Would nadal be the GOAT if he solves the Djokovic enigma?

[dominikk1985]

Of course right now roger is the goat easily. but if nadal would make the adjustment to overcome novak, would he be the GOAT?

You could argue that federer was never really able to dominate nadal. with nadal now it's the same. Novak hands him his ass regularly.
However if he would really solve the puzzle and turns it around against novak you could argue that he would have done what federer was never able to do. To me if nadal overcomes novak and wins about 5 more slams he is the goat even if fed has one or two more majors.

On the other hand if novak continues to dominate him he is of course way out of the GOAT discussion, probably even top5 discussion. So it's absolutely crucial to overcome novak for him. If we have that standard for roger (someone who has a losing record against his main rival can't be GOAT) we need to have the same standard for rafa.

To me it is like that: if rafa doesn't overcome novak (yes the beat the gluten eating baby novak but I'm talking about prime novak here) roger remains the GOAT no matter how his h2h against nadal is. but if nadal is able to overcome the new king he is the GOAT even when fed has a slam or two more than him.

However right now I don't see how nadal should overcome the king. novak is owning him in so many ways that nadal doesn't even know where to start to find a way.

 

[celoft]

No.

During his prime years(2007-2010) he just won 7 slams.

Federer won during his prime years(2004-2007) 11 slams.

Nadal needed to overcome what Federer did during his prime years, that is winning more than 11 slams during the years of Rafa prime(2007-2010), which he didn't.

Bottom line Fed is the GOAT.

 

[CMM]

yes the beat the gluten eating baby novak but I'm talking about prime novak here

:roll: ..............

 

[Sid_Vicious]

Nah, Nadal would have to tie Federer or pass him to be GOAT imo. I think he will pass Federer.

 

[Ben Hadd]

I don't see Fed's record being broken anytime soon. Not by Nadal at least. There is no Djoko solution atm.

 

[Raistlin]

Most importantly if Nadal solves the Djoko problem and Federer solves the Nadal problem, would that make Fed undisputed GOAT? :twisted:

 

[Rippy]

No, he'd need 16 slams.

 

[West Coast Ace]

The only way anyone will take the GOAT from Fed without going to at least 17 would be:

some guy shows up on tour; wins 3 straight calendar Slams to get to 12 (and barely loses any matches, and maybe an undefeated yr) and either retires out of boredom or injury or dies in a plane crash. And even then it won't be unanimous.

And for Nadal - and I know his fans aren't going to like this: if he ever got to 15 (and he won't) - he'd be so nervous/neurotic I don't think he could pull the trigger and win the 16th.

 

[Agassifan]

Fed had a distinct problem with Nadal on slow courts (high spinny ball to 1HBH). The djoker does just about everything better than Nadal on every surface. Apples oranges.

 

[Sartorius]

Not sure Djokovic is an "enigma" for Nadal when he has won against him 16 times. And if the intention is to bring up the Oh-So Important H2H(TM) thing, Nadal actually leads him.

Besides, Nadal and Djokovic are the same age, they are very likely to meet many more times, likely on different surfaces. Would anyone seriously bet on Djokovic winning all those encounters? Maybe he can and he will, but I certainly wouldn't bet on it.

I would even say that Nadal isn't exactly an enigma to Federer, perhaps only on clay, but even that's not really an enigma because Federer knows and has said before that Nadal is better than anyone on clay. The only time Nadal has become something of an enigma to Federer is 2008, when Nadal peaked and Federer slightly dipped. It was about form as much as it was about the match-up.

Nadal's story with Djokovic has been vastly different, including on the technical/match-up side, Djokovic managed to topple him (and more importantly, everyone else) this year but if there's something I would bet on, it would be Nadal beating Djokovic sometime not really far from now.

...

Oh, the GOAT thing?.. Putting that debate aside, in tennis nobody has to beat a certain player to be successful or win a tournament.

 

[FedererBestTennis]

I think the definition of GOAT has been twisted recklessly. Lets get something straight.

GOAT means Greatest of all Time. Not player in the best form right now.

Even if Raffito solved Novak, he would not be GOAT because his accomplishments pale in comparison to Fed's.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Nadal would need to win atleast one Calendar Grand Slam to be the GOAT. After all the real GOAT Rod Laver has won 2 Calendar Slams. What he has to do to surpass Federer is much less but of course Federer is not and never was the GOAT standard in the real World.

 

[RAFA2005RG]

The advantage Nadal has is he's got a 16-12 record over Djokovic. So there will never be an absurd lead for Djokovic in the head2head, if a lead at all. Also, does anyone seriously think Djokovic will win 4 slams per year? The only place Djokovic can meet Nadal is in the FINAL of slams, so if Djokovic loses any of the 4 slams each year then the titles will will more than likely go to Nadal, and if Nadal continues to be a top 2 player for the next 3 years then that's at least 13 slams for Nadal.

 

[Clarky21]

The advantage Nadal has is he's got a 16-12 record over Djokovic. So there will never be an absurd lead for Djokovic in the head2head, if a lead at all. Also, does anyone seriously think Djokovic will win 4 slams per year? The only place Djokovic can meet Nadal is in the FINAL of slams, so if Djokovic loses any of the 4 slams each year then the titles will will more than likely go to Nadal, and if Nadal continues to be a top 2 player for the next 3 years then that's at least 13 slams for Nadal.

Yeah,and Nadal had a 16-7 record over Novak just 4-5 months ago. That's how quickly a h2h can turn around. Look for their h2h to be lopsided in Novak's favor big time when it's all said and done. At this point I don't think Nadal will ever beat Novak again.

 

[Ray Mercer]

Nadal will never beat Djokovic again. If Dodig can handle him Djokovic would feed him a hefty breakfast. Nadal doesn't have the aggressive game. His strategy of waiting out errors is not effective against Djokovic.

 

[RAFA2005RG]

Yeah,and Nadal had a 16-7 record over Novak just 4-5 months ago. That's how quickly a h2h can turn around. Look for their h2h to be lopsided in Novak's favor big time when it's all said and done. At this point I don't think Nadal will ever beat Novak again.

Okay, I'll look for that lopsided h2h and I'll quote you on this post no problem at all there

 

[Talker]

Nadal would need to win atleast one Calendar Grand Slam to be the GOAT. After all the real GOAT Rod Laver has won 2 Calendar Slams. What he has to do to surpass Federer is much less but of course Federer is not and never was the GOAT standard in the real World.

Calendar slams are hard to get but it's still is just a streak lasting less than a year.

So even if Nadal would have one it wouldn't make him GOAT but would help as he would have had a very dominant year, he doesn't have one that matches Fed's top 3-4 as of now.

 

[Towser83]

It can't really be compared.

One, Nadal still does have a winning H2H against Novak.

secondly, for Nadal to overcome Djokovic, what does he have to do, beat him once, beat him twice, win every match they play?

thirdly, Nadal is only a year older than Djokovic so he has time to overcome him. Federer is 5 years older than Rafa so after a while he was only going to get worse while Nadal got better.

You can go back to the end of 2007 where the H2H was quite close 8-6 to Nadal. they had played 7 matches on clay, 5 on hardcourt and 2 on grass, so it was about as evenly spread as it ever would be while also having a decent amount of matches. You could say 7 of the meetings were on surfaces favouring Nadal and 7 favouring Federer and there was a 2 match gap, which is only a one match swing (so say Federer won the match points in Rome 2006, they would have been on 7-7 with a pretty fair balance of suraces. That's all that seperated them - literally one point could have made them even in H2H)

Now beginning in 2008, Federer loses 5 matches in a row and I think 9 of the next 11 meetings. Nadal was getting better but Federer was getting worse, and being older than Nadal by 5 years you can't expect anything else. To have kept a decent H2H, Federer needed to dominate Nadal in the early years, but that wouldn't have been possible even if he won every meeting on Hardcourt and grass. At the end of 2007 it would have only been 8-6 to Federer if he had won all HC matches they played.

With Nadal though, he is only a year older than Djokovic so he should decline only a bit quicker than Novak. Last year Nadal was in his prime and is reaching a lot of finals this season and mainly getting beaten by Djokovic playing his best, so nadal is pretty much in his prime too. If he started to really go down hill then he's in real trouble, but it's likely he won't play Novak much more if that's the case. However Novak doesn't have an youth advantage over him, so the fact he is losing is down to Djokovic becoming a better overall player than Nadal. Nadal is not handicapped by advancing years so he has a fair chance to combat Novak over the next few years, unlike Federer who was getting older as Nadal moved towards his peak.

 

[RAFA2005RG]

Calendar slams are hard to get but it's still is just a streak lasting less than a year.

So even if Nadal would have one it wouldn't make him GOAT but would help as he would have had a very dominant year, he doesn't have one that matches Fed's top 3-4 as of now.

Actually Nadal is the only player for over 40 years to win Roland Garros, Wimbledon and US Open in the same calendar year, and the only player to ever do it on 3 different surfaces.

 

[Talker]

Actually Nadal is the only player for over 40 years to win Roland Garros, Wimbledon and US Open in the same calendar year, and the only player to ever do it on 3 different surfaces.

That's a great accomplishment no doubt and will count some on his resume.

 

[Posture Guy]

I think Nadal has the opportunity to do it, but his health is a huge issue. The guy has constant nagging injuries, some that are public, some that aren't. If he doesn't resolve them, I don't think he'll pass Federer.

but if he got and stayed healthy I think he would have a legit chance.

 

[Crisstti]

I don't agree with the concept of GOAT,but for the sake of the argument...

Of course right now roger is the goat easily.

If we have that standard for roger (someone who has a losing record against his main rival can't be GOAT) we need to have the same standard for rafa.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you said here, but I don't see how you're applying the same standard for Roger and Rafa if you say that Roger is the GOAT despite his losing record against his main rival, but Rafa couldn't be if he has a losing record against Novak.

No.

During his prime years(2007-2010) he just won 7 slams.

Federer won during his prime years(2004-2007) 11 slams.

Nadal needed to overcome what Federer did during his prime years, that is winning more than 11 slams during the years of Rafa prime(2007-2010), which he didn't.

Bottom line Fed is the GOAT.

So if Rafa wins 16+ slams he still wouldn't be GOAT because he wouldn't have won them in his prime?. That doesn't make any sense. At all.

Fed had a distinct problem with Nadal on slow courts (high spinny ball to 1HBH). The djoker does just about everything better than Nadal on every surface. Apples oranges.

I think you forget that since 2008 Rafa began to beat Roger (more often than not) on all surfaces. And he was beating him more often than not for that matter way before his prime.

 

[RAFA2005RG]

That's a great accomplishment no doubt and will count some on his resume.

Yep and in 2010 in addition to the RG, Wim, USO he also won 3 straight Masters shields and made the final of World Tour Finals.

 

[Clarky21]

Okay, I'll look for that lopsided h2h and I'll quote you on this post no problem at all there

Go ahead. You'll be bitterly disappointed when the h2h is obscenely lopsided in Novak's favor,so quote away.

 

[Towser83]

Nadal would need to win atleast one Calendar Grand Slam to be the GOAT. After all the real GOAT Rod Laver has won 2 Calendar Slams. What he has to do to surpass Federer is much less but of course Federer is not and never was the GOAT standard in the real World.

Comparisons are pointless. Laver MAY be the GOAT, but then he never won any majors on hardcourt. How do we know that his grand slams wouldn't have been wrecked by playing on a 3rd surface? Equally if the majors were today played on two surfaces and those two were hardcourt and grass, Federer would have 2 or 3 calendar grand slams.

Laver might be the overall best player in history, but I'd say in the open era Federer is the best. Laver did win a grand slam in the open era, but winning 4 in a row doesn't make you the best, just like Novak won't be the Goat if he wins all 4 next year. What makes Laver possibly the best is all he did as an amateur as well. Hence narrowing it to open era he is not the best. The reason why I say this is because it's impossible to say who really is the best, so breaking it down to open era achievements at least makes it easier to make a definite claim. So Federer GOAT of open era, but I wouldn't say GGOAT (Greatest GOAT of all time) :lol: which is probably laver.

 

[West Coast Ace]

Comparisons are pointless. Laver MAY be the GOAT, ...

Great post. As much as I respect Laver's achievements - and sacrifice so the players today can make so much money - there are some things that have to be addressed when reviewing his major wins. The 'amateur Slam' is watered down because a lot of the top players had gone pro, limiting the fields he had to beat. The surface commonality is a big issue too.

 

[RAFA2005RG]

GOAT is the most meaningless title/achievement, because it is impossible to prove. That makes an awful lot of wasted posts by fans (on something that doesn't exist and can never be proven) :lol:

 

[Talker]

Yep and in 2010 in addition to the RG, Wim, USO he also won 3 straight Masters shields and made the final of World Tour Finals.

A very good year, I wonder how it would be rated in the open ERA?

I don't think Nadal is done yet, he played great this year and only Djokovic is stopping him from having another top year.

Nadal has only one problem so solving the Djokovic riddle is important as far as how he'll stand when his career is done. It's not quite at that point yet but getting there.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

Would nadal be the GOAT if he solves the Djokovic enigma?

 

[Talker]

Laver will always be up there, just no way to prove either way.
He did lose six times however in the finals.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

Nadal would need to win atleast one Calendar Grand Slam to be the GOAT. After all the real GOAT Rod Laver has won 2 Calendar Slams. What he has to do to surpass Federer is much less but of course Federer is not and never was the GOAT standard in the real World

Lol. Real World? Good one. That is nothing more than your opinion.

 

[Povl Carstensen]

Yep and in 2010 in addition to the RG, Wim, USO he also won 3 straight Masters shields and made the final of World Tour Finals.

But Nadal has not had enough of these years to get close to Federers record.

 

[West Coast Ace]

GOAT is the most meaningless title/achievement, ... an awful lot of wasted posts...

So why are you commenting multiple times in this thread?

You could make the same claim about 98% of the threads. We like tennis. We like talking tennis. To paraphrase Jimmy Connors, "it's what we do, it's why they come."

Everyone knows it's not a match formula. But it can lead to interesting debates - people bring up things others never considered.

 

[TMF]

If Nadal win 17 slams, he's the goat and no one can dispute it. Even if he has less Wimbledon titles than Fed, I still rank him higher due to 17>16. I know some of you like NadalAgassi and Thundervolley will disagree since they believe Wimbledon is the most important and great champions are judged by Wimbledon way more than other slam events. Therefore they will still have Fed>Nadal.

If Nadal can only tie Fed's 16 slams, he needs to able to match Roger's many incredible stats, or have something that is comparable to Roger.. Such stats include 23 slam finals, 237 straightwks at #1, win 3 slams per year and reached all 4 slam event in one calendar year in 3 occasions, 5 WTF. Atleast 5 finals in all 4 slams, 10 straight slam finals. This is just to name a few. Nadal has to do somehing incredible to catch Roger besides match Roger's 16 slams.

 

[celoft]

So if Rafa wins 16+ slams he still wouldn't be GOAT because he wouldn't have won them in his prime?. That doesn't make any sense. At all.

Nadal is 25 which is oldish for a grinder with his style to win 6 or more slams from now on. Don't see him winning more than 12 or 13 tops. For him to win 16 or more he had to win more slams during his prime years, when slams were easier for him to win without Nole 2.0 dominating. 2009 was a wasted year of his prime, for example.... He only won 1 slam instead of 3 like he did in 2010... Also despite 2008 being his best year he only won 2 slams instead of 3... 2008 and 2009 were years where he was at his best ever and still he didn't win 3 slams in either year. Now with Nole 2.0, slams will be very hard to win for him.

 

[RAFA2005RG]

But Nadal has not had enough of these years to get close to Federers record.

But he's ahead of Federer in slams won by the same age. Nadal also has the career grand slam which Federer didn't have at the same age, and far more masters titles (more than Federer currently has even!). Do you really expect someone at age 25 to have anything close to 16 slams?

 

[Clarky21]

But he's ahead of Federer in slams won by the same age. Nadal also has the career grand slam which Federer didn't have at the same age, and far more masters titles (more than Federer currently has even!). Do you really expect someone at age 25 to have anything close to 16 slams?

Come on,dude. Do you really believe this? Nadal was never going to get to 16 slams,and probably overachieved to get to 10. The idea of him winning 6 more slams just to tie Roger is never going to happen in a million years. He is done,spent,finished,used up...come to terms with it and you will be much better off.

 

[Raistlin]

But he's ahead of Federer in slams won by the same age. Nadal also has the career grand slam which Federer didn't have at the same age, and far more masters titles (more than Federer currently has even!). Do you really expect someone at age 25 to have anything close to 16 slams?

Six more french open titles is a possibility but....I doubt it

 

[RAFA2005RG]

Come on,dude. Do you really believe this? Nadal was never going to get to 16 slams,and probably overachieved to get to 10. The idea of him winning 6 more slams just to tie Roger is never going to happen in a million years. He is done,spent,finished,used up...come to terms with it and you will be much better off.

LOL, Nadal last year won 3 slams. And this year he's won a slam and been in 2 of the 3 slams finals and was injured in the other (the AO which he had won 12 sets in a row in before the injury). So knowing that Nadal may be winning 3 slams next year, you really want to doubt he'll get 16 slams?

 

[Ray Mercer]

LOL, Nadal last year won 3 slams. And this year he's been in 2 of the 3 slams finals and was injured in the other. So knowing that Nadal may be winning 3 slams next year, you really want to doubt he'll get 16 slams?

The only reason why he won a slam this year because he didnt play Djoker. He was lucky. He isn't going to get lucky 7 more times.

 

[RAFA2005RG]

Six more french open titles is a possibility but....I doubt it

Yeah because he's a claycourt specialist, right? Because we are in 2006, yeah?

 

[RAFA2005RG]

The only reason why he won a slam this year because he didnt play Djoker. He was lucky. He isn't going to get lucky 7 more times.

Yeah such a pity Djokovic is still getting owned by a 29-30-year-old in slams. That really bodes well for Djokovic winning every slam....

 

[NadalAgassi]

Just winning the most slams is not the only criteria for being GOAT. It is just made so on this forum by the ****s since this is Federer Palace. However an example of this is Margaret Court who has the most womens slams with 24 but who very few believes is the GOAT. Another is Roy Emerson who won 12 and absolutely nobody believed is the GOAT.

Of course if Nadal reached 16 slams, heck even 14-15, he would be clearly ahead of Federer who is his b1tch over the years, who will have far fewer Masters titles, who doesnt have as complete a career, etc...However being superior to Federer doesnt neccessarily make you the GOAT. Whether Nadal would do enough to be superior to Laver, Sampras, and Borg if he reached 16 would depend on alot of other factors.

 

[Ray Mercer]

Just winning the most slams is not the only criteria for being GOAT. It is just made so on this forum by the ****s since this is Federer Palace. However an example of this is Margaret Court who has the most womens slams with 24 but who very few believes is the GOAT. Another is Roy Emerson who won 12 and absolutely nobody believed is the GOAT.

Of course if Nadal reached 16 slams, heck even 14-15, he would be clearly ahead of Federer who is his b1tch over the years, who will have far fewer Masters titles, who doesnt have as complete a career, etc...However being superior to Federer doesnt neccessarily make you the GOAT. Whether Nadal would do enough to be superior to Laver, Sampras, and Borg if he reached 16 would depend on alot of other factors.

Hey bud how does it feel to see your you boy getting owned time and time again by Djokovic? It's time for you to jump aboard the Djokovic bandwagon. Your hero is done.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Djokovic is one of my favorite players too and I am happy for him having a good year. I dont hate on players just because they do well against my favorites. That is the ******* way of things. No need to worry about Nadal who has a slam title already this year and has made the final of almost every event he has entered.

Federer is the one who is long finished and embarassing himself by continuing to play and deluding himself he still has any chance at this point.

 

[RAFA2005RG]

Nadal also has the surface record of 81 wins in a row. And if he wins another 2 Roland Garros titles he overtakes Sampras' record of winning a slam title 7 times, by winning Roland Garros 8 times. And then there's the singles gold medal which Federer doesn't look likely to win. And yes the masters titles which could reach 25-30 by the end of Nadal's career. And the only player to win 3 slams in a calendar year on completely different surfaces (clay, grass, hard). And 102 weeks ranked number one and maybe more to come. Lots of things in Nadal's favor if he reaches 16 slams, certainly enough factors to put him ahead of Federer in history.

 

[Clarky21]

Yeah because he's a claycourt specialist, right? Because we are in 2006, yeah?

Nadal is,and has alway been a clay court specialist. How many of his titles have come off of clay? How many titles has he ever defended off of clay? Now,knowing the answer to those two questions should be enough to tell you he is a tried and true dirt baller,and always will be. Well,at least until Djokovic dethroned him this year that is. Now he will be lucky to win any titles at all with Novak around.


Oh,and Nadal will not win 2 more RG titles because he is done winning slams. You will see when he wins jack all next year.

 

[Ray Mercer]

Nadal also has the surface record of 81 wins in a row. And if he wins another 2 Roland Garros titles he overtakes Sampras' record of winning a slam title 7 times, by winning Roland Garros 8 times. And then there's the singles gold medal which Federer doesn't look likely to win. And yes the masters titles which could reach 25-30 by the end of Nadal's career. And the only player to win 3 slams in a calendar year on completely different surfaces (clay, grass, hard). And 102 weeks ranked number one and maybe more to come. Lots of things in Nadal's favor if he reaches 16 slams, certainly enough factors to put him ahead of Federer in history.

But he isn't going to win 11 slams let alone 16. Right now he can't even beat Dodig let alone Djoker. If thye meet at the US Open I'd be surprised if Nadal was able to muster 6 games from him.

 

[RAFA2005RG]

Nadal is,and has alway been a clay court specialist. How many of his titles have come off of clay? How many titles has he ever defended off of clay? Now,knowing the answer to those two questions should be enough to tell you he is a tried and true dirt baller,and always will be. Well,at least until Djokovic dethroned him this year that is. Now he will be lucky to win any titles at all with Novak around.

LOL 'lucky'. That's a great argument. Djokovic won the 2008 Australian Open and then was never heard of again on the big stage until 2011. Was that 2008 title 'lucky'? Federer just beat Djokovic at Roland Garros this year. Was that 'lucky'? Given that Djokovic has only had one year at the Nadal/Federer level (although it was reliant on Nadal and Federer's level dropping somewhat), is that 'lucky'? :lol:

Nadal won the 2008 Olympics on fast hardcourt, the 2009 Australian Open, 2010 US Open, Indian Wells twice, Canada Masters twice....what the heck more do you want? :lol:

 

[Clarky21]

LOL 'lucky'. That's a great argument. Djokovic won the 2008 Australian Open and then was never heard of again on the big stage until 2011. Was that 2008 title 'lucky'? Federer just beat Djokovic at Roland Garros this year. Was that 'lucky'? Given that Djokovic has only had one year at the Nadal/Federer level (although it was reliant on Nadal and Federer's level dropping somewhat), is that 'lucky'? :lol:

Why didn't you answer the questions? I'll repeat them for you: How many titles has Nadal ever defended off of clay? How many titles has he won off of clay?