Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sports Bar' started by TrippleOG, Sep 8, 2017.
Love watching this guy play, cant wait till Djokovic is back though.
He should beat Anderson
I honestly think he beats canderson even if he is drunk on court
So 16 GS by the age of 31.... 3 roland garros dont seem unlikely within the next 5yrs
Will equate Federer
Meh, not terribly intimate with tennis, but it's become apparent that Nadal is already the GOAT clay player, but Federer is the GOAT.
Nadal has the advantage in their own rivalry, by a significant margin, but only due to his dominance on clay. Federer has the edge elsewhere. Meanwhile, if you take away Nadal's French Open victories, he only has 5 majors outside of them. Meanwhile, you could take away Federer's 8 Wimbledon victories, and he still has 5 a piece at both the US and Australian Opens. Federer also has six Tour victories compared to Nadal's two. Nadal appears unlikely to catch him in Singles career victories, too, considering his 17-year old professional career is only three years younger than Federer's, and he currently trails 73 vs. 93; despite the additional years Nadal is likely to enjoy in reserve for his career.
Seems to me their careers evolved almost in parallel, and Federer has proven himself the greater of the two. Meanwhile, as he nears retirement, when Nadal should enjoy his final years without Federer in his way, we haven't really seen any superstar talents emerge in this era on par with what a young Federer encountered before Nadal arrived (i.e. Sampras), and with which Federer had to contend in those same respective years of his own career in Nadal himself. Unless this German Zverev kid ascends in the next few years, who is there coming up to challenge Nadal? I'm talking about the fact that all five of the top 5 ranked players in the world right now are 30 years or older.
This stuff matters. The lack of any truly great rivals is why Lennox Lewis isn't ranked higher in the HW boxing pantheon; literally something over which he had zero control.
Essentially, I'm saying I don't really care what Nadal is able to do after Federer leaves against the same competition they both played against their entire careers (ex. Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka). I saw both of them measured against this field, their careers almost perfectly synchronized, and Federerer was the greater of the two. So what more do I need to see? What could Nadal possibly achieve or show me against this same competitive field that would change my mind about what I've already witnessed?
If Nadal wants any chance at being remembered as the GOAT, he needs this Zverev kid to become a wunderkind, fast, and then he needs to dominate the kid. He needs to prove himself against greatness than Federer didn't best himself. It also wouldn't hurt if he did the same to Djokovic and Murray, who hopefully continue to maintain top form, and in a more dominant fashion than Federer outperformed these guys while he was around.
Rafa Slam next year = 20 slam wins.
Nadal has had unbelievably bad luck/incredibly great matches he lost at the australian open and 2 years with injuries that reduced his slam count. He'll pass Roger in slam count.
Roger's win over Rafa at this year's Aussie Open was probably the most significant win in their rivalry since Rafa beat him in '08 at Wimbledon, and that gives him some lee-way for now... but Rafa will end up as the GOAT.
I'm fine with Roger being the GOAT tho. Rafa is still my fav player and the most entertaining tennis player to watch ever, IMO.
100% agree, Federer is still cool though but I love Rafa!
What's unfortunate for Federer is that he would be regarded as the greatest clay court player of all time had nadal never showed up. 4 consecutive French open runner up finishes to nadal then winning in 09. Very likely he would have 6+ French opens and close to 30 total majors. Some consider him still the 2nd best clay player ever.
Ultimately it will come down to total majors for GOAT status. Nadal was younger to win his first major and win the grand slam. Federer's early dominance is considered the weakest era. Sampras and Agassis days were done apart from a few majors appearances and the torch was passed in a significant Wimbledon Sampras match in 01 before Federer actually dominated the majors, so young Federer had it easier than young nadal. In a sport like tennis, you have to look at head to head matches when it's so close to determine the GOAT. Nadal being 9-3 against Federer in grand slams will give nadal the edge should they both finish 20-20, which is very possible.
This is the tennis equivalent of a Brazilian fighter not making an excuse.
In the end Nadal is much closer to federer than peopl think
Its just the injuries that play a part, along with the total weeks at #1 which federer has 300+ and nadal 140+ and the atp finals federer 6, nadal 0
Perhaps, but this isn't an argument. I know how limited my knowledge is.
I follow the ATP at least closely enough to know that my opinion of Federer as GOAT is by far more popular amongst tennis gurus and analysts than any opinion to the contrary.
*Edit* Wait, I think I am misreading the intent of what you wrote there (i.e. "won't...").
People make excuses for Nadal's injuries, but then they ignore the fact that this latest major he picked up saw Djokovic, Murray, and Wramrinka on the sidelines.
Injuries are part of the game, and it's a risk that be controlled, partially. Smarter training (including strength and conditioning) and certain playing styles in all sports, not to mention scheduling, are less likely to induce injury. It's an inevitable part of sport. Mike and Mike don't sit around every day wondering what Len Bias could have been if he didn't die, or that Grant Hill very likely would have been a Top 15 player of all time if he didn't bust up his hip, knee, and ankle.
Supposition counts for little to legacy in sport.
Rafa did it again. If this trajectory continues, Rafa could very well eclipse Federer Grand Slam total before Nadal retires (bar injuries). Both are GOATS, but obviously Rafa has the better of Roger most of the time.
You must be confused. Rafa doesn't need supposition now and he will never need it for GOAT contention.
Guy was down for 2 years, came back and won 2 majors this year, in the Final for 3 taking Federer to a 5th set. He might win 3 or 4 next year. He's already AT LEAST the 2nd best ever, like, let's not act like we're projecting some 'could have been' star here, Rafa is all time great if he never plays another point.
They also never look to see who was missing for the major that was won, either. The only time I've ever even heard that is in reference to Roger winning the French without playing Rafa. But still, it doesn't count against him that much, if at all. Like Rafa always says, "tennis is a sport of victories" -- those major wins each count pretty much equally no matter what. Some are highlighted for great matches, but at the end of the day, a slam is a slam.
I didn't contradict that. I merely pointed out that future generations won't concern themselves with the nature of their relative injuries when measuring and deciding on their legacies.
Why? Because we never do.
I think you've got to give it to who whoever ends up winning more GS's between Nadal and Federer, h2h be damned.
Roger has 300+ weeks at #1, dominance matters
i have hated nadal ever since they've been referring to him as "rafa."
He has nothing on federer
There are many factors. But in individual sports like tennis, golf, etc, the single biggest factor is wins at majors IMO. After that would be factors like dominance on all surfaces, longevity, h2h, etc.
If they end up tied in GS's, Id still give the edge to Fed(despite getting wrecked in tge h2h). But if Nadal ends up with more trophies, I think that(combined with being up 23-14) would be enough to earn him title of GOAT, despite the perception that he is merely clay court specialist. But I'm not that into it. Just my .02.
Agree 100%. Seems odd to knock a guy for only being god-like on one surface, and being just excellent on others.
If Rafa has more majors than Fed he's the GOAT no question. Otherwise arguments can be made both ways considering the h2h score.