Will all Federer fans finally accept?

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Yes of course he is. He got the most points throughout the whole season. They were all earnt, not donated.
The argument of Federer having a better h2h this year has been used through all of their respective careers by the VB. So I guess you finally accept that the Fedal h2h is bogus in terms of determining their greatness and other stats like weeks number one, and grand slams, titles etc matter more? Or does that only come into play this year because roles are switched ?
You just answered your own question with the bolded ;)

Suddenly they value consistency and being no.1 over H2H. Funny bunch. :p
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
It is funny.

The VB needs to use the argument of consistency and the importance of the #1, but they cannot do so without Federer fans claiming how important the H2H is, so, just claim that Federer fans suddenly claim that the H2H has grown in importance to them ( which is obviously not true) and go on as needed?

I mean, it is one thing to be delusional, but it is completely different to force upon yourself a delusion and believe in it.

:cool:
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Here's a video about the somewhat similar situation in the past:


I agree with the gentleman at 0:38 (Rino Tomassi). You have to judge a year from the beginning to the end, ranking has to award both big titles and week-in week-out consistency and Nadal had both this year so he's the best player of 2017 for me.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Hmm. This year, Fedfans have started to love the H2H. If so, they should also like the opinion that Rafa is the GOAT because of his H2H against Fed. :cool:
I don't care that much about H2H to be honest. Which is why I admit Rafa is the rightful no.1 this year.

It's just funny seeing the rival fanbase suddenly disregard the H2H when they have used it for a decade in their arguments.

Fed has better results in slams? Doesn't matter, H2H.

Fed spent more weeks at no.1? Doesn't matter, H2H.

Fed's consistency is amazing? Who cares, H2H.

Every time these arguments were used in Fed's favor, the ************* completely ignored them and disregarded them and propped up the H2H continuously.

Now the same ************* completely regard these accomplishments as essential when it comes to this year, when their boy has a losing H2H.

Their inconsistency has simply been exposed.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Hmm. This year, Fedfans have started to love the H2H. If so, they should also like the opinion that Rafa is the GOAT because of his H2H against Fed. :cool:
Lol, some very carefully picked words here.

"Started to love" is not the same as "think that it is more important as before" from which seems to stem the argument in your last sentence when it comes to the VB.

You know you are screwed, when you have to pick your words like that, because you know in yourself what you are doing.

A total confirmation of what I have written several posts ago.

Onto posting pics of Nadal and other trolling for you I guess.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
At some point you will stop being salty. Federer can't be better as he is no.2. In most cultures no.1 means better than no.2 . It is what it is, 2017 belongs to Nadal. There can only be one.

It's better to accept the reality and enjoy the year Federer
Rafa received the 2017 ATP World Tour No.1 trophy from ATP President Chris Kermode for finishing the year at number one in the rankings. It does not matter whether Fedfans like it or not.
Nadal is the ATP #1 with having the most points but that doesn't translate being the best player when taking their stats and H2H into context. Federer has more single titles, better winning percentage, dominate the top ten players. Even if they were close, Federer wins the H2H tie-breaker(4-0) is the final nail in the coffin.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
I hate to remind people of a certain (former?) poster here, but one is fact and the other is opinion :)
Your opinion his not fact either. The argument for Federer being the better player is backup with having more titles, higher winning percentage. Federer is 4-0 against Nadal who was denied 4 titles this year.
 
Anyway, Nadal isn't the undisputed best player of the year, not when he won a similar amount of titles but failed to beat his main competitor every time in the given period. His ranking is well deserved but undisputed is too much.

Gotta love though how fedtennisphan who only talks about other players' fans is nowhere to be seen after Goffin's heroics. :D

Federer isn't the undisputed greatest player of all time, not when he won more slams but failed to consistently beat his main competitor throughout his career. His GOATness is well deserved but undisputed is too much.
 

octobrina10

G.O.A.T.
Nadal is the ATP #1 with having the most points but that doesn't translate being the best player when taking their stats and H2H into context. Federer has more single titles, better winning percentage, dominate the top ten players. Even if they were close, Federer wins the H2H tie-breaker(4-0) is the final nail in the coffin.
Your opinion is not a fact.
 

TennisLBC

Professional
Nadal is the ATP #1 with having the most points but that doesn't translate being the best player when taking their stats and H2H into context. Federer has more single titles, better winning percentage, dominate the top ten players. Even if they were close, Federer wins the H2H tie-breaker(4-0) is the final nail in the coffin.
What do you think Nadal's winning percentage would be if he only played clay court events?

Federer had a great year, but he didn't play a full schedule. Crowing about winning percentage is disingenuous.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
How do you define objectivity, out of curiosity? Guessing your view is tainted by bitterness.
I was an Andy Roddick fan. Yet I don’t even consider him top 30 all time because of his serve and because he played in a weak era (the same weak era Fed and Nadal played in). That is objectivity.

Am I always objective? No. Am I blinded by emotions at times? Yes. But (I’m not saying you) many Fed fans try to have it both ways. They’ll moan about the VB and their attacks but act like it’s okay for them to do it because they are Fed fans. They will be logical about any number of things but will suddenly become impossible when it comes to Fed. I do try my best not to be a hypocrite. I probably have failed at it a few times but I try.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
What do you think Nadal's winning percentage would be if he only played clay court events?

Federer had a great year, but he didn't play a full schedule. Crowing about winning percentage is disingenuous.
I still think he would have a better win/loss record against the top 10 players had he play on clay.

Even if disregard the win/loss percentage, the numbers still in favors of Federer, especially the H2H.

Nadal is the YE #1 and Federer is the best player in 2017. We can give it a rest.
 

MasterZeb

Hall of Fame
What do you think Nadal's winning percentage would be if he only played clay court events?

Federer had a great year, but he didn't play a full schedule. Crowing about winning percentage is disingenuous.
But most of Nadals wins and success this year has come on the clay. Also you're comparing Nadal playing just one surface to Federer playing two.... where's the logic.
 

TennisLBC

Professional
But most of Nadals wins success this year has come on the clay. Also you're comparing Nadal playing just one surface compared to Federer playing two.... where's the logic.
I am saying that discounting Nadal status as world number one by Federer Fans is disingenuous since Nadal has won more matches than Federer played all season. What do you think Nadal record would be if he cherry-picked his tournaments? That's my logic.
 

MasterZeb

Hall of Fame
I am saying that discounting Nadal status as world number one by Federer Fans is disingenuous since Nadal has won more matches than Federer played all season. What do you think Nadal record would be if he cherry-picked his tournaments? That's my logic.
Firstly I completely agree. And two Nadal cannot cherry pick his tournaments (as much as Fed) as he hasn't obtained he right to. He has to be 35 I think, not sure. You're wording it as if Nadal was forced by some brute to play that many tournaments and all the 500s etc. His decision. So yes. He did cherry pick as much as he could.
 

octobrina10

G.O.A.T.
Nadal is the YE #1 and Federer is the best player. Just give it a rest.

Winning percentage
Federer 52-5(91%)
Nadal 67-11(86%)

Single titles
Federer 7
Nadal 6

Record against top 10
Federer 14-2
Nadal 11-6

H2H
Federer 4
Nadal 0
If you want to give it a rest, just do it - stop arguing.
 

TennisLBC

Professional
Firstly I completely agree. And two Nadal cannot cherry pick his tournaments (as much as Fed) as he hasn't obtained he right to. He has to be 35 I think, not sure. You're wording it as if Nadal was forced by some brute to play that many tournaments and all the 500s etc. His decision. So yes. He did cherry pick as much as he could.
No one is forced to play tennis. I'm just looking for some a little honestly. If Federer was have played the same number of matches as Nadal at his current winning percentage, he would be No.1 easy. But that didn't happen.

How about enjoying the fact that Fed had a great year. He's not No.1, but as a fan, I'm glad he played well. This is not a zero sum gain folks.
 

YellowFedBetter

Hall of Fame
Hear what you're saying. But commenting judgmentally on a player--completely irrespective of one's feelings about said player--does not constitute impartiality. In that example of Roddick, no one would take an assessment that put him in the upper echelon seriously.

In the case of Federer, he is the widely acknowledged GOAT, and his achievements dwarf every other player's. For that reason, objectivity does not come into play in the way that you're using it.

If your goal is to have Federer fans declare another player GOAT, the term you'd apply would be "delusion." Seriously, there can be all sorts of discussions related to all things tennis. But the widest swath of tennis analysts have reached consensus.

If your distaste is for the "GOAT" label, I can also understand. But that's semantics, and its overuse is directly related to the venom spewed by the opposition's fans.
There is a bit of chicken and egg situation, yes. But thank you for taking the time for a well balanced rational point, even if I don’t agree with all of it I appreciate it.
 

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
It's ice to see Fedfans finally accepting the h2h does matter after all :D
The h2h is a weird thing because there's a simple logic of in a contest between two people if one wins the most then that person is surely "better" . Yet we Fed fans have always argued that that doesn't apply and now Nadal fans are arguing that for this year it doesn't apply.

I understand tennis being a tournament sport and giving undue importance to the H to H means you create weird anomalies like effectively saying Fed would be judged a better player if he'd lost more semi-finals at RG (something he seems to acknowledge in the press conference after RG 08: I could lose every time in the semifinals and tell myself I don't want to face him in the finals, but I've been strong and I've been tough, and I made my way there. That gives me great, great feeling, you know, a good satisfaction. http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2008-06-08/h.php ) but sometimes I do find it a little head-spinning.
 

peakin11mugs

Semi-Pro
It's ice to see Fedfans finally accepting the h2h does matter after all :D
Hmm. This year, Fedfans have started to love the H2H. If so, they should also like the opinion that Rafa is the GOAT because of his H2H against Fed. :cool:
LMAO no fed fans values the h2h (VB even started to reject it after djoker got it over nadal and fed) H2h is useless unless you win the tournament as well. It’s just hilarious VB bread and butter arguments come back to destroy their boy he is now a weak era mug and slam inflater now they’re suddenly denying h2h And it’s hilarious VB suddenly value finals, no 1 and consistency. Guess what we agree with VB because everyone knows that! and in all three of these no1, finals, consistency fed annihilates nadal. It’s not even close. It’s a joke how far fed is in these fields. So does djoker over nadal for that matter
 
Nadal is the YE #1 and Federer is the best player. Just give it a rest.

Winning percentage
Federer 52-5(91%)
Nadal 67-11(86%)

Single titles
Federer 7
Nadal 6

Record against top 10
Federer 14-2
Nadal 11-6

H2H
Federer 4
Nadal 0
Nadal certainly best of 2017 but as for greatest ever its impossible to say until carwers have ended. But as of now Nadal probably jas a better resume if you compare the era he won his Majors compared to Federer. Its ultimately goijg to come down to whomever someone supports. There will never be a GOAT that is undisputed. Not now.
 
Nadal's resume is overly skewed to clay, so that all but eliminates him from consideration as GOAT.
Thats ridiculous. He has more USOand wimbledons than Agassi who is widely regarded as a hall of famer. He has same wimbledons as connors!! To say he isnt GOAT because he is too good on clay is poppycick. Its his clay resume that on top of his ATG status on other surfaces elevates him in many peoples eyes to GOAT status. The YE1 was also massive this year. Whatever way you look at it 2017 elevated Nadal to a whole new level.
 

Rippy

Hall of Fame
Sure, Nadal is the rightful number one. He accumulated more points over the year, and deserved it.

It is kinda funny, I mean it's really the "Nadal-fan logic" that would suggest Federer had the better year: close in terms of titles between the two, but Federer won all the H2H matches.
 

Firstservingman

Talk Tennis Guru
Thats ridiculous. He has more USOand wimbledons than Agassi who is widely regarded as a hall of famer. He has same wimbledons as connors!! To say he isnt GOAT because he is too good on clay is poppycick. Its his clay resume that on top of his ATG status on other surfaces elevates him in many peoples eyes to GOAT status. The YE1 was also massive this year. Whatever way you look at it 2017 elevated Nadal to a whole new level.
Hello there, new user! :D
 

Krish0608

Hall of Fame
That Nadal is the true and rightful World No 1 and best player of 2017? All I have been hearing is that if Federer had won the WTF he would become the moral no 1 or something but the final gap is more than a 1000 points between them. Hence are they willing to admit that Nadal is the undisputed best player of the year?
Nadal is the world no. 1, I accept. But the undisputed best player of the year is Roger Federer. Sorry to tell you that, mate.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Nadal is not the GOAT. He has a lot to catch Federer's overall achievements.


Most GS titles
1. Roger Federer 19*(career slam)
2. Rafael Nadal 16*(career slam)
3. Pete Sampras 14
4. Novak Djokovic 12*(career slam)
5. Björn Borg 11
6. Andre Agassi 8(career slam)
= Ivan Lendl 8
= Jimmy Connors 8
9. John McEnroe 7
= Mats Wilander 7
11. Stefan Edberg 6
= Boris Becker 6

GS finals
1. Roger Federer 29*
2. Rafael Nadal 23*
3. Novak Djokovic 21*
4. Ivan Lendl 19
5. Pete Sampras 18
6. Björn Borg 16
7. Jimmy Connors 15
= Andre Agassi 15
9. John McEnroe 11
= Mats Wilander 11
= Stefan Edberg 11
= Andy Murray 11


Consecutive GS finals
1. Roger Federer 10
2. Roger Federer 8
3. Novak Djokovic 6

4. Rafael Nadal 5
5. Andre Agassi 4
= Rod Laver 4
= Novak Djokovic 4
8. Jimmy Connors 3
= Andy Murray 3
= Björn Borg 3
= Björn Borg 3
= Björn Borg 3
= Ivan Lendl 3
= John McEnroe 3
= Ivan Lendl 3
= Ivan Lendl 3
= Mats Wilander 3
= Jim Courier 3
= Jim Courier 3
= Pete Sampras 3
= Rafael Nadal 3

GS semi-finals
1. Roger Federer 41*
2. Jimmy Connors 31
= Novak Djokovic 31*
4. Ivan Lendl 28
5. Andre Agassi 26
= Rafael Nadal 26*
7. Pete Sampras 23
8. Andy Murray 21
9. John McEnroe 19
= Stefan Edberg 19
10. Boris Becker 18


Consecutive GS semi-finals
1. Roger Federer 23
2. Novak Djokovic 14
3. Ivan Lendl 10
4. Novak Djokovic 9
5. Ivan Lendl 6
= Nadal 6
7 Andy Murray 5
= Boris Becker 5
9. Roger Federer 4
= Rod Laver 4
= Tony Roche 4
= John McEnroe 4
= Andre Agassi 4
= Jim Courer 4
= Nadal 4


GS quarter-finals
1. Roger Federer 51*
2. Jimmy Connors 41
3. Novak Djokovic 37*
4. Agassi 36
5. Ivan Lendl 34
6 Rafael Nadal 32*
7. Andy Murray 30*
8. Pete Sampras 29
9. John McEnroe 26
= Stefan Edberg 26
11. Boris Becker 23
12. Björn Borg 21

Consecutive GS quarter-finals
1. Roger Federer 36
2. Novak Djokovic 28
3. Ivan Lendl 14
= Andy Murray 14
5. Rafael Nadal 11
6. Pete Sampras 10
7. Ivan Lendl 7
= Mats Wilander 7
9. Andre Agassi 6
= Rafael Nadal 6

All Four Slams Per Year
Rod Laver 1969

Three Slams Per Year
Jimmy Connors 1974
Mats Wilander 1988
Roger Federer 2004
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007

Rafael Nadal 2010
Novak Djokovic 2011
Novak Djokovic 2015



All Four Slam Finals Per Year
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2009

Novak Djokovic 2015
Rod Laver 1969

All Four Slam Semi-finals Per Year
Rod Laver 1969
Ivan Lendl 1987
Roger Federer 2005
Roger Federer 2006
Roger Federer 2007
Roger Federer 2008
Roger Federer 2009

Rafael Nadal 2008
Novak Djokovic 2011
Novak Djokovic 2012
Novak Djokovic 2013
Novak Djokovic 2015

Andy Murray 2011

Most consecutive matches won at one Grand Slam event:
1. Björn Borg (Wimbledon), 41
2. Roger Federer (Wimbledon), 40(walk-over in 2007 not included)
= Roger Federer (US Open), 40

4. Rafael Nadal (French Open), 39
5. Pete Sampras (Wimbledon), 31


Most Grand Slam match wins
1. Roger Federer 325*
2. Novak Djokovic 237*
3. Jimmy Connors 233
4. Andre Agassi 224
5. Ivan Lendl 222
6. Rafael Nadal 226*
7. Pete Sampras 204

Other Stuff:

Year-End Championships
1. Roger Federer 6
2. Ivan Lendl 5
= Pete Sampras 5
= Novak Djokovic 5
5. Ilie Nastase 3
= John McEnroe 3
= Boris Becker 3


Most Year-End Championship finals
1. Federer 10
2 Ivan Lendl 9
3. Boris Becker 8
4. Pete Sampras 6
= Novak Djokovic 6
6. Ilie Năstase 5
7 Bjorn Borg 4
= John McEnroe 4
= Andre Agassi 4
10. Lleyton Hewitt 3

Most Weeks at #1
1. Roger Federer 302*
2. Pete Sampras 286
3. Ivan Lendl 270
4. Jimmy Connors 268
5. Novak Djokovic 223*
6. John McEnroe 170
7. Rafael Nadal 154*
8. Björn Borg 109
9. Andre Agassi 101
10. Lleyton Hewitt 80

Consecutive Weeks at #1
1. Roger Federer (1) 237
2. Jimmy Connors (1) 160
3. Ivan Lendl (1) 157
4. Novak Djokovic(1) 122
5. Pete Sampras (1) 102
6. Jimmy Connors (2) 84
7. Pete Sampras (2) 82
8. Ivan Lendl (2) 80
9. Lleyton Hewitt (1) 75
10. John McEnroe (1) 58
11. Rafael Nadal (1) 56

Year End #1
1. Sampras 6
2. Federer 5
= Connors 5
4. McEnroe 4
= Lendl 4
= Novak Djokovic 4
= Nadal 4

Highest Season Winning Percentage
1. John McEnroe (1984) .965 82–3
2. Jimmy Connors (1974) .959 93–4
3. Roger Federer (2005) .953 81–4
4. Roger Federer (2006) .948 92–5

5. Björn Borg (1979) .933 84–6
6. Novak Djokovic(2015) .932 82-6
7. Roger Federer (2004) .925 74–6
= Ivan Lendl (1986) .925 74–6
9. Ivan Lendl (1985) .923 84–7
10. Ivan Lendl (1982) .922 106–9
11. Björn Borg (1980) .921 70–6
= Novak Djokovic (2011) 0.921 70-6
13. Ivan Lendl (1989) .919 79-7
= Jimmy Connors(1975) .919 79-7
15. Jimmy Connors(1976) .918 90-8
16. Jimmy Connors(1978) .917 66-6
17. Björn Borg(1977) .916 76-7
18. Rafael Nadal (2013) .915 75-7
19. Ivan Lendl (1987) .914 74-7
20. Roger Federer (2017) .912 52–5

Most ATP Titles
1. Jimmy Connors 109
2. Roger Federer 95*
3. Ivan Lendl 94
4. John McEnroe 77
5. Rafael Nadal 75*
6. Novak Djokovic 68*
7. Björn Borg 64
= Pete Sampras 64
9. Guillermo Vilas 62
10. Andre Agassi 60
11. Ilie Nastase 57
12. Boris Becker 49

Most match wins versus top 10
1. Federer 211*
2. Djokovic 181*
3. Lendl 161
4. Nadal 152*
5. Connors 137
6. Sampras 124
7. Becker 121
8. McEnroe 120
9. Bjorn Borg 110
10. Agassi 109

Most Master Series or equivalent win
1. Novak Djokovic 30*
= Rafael Nadal 30*
3. Roger Federer 27*
4. Ivan Lendl 22
5. John McEnroe 19
6. Andre Agassi 17
= Jimmny Connors 17
8. Bjorn Borg 15
9. Andy Murray 14*
10. Boris Becker 13
11. Pete Sampras 11

Consecutive Match Win Streak
1. Guillermo Vilas 46 1977
2. Ivan Lendl 44 1981–82
3. Novak Djokovic 43 2010–11
4. John McEnroe 42 1984
5. Roger Federer 41 2006–07
= Björn Borg 41 1979–80
7. Björn Borg 35 1978
= Thomas Muster 35 1995
= Roger Federer 35 2005
10.Jimmy Connors 33 1974
Thanks for taking the time to do that. Reading it actually confirms the view made by Agassi that Nadal is ahead of Federer in goat race. All of Federer most impressive stats were before Nadal and Djokovic peaked which does seem to suggest Nadal and Djokovic moved the game to new heights. It reminds me of snooker. Steve Davis had all the records but Stephen hendry was considered greater even before he broke Davis records as Davis never again got to the top when Hendry arrived. In any sport that is the case really. Had Federer been over 30 when he stopped winning as regularly then it could be put down to natural decline but he stopped winning anywhere near as regularly in his peak years.
Federer led Djokovic in both H2H and Slam H2H at the end of 2012. He only lost both leads aged 32-34. What are you talking about? The fact he’s only 1 win behind Djokovic despite being 6 years older is incredible, and is a credit to his longevity. He should be like 10 wins behind by now.

Nadal OTOH has always been a match up issue and the H2H was clay skewed from the start. Fed still better on grass and HCs.
 
Federer led Djokovic in both H2H and Slam H2H at the end of 2012. He only lost both leads aged 32-34. What are you talking about? The fact he’s only 1 win behind Djokovic despite being 6 years older is incredible, and is a credit to his longevity. He should be like 10 wins behind by now.

Nadal OTOH has always been a match up issue and the H2H was clay skewed from the start. Fed still better on grass and HCs.
Nadal is 8-5 on outdoor HC. Federer is better indoors and on grass. But on clay and outdoor HC over last 8 years or so Nadal has a clear advantage. Im not sure how the h2h is clay skewed whem most of their matches have been off clay. They have only played 15 times on clay.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Nadal is 8-5 on outdoor HC. Federer is better indoors and on grass. But on clay and outdoor HC over last 8 years or so Nadal has a clear advantage. Im not sure how the h2h is clay skewed whem most of their matches have been off clay. They have only played 15 times on clay.
During Fed’s prime they played 11 matches on clay but only 7 matches off it.

Fed’s better on outdoor hard too. It’s just a fact that most of their matches there have been on slow HC, or in 2013 which was Fed’s worst year.
 

peakin11mugs

Semi-Pro
YE1 equals best in the world. That is a fact. Otherwise no point to the trophy Nadal won at WTF.
If No 1 is the be all and end all then how on earth can VB think nadal is best or GOAT etc when he has been no 1 for such little time during his career and his very peak. Fed took 302 weeks, Djokovic took 228 and Murray took 41. For most of his peak fed and Djokovic were ranked no 1. Fed took away no 1 from him post prime even

And nadal isn’t a better outdoor hardcourt player. That’s ridiculous. Federer has 10 HC slams to nadals 3 and has what 21 hard masters vs nadals 3 or 4. No contest. Nadal can peak with a good draw and one or solid opponents but can’t really beat any decent hardcourt draw hence can’t do WTF top 8 players which is indoors I know but point stands
 

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
What do you think Nadal's winning percentage would be if he only played clay court events?
And what do you think his *ranking* would be if he only played on clay? ;)

So, still beating this horse to death, people? It's pretty obvious that the lines have been drawn here and the two camps won't be reconciled on this. Likewise, some people like to think that Wozniaki was the undisputed best player in 2010-2011, and others disagree, that's how it is.

Also, VB, you should be more confident in your guy and in what you believe. All this "Please, Fed fans, acknowledge that our Rafa is the best, pretty please" feels a bit... odd, to be honest.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Nadal is 8-5 on outdoor HC. Federer is better indoors and on grass. But on clay and outdoor HC over last 8 years or so Nadal has a clear advantage. Im not sure how the h2h is clay skewed whem most of their matches have been off clay. They have only played 15 times on clay.
Until Fed turned, they played 14 matches on clay and 11 off it.

Only after Fed turned 30 did they finally start to meet more times off clay than on it. So your point doesn't hold.

And in which universe is 8-5 massive advantage? Especially when they only met 4 times in Fed's prime on outdoor HC. And may I suggest you look up how many trophies this record got Nadal. You'll be shocked at the result.
 
If No 1 is the be all and end all then how on earth can VB think nadal is best or GOAT etc when he has been no 1 for such little time during his career and his very peak. Fed took 302 weeks, Djokovic took 228 and Murray took 41. For most of his peak fed and Djokovic were ranked no 1. Fed took away no 1 from him post prime even

And nadal isn’t a better outdoor hardcourt player. That’s ridiculous. Federer has 10 HC slams to nadals 3 and has what 21 hard masters vs nadals 3 or 4. No contest. Nadal can peak with a good draw and one or solid opponents but can’t really beat any decent hardcourt draw hence can’t do WTF top 8 players which is indoors I know but point stands
A comparison on outdoor HC between Nadal and Federer is hard as the valid point another poster made makes sense. We havent really seen them peak v peak . Too big an age gap so these arguments will run and run i guess.

Three USO for Nadal though is some achievement given many thought je would never get one and i tjink it was the last Major he got ? I think he won W and AO before getting USO?
 

peakin11mugs

Semi-Pro
A comparison on outdoor HC between Nadal and Federer is hard as the valid point another poster made makes sense. We havent really seen them peak v peak . Too big an age gap so these arguments will run and run i guess.

Three USO for Nadal though is some achievement given many thought je would never get one and i tjink it was the last Major he got ? I think he won W and AO before getting USO?
Maybe we haven’t seen them peak for peak but fed has 10 hard slams, 21 hard masters. Nadal has 4 slams and like 5 masters and far far far too many losses to any mug under the sun. It isn’t a contest.

We did see nadal and Djokovic peak for peak and Djokovic went 7-0 v nadal twice. 7 finals in a row. 7 victories in straigh sets. Nadal was completely outclassed and outplayed
 

octobrina10

G.O.A.T.
And what do you think his *ranking* would be if he only played on clay? ;)

So, still beating this horse to death, people? It's pretty obvious that the lines have been drawn here and the two camps won't be reconciled on this. Likewise, some people like to think that Wozniaki was the undisputed best player in 2010-2011, and others disagree, that's how it is.

Also, VB, you should be more confident in your guy and in what you believe. All this "Please, Fed fans, acknowledge that our Rafa is the best, pretty please" feels a bit... odd, to be honest.
The best, no doubt:
 
Top