doing it SIX or even SEVEN times!
 

JasonG2019

Rookie
Hardly anyone in the world knows those stats, even tennis commentators don't know those stats.
Plus I think Rafa will win at least 23 slams anyway, and maybe a lot more, as he gets better and better at the US Open and maintains his Roland Garros domination in addition to a revival on grass :)
Revival on grass? I have not seen any revival on grass, he looks good but nowhere near Wimbledon Champion standard now.

In 2018 he lost to a 23rd ranked Djokovic who at the time had little confidence. Last year he lost to an average Federer who only 3 weeks before he had beaten easily in Paris.

I agree at FO and USO he looks very dominant like Djokovic does in Australia and Wimbledon but i think saying Nadal is revived on grass is stretching it.
 

PeoplesChamp

Hall of Fame
Hardly anyone in the world knows those stats, even tennis commentators don't know those stats.
Plus I think Rafa will win at least 23 slams anyway, and maybe a lot more, as he gets better and better at the US Open and maintains his Roland Garros domination in addition to a revival on grass :)
Also, Rafa and Federer are tied at FIVE year-end-#1s, and I think we can safely say Federer will never make it to SIX, whereas Rafa has a very good chance at doing it SIX or even SEVEN times!
This is far from true, but even if it were, you are openly admitting to depending on the ignorance of folks to push your agenda :laughing: Don't you worry. If there are some people who aren't aware of these stats, they will be when the sh1t hits the fan after RG.
 

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
Of course. And Djokovic can never be the GOAT either because he lacks crowd support. So, Federer is the obvious GOAT for eternity.
As a hardcore Fed fan I'll concede that Nole is overall GOAT if he equals Fed at 20. Winning all Masters is an amazing accomplishment. He is truly great on everything, hard/clay/grass/indoor.
 

vex

Hall of Fame
You should remember Fed is setting a bar and Nadal is just trying his best all his career to reach it.

Fed has spent almost 10 years to set his own milestone / summit.

Wonder if Nadal or Djokovic can set a new trend and not play to just do a +1/2
... they’re literally playing the exact same game. All three have already blown the doors off the accomplishments of any prior generation. Fed getting a head start on the big 3 era means nothing. Your argument might make sense if Fed played in the 80s/early 90s and the game had radically changed.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
Fed getting a head start on the big 3 era means nothing.
Even if Roger got a "head start on the big 3 era" as you claim, it's been eleven years since Roger earned the slam record in 2009. That's more than enough time for Nadal and Djokovic to have caught-up, and more so considering NO player born in the 90's won a slam during those 11 years.

And what exactly is the "big 3 era"? Since Nole reached his peak in 2011, Federer has won nearly the same number of slams as Murray and Wawrinka. The only time that can truly be called the 'Big-3 era' is 2017 - current, because the Big-3 have won all the slams.
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
GOAT with only 2 Wimbledon titles?
No GOAT has this much of an unbalanced as The BULL; "sorry fans!" The deficits are many when it comes to the resume of Rafa in comparison to Fedovic! The most glaring shortcoming is the infrequency of defending a title off the clay surface! He's only played a couple YEC finals with absolutely no wins! GOAT? I think not folks! :sneaky:
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
Lol, fck WWE!
Who in the hell wants to see Roman Reigns mainevent Wrestlemania for the 5th time and against Goldberg? ****ty booking by the WWE.
I certainly don't want Goldberg/Roman, and im tired of Roman main eventing (I HIGHLY doubt they will go on last anyway) but im always here for Bill :D
 

Robin3381

Rookie
I certainly don't want Goldberg/Roman, and im tired of Roman main eventing (I HIGHLY doubt they will go on last anyway) but im always here for Bill :D
I agree with you but there is already rumors on Goldberg/Roman being the mainevent. I am seriously sick of WWE's booking. Look at how many mainevents Roman Reigns get. The guy has mainevented wrestlemania more times than Undertaker, Brock Lesnar and Stone Cold. Just think about it. Vince Mcmahon seriously needs to GTFO.
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
I agree with you but there is already rumors on Goldberg/Roman being the mainevent. I am seriously sick of WWE's booking. Look at how many mainevents Roman Reigns get. The guy has mainevented wrestlemania more times than Undertaker, Brock Lesnar and Stone Cold. Just think about it. Vince Mcmahon seriously needs to GTFO.
People would be even more mad if Roman beat The Fiend though. I do wish Vince would realize no one cares about a Roman Reigns title reign.
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
Federer achieved those consecutive weeks in 2003-2007, in the pre-Djokovic era and when Nadal was an immature teenager in Grand Slams on hard, when it was objectively easier. With same-age Djokovic and Nadal, Federer could only dream of achieving 237 consecutive weeks as #1, about 80% of Federer's weeks as #1 were pre-2008, and about 90% of his weeks as #1 were pre-2011.

In addition, Federer's advantage in weeks as #1 and ATP finals is compensated by Nadal's advantage in H2H, Olympics, Masters 1000, higher winning percentage in Slam finals, higher winning percentage in career and 5 Davis Cup (including a 96% winning percentage in Davis cup matches in singles).

Crucially, he number of Grand Slams is the most relevant all-time great criterion. Other criteria are just tie-breakers in case two players are tied in Slams. If Federer isn't talented enough to win as many Slams as Nadal, he ain't no GOAT. They are playing in the same era, claiming that Federer with less Slams is better than Nadal would be completely unobjective. Especially when the Big 3 have been playing for the Grand Slam record as the main goal, in an era where the Grand Slam record was percieved by the press, fans and players as the Holy Grail of tennis. Of course some unobjective Fed fans can still claim Federer as the GOAT but that would be the equivalent of some delusional Sampras fans still claiming Sampras to be greater than Federer.
I can't believe a troll thread yielded such a great write-up. Thanks for posting this.
 

vex

Hall of Fame
Even if Roger got a "head start on the big 3 era" as you claim, it's been eleven years since Roger earned the slam record in 2009. That's more than enough time for Nadal and Djokovic to have caught-up, and more so considering NO player born in the 90's won a slam during those 11 years.

And what exactly is the "big 3 era"? Since Nole reached his peak in 2011, Federer has won nearly the same number of slams as Murray and Wawrinka. The only time that can truly be called the 'Big-3 era' is 2017 - current, because the Big-3 have won all the slams.
The first argument is completely illogical. Sure, Fed won 15 slams by 2009. Djoker and Rafa wok 15 slams in similar times. Fed pushes the record further into 2017 and Rafa and Djoker will have their years to answer him. Surely you aren’t suggesting Rafa and Djoker should have won 21 slams in the time Fed won 15...? Makes no sense.

The Big 3 era really begins around ‘09/‘10 when Djoker started to reach his prime. I’d argue that it ended in 2017 but I dunno, Fed is still relevant at Wimby. He nearly won it last year. Take that tourney away tho and we’ve been in a Big 2 era for quite some time.
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
The first argument is completely illogical. Sure, Fed won 15 slams by 2009. Djoker and Rafa wok 15 slams in similar times. Fed pushes the record further into 2017 and Rafa and Djoker will have their years to answer him. Surely you aren’t suggesting Rafa and Djoker should have won 21 slams in the time Fed won 15...? Makes no sense.
Well, Nadal had 9 slams and the calendar grand slam all before Djokovic's era, so you saying Federer had this huge head start over him is plain wrong. One may argue that Roger (and Rafa) had a huge head start over Djokovic, but that's Nole's fault for taking a 3-year absence after winning his first slam in 2008. In case you've forgotten, after losing to Nole at the AO and then losing RG, Wimbledon, and the #1 ranking to Nadal in 2008, many were predicting that Federer wouldn't break Pete's slam record.

Regardless, though Federer was +7 over Rafa and +15 over Nole in the slam count heading into 2011, with no strong young guns in their path to stop them from winning slams (something all previous ATGs faced), definitely Nadal and Djokovic have had more than enough time to make up for any 'head start' that Federer supposedly had.
 

vex

Hall of Fame
Well, Nadal had 9 slams and the calendar grand slam all before Djokovic's era, so you saying Federer had this huge head start over him is plain wrong. One may argue that Roger (and Rafa) had a huge head start over Djokovic, but that's Nole's fault for taking a 3-year absence after winning his first slam in 2008. In case you've forgotten, after losing to Nole at the AO and then losing RG, Wimbledon, and the #1 ranking to Nadal in 2008, many were predicting that Federer wouldn't break Pete's slam record.

Regardless, though Federer was +7 over Rafa and +15 over Nole in the slam count heading into 2011, with no strong young guns in their path to stop them from winning slams (something all previous ATGs faced), definitely Nadal and Djokovic have had more than enough time to make up for any 'head start' that Federer supposedly had.
Rafa was a complete nonfactor in his early years outside RG. Denied Fed basically nothing.

and you want both Rafa and Djoker to win MORE slams in the time Fed won 15 while alsofighting each other AND Fed?

I’m sorry, your argument is absurd
Just looking at Rafa alone (I’m not even a fan) the dude has had to win every single one of his slams while another prime ATG was there trying to block him. Every single one. His path has been harder than Fed’s beyond any doubt
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
Rafa was a complete nonfactor in his early years outside RG. Denied Fed basically nothing.

and you want both Rafa and Djoker to win MORE slams in the time Fed won 15 while alsofighting each other AND Fed?

I’m sorry, your argument is absurd
Well it's just selective thinking, deluding themselves into a happy place! :sneaky:
 
Do you have GOAT points adjusted for difficulty?
Not directly, but Big Win points reflect opponent strength (i.e. difficulty) throughout the whole career as well as Weeks At Elo Top 5
Peak Elo Rating GOAT Points reflect difficulty, but during peaks.
Most Big Win GOAT Points: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=BigWinsGOATPoints
Most Weeks At Elo Top 5 GOAT Points: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=WeeksAtEloTopNGOATPoints
Most Peak Elo Rating GOAT Points: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=BestEloRatingGOATPoints
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Not directly, but Big Win points reflect opponent strength (i.e. difficulty) throughout the whole career as well as Weeks At Elo Top 5
Peak Elo Rating GOAT Points reflect difficulty, but during peaks.
Most Big Win GOAT Points: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=BigWinsGOATPoints
Most Weeks At Elo Top 5 GOAT Points: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=WeeksAtEloTopNGOATPoints
Most Peak Elo Rating GOAT Points: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=BestEloRatingGOATPoints
Thanks. I congratulate you on great work you do. I think that you are better than anyone else in this field.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
Not directly, but Big Win points reflect opponent strength (i.e. difficulty) throughout the whole career as well as Weeks At Elo Top 5
Peak Elo Rating GOAT Points reflect difficulty, but during peaks.
Most Big Win GOAT Points: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=BigWinsGOATPoints
Most Weeks At Elo Top 5 GOAT Points: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=WeeksAtEloTopNGOATPoints
Most Peak Elo Rating GOAT Points: https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/record?recordId=BestEloRatingGOATPoints
Even in these statistics, Federer is constantly ahead of Nadal and never 3rd like some fanboys claim.
 
Top