Will nadal beat federer's grand slam record??

[davey25]

I have noticed that people tend to ignore that rafa has had quite a head start over federer. Nadal is still 2 slams ahead compared to federer of rafa's current age and he will need to win either french or wimbledon to keep that gap.

Nadal needs to win 2 grand slams every year to also have 16 slams at the age of 29. If nadal continues to dominate french open then this doesnt actually seem as difficult as it may initially look. This years french open would certainly tell us if nadal really is still that dominant on clay.

But ofcourse federer's not retired yet and may go to win as many as 20 grand slams who knows and I think he would have nadal very well in his mind and will be motivated to continue to win so it makes it very dificult for nadal to get close to him.

I certainly think nadal will break sampras's no.2 spot. And provided he will continue to have a superior H2H with federer, I think 15 grand slams is all nadal needs to be the GOAT.

What are your opinions on the matter?

There are so many flaws with your reasoning it isnt even funny.

Nadal is an early bloomer by nature so he isnt going to be winning slams at the same age as Federer even if he were to match his longevity (and his giving his playing style matching his longevity would already be a challenge enough). Also we are now into the point Federer was winning at a 3 slams per year rate so Nadal's lead per age isnt going to last much longer.

Winning 2 slams a year until he is 29!?!!? Nadal has only had one year in his whole career he has won 2 slams in the same year. And the idea of him winning any slams at 29 when his body is already showing much more signs of strain at 23, let alone 2 per year up until that point, is comical.

Not to mention you seem to be presuming Federer will never win another slam, even though he has won 3 of the last 4 and nearly won the other one. So lets see Federer who was a relatively late bloomer you somehow feel has won his last slam at 28, while Nadal who was a very early bloomer who plays a grinders game will be winning 2 slams a year at 29. Ummm ok, great logic there, LOL!

 

[ecurb]

There are so many flaws with your reasoning it isnt even funny.

Nadal is an early bloomer by nature so he isnt going to be winning slams at the same age as Federer even if he were to match his longevity (and his giving his playing style matching his longevity would already be a challenge enough). Also we are now into the point Federer was winning at a 3 slams per year rate so Nadal's lead per age isnt going to last much longer.

Winning 2 slams a year until he is 29!?!!? Nadal has only had one year in his whole career he has won 2 slams in the same year. And the idea of him winning any slams at 29 when his body is already showing much more signs of strain at 23, let alone 2 per year up until that point, is comical.

Not to mention you seem to be presuming Federer will never win another slam, even though he has won 3 of the last 4 and nearly won the other one. So lets see Federer who was a relatively late bloomer you somehow feel has won his last slam at 28, while Nadal who was a very early bloomer who plays a grinders game will be winning 2 slams a year at 29. Ummm ok, great logic there, LOL!

Very good points.

 

[nikdom]

There are so many flaws with your reasoning it isnt even funny.

Nadal is an early bloomer by nature so he isnt going to be winning slams at the same age as Federer even if he were to match his longevity (and his giving his playing style matching his longevity would already be a challenge enough). Also we are now into the point Federer was winning at a 3 slams per year rate so Nadal's lead per age isnt going to last much longer.

Winning 2 slams a year until he is 29!?!!? Nadal has only had one year in his whole career he has won 2 slams in the same year. And the idea of him winning any slams at 29 when his body is already showing much more signs of strain at 23, let alone 2 per year up until that point, is comical.

Not to mention you seem to be presuming Federer will never win another slam, even though he has won 3 of the last 4 and nearly won the other one. So lets see Federer who was a relatively late bloomer you somehow feel has won his last slam at 28, while Nadal who was a very early bloomer who plays a grinders game will be winning 2 slams a year at 29. Ummm ok, great logic there, LOL!

Well said and this should be obvious stuff to everyone, but you know what fanhood does to some people!

 

[thejoe]

He could get very few more, he could quite lots more, but I don't see him breaking the record. I don't see him getting more than 12 or so.

 

[kishnabe]

I'd say he has 3 more slams( 2 more Aussies, 1 US open) other than the FO...In terms of how many more FO he can get...who knows...I actually don't want to think of that.
So his slam count would be from 9-12 but it won't be above Federer 16-???!

 

[Algo214]

no freaking way he will, maybe 2-3, 4 if he's lucky but that's it

 

[Rhino]

He might not even win the 2010 French Open.

 

[babbette]

He might not even win the 2010 French Open.

booo Rhino....boo.

 

[Rhino]

booo Rhino....boo.

Well people always jump the gun here don't they. After Fed's Australian Open victory people were saying he would go to win the next 347 slams, and now just 3 months later he's done.
You never know in sports, thats why we love it.

 

[Thinker_145]

Not to mention you seem to be presuming Federer will never win another slam, even though he has won 3 of the last 4 and nearly won the other one. So lets see Federer who was a relatively late bloomer you somehow feel has won his last slam at 28, while Nadal who was a very early bloomer who plays a grinders game will be winning 2 slams a year at 29. Ummm ok, great logic there, LOL!

Did you forget to read the entire post or do you always try to come off as smart?

But ofcourse federer's not retired yet and may go to win as many as 20 grand slams who knows and I think he would have nadal very well in his mind and will be motivated to continue to win so it makes it very dificult for nadal to get close to him.

:roll::roll::roll::roll:

 

[Carsomyr]

Did you forget to read the entire post or do you always try to come off as smart?

But ofcourse federer's not retired yet and may go to win as many as 20 grand slams who knows and I think he would have nadal very well in his mind and will be motivated to continue to win so it makes it very dificult for nadal to get close to him.

You also said Nadal will break Sampras's record.

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

[JustBob]

I'd be surprised if Rafa gets more than 10.
He already has physical issues and I don't believe he'll have the success/longevity that Federer is currently enjoying.

 

[BounceHitBounceHit]

Rafa is a great player but highly unlikely. BHBH

 

[ecurb]

Chang had the best chance of beating Roger's total slam count since he had the most slams at the earliest age....age being so important and all.

 

[Augustus]

It's very unlikely that Nadal will beat the slam record. As of now, he'll need to win at least 11 more slams for that to happen, hopefully everyone realizes just how difficult that will be. Even if he wins 4 more French Opens, 3 more Wimbledons and 3 HC slams (nearly impossible), it ísn't enough. On top of that, Federer will probably win two or three more slams.

Nadal had to play insane tennis and win several epic matches just to win two non-clay slams. He's a great player, but this is just too much to ask. As for the age debate, sure Nadal is young, but that isn't the only thing that counts. There's also a thing I'd like to call 'career age'. It's no secret that Nadal has had severe injury problems, remember he's been at the top of the game since 2005, playing a very physical game. It wouldn't surprise me if Federer and Nadal retired around the same time, and I certainly don't expect Nadal to be playing into his thirties...

 

[dmt]

another troll thread

 

[rommil]

If Nadal decides to be a photographer, a reporter or a plant near the wall, maybe he can also be in the same room together with all these guys.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0Lh7Km7OI8

 

[TheLoneWolf]

If Nadal decides to be a photographer, a reporter or a plant near the wall, maybe he can also be in the same room together with all these guys.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0Lh7Km7OI8

You are obviously a Nadal hater. For being a plant near the wall, he has inflicted a lot of pain to your GOAT (to the point of causing him watery eyes once or twice.)

And yes, do tell me again how I don't have credibility because of saying that "Nadal will run himself to the ground even in pain" when in reality he is a pussey that withdrew from AO 2010 against Murray with his legs still attached. LMAO.

 

[Markov]

Can't see it happening

 

[dmt]

If Nadal decides to be a photographer, a reporter or a plant near the wall, maybe he can also be in the same room together with all these guys.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0Lh7Km7OI8

yeah nadal has had a worthless carrear

 

[namelessone]

The real question boys and girls is,will ANYONE beat Fed's GS record?

 

[Markov]

The real question boys and girls is,will ANYONE beat Fed's GS record?

I hope so... for the sake of tennis

 

[Netspirit]

Some change in tennis rules, court surfaces or ATP schedule (like adding a fifth major) may have unforseen consequences, allowing one player to dominate his weaker competition and grab more slams than Federer. It does not mean he will be a better athlete, though.

Most sport records get beaten sooner or later. Who could think 10 years ago that Sampras' records would not last a decade?

 

[ecurb]

The real question boys and girls is,will ANYONE beat Fed's GS record?

Certainly not impossible, but it definitely won't be Nadal. He will barely beat Agassi's record.

 

[Dimension]

Certainly not impossible, but it definitely won't be Nadal. He will barely beat Agassi's record.

Exactly the same line that bruce38 would say.

 

[Dimension]

I bellieve Fed's GS record will stand the test of time for many many years to come (could even be eternal, who knows). Optimistically speaking, it's not implausible to say Nadal could possibly get close to Fed's number, but at this rate I just don't think Nadal can surpass Fed's GS count.

 

[Chadwixx]

Nadal only has two grand slams off dirt in his 9 year career. I think your asking a bit much unless he plays for another 10 years at the level he showed in 2008. People are forgetting how poor his record vs top10 players has been the past year.

 

[Spider]

It will be very very tough for Nadal but he is the closest out of anyone to perhaps achieve it. The only problem for Nadal is, if Nadal adds a couple of slam titles more to his cabinet, it looks like Federer is more than capable of doing the same thing (if not more). So getting close to Federer is already's one of the biggest challenges for anyone, let alone surpassing him.

 

[kimbahpnam]

"Impossible is nothing".....except Nadal beating Fed's GS record.

 

[pjonesy]

If Federer gets to 20, I do not think Nadal would get there. But, it certainly might be possible for Nadal to win 2 or more of every GS. Oh, I forgot that he has not won the US Open. Well, I do think he might break Agassi's record.

 

[Bhagi Katbamna]

I don't think so. He could get as many French Opens as Federer has Wimbledons but not as many US Opens or Aus. Opens.

 

[JennyS]

Nadal's likely last year to be a Slam contender will be 2013 (age 27) and this is being generous. That would give him a 9 year window of winning Slams, which is more than McEnroe (7), Wilander (7), Lendl (7), Borg (8] and Edberg (8]. Considering his style of play and early success, a 9 year window of winning Slams would be remarkable.

So keeping that in mind, that leaves him with 15 Slams to work with. He is not going to win 11 out of the next 15 Slams. Even if 4 of those were French Opens, he'd still need at least 7 non French Opens to go with it.

 

[volleynets]

I hope so... for the sake of tennis

Federer is one of the most respected champions of all time. Why would it help the sake of tennis if he had his record beaten???

 

[Spider]

Federer is one of the most respected champions of all time. Why would it help the sake of tennis if he had his record beaten???

Records are meant to be broken. Like for example, if Murray surpasses Federer as far as slam titles are concerned, it will be huge in UK.

 

[Bhagi Katbamna]

If Murray just wins one, it will be a big deal in the UK.

 

[caulcano]

Probably not.
I'd guess at best 4 more at the FO. 2 at Wimbledon. Then one more at the other two.

 

[Rhino]

Nadal's likely last year to be a Slam contender will be 2013 (age 27) and this is being generous. That would give him a 9 year window of winning Slams, which is more than McEnroe (7), Wilander (7), Lendl (7), Borg (8] and Edberg (8]. Considering his style of play and early success, a 9 year window of winning Slams would be remarkable.

So keeping that in mind, that leaves him with 15 Slams to work with. He is not going to win 11 out of the next 15 Slams. Even if 4 of those were French Opens, he'd still need at least 7 non French Opens to go with it.

This pretty much covers it.

 

[Markov]

Federer is one of the most respected champions of all time. Why would it help the sake of tennis if he had his record beaten???

If the record would stand unbeaten for a very long time, that would mean that the level of the top players of the future would be lower than Federer's level. And I want to see tennis get better, not worse But I'm almost certain that nobody's going to beat the record unless the rules of the game are dramatically changed or the number of annual GS tournaments increased...

 

[Totai]

Records are meant to be broken. Like for example, if Murray surpasses Federer as far as slam titles are concerned, it will be huge in UK.

I can't beleive you just said that....made me puke a little thinking of Murray beating Feds slam record

 

[borg number one]

Nadal's likely last year to be a Slam contender will be 2013 (age 27) and this is being generous. That would give him a 9 year window of winning Slams, which is more than McEnroe (7), Wilander (7), Lendl (7), Borg (8] and Edberg (8]. Considering his style of play and early success, a 9 year window of winning Slams would be remarkable.

So keeping that in mind, that leaves him with 15 Slams to work with. He is not going to win 11 out of the next 15 Slams. Even if 4 of those were French Opens, he'd still need at least 7 non French Opens to go with it.

Good analysis. Yet, of course, all of it follows from the assumption as to him not winning any more Slams after 27 and also the assumption that Federer will not decline and keep adding some more. What you say is true though. winning 11/15 will be a tall order by 27, with Nadal turning 24 this Summer near the end of 2004. His slam count so far is much like Borg's was at this age, though Borg had about 9 slams by the age of 24. I think Federer was in the same ball park as Nadal by age 24 (6). He has added about 10 slams after age 24 (age 25-28) I believe (2005).

 

[jackson vile]

Nadal will not beat Agassi's record.

Really? You willing to bet on that?

 

[Rippy]

Records are meant to be broken. Like for example, if Murray surpasses Federer as far as slam titles are concerned, it will be huge in UK.

If Murray won a slam, it would be huge in the UK.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

If Murray won a slam, it would be huge in the UK.

Quoted for truth.

Funny as he is a Scotchman, but I have no doubt that once he wins his first slam, he will be ordered Knight by the Queen herself (as if anybody else could do that.)

 

[pjonesy]

Good analysis. Yet, of course, all of it follows from the assumption as to him not winning any more Slams after 27 and also the assumption that Federer will not decline and keep adding some more. What you say is true though. winning 11/15 will be a tall order by 27, with Nadal turning 24 this Summer near the end of 2004. His slam count so far is much like Borg's was at this age, though Borg had about 9 slams by the age of 24. I think Federer was in the same ball park as Nadal by age 24 (6). He has added about 10 slams after age 24 (age 25-28) I believe (2005).

Should have figured I'd see you around here, Borg. Anyway, I would also have to agree that this pretty much sums it up. Nadal continues to stress his body like nobody else. I'm sure that if he keeps up this style of play, 27yrs old for him would feel more like 33. Do you think that if he significantly reduced his schedule, that he could extend his career? Or, Being the star that he is, will he continue to be heavily committed and play in all the mandatory tournaments plus 1 or 2 others?

 

[ecurb]

Good analysis. Yet, of course, all of it follows from the assumption as to him not winning any more Slams after 27 and also the assumption that Federer will not decline and keep adding some more. What you say is true though. winning 11/15 will be a tall order by 27, with Nadal turning 24 this Summer near the end of 2004. His slam count so far is much like Borg's was at this age, though Borg had about 9 slams by the age of 24. I think Federer was in the same ball park as Nadal by age 24 (6). He has added about 10 slams after age 24 (age 25-28) I believe (2005).

Quoted for truth.

 

[TheLoneWolf]

Quoted for truth.

83ecurb, you got it all backwards.

 

[Santiago]

Maybe Fed getting mono was his ticket to getting the French Open.Rafa beat him at French and Wimbledon and later became No.1 which he would then do everything to try and stay at.He beat Fed at Australian, had a great start to 2009 and then got injured.So his great run took its toll on him physically and opened the door for Fed.But that's what makes Fed great, he took the opportunity.Losing Wimbledon and at Aussie to Rafa would have hurt Roger as he knew that he could keep Rafa away from achieving the career grand slam.But now that he has the french maybe it was all worthwhile.

 

[Cyan]

LMAO. Nadal will be lucky if he retires with 10 slams.... Nobody on tour, except for Fed, looks like they will win 16 or more slams...

 

[Chadwixx]

If Murray won a slam, it would be huge in the UK.

If murray wins his first round it will be huge in the uk. If murray hits an ace it will be huge in the uk. etc

 

[Sentinel]

83ecurb, you got it all backwards.

Total Posts: 387 (73.76 posts per day)

Wow, lone wolf, you sure need some female company at your basement!! Is this not a record, or did someone once crack 100.