Fedal Wars: Who’ll Finish Higher Ranked In 2014, Roger Federer Or Rafael Nadal? [Poll]
by Sean Randall | July 24th, 2014, 12:39 pm
  • 196 Comments

With nothing but cement between now and the end of the season, can Roger Federer overcome an 2,085 point deficit and finish 2014 ahead of his rival Rafael Nadal for just the second time this decade on the ATP rankings?

July 21 Race standings:
1 Djokovic, Novak 7,250
2 Nadal, Rafael 6,645
3 Federer, Roger 4,560

Let’s weigh the data.

The case for Federer:
- He’s historically far better on hardcourts than Nadal – Federer has 53 career hardcourt titles to Nadal’s 16.
- Usually plays his best tennis in the fall indoors, at the same time Nadal is burnt out (he leads Nadal 4-1 on indoor hardcourts).
- ATP Finals played indoors in London where he usually does well – Nadal has never won the title.
- Will have extra points to earn from Davis Cup – Spain already lost.
- Nadal has never defended a hardcourt title – he will try defending Canada, Cincinnati and the US Open this summer.
- Has adjusted to the bigger racquet and is working well with Edberg.
- Has won the US Open five times, Nadal twice.
- Already has more Grand Slam wins this year (14) compared to last year (13).
- Good odds he won’t play Tommy Robredo again, and should be seeded high enough to avoid Nadal/Djokovic in quarters.
- More players out there who can beat Nadal (Raonic, Dimitrov, Kyrgios, Wawrinka).
- Is 24-4 this year on hardcourts, Nadal 16-3.
- Is Rafa’s back issue truly behind him?
- Rafa overdue for another knee flare up?
- US Open scheduling often not kind to Nadal.
- There’s no more clay!

The case for Nadal:
- He’s ahead by over 2,000 pts!
- Has made the final at the US Open everytime he’s played this decade winning twice, while Federer hasn’t made reached the final since 2009.
- He 5 years younger than Federer who turns 33 in a few weeks. 33!!
- He should be well-rested after a month off.
- No major knee issues this year.
- Federer overdue for a back flare up like we saw last year.
- Federer hasn’t won a hardcourt summer title in two years (2012 Cincinnati).
- Has 4 titles on the year including Slam compared to Federer’s 2 (Halle, Dubai).
- Has more hardcourt titles since start of last year (5) than Federer (2).
- Has finished ahead of Federer in the rankings 3 of the 4 years this decade, only falling behind Federer in 2012 when he was injured.
- More players out there who can beat Federer (Gulbis, Robredo, Wawrinka).
- Doesn’t have four kids to worry about and a wife.
- 23-10 vs Federer, 9-6 on hardcourts.

Warning: If you don’t want to talk “Fedal”, go somewhere else. In keeping with the cringeworthy spirit of this debate, this is an almost-anything goes thread. Be afraid.


Also Check Out:
Poll: Who’ll Finish 2014 No. 1, Novak Djokovic Or Roger Federer
Fedal Wars: Nadal Well Ahead Of Federer In Masters Titles, But Does It Matter In The GOAT Discussion?
Roger v Rafa Fandom: The Fedal Wars Rage On
Fedal Wars: Agassi Puts Nadal Ahead Of Federer On The GOAT List, Is He Right?
Fedal Wars: In The GOAT Debate, Are Nadal Fans Rooting Against Federer To Win His First Davis Cup?

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get Tennis-X news FREE in your inbox every day

196 Comments for Fedal Wars: Who’ll Finish Higher Ranked In 2014, Roger Federer Or Rafael Nadal? [Poll]

Kimberly Says:

I wonder if Sean is taking meds that cause delusions.


Sean Randall Says:

Kimberly, blame the heat (no not the Miami Heat).


montecarlo Says:

Is this a joke?

Real question should be, who will finish 2014 as Rank No. 1, djokovic or nadal?


van orten Says:

Fed would have passed nadal sometime in 2012 anyways . He won Wimby when rafa played the event but lost (not at 100%) early. Same happened to fed in 2013. And djoker was there in the mix too. So injured or not it is pretty fair to suggest fed would have finished ahead at least a few weeks.

This is great. Look at all the stats the two have produced even in the new decade .sure fed didn’t win many slams but he finished runner up twice and played a lot of hard fought semis where he played on top of his game but lacked taking his chances. Maybe the others just played better it does not matter. He is still there on any given day. Nadal on the other side as long as he can play will win the most of his matches. As long as he stays tenacious and play every point with his trademark intensity he is so hard to beat . Lets face it the best wins are vs nadal djoker and fed. I d put nadal on number one because sometimes it feels that the other 2 present u the win on a silver plate. Not rafa. almost Never. We can be happy fed and rafa cause still so much passion, joy sometimes pain ;) they ll be missed but always remembered. I ll show my kids vids on utube of the best points. Where to start ?!


Hippy Chic Says:

Who cares,i think i would rather have a GS,and be ranked lower,than be ranked higher without a GS,a no brainer i wouldve thought?


Hippy Chic Says:

Nice post Van Orton,giving credit there to both players a refreshing change on this forum from the usual trash talking….


Ben Pronin Says:

The important thing is that Federer is clearly in the driver’s seat.


jonathan Says:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! O-M-G!!!

Fed won USO five times. The last SIX years ago! Nada? Just twice in the last four USOs! Oh those pesky details! Hilarious!

Leads Nadal 4-1 indoors! Hmm, last time I checked with y’all, ranking wasn’t based on h2h. (Aside: Rafa beat Fed in their last indoor meeting and 4-0 on hc last two years!

Never defended a hc title? No, but defending points has nothing to do with year end totals and Nadal certainly doesn’t have to win them outright to stay ahead of Fed. Fed hasn’t won a 1000-level or higher on ANY surface in almost TWO YEARS.

With this ancient yesteryear glory day history-laden analysis, maybe Connors still has a chance!
hahahahaha

Listen, Rafa’s never needed a Fed injury to stay ahead of him. It’s the other way around.

The case for Federer is based on ancient history and holding out for a Nadal injury.

HAHAHAHA

Fed or Rafa in 2014??? Should be Fed or Wawa more likely.

Thanks for the laughs Sean really. You’ve outdone yourself. That was truly priceless.

Comical! ROTLMAO!!!!


Lodhi Says:

Fed can be number 2.

Why is it so hard to believe ya’all ?


jonathan Says:

Sure Lohdi! He can even be number 1 if Nole gets injured too! Who knows? He might become hyper-sensitive to airborne gluten dust or something. Why not? The Fed faithful can all dream in hope, no?

heeheehee!


nadalista Says:

Drivel. Thank goodness I’ve been banned from Tennis-x, sorry, Fed-x blog…………


jonathan Says:

xmike Says:
@ jonathan is that the trick part of the question? or are you considering “big” servers anyone that occasionally pops an ace at over 200 kph?

I don’t want to be accused of talking Fedal on a non-approved blog so I will answer here.

Yes, that’s the trick part as in NEVER.

I meant guys over 6’3″ under 30 with the exception of Dr. Ivo.

Mueller used to serve very hard but he’s too old now. Even Fed’s fastest and average 1st and 2nd serve speeds were all higher than Mueller’s when they met at Wimby.


roy Says:

”He’s historically far better on hardcourts than Nadal – Federer has 53 career hardcourt titles to Nadal’s 16.”

federer has a better HC record but that stat is misleading because federer has PLAYED far more hardcourt events due to age, lack of injury and schedule allowing him to win more titles anyway.

- Usually plays his best tennis in the fall indoors, at the same time Nadal is burnt out (he leads Nadal 4-1 on indoor hardcourts).

yes but two of those were when nadal was what, around 20?

- ATP Finals played indoors in London where he usually does well – Nadal has never won the title.

again, misleading. nadal has missed that event a lot. he’s also made two finals there and 2 SF, better than murray, no?

- Nadal has never defended a hardcourt title – he will try defending Canada, Cincinnati and the US Open this summer.

this means absolutely nothing. i don’t know why people keep using this stat. so if you win indian wells and lose miami final one year but the next year you lose indian wells final but win miami, it proves you’re a bad hardcourt player, right?
just silly. look at his hard court resume and compare it to everyone else.
only federer and djoker have superior resumes. you might make an argument murray can match him depending on what your prioritize.


Ben Pronin Says:

What can you prioritize to say Murray is better than Nadal on hard?


jonathan Says:

Of course it’s not only Nadal being injured that has benefited Fed.

Even this year, the only reason he is No. 3 is because of injuries to Delpo and Murray.


Daniel Says:

Jonathan,

I think this argument of injury doesn’t hold because he is #3 ahead of the other Slam winner of the season in Wawa who won a Masters title also. So he is #3 because he is playing better than last year, having more top 10 wins and more wins overall.

For example, Nadal played 4 tourneys more than Djoko (including 6 on clay – where he is most dominant, compared to Djoko’s 3) and still is behind him in both race and last 52 weeks rank (even holding 2 Slams, still).

Also, although I agree that past 4 years Nadal had more success in HC compared to Federer we still can’t discount some of the old stats. The one regarding never defending a HC title is telling and this year he will have his best shot as he will play 3 tourneys with this possibility, If not here he may very well get it in the beginning of next year in Doha.

I always get the feeling with Nadal that he is build on confidence mostly. In 2010 he was son high and had the new serve. His target was US Open. Last year I think not even him fancy his chances in IW but after that it gave him extra motivation for US hard swing. Once he won that Montreal Semis versus Djoko in third set breaker he went on a row. Had he lost that match it could have changed all his prep for US Open and confidence wise in that particular final and how he rebound third set US Open.

So, to me, if he doesn’t win Montreal nor Cincy can’t see him winning US Open (as it was the case in both 2010 and 2013, he won Canada Masters in both those years). And if he loses to the young guns who are all due for a win against him (Dimi, Raonic and Nishi), it will only make it worst. No harm in losing to Djoko, Murray or Fed on fast hard.


skeezer Says:

Yes Fed has benefitted from winning all those Slams cause of Nadal. ROFL. If it wasn’t for Nadal Fed would be nothing. Hee Ha.

“federer has PLAYED far more hardcourt events due to age, lack of injury and schedule allowing him to win more titles anyway.

And thats Tennis.


Daniel Says:

Ben,

- Nadal has 6 HC Slam finals, 3 wins (2 US and 1 AO) and 3 RU.
- Murray has 5 HC Slam finals, 1 win (US) and 4 RU.

- Nadal has 8 masters on hard 8-7 in finals (4 different: IW, Canada, Cincy and Madrid indoor)
- Murray has 9 Masters on hard 9-3 in finals (5 different: Miami, CIncy, Shangay, Canada and Madrid indoor)

- Nadal has 16 titles on HC percentage: wins/loss 329/92 0.781
- Murray ahs 22 titles on HC percentage: wins/loss 304/87 0.777


Tennis lover Says:

Guys have a good luck having a popcorn with weekend blockbuster..the blockbuster is Nadal ain’t gonna win US OPEN 2014..


Daniel Says:

Btw,

Apart from last year where Nadal won 3 HC titles, he only had 1 other win in Canada in 2010 this decade, so he won 4 HC Masters in the last 4 and a half years while Federer had won guess how many? 4, exactly the same amount and is tied with Nadal in titles finals as well, both at 4-3 on HC masters.

The problem for Fed is that last 3 finals he played on Masters he lost, to Wawa, Djoko and Nadal (the other 3 members of current top 4).

So this sense that Nadal is infinite superior to Fed in HC Maters this decade is not true. Of course, the trend for Fed is to lose more and Nadal to win more (but a maybe), as Fed can maybe win Cincy and a few others. Bet none of you Nadal fans were thinking Fed could be in another MC final and this year he was a few games away from winning there. if in Nadal’s clay dominance.

So you can mock all you want but if he is #3 he has as good of a shot as most apart form Djoko and Nadal who would be favorites against him.


Patson Says:

US Open 2014: Nole

Nole is about to get into that 2011 mode – the beast mode.

The rest of the field can decide who is going to be 2, 3, 4, 5 …. because Nole is going to stay #1 for a while now. :-D


metan Says:

What a joke by Sean, but it is OK as long as not Jinx. Hahahahah! We all know how the story begins.


Hippy Chic Says:

Patson if you were to believe Jamie then? ATM hes saying Stan or Roger will win the USO this year,not Novak,not Rafa sorry,im guessing that prediction will most probably change a gazillion times between now and then though,so fear not it will probably be Novak by the time the USO gets here,if that sort of thing floats your boat….


Hippy Chic Says:

I dont know why Daniel says due a win,surely you dont get what your due,you get what you earn,due a win over Nadal,then i suppose if we all use that logic then they are due a win over any of the top players why single out just Nadal on that theory??anyway i never bet against Federer winning another MS or another GS for that matter,so please dont put words into peoples mouths,and as for the ranking i doubt either would really care titles are what they really want especially GS….


Giles Says:

Daniel. So, according to your theory if Rafa doesn’t win Canada or Cincy you can’t see him winning USO. How so? I remember posters berating Rafa’s CC season this year and especially his loss in the Rome final, which tourney was supposed to be the yardstick leading up to the FO, and look what happened! Rafa won his 9th FO. Maybe he won’t win any of the HC lead-ups to the USO and maybe he will but USO is a GS where he will give his all.
Vamos Rafa!
Stay healthy!


jonathan Says:

Giles, same old same old tired wishful analysis from the Fed hopeful that Rafa will never win.

Nothing new.

If their self serving prognostications were accurate, Rafa would never have won anything off clay in his career and not even the French Open after 2009.

Oh, and of course he’d be retired by now because of his “unforgiving” and “wrong” style of playing tennis (i.e., beating Fed).

Hilarious!


metan Says:

Don’t worry all RAFA fans, Rafa has his own way to do the surprise. Hehehehe. And I said FIFTEEN IS COMING SOON.

VAMOS RAFA!!!


jonathan Says:

Incidentally, according to Fed himself, Nole played the wrong style when he came back from match points down at the 2011 USO:

“To lose against someone like that, it’s very disappointing, because you feel like he was mentally out of it already. Just gets the lucky shot at the end, and off you go… Look, some players grow up and play like that. I never played that way. I believe in hard work’s gonna pay off kinda thing”

And again when he lost to Murray in Dubai:

“He’s going to have to grind very hard for the next few years if he keeps playing this way. He tends to wait a lot for the mistake of the opponent.”

However, when he wins, he’s often quick to point out how well his opponent played.

So, on some level I suppose, you can’t really blame his fans for doing the same now, can you?


skeezer Says:

@giles
This is flatly not true. I had mentioned back then that regardless of rafa’s unusual bad cc record this year, it would all be washed away if he won RG, which in fact he did.
That said, Daniel is not “off” in his analysis imo, this is not Clay, its HC.

Sean,
You need to start a separate topic other the Fedal wars, call it “pick a fight with Fed fans”.


jonathan Says:

That’s funny.

And here all along I thought it should be called “pick a fight with Kool-Aid drinkers.”

Oh well.


skeezer Says:

^awwww..your feelings hurt? Show me on this thread where it should br called “pick a fight with Kool-Aid drinkers.” And then lets talk about you.
Oh well.


Humble Rafa Says:

The real tennis season is over and Humble King is already coronated. What’s the point?


RZ Says:

I think Fed will close the gap but I can’t see him passing Rafa. He probably would have to win the US Open and the year-end championships to do that – a hard ask.


Ben Pronin Says:

Daniel, Nadal did not win Canada in 2010. He went into the US Open with no summer hard court titles. Still won.

I also know the stats between Murray and Nadal and I’ll still take Nadal.


skeezer Says:

Rafa should have a better HC season than Fed.
Fed will be 34.
Rafa is 28, in his prime. Rafa has not complained about any niggles or excuses leading up to the season. So, no excuses, yes?


Giles Says:

Fed will be 33 not 34!!!
Geez! His fans don’t even know his age!
All they know is 17!!!


SG1 Says:

Fed and Rafa win more than 0.5 slams per life year. Damned impressive.


Hippy Chic Says:

SG1 exactly,no wonder the fans gets so passionate about their favorites,Feds been the best player of the last decade winning the most GS,Rafas been the best player this decade winning the most GS,i very much doubt anyone will ever surpass any of the records Federer has like the QTF final streak etc,or Rafa winning a GS nine times,or a GS for 10 consecutive years,both are such amazing players,and tennis is all the better for it IMO….


jonathan Says:

hahaha yes skeezer, actually I’m quite devastated. Thanks for caring!

But why cherry pick “on this thread” when we could open the selection to 99% of your posts everywhere.

However I’ll play along. Here’s one that satisfies both criteria:

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2014-07-24/16467.php#comment-559318

BTW, yes, Nadal will easily have a better HC season than Fed. Like he’s had so far this year already and two of the three years before that.

Besides, Rafa’s won the last four hc meetings vs Fed (see? I even left out clay just for you) with Rafa taking 8 of 9 sets played.

shammon indeed!


Daniel Says:

That is correct Ben, now I am scratching my head where did I Read he won Canada 2010..

So in this case I have to remove 1 more HC Masters from his total in the Murray comparison.

I am with you, I still take Nadal over Murray on HC, but is not a big difference results wise and if Murray wins a few more HC Slams he could surpass him.

Giles , my point is because Nadal is built on confidence (in my view). Last years he had another Wimby loss but rebound pretty fast and in 2010 he had just won Wimby and RG regardless if he lost both Masters Pre US Open and was at the maximum peak of his career. NOs is 4 years later he is defending champion with another poor Wimby so I sense he need a big win in one of to masters otherwise he can doubt himself, and once there his chances can decrease, specially against Novak. Any other Djoko loss on HC could be worst for his chances.

I know, he just beat Djoko in RG final after losing in Rome final (where most – me included thought Djoko would be the favorite), but that was clay, his domain. We learn our lesson for good. Until he loses in RG, he is favorite to win every match he plays, period!


Daniel Says:

HC,

The “due” win happened to Federer as well, happens to every player who dominates certain HxH, kind of we got the sense eventually (law of averages) they will lose to players they dominate. I am still waiting Fed losing to Ferrer any day or to Raonic…Similar to Roddick getting that win after so many losses., or Hewitt last year. Some may never get this ‘due’ win but some will, and we can only wait or speculate who will get it first.

With Nadal is similar, some are knocking on the door and even a Berdych win on HC wouldn’t surprise me (although this seems to be the safest bet in tennis nowadays). But I think Raonic gets a win against him in near future, prior to Dimitrov, and with Federer as well.


Doug Says:

I would suggest retracting this article since it is factually and conceptually incorrect. The numbers are wrong and concept of rankings/standings are wrong (switched). Nadal is actually over 6,000 points ahead of Federer in the rankings: 1. Djokovic 13,130, 2.Nadal 12,670, 3.Federer 6,070. The author mistakenly thought the race to the ATP Tour Finals (London) is the ranking.


Hippy Chic Says:

Daniel fair enough,but you left out Novak in your list of players that he can also loose to on their day,Nadal lost some matches against players on his best surface,whos to say that by the same logic the same thing wont also happen to Novak?and i know you didnt mention Novak,and the only reason i brought him up was because this is the HC season coming up and his best part of the season,and BTW Nadals made the finals of the WTFs twice,and Miami masters 3/4 times?and has a losing H2H against Daveydenko,does that mean hes due/deserves to win all of those?


Daniel Says:

Mimai he is due for a win because is the slowest HC and he made a lot of finals but eventually lost to the two best HC players than him: Fed and Djoko and Davydenko who dominates him on hard courts so he was always facing simeone better. For exmaple Djpko is due for a Cincinati title 0-4 in finals. Nadal on the other hand never made a final and last year he won it in his first attempt. See the difference, when he got to play Raonic and Isner back to back in masters finals. Hewas kind of lucky but it happens to all of them. Djolovic have coutnless matches in that 42 match winnign straek where he could get beaten by several different playedprs but some luck help him there as it was with those Fed semis in US 10-11.

WTF nadal had the same Miami problem, face Fed and Djoko in his two finals, players who have 6 and 3 (and Djoko could have a few more WTF as well) and he didn’t play enough (only 6 times although qualifying 9. Sometimes there is just a tourney they just can’t win.


Hippy Chic Says:

You contradicted yourself there then,sometimes theres a tourney you just cant win?well exactly then in that case how on earth can you be due a win in this tourney or that tourney,it really doesnt make any sense what your saying,but maybe im missing something here,but it wouldnt be the first time though lol?


Hippy Chic Says:

And i dont believe luck has anything to do with these things,you make your own luck in this world,if its meant to happen it will,if not then it wont?but i certainly wont spend my days tying myself up in knots worrying about what couldve been?


Hippy Chic Says:

Funny how some people win because they are getting what they are supposedly due/deserve,and others win and we yet again bring in the word luck?


skeezer Says:

Ms jonathan,
Sorry, that doesn’t qualify. Now start re reading your comments on this thread and prove it wrong. You’re still trying to pick a fight, I’m not biting.
Hee heee.

Giles,
My typo, 33 next month, not 34.


jonathan Says:

I did and it counts plenty just like 10-23 counts which is your whole raison d’etre here in addition to the plethora of kool aid fed fanboy laden attacks from you on almost every other thread you comment.

You’re not biting? Hahahahahahaha! You just did!


marta Says:

Error! Nadal is the one who had 13 Grand Slams

last year and now had 14 Grand Slams. Federer has

17 Grand Slams. If you are writing an article

about it at least give the correct information.

Thank you.


Daniel Says:

HC,

I am not contradicting myself. In a perfect world Djoko would have Cincy, Nadal Miami, Fed Monte Carlo, Murray an AO, Rosdick a Wimbledon on so on. When I mean due, is the sense that some results and tendency of particular tourneys and some players preferences seems to point out they are in for a win any tiem soon. Similar to these young guns almost getting that big win over a big name. What Hapepned to DelPo a few years back: he was 0-4 or 0-5 agaisnf all of Fed, Nadal, Murray and Djoko but he was ‘due’ for a win against them and eventually he got his wins against all of them. Is similar to these young guys, they are due for some big wins and we saw a few this year already. Dimi versus Murray, Gulbis over Fed in RG.

Regaridng luck then we agree to disagree. Because I can use luck as one of the variables to ju stify why Nadal doesn’t have Miami, Djoko Cincy and Fed MC and Murray AO you have to think of luck and not see only it. But think as a part of it. Just to explain some odd statistics. It’s a grey area not 8 or 80.


Hippy Chic Says:

Daniel OK then well i think Murray is due/deserves to get back into the winners circle and want him to win the USO,and i think Nadal is due to win the WTF and Miami,and so i want him to win those,and some of those younglings are due/deserve a win over Novak too,damn shame then that we dont all get what we are supposedly due/deserve in this world,JMO for all its worth….


Hippy Chic Says:

IMO The word lucky is such a slap in the face,dressed up to sound like a compliment when really its an insult,he won because this?he won because that?its implying your win was down to the other players misfortune or bad luck(sigh),its like saying from one fan to another your happy but you really have no right to be,as its like an astericks against the win?


madmax Says:

jonathan Says:
Of course it’s not only Nadal being injured that has benefited Fed.

Even this year, the only reason he is No. 3 is because of injuries to Delpo and Murray.

July 24th, 2014 at 3:00 pm

jonathan, perhaps you should just chill a bit. For anyone to say that Feds achievements are based on others’ injuries need to be taken out into the light, fresh air for some clarity.

How about Fed’s sheer, pure genius? Think about it.

Kep working hard Fed, and the rewards will come to you.


madmax Says:

I guess Rafa was injured in every match he played and therefore the opponents who beat him just suck at tennis anyway?


Polo Says:

We all know that people who denigrate another’s accomplishments by citing excuses and contrived scenarios are just sourgrapes. They know that and what makes them even more sour is that no amount of derogatory comment can change what is a fact. I can only smile when I read such sourgrapes because I know it only reflects their self pity.


Hippy Chic Says:

Polo exactly well said….


jonathan Says:

A bit melodramatic from the fedfans re my comments.

Nowhere did I say Fed isn’t a great player. Twisting my words is a sad argument.

As is calling me Mrs. Hard to discuss tennis when a great debate like questioning my masculinity comes into play. Sheer brilliance. Didn’t know I was dealing with 12 yr olds.

Fact is, Fed’s probably the second best player of all time. Please show me where I’ve said otherwise.

Hilarious. Just have to let out a bit more line.


skeezer Says:

^you make our own melodrama….


Polo Says:

^^ and that’s how to give a veiled apology.


Polo Says:

oops, my comment was for that preceding skeezer’s.


Sirius Says:

These fedal wars seem stupid when you see real war going on Gaza. Thousands of innocents killed without any valid reason. We live in a cruel world


Steve 27 Says:

Rafael Nadal still has a shot to recover number 1 in Paris Bercy or in the Masters in London. Hope Djokovic miss the Asian swing to stay at home with his wife and his child, then the odds to recover the number 1 will be archievable. But I prefer to win the US Open and end number 3 than be the best without majors. Btw, Fed will be number 4, behind Wawrinka.
Vamos!


jonathan Says:

Apology? Waaaay off.

Got a few nibbles though!

My points stand uncontested save a few desperate insults.

Shammon fishy fishy.


Polo Says:

Jonathan, you point is “uncontested” as you claim, and the reason is, it is not be a good idea to contest because it is rooted on an erroneous premise. To argue with you is tantamount to validating your erroneous assumptions.


jonathan Says:

So personal insult is the correct course of action according to you. Duly noted.


skeezer Says:

I don’t see the need to “expect” anything from Fed. He is not in his prime, although still he was just in a GS final.
Rafa, on the other hand, age wise, is in his. Fed has already set the standard for all other players to reach, with 17 Grand Slams. Hope Fed does well this year and continues, but if it does turn out to be a disappointing year for him………..SO?
The pressure is on Rafa to excel this year, no doubt. And just recently losing to another 100+ ranked player in a Slam, in his prime, is not something to toot about.

Talking all this repeated nonsense about how Rafa has beaten Fed is not going to change the Slam count. But winning Slams will, not losing early in them.


judee Says:

@Sirius great post agree with everything you said


jonathan Says:

Hook. Line. Sinker.

So easy.

10-23.


skeezer Says:

Last time I checked 10-23 doesn’t = 17. It seems you want to just create your own numbers. Fine, you have have right to your own opinion. Good luck with that.


jonathan Says:

Mine.
Agassi’s.
McEnroe’s.
Djokovic’s.
Murray’s.

Why don’t Agassi think 17 be the be all end all yo?


jonathan Says:

Guess they be making up their own numbers too.

Say whaaaaaaat????


skeezer Says:

Hook. Line. Sinker.

So easy.

17.


jonathan Says:

I’m a ventriloquist and skeezer’s my…

So many options.

That was fun. Lets do this again real soon.

Woot woot!!


skeezer Says:

All the guys mentioned here have recorded different opinions at different times. Know who is the past GOAT who has never wavered? Whooops, you don’t know tennis history apparently. Study…study…play…and study more. Internet doesn’t have all your credo…
Am confidant when Feds career is over the greats of today and yesterday will crown the Fed the GOAT of all eras. Talk all you want, the records will not change. His records will stand for a very long time. Rafa? He will be recognized as the greatest # 2 in Feds era and the GOAT of Clay. End of story. His stats will always tell the clear story of his undeniable all time greatness.

Sean…are personal insults allowed? Not the last time I checked the guidelines.


jonathan Says:

Actually, Muzza and Nole have been consistent whereas Mac and Agassi currently have Rafa as GOAT which makes perfect sense as it took him a few years to pass the former GOAT.

Same as fed wasn’t always goat before Rafa. Hope this helps.

Ooooooh there’s that pesky devil in the details again.

Man, the fish sure are biting tonight. Just gotta know what bait to use.

This one is too small so I’ll have to throw it back.

Oh well.


Michael Says:

It is remarkable that at this advanced age not amenable to excellence, Roger is still lurking around like a collosus sweeping all before them and leaving behind them. He is still threatening the position of the two best players today namely Novak and Rafa and this definitely goes to show the greatness of Roger and his incredulous domination of the sport all these years. Ofcourse, he is not winning majors anymore, but still he is always in the reckoning in the top ranking and that is something quite extraordinary and in a way unprecedented. Compare Roger to any other player who all faded away in their old age – namely Sampras, Agassi, Mcenroe, Becker, Edberg, Lendl etc., and apparently Roger would be a Knight in shining armour. Now coming to the current year, I do not know whether Roger will overtake Rafa, but it is definitely plausible considering that Rafa has to defend a lot of points from hereon and that is going to be an onerous task. And to imagine Roger becoming No.2 in this supposedly toughest era in Tennis only goes to bust the myth of Roger dominating an erstwhile weak era and relatively unimpressive in a stronger era. Not only Roger, the young guns today are finding it difficult against all veterans. Just imagine a veteran like Stepanek who was not even in the reckoning for the top slot in his young years demolishing Andy at the Queens and giving a nightmare to Novak at Wimbledon. Even if Roger doesn’t overtake Rafa in the coming days, I think he has already done enough to embellish his credentials.


jonathan Says:

Funny how when they change their minds it’s always in favour of Rafa. That’s the natural order of things.

Even the great Pete Sampras gave it up to call Fed the GOAT but now he’s not so sure saying Rafa has an argument with the 23-10 being a serious factor.

Like the others, Pete will eventually switch to Rafa.

It’s revolution Baby.


skeezer Says:

@michael.
Word.
@ms jonothan,
show the facts and factual links, not your propoganda. Also, you’re so stalkng me in responses. Although the admiration is nice, the idiocy is not. Lay off already.
Your biting your own bait.


Michael Says:

Jonathan,

At present Roger is the most successful player in Tennis. You say, what if Rafa overtakes him ? Well that is for the future which is highly uncertain ? Have you seen the fate of players like Soderling, Del Potro etc. So, in Tennis, nothing is certain. We can only debate with what is on table. Ofcourse I have never ever denied that Rafa is a phenomenal player and is certainly in the legion of Greats with all his accomplishments. But there is no point in pondering on who is the GOAT ? That doesn’t merit a discussion today at all when Rafa is lagging and has still some years of good Tennis left in him. Let us see what he has to offer and then debate on it.


mem Says:

I don’t care who the GOAT is, the GOAT can be sean randall for all I care. I prefer to wait and let the history books speak when the time comes. as long as the BULL beats the GOAT more than the GOAT beats the BULL, everything is cool with me!


Hippy Chicl Says:

Michael you nailed it,Rogers been the most consistent player throughout his whole career,and Rafas been the most consistent player this new decade,since 2010 Rafas won more GS than any other player,i believe he was the second best player of the last decade,although people will correct me there if im wrong?anyway Roger has some amazing records that i doubt will ever be passed too many to mention,and Rafa winning a GS for 10 years,and 9 at the same GS,IMO its unlikely those records will ever be surpassed,both have achieved amazing things in tennis,we should give both the credit they deserve….


Margot Says:

@skeeze
Could you please stop addressing Jonathon as “Ms.”
Are you implying that because “he” is obviously a “she,” then her arguments are worthless? Well that seems very sexist to me or
2) are you implying that all Nadal fans are women? I’m sure that, while the majority may well be, though I’m not sure that numbers of followers on facebook is an accurate gauge, I’m fairly sure that ALL Rafa’s fans are not women. So it is a wrong assumption.
Of course if it were merely a slip of the keyboard, I apologise.


Hamza Says:

Fed’s always been much , shall we say, fluent in his stroke play. Combine that with the amount of success he’s had, and you have a guy who quite alot of people would like. Elegant in his stroke play, very smooth in his shot making. Sort of like Mark Waugh, an Australian cricketer who was elegance personified.

Even if Rafa doesn’t catch up to 17, historians may consider Fed the greatest simply because of his records. But for me , Nadal would just edge Fed out in terms of true grit and the ability to overcome obstacles. After 2011, I truly thought Nole would be his life-long kryptonite. He is Rafa’s nemesis, but not his kryptonite. It takes great amount of hard work and a big heart to overcome 7 losses in a row out of which 3 were major finals. There are some things that are just not measurable.

Besides, I’m a much bigger fan of the gladiatorial aspect of tennis rather than it’s ballet-like grace. But that’s just me. If you are a Gladiator and Rocky Balboa fan, chances are you are a candidate of being a Nadal fan.

Fed’s a legend, no disputing that.


jonathan Says:

Because goat is subjective (as is success for that matter) not everyone agrees but over time more and more players including the ones listed are coming to the same choice as Rafa continues to add to his legacy further distancing himself from the former goat.

Federer should be able to hold onto The second best of all time for many years to come.


jonathan Says:

Michael, I didn’t say what if Rafa overtakes him.

In my opinion by calling him goat like Agassi and McEnroe, he already has. These great players of the game nor myself believe that Roger is “lacking”, not Nadal.

Subjective opinion on a subjective matter vs fact is not a difficult concept for most.

But what do I know, I’m just a woman. Hahahahahahaha

Hope this helps.


Margot Says:

@jonathan
“Just a woman” just about sums up some attitudes on here.


jonathan Says:

“nor” should read “and”.

BTW if women ran the world, we would not be in the mess we see in Israel and Ukraine today.

So I take Ms as a compliment especially given the source on several levels.


Michael Says:

Alison,

You are resonating exactly my thoughts !! My two cents !!

Jonathan,

Well, ofcourse GOAT is subjective and based on perception and in all probability it might not be decided one way or other, for critiques will find holes in every Tennis player’s profile.

By the way, Agassi has not enshrined Rafa as GOAT. He only told that he has tremendous potential to become one. Ofcourse Mcenroe has already labelled him as one. So, it basically boils down to individual perception. A majority of Tennis Greats side with Roger, while others vote for Rafa. I am wondering how can we come to any premature conclusion based on such diverse views ? It is another matter that I never evince faith in this GOAT theory and believe that perhaps it might be decided one way or other when the end of World nears !!


Okiegal Says:

@Hamza

I too like”gladiator” tennis. It is just more interesting for me. I don’t want to know in advance who is gonna win the point…….grind baby grind! Sometime my guy wins the point and sometimes not. The 57 stroke rally at the USO against Novak, he lost……Oh but the battle was genius! It’s just what each person prefers……a matter of choice. Bring on HC……so ready!!


skeezer Says:

Hamza,
Now that is a great post! Respect.
Margot,
Wrong on both assumptions, however the Ms will stop.


Margot Says:

@Skeeze
Cheers and if anyone does it to you, or anyone else for that matter, and I notice, I’ll certainly call them out too.
In fact, I think “staff” are the worst offenders on here and kind of set the tone.
Anyway! Enough already! Back to tennis.
I’m even more nervous than normal about Andy and I do hope he’s got his mojo back and bloody well wins something soon!
Come on Andy!


skeezer Says:

Margot,
Thank you.
Hope Andy gets his mojo back too ;)


jonathan Says:

Michael that was Andre’s opinion in the past but a few months ago he is now convinced Nadal is the greatest…

The former world No 1 opted for the Spaniard over Federer, whose wife
earlier this week gave birth to a second set of twins, because he has
thrived in an ultra-competitive “golden age of tennis”. “I’d put Nadal number one, Federer number two,” the eight-time Grand
Slam-winner said

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/rafaelnadal/10816170/Andre-Agassi-picks-Rafael-Nadal-ahead-of-Roger-Federer-as-tenniss-greatest-all-time-player.html

The majority of tennis players such as Sampras and Agassi now feel that either Nadal is the GOAT (Agassi’s view) or that Federer is no longer the undisputed GOAT. (Sampras’ view).

I enjoy sensible discussions with you Michael even though our opinions differ. There is no need for some to get personal. You are a great Federer fan and an asset to this site.


Giles Says:

For Andy to win something he has to reach a final first and then …..


jonathan Says:

Here is what Giles Simon said this week:

“My opinion is that if very different surfaces were to exist, with very slow red clay courts and very fast indoor courts, Roger would have won only half of his titles.”


skeezer Says:

^but he doesn’t . Living in “ifs” only conjectures more “wishing”.

“The greatest champion our sport has known.”

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jul/02/rod-laver-wimbledon

I would take Lavers opinion over Agassi anyday(Boris Becker was also the latest guy to chime in on Fed). We can find all the links we want, but the wiki page of Feds is undeniably unmatchable. History will tell even a greater story, and that story will be Roger Federer.


Giles Says:

Boris Becker was just giving joker a back- handed compliment by calling fed the greatest. IMO.


jonathan Says:

Laver was ONE of the best but only won slams on grass and clay. No slam hard courts at the time.

I respect his opinion but he is old and stuck in his ways not unlike someone who thinks that music from his generation is the best and cannot adopt to evolution. His belief of Fed as GOAT is one largely based upon romantic nostalgia.

Most of today’s players from the open era now think otherwise.


James Says:

Sean Randall strikes again! Nadal-Federer always sells.


jonathan Says:

As far as Becker goes, I trust his current boss’ opinion more than him.

Nole is on record as calling Nadal the best player ever.

Preach it Nole.


Hippy Chicl Says:

Hamza Rafas my favorite player too,but i agree with everything your saying,funny though when it comes to the womens game i prefer artistry,yet when its the men i prefer the gladitorial type of tennis,just my opinion….


Hippy Chic Says:

BTW Dont know why there was an L at the end of my monikor?


skeezer Says:

Re; Laver
From the posted link;
“Of the five, Laver is the only one who grew to greatness in the amateur era – and the only one who has done the Grand Slam twice: unpaid, then several years later as a professional when the game went open. It is often said that the five years he was excluded from competing for a major cost him several important titles, and probably even another Grand Slam.”
When someone tries to ditz on Laver, their credo gets washed away imo.
Agassi? Well, read HIS book.


jonathan Says:

Gilles Simon, who is in the running to replace Roger Federer as President for the players council with the ATP adds, ““The slowdown of surfaces has been a ‘political’ decision. One player in particular insisted to have surfaces with similar speed, decreasing the differences. I just don’t want to tell his name. All I want to say is that some players are more influential than others”

Nailed it Gilou. Preach it indeed.


Giles Says:

I hope Simon and not Wawa becomes President of the Players Council.


Hamza Says:

Laver is a colossal figure in tennis. Yes the game has modernized, but he remains a colossal figure, and Laver’s opinions have to be respected and they’re based on reason.

Besides, even as a Rafa fan, there is no question about the fact that Fed has won more at this point. Now you could argue he’s older, but then that doesn’t change that he’s won more (I’m being Mr. Obvious here) . And it’s also true that when people talk about tennis, we’ve always looked at majors as a yardstick. He’s got 17, he’s the best of all. So I’m probably just saying what Michael has been saying.

But at the same time, if you freeze Nadal’s career right now, it’s a HUGE thing that there isn’t a long-period of time in his career when he was dominated by someone. Djokovic comes close and probably will remain so for the rest of Nadal’s career. That is a remarkable thing. I wouldn’t say it justifies calling Nadal the best player we’ve ever seen, which I personally think is an outrageous thing to say for anybody anyway. But, this one thing about his career is the one I hope he can carry through till the end of his career.

Looking at the way Nadal’s career has panned out, if I had the option to build a new heroic character for the greek mythology, I’d have to add Nadal there, or may be Nadales rhymes better with Hercules and Achilles.


jonathan Says:

I’m with Agassi. (And respect Laver’s opinion like I said above).


Polo Says:

Still talking about the GOAT? The discussions never end because everybody is complicating it with too many parameters when in fact, it is rather simple. The most important tournaments in tennis are the majors. So whoever has the most is the greatest.


Okiegal Says:

Rafa has definitely been Roger’s “Achilles Heel” the last few years……..and Novak has been bothersome for Rafa…….not to mention the horrendous upsets he has had……..but that’s the sport, no??


Okiegal Says:

How would Laver fair against the players in this era and vice versa? Taking into consideration the wooden racquets with cat gut opposed to the metal ones with the new string types and stringing techniques……hard courts opposed to grass and clay?? I would like to see those two eras flip flopped. Did this make sense?? Probably not…..lol


Hamza Says:

@Okiegal

I personally think the sole reason why Laver won’t be successful today is that he was 5 foot 8 and I don’t see how he would overcome that disadvantage in today’s power game.

If at all, the one thing that has become more important over the last decade or so, is height. Agassi wasn’t tall , but even he was 5 ft 11.


jonathan Says:

If it was that simple then there would be no debate for which there certainly is. Therefore GOAT is not so simple. Only for those that hold that view.

Assuming I’m now moderated because I questioned another poster about the meaning of shim. I will refrain from commenting on anything not related to tennis in the future. However I suspect it is due to my similar views of Agassi’s which seem to be discouraged here.

If I stay moderated, I will happily leave. No hard feelings!


Okiegal Says:

@Hamza

You make a great point……I had not even thought about that. Hey, thanks for the feedback…..it’s so nice to read sensible comments about all the players.


Michael Says:

Jonathan,

The majority of tennis players such as Sampras and Agassi now feel that either Nadal is the GOAT (Agassi’s view) or that Federer is no longer the undisputed GOAT. (Sampras’ view).

Has Sampras too picked Rafa to earn the sobriquet of GOAT ? I doubt that is the case. But well if you have any link to substantiate it, you can share the same with me. Ofcourse I saw that link of Agassi where he has opted for Rafa to earn the GOAT sobriquet.

All said and done, as even you have maintained earlier, the sobriquet of GOAT is a subjective opinion depending on perceptions and individual evaluations and it might be never settled one way or other. But, for the fun of it, let us continue our discussions on the same.

I enjoy sensible discussions with you Michael even though our opinions differ. There is no need for some to get personal. You are a great Federer fan and an asset to this site.

I too share your sensible thoughts and agree with you wholeheartedly. I derive great pleasure in discussing with you. Thanks.


contemperory Says:

Just because Agassi has said that Nadal is the GOAT doesn’t mean that he is the GOAT. This is the first time that we are hearing this argument. We have heard all others, but this one is out of the world. If we do a statistical analysis with 100 different tennis players and experts, do you expect the majority to have one single opinion?I am sure that we will have all kinds of opinions coming out. You can’t just hinge on Agassi or McEnroe.

I tend to agree with Michael and Hamza, this is a subjective thing to talk about. There are people who opine that this Fedal war in itself is baseless. Now, Jonathan, you did a wrong thing by not giving Rod Laver enough credit to his career success. You may not understand it, but after 20-30 years,some people like you will call Nadal and Federer as old and stuck. No one can take away other’s greatness, period.

No one can argue against the fact that Fed is the most successful player of all time at this moment.As to who is the GOAT, let us talk about it when both of them hang up their boots.At this moment there is no point in saying that Fed is #2.


Wog boy Says:

Sampras:

“But if pushed, Sampras would lean towards Federer as the GOAT – greatest of all time – because of his consistenty and longevity.”

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8788974


jonathan Says:

Success is no more objective than GOAT so neither are absolutes and can therefore be openly debated.

Michael if you go back and read what I said, I didn’t say Sampras thought Nadal was Goat but nor does he still believe that Federer is as he had in the past as had I up until past year.


Giles Says:

Inasmuch as fed fans jump on the joker bandwagon we now have joker fans returning the compliment! Lol
Keep jumping! Good Fun!


madmax Says:

jonathan Says:
A bit melodramatic from the fedfans re my comments.

Nowhere did I say Fed isn’t a great player. Twisting my words is a sad argument.

As is calling me Mrs. Hard to discuss tennis when a great debate like questioning my masculinity comes into play. Sheer brilliance. Didn’t know I was dealing with 12 yr olds.

Fact is, Fed’s probably the second best player of all time. Please show me where I’ve said otherwise.

Hilarious. Just have to let out a bit more line.

July 26th, 2014 at 12:10 pm

Jonathan, I get really sick of people such as yourself. Federer, second best player of all time? Okay, that’s your opinion. But why don’t you look at the facts first? You keep quoting 10-23? Remember please, some of those finals which Roger made, Rafa didn’t and vice versa.

There is no argument for now. Fact. Federer is the best player of all time for so many reasons. Won’t list them all cos it will be lost on people like you.

Rafa, joint second with Sampras. The facts don’t lie. By the way, you are the one who is melodramatic here. You get responses from the fed fans that you don’t like, so you repeat yourself over and over. We won’t change our minds, nor will you, so it is a lost argument here.

Thank goodness for this thread, otherwise it would get clogged up on all the others and really irritate a whole lot of people. Probably already does.

Wog boy, consistency and longevity, most definitely. Who else can match Federer in that department? Answer?

No one.

Not ever.


madmax Says:

Contemporary, Agassi says Federer is the GOAT, then Nadal, then Federer.

Let’s look at the facts shall we? The Grand Slam total is the bar and until that changes, there isn’t really an argument.

Or we go back to Rod Laver and his achievements, where I guess, in his era, he was/is the GOAT.


madmax Says:

Let us see what Roger can come up with this year.

His achievements, well. Really. What can one say? Wog boy mentions the consistency and the longevity and there is plenty of evidence of that, over the years. Here is one of them, coming into the hard court swing –

“Why is this particular record so spectacular, despite being overshadowed by his own conquests at Wimbledon or Nadal’s reign at Roland Garros? Why have other modern superstars rarely approached five straight titles at Flushing Meadows?”

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2140826-why-roger-federers-5-consecutive-us-open-titles-is-an-unbreakable-record


Hippy Chic Says:

LOL I thought the thread topic was who will finish the year ranked higher Federer or Nadal,not whos the GOAT,funny how when one mentions the names Fedal and that always ends up been the topic of conversation anyway,maybe they should re-name this forum GOAT-X??


jonathan Says:

Madmax, as far as I know, most slams defining goat is not a fact. Please provide a source for this as this is news to me.

Sampras no longer believes that there is one GOAT. Yes he used to say Fed as did I but Nadal has further impressed since that time to the point that Sampras has evolved his opinion.

You don’t see anyone debating that Fed has the most slams because that is a fact. However GOAT is not fact.

Nadal is the GOAT IMO and many respected profession players as well.


jonathan Says:

Also madmax, I’ve provided a link where Agassi stated just a few months ago that he believes Nadal is the greatest followed by Roger so not sure what you are basing your statements about him

Sorry to hear you are sick of people like me with my opinions on the greatest.


jonathan Says:

Wog Boy, there is no quote from Sampras in that article to support the writer’s statement. Have to question his comprehension skills I’m afraid.

Sampras sums up his opinion quite suscinctly however in that article by saying “There is no one greatest.”


jonathan Says:

“I mean, there’s not one greatest player,” says Sampras from that article. Pretty hard to misinterpret that.


Sean Randall Says:

“Preach it” Hawkeye!


hawkeye Says:

I can certainly go with that moniker should you prefer Sean. Please explain why I’ve been placed in moderation so I can avoid unacceptable behaviour.

Hawkeye. Yes I quite like that.


skeezer Says:

hawkeye? LMAO.
Knew there was something fishy going on ;)


Margot Says:

@ the 3 of u above
“Preach it” is interesting American slang. Not used in the UK at all. Here the word has 1) a definite religious association or 2) it means been lectured at in an over-bearing way.
I guess across the pond it means, “spread the word,” but not necessarily of God…;)


Hippy Chic Says:

I dont really care that Roger is the GOAT,and this is coming from a Rafa fan,Rafa is already also an all time great with multiple GS on all surfaces,his 14 is better than Petes who doesnt actually have that,and that is good enough for me??


Hamza Says:

I didn’t realize Jonathan was Hawkeye. I don’t post that often but I read the comments very frequently. I’ve been wondering for a while where Hawkeye has been. Good that it was just a moniker change.


Polo Says:

Good attitude, Hippy Chic. You’re right, Nadal is already among the greatest ever anyway. There is so much to be proud of and happy about.


Wog boy Says:

“Wog Boy, there is no quote from Sampras in that article to support the writer’s statement. Have to question his comprehension skills I’m afraid.”

Have to question your reading skills I’m afraid.

The point was that Sampras never said that Rafa is the best ever, as cult members were claiming without giving us link to prove it, until I posted this link from this year interview at AO, but he did say :

“Is there one greatest player of all time? I don’t know,” said Sampras, who boasts one more grand slam singles title than Nadal but possesses three less than Federer.

“I think if you look at the numbers, you have to look at Roger, what he’s been able to do: 17 majors, been No.1.”

Btw I watched his interview on channel 9, I agree with him, Roger has a numbers, Rafa doesn’t have a numbers but for me Rod Laver morally is the best for the reason Sampras stated in this interview, one can only speculate how many GS RL could end up with;

“What Rod (Laver) did back in the ’60s – five years he didn’t play any majors when he was in his prime, so he could have had over 20 majors.”


skeezer Says:

Sanity has come back to this thread, thank u all.
Hamza, HC, polo.
@Margot, re;sexist…George Elliot, J.K. Rowling and there monikers? Sexist or not ?;). A fair question?
wog boy,
Put some shrimp on the Barbee, and I owe you a FostersI :-)


Michael Says:

It is not just the accumulation of majors, we need to take into consideration for identifying the most successful player. What really counts is also the no. of weeks one remains No.1 because it is that parameter which determines consistency and here I think Roger is way ahead above Rafa or any other player in Tennis history with most number of weeks as No.1 and that too consecutively. If you take the wikipedia on Roger, it clearly mentions that he has been rated as the GOAT by a majority of Tennis Analysts, commentators and individual players and that really counts. Well, individual players have their opinion about who is a better player. For instance, if you take Andy, he rates Rafa ahead of Roger but on the other hand if you take the other Andy Roddick, he reads it conversely and rates Roger above Rafa. So, it is all about perception. Finally, it will all boil down to the totality of their achievements and right now Roger is leading the race to be rated the most successful player, as I never believe in the GOAT sobriquet. If anybody says otherwise, then I would say he is tweaking and twisting facts and figures to distort the outcome. And about this individual opinion about players, well they react upon instant success. If Rafa goes on to win the US Open this year for instance, then you will have erstwhile players like Mcenroe or Connors calling him the GOAT, then with passage of time this will taper away when another tournament comes in and Rafa fails. So, the GOAT discussion is constantly evolving as the players progress in their career and I would say it is too early to call. Right now, Roger is head and shoulders above everybody in sight to be rated as the most successful player whether it is in terms of pile up Grand slams, most weeks as No.1, maximum number of World Tour finals, his incredulous consistency in majors, most number of tournament wins and his indomitable record of not missing any Grand slam in his career. All these make him as the most successful player and Rafa is right now behind. May be, it is possible that Rafa when he finishes his career would overwhelm these achievements and race ahead. We never know ? But till then, it would be better to stick to the present rather than dwell on future which are full of imponderables where anything can happen and we can only conjecture at the moment.


skeezer Says:

“So, the GOAT discussion is constantly evolving as the players progress in their career and I would say it is too early to call”

Michael, you contradict yourself at times imho. The argument or discussion is NOW, not in the future. For decades Laver was considered the GOAT. What is your opinion as of NOW? I agree, the future is different. Rafa, Nole, Murray…further out maybe a young gun may prove otherwise. But to put aside Rogers body of work so as too WAIT till something equal or better comes along is an insult to the mans legacy. He’s there NOW.
The discussion for the most part here has been “at the moment”, otherwise isn’t it all conjecture and “ifs”, because truly nothing else has happened yet otherwise. Feds records as of NOW speaks its superlative volumes.


Okiegal Says:

@Chic

I think you are right……the forum should be called GOAT-X……..LOL……it never ends….


Okiegal Says:

@Skeezer 11:10

You left me out. Do you think I’m insane?? Lol


Sirius Says:

Goat is defined by french titles, multiple slams on all surfaces [wilander is a contender here too ;) ], olympic gold in singles, and most importantly multiple davis cup titles. So the goat is one and only Rafael ‘EL MATADORO’ Nadal!

*Its quite funny to find out that jonatroll was hawkeye


kjb Says:

@skeezer

Exactly!


Sirius Says:

Oops, i meant jonathan!


kjb Says:

I will also add……..Of course Agassi will discredit Federer. Fed was destroying Agassi by the time he was 22 years old, and Agassi was couple years younger then Fed is now. With way less matches in his legs. 2004 Master Cup Final! Sometimes it feels like all the Rafa fans around here started watching tennis in 2010.


skeezer Says:

“started watching tennis in 2010.”
No! There was Tennis before then? Who would have known?
*gasp*
;)
@sirius
jonatroll! lol :-)
@Okiegal,
Of course you are excluded, city of Thunder? C’mon! :)


Margot Says:

@Skeeze
Mary Ann Evans used the name “George Elliot” to “ensure her books were taken seriously.” Women could publish romantic novels, eg Jane Austen, but it was prevailing wisdom that they were capable of little else.
As an observer of the virtual world, as well as the real one, I can assure you that such attitudes did not die out in the 19c.
Which is why I am highly suspicious of posters with male names, being addressed as Ms/Mrs/Miss.


skeezer Says:

@Margot
Yes I got that also. Regarding the great novelist Mary Ann Evans and wish she published as such, and am sad she felt her books would not be taken seriously.
This was actually a lead in my question to you; Do u think is this … is being female using a male name …in a conversation….in a way…in turn be sexist to the male gender? (Attempting to post male, but is female). I have my suspiciousness also. I know you are female and I for one enjoy a conversation as such with utmost respect, but can it be disengenuous to have a discussion with one who you think is a female (or male)but is not? Should there be a difference or concern or not? I need to be enlightened.


Michael Says:

Skeezer,

Michael, you contradict yourself at times imho. The argument or discussion is NOW, not in the future. For decades Laver was considered the GOAT. What is your opinion as of NOW?

That is already well recorded. I have repeated often that Roger is the most successful player at the moment. There is just no contradiction over there. But as you know I do not subscribe to the sobriquet of GOAT and do not want it to be monopolised on any player because future is always uncertain and achievements too are perspective and subjective based on inference.


Hippy Chic Says:

Roger won 15 of his 17 GS in the last decade,and Rafa won 6 of his 14,Rafa has won 8 GS this decade since 2010,and Roger has won two,Roger was the best player of the last decade,and Rafas been the best player this decade,Roger has the QTF streak,and the weeks at number 1,the 6 WTFs,7 Wimbledons,5 USOs,4 AOs,better numbers than Rafa at 3 of the majors,Rafa has 9 FOs,27 MS titles,a GS for 10 consecutive years,multiple GS on all surfaces,an Olympic Gold Medal,just pointing out some of the records both have,both players won multiple GS mulitple years,Rafas done it 3 times,and Roger too many times to count,anyway as you will notice,theres no belittling of either player,as both have amazing records that i doubt will ever be beaten,but one would have to say,even as the most die hard Rafa fan Roger still edges Rafa somewhat in most areas….


Hippy Chic Says:

Michael indeed why does there have to be a GOAT? if there does then one would say Roger for sure,but why not just appreciate both players in their own respective areas of greatness,that they have brought to the game????


contemperory Says:

Happy Chic, that is a wonderful perspective. There is lot of spice in the Fedal war, but it is really pointless, imo.


Hippy Chic Says:

Thanks for the kind words Contemperory,ive never seen the point in putting one down in favour of the other,doing that only results in posters looking quite foolish and bitter as fans IMO anyway….


contemperory Says:

Yep, both are amazing players,and like JMAc used to say “We are fortunate to live in this golden era of tennis”.


Michael Says:

Alison,

You make sense. I definitely agree. Why there has to be a GOAT sobriquet at all and thereby open up a pandoras box where many will agree to disagree ? For me, anybody to be labelled as a GOAT, your achievement should be phenomenal and just unsurpassable like say Rafa’s incredible achievements on Clay where you cannot find a shred of weakness to belittle. Not only Rolland Garros, where Rafa has won an invincible 9 times, he has also dominated other Clay court Master series titles too like no one has before or possibly after. Ofcourse, it can still be debated that Rafa can be surpassed on Clay in a literal sense. But that seems unlikely considering the sheer magnitude of his achievements over the years and the frightening thing is that he is still not finished ? So, there is that question mark as to how many more titles he would add to on to his already imposing numbers. I literally doubt that anybody can maintain such incredulous consistency on Clay ? Atleast for another two generations, Rafa’s supremacy is preserved. Ofcourse, this is not to belittle in any manner Roger’s achievements on other surface. But it is not that imposing to say it can never be surpassed in future. So there is that big question mark hanging over which is not comparable to Rafa’s influence on Clay. And moreover rationally speaking, when you are conferring Rafa with that GOAT sobriquet on Clay, how can anybody become the GOAT overall excluding Clay ?


Okiegal Says:

@Michael

I have commented a few times on this forum that “Greatest of All Time” is really a bit much….all time means all time…..we don’t know what is to happen in the future. Records are made to be broken. A weak era could happen and a hot shot young player could make the scene and win everything. We don’t know. Greatest of their time would be a better choice of words imo. We have seen awesome players from the past and I think it is disrespectful to their achievements. We all know that Roger, Rafa and Novak are great players but to call one of them GOAT is not possible……for all time could be a very very very long time…..until poof….the earth is gone?? Just saying. My 2 cents……


Okiegal Says:

@Michael

Slow fingers……your great post beat mine….we are on the same page…..including Chic too.


Hippy Chic Says:

Thanks Polo for those kind words @7.34am June 28th,that is and always will be good enough for me…
Thanks for the reply Michael….


Polo Says:

Some people are quite gullible that whatever some past big name player says, they take it hook, line and sinker. It’s not gospel truth, folks. It’s just an opinion which couldn’t be any more true or more erroneous than ours.


Daniel Says:

The “need to have a GOAT” only happens because their resume is beyond what anybody else has achieve in tennis, specialty Roger.

Brief history in last years GOAThood.

Until Fed made the scene when Sampras won 14 and dominated Year end #1 for 6 straight years he was anointed GOAT. Not having a RG was a major thing but didn’t have any real impact in Sampras Legacy back than.

Sorry to discredit a bit but before Nadal’s burst the scene, The French Open had his particular aura but not much relevance in the big scheme of things because none of the former greats, apart from Borg dominated RG the way NAdal did. RG has a lot of 1 Slam wonder more than any other Slams because usually it was won by clay experts only. Wimbledon and US Open had few winners and mostly the usual suspects, the top dogs because they were the tourney every body wanted to win.

Nowadays the majors kind of got all the same relevance (although Wimbledon is still by far the most coveted and prestigious one) once everybody start taking AO serious during Sampras and Agassi’s year. Today, a major is a major and everybody play all major the same way.

So, a few years ago, the measure was Grand Slam titles and the number #1 associated records (year end and weeks or consecutive weeks) because it showed consistency and who dominated and was the best player in the world over the field and the longest.
Smapras knew this and that is why he played a l0ot of smaller tourney to get back to #1 whenever he lost it. He had his 6 Straight YEar end #1, a record that will most likely survive forever, but never was #1 for a whole year like Fed and a few other were.

When Fed burst the scene with his style of play the whole tennis world was in awe, proved when he dominated from 2004-2007 with 3 Majors won by year in 4 of those years, going for Roger Slam twice. He was anointed future GOAT, what he proved to be by his complete resume of titles.

Tennis evolve to more complete players, helped with string and racquet technology and slowing of courts and suddenly we have 2 great players with careers Slams and a potential one in Djokovic if he wins the French in near future. That was never getting even close to happen in the past days.

With the advent of Nadal, beating the “consider GOAT’ was when things started to change because people start praising Nadal’s unique records to validate his point. Deep down most believe in GOAT if you have someday who dominates most of the more important parameters and when Nadal starts beating this guy too many times people start scratching their heads and thinking, would he be the GOAT?! THis is the simple base question to move almost all Rafa Fans and why they don’t can’t consider Fed GOAT and or think NAdal is even with his failing at a bunch of historically important records. They just can’t see beyond this match up, and is thei opinion and their right to do so. My main problem is because ethey start picking records to validate Nadal and not use what was always consider by many expert as the measure of greatness. Fed was only consider better than Sampras when he surpassed Sampras in almost every record Sampras had (total major, weeks as number one, consecutive weeks as number one Year end #11, 1 less only and more WTF titles, plus the elusive RG to complete his boy of work).

Some of Nadal’s fan look at only the records he excels and tennis as of late.

The number 1 records count as year end #1 and Davis cup and Olympics Gold never matter pre Nadal years. This are second tier values, and this is non biased Fed fact. It ddin’t matter before (whe TAP was created) and work as a “bonus” records.

The number # 1 ranking and WTF A tourney every great player of the past with multiple Grand Slam titles won except for Nadla matters more. Nadal wil always have against him his success in clay, because it is a disparity to his overall reusme.

His number #1 records are poor for somebody who is claimed by Jonathan to be GOAT. Maybe somewhere next year even Djokovic will have better numbers than him, and his records on majors outside clay (with 5 titles) is nothing out of the world: Lends, Agassi, Djokovic, Federer, Mc Enroe, Smapras, to name a few all have better records than him.

I said it before and will say it again, unlees he finishes this year or next year #1 and with multiple majors titles (he still have US Open to go), how can he be considered GOAT if he only have 3 great years compare and ever dominated for longer periods of time?! If everything goes to plan and Djokovic finishes year end #1), this decade he would have dominated inly 2 years while Djokovc 3 and last decade Fed dominated 5 and Nadal 1.

And this decade he is 8 majors to Djoko 6 (still US Open to play), but it’s not hard to see Djokovic surpassin him next year or 2016, and if we consider after 2011, Djokovic is 6 to Nadals 5.

He has to be number 1 more years and win more majors outside clay and maybe 1 WTF just to not have an empty place.

Having a better HxH versus Fed, Djokovic and Murray won’t have any impact if he keeps losing to big tall big hitter in Wimbledon and doesn’t have consistency enough to dominate for a whole year.

People have short memory this days NAdla to be consider better than Fed will have to have is set of records (the 9 Slams in one particular event, inning Slam every year for 10 years ) but he will have to beat Fed in his most important records: total majors and Number 1. He can’t equal the consecutive records (semis, major finals, quarters, major played and etc…) but at least the main ones.


Giles Says:

Daniel. Aren’t you forgetting that fed had a headstart on Rafa having turned pro in 1998 and Rafa in 2001?? And how many majors has Rafa missed due to injuries?


Daniel Says:

Giles,

Rafa lost a few majors without injury that most of them he could play but know he would not won, example, AO 2013, -if he could have played 2 weeks later he could have played but prefer not too as a tactical decision that proved to be the right one. Can you imagine how many majors Fed played where he actually knew he wouldn’t won but played even so? That is call consistency, a bit of luck, or just playing tennis the right way without pushing your body to the brink.

This is an ambiguous question because it only proves than Nadal to play to his maximum 110% is not physical appropriate because it can only lest for a few while and not the whole season. NO wonder he is spent the longer the year takes and the faster the court became usually under performing post US Open with exception of 2 years. On fast HC indoors almost everybody has a chance against him, his only titles after US Open in his entire career are: 1 Tokyo (2010), 1 Madrid Masters (when it was played on October) in 05′ and 1 Beijing title in 05′. 3 titles and 6 finals lost. 1-2 winning rate.
This stat tell the whole case.

And if we go further and consider after Wimbledon he has this same 3 titles plus 2 US Open, 1 Cincy and 3 Canada Masters, for a total of 9 titles after Wimbledon in his entire career dating back to 2005 (when he shake tennis world).
This is 9 titles out of average 8 tourneys played play after Wimbledon for 9 years (72 titles). If we remove the year he didn’t play after Wimbledon (whole 2012), take out 8 tourneys plus the times he didn’t play WTF in 2005 and 2008 and we get 9 tourneys won out of 62 played on average. Somebody can check all tourney he played in his career after Wimbledon for us to have the exact numbers. No wonder he says in the other tread he is not favorite for Year End Number 1. Unless he excels again in the next month of play (2 Masters and US Open) or Djoko has a major let down, he knows historically he doesn’t win much this time of the years. He can even win US Open and still finishes #2 for the year (I also rather have 2 Slams than finish #1).
The bulk of his titles is always won in a 3-4 months period, from March to July, with a few bunch in February plus 1 AO and 1 Doha.,

Half his titles (32: 9 RG, 8 MC, 8 Barcelona and 7 Rome) are won in a 2 months period time.


Giles Says:

Daniel. Wimby 2009, USO 2012 and AO 2013 come to mind. Didn’t he also withdraw from AO sometime back?


Daniel Says:

Yes Giles,

He also didn’t play AO 06′, RG 04′ and Wimbledon 04′. After he played his first major, in US Open 03′ (he also played Wimbledon that year), he missed 6 majors (4 after he won his first one in RG 05′ and 2 prior in 2004), out of 45 majors spam after his debut. He played in 39 majors won 14, 36% winning rate or 31,1% after he played his first major (regardless if wasn’t able to play).

Federer on the other hand has won 17 Slams out of 61 majors played, 28% winning rate or 17 out of 62 (after he played his first major in RG 1999, did not qualify for US 1999) for 27,4%.

If Nadal plays more Slams and win his rate will grow or if he plays in his fading years his rate will decrease.

At one point Fed was 32% right after Wimbledon 2012, but had 8 majors with no win ever since. The longest strike he had was 9 majors without win after AO 2010.


Michael Says:

Okiegal,

That is precisely the point. Records are meant to be broken in future and for the GOAT sobriquet to stand scrutiny, it should stand for all generations to come and that is something which cannot be forecasted in advance. As I said, you need to have that imposing numbers to foot the bill just like what Rafa has amassed on Clay which is just mind boggling. Even there, you can ofcourse argue that it might be broken in the future.

A weak era could happen and a hot shot young player could make the scene and win everything

Well even Roger’s record is undermined by his critiques that he was fortunate to accumulate some of his majors playing in a weak era and so irrespective of how much you win, your critiques would always find black holes in it. It is not that it sticks automatically, for it is the overall record that counts. But perceptions of everyone vary and you cannot come to a consensus not only for the GOAT sobriquet, but for everything in this World. There is always a differing opinion. Nothing is perfect.

Yes the sobriquet of Greatest of their time would suit Roger, Rafa and Novak (in that order) at the moment.

Alison – Thanks to you too !!


Michael Says:

Daniel,

Don’t you think to be counted as the GREATEST OF ALL TIME, you must be dominating on all Courts and your records must be overwhelming to boot ?? Ofcourse, Roger has a great record on Clay, but when it is measured relatively to other courts, it pales in significance. He has lost many finals on that surface, mostly to Rafa. He could win just a single French Open in 2009 and not many Master Series titles too on that surface. This paradigm applies not only to Roger, but Rafa too, who has a relatively mediocre record on other Courts compared to his favourite Clay surface. So by no means, both can earn the GOAT sobriquet at the moment unless one of them in the near future surprisingly just runs away with it and accumulates more titles to bolster their respective profile. Yes, this is definitely possible and a probable outcome. But, we need to wait for it to transpire rather than counting the chickens before they are hatched. At the moment, we should just respect the achievements of these phenomenal players like Roger, Rafa and Novak of what they have offered to this game and made it worthy by their significant contribution. They have through their splendid added more glitz and glamour to this Sport and made it truly Global. The Game has attained more commercial value due to their contribution and Tennis has benefited as a whole.


skeezer Says:

@Margot
Re; Sexism
No comment to my post?


skeezer Says:

@Michael,
You ask the wrong question, as with most of your posts;

Who else other than Fed has the dominating record on ALL surfaces? Or, and again, who else has a better totality record on all surfaces? Uh, anybody?

There in you find the answer. You are flawed trying to appease imo..

Then you continue….
“But, we need to wait for it to transpire rather than counting the chickens before they are hatched”
This cracks me up. It is a loaded statement to infinity. Lets all wait to 2059 to decide who is the current GOAT of this era and past. How ridiculous is that? By that theory, no one player ever at any given time can earn the right to be called greatest ever, no matter if they have won 10 or 100 Slams. This gets fun fun funnier. The logic here sometimes belongs in la la land. But wait…. Its the dysfunctional tennis blog. Got it.


Hippy Chicl Says:

Daniel is there much point Nadal actually continuing to play tennis,as his career to you seems like such a dead loss according to you,i mean usually when a player wins 5 GS off clay its usually considered good enough why not Nadal,hes completed the career GS,won multiple GS on all surfaces,won a GS for 9 years,has won the most GS this decade,granted not the GOAT but surely an all time great,and yet you wont allow him that luxury,is his career that much of a failure to you,and not knocking Novak as hes an amazing player but he will also be 28 next year,it took him 18 months between majors,so one has to say things are getting harder for him now too,Novak too has holes in his resume like the lack of a FO,Rafa doesnt have the WTF,and theres no guarantee either will win either,but all are amazing players,why not give them all credit instead of belittling one in favour of another for a change purlease??


Margot Says:

@Skeeze
Lol don’t religiously read tennisx every day y’know….. especially this thread……;)
As poor Mary Ann was just trying to get taken seriously then no, she was not being sexist, rather she was subverting the sexism prevalent at that time.
As regarding your other q., well we know people play extraordinary games on the net all the time, and while it is mildly interesting psychologically if people pretend to be the opposite gender; it is of no consequence. The argument surely should be with their ideas/opinions rather than whether they really are women/men?
BTW Virginia Woolf and Ursula Le Guin have both written very interesting novels about people who changed sex over time. Le Guin especially, with macho men suddenly finding themselves turning into pregnant women….:)


Michael Says:

Skeezer,

You ask the wrong question, as with most of your posts;

That sounds a bit overdone. You must exactly pinpoint where I have been erring in the past as well as present !!

Who else other than Fed has the dominating record on ALL surfaces? Or, and again, who else has a better totality record on all surfaces? Uh, anybody?

Did I ever dispute that ? What is evident is that your inference from my posts are faulty. It is already well recorded that Roger is the player of all surfaces, but how can you ever say he was dominating on Clay where it is Rafa who has ruled ?? Ofcourse, considering the totality of their achievements, Roger has a more consistent record on all surfaces compared to Rafa and that is why currently he is being placed on top and Rafa is behind. But, you forget the age factor here. Roger is 33 and Rafa is 28 at his prime and still some years to go. You never know what he more he has in his arsenal ? So, don’t you think it is time to wait till they finish their respective careers to find out who is greater ? When it comes to H2H, you bring this age factor into the equation, but when it comes to the totality of their achievements, this age factor fades away. Doesn’t that exhibit your bias and prejudice more than anything else ? Even, if Rafa overhauls Roger in major counts, nobody is going to accept that he is greater, say for example if he accumulates 12 French open titles and garners 7 in others.

There in you find the answer. You are flawed trying to appease imo..

I am not in the job of appeasement for I gain nothing out of it. Like you, I am a great fan of Roger, but I do not despise other players who have contributed to the Sport in their own way.

This cracks me up. It is a loaded statement to infinity. Lets all wait to 2059 to decide who is the current GOAT of this era and past. How ridiculous is that?

Even the sobriquet of GOAT defies finity. How can you confer anyone with the title of GREATEST OF ALL TIME which includes even the future ? How can you be so sure that Roger or Rafa or Laver records are here to stay ? 50 years from now, we never know how Tennis would evolve and there might emerge a player who overhauls past records. But even then, he can never be conferred with the GOAT prefix. What is the best possible usage is we can confer on such extraordinary achievers is the sobriquet of being the most successful player.

How ridiculous is that ?

There is nothing ridiculous in it. Ridiculousness is the way in which you hurry to confer somebody the title of GOAT which is a misleading term. For your information, even Roger finds this GOAT debates quite silly and meaningless. He has this well recorded that we might never know who is the GOAT for it is difficult to evaluate past, present and future generations in terms of the scale of their achievements. Will you label Roger’s comment too as ridiculous in the same manner ??

By that theory, no one player ever at any given time can earn the right to be called greatest ever, no matter if they have won 10 or 100 Slams

Ofcourse, that is well the case which Roger too has resonated. We can only talk of the past and present and not predict the future and so the GOAT discussions will lead us to a road with no end. Even I am willing to revisit the conferment of the GOAT sobriquet of Rafa on clay. Let us only maintain that he is the most successful player on Clay.


Michael Says:

Skeezer,

What you think about the earlier generation who conferred Laver with the GOAT sobriquet. Don’t they look outdated today and past the sell date for he has some real competition on hand ? Even Sampras was called as the GOAT after he became the player to overhaul Laver and Borg’s record. But it didn’t take long to eclipse his achievements. So, the GOAT title just couldn’t stand the test of time.


Margot Says:

@Michael
Lol, when Fedal are long, long retired, when Fedal fans are swapping photos of their darling grandchildren….still GOAT arguments will rage…
When the sun finally burns out, still….etc etc ;)


contemperory Says:

Michael,

You say that if Rafa ends up in 20 titles with 12 French and 9 non-French titles, we cannot accept that he is the GOAT.

The current benchmark for GOAT is the number of grand slam titles. By that mark, Rafa would then be coronated as the GOAT.I am not sure your argument holds good.


Okiegal Says:

@Michael 12:25

Great post……My sentiments exactly. I will alwAys stand by this argument……no GOAT debate for me…..it has become redundant and boring and a major waste of time.


Hamza Says:

@Margot

I guess when I’m in my 50s, I won’t have the energy to fight about Fedal :). Besides, do you really think today’s 2 year old turns 20, he’ll be hooked up to Fed and Nadal. Naah. This is probably going to end after 4-5 years after Fed and Rafa retire, and when they stop featuring in the news.

Don’t tell me Tom Gainey and Sean Randall will be talking about Fedal even in 2030, or will they ?


Hamza Says:

@Margot

Hah I see the sarcasm though


Michael Says:

Margot – These GOAT arguments rage for just fun. There is nothing productive about it except serious number crunching facts.

Contemporary – I said only 7 in others and not 9. At the moment what Rafa has got is 9 French Opens and 5 in others. I wonder who has fixed that benchmark of only taking into account the grand slam titles for determining the GOAT ? If it is so, then what about Master series, 500 and 250 tournaments which are up for grabs. What is the point in winning those ? Do you know why Jimmy Connors is considered as one of the Greats despite his winning just 8 majors. It is because, he has won about 109 titles in his career. What is the point in being World No.1 if that is never taken into consideration ? Or even winning the World Tour Finals ? Do they all become insignificant in the scheme of things of invariably measuring only slam wins to determine who is greater ? I do not think such a flawed definition will hold the test of rational reasoning.

Okiegal – Agree. Thanks !!


Giles Says:

Michael. Excellent posts. It is very obvious that you put a lot of thought in your comments and the end result is very enlightening.


Patson Says:

I kept telling myself : I’m not going to say something. I’m not ! I just won’t ! I don’t want to. No ! This GOAT debate is meaningless ! I should stay away ….typed something….deleted it……no won’t say . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ok, I’m going to say something.

I’ve always had issues with majors being the main metric to determine who was the best. Sure you throw in year-end weeks and all. But between two players one being someone who has been number 1 for more weeks, while the other having more majors. I would guess the majors guy would be favored more. Now the majors count has a problem too.

Suppose, for the sake of argument, Nadal wins 18 majors, with 13 of them being French. Would you still call him the GOAT ? Those who flashed Fed’s 17 would be quick to point out the clay bias but then the GOAT-hood yardstick has been majors. Doing that would be similar to moving the goal post in the debate. Then, we would go to year-end weeks and there Fed would comfortably beat Nadal. But then, Nadal’s supporters would point out the Head-to-Head against Fed which is only going to tilt more towards Rafa than Fed with time. Then we’ll have people like Skeezer who’ll point out that Nadal never won the YEC, and then we’ll have Nadal fans saying Nadal won more Masters events than Fed.

As Margot suggested, this debate, whether Nadal breaks the 17 or not, is never-ending. There is no end to it. It is practically impossible to resolve this. In fact, there is a greater chance of finding alien life in the universe than resolving this.


Steve 27 Says:

The best player of this decade is Rafa Nadal, second is Djokovic.
Is not debatable.


Patson Says:

@Steve

So far , yes. Stats back you : Nadal’s won 8 slams since 2010, Nole has won 6. However, the decade has not ended Steve. The jury is still out !


Steve 27 Says:

I predict 10 for Rafa and 9 to Djokovic, Patson.
The result will be the same for me.


Daniel Says:

HC,

In no way I say Nadal’s career is over and nor that he is not a great champion. My problem with his results is that they are not evenly balanced. To the core he is a greta player hence his 5 Slams outside clay but his impressive dominance on clay elevated him to a far ahead result due to 9 Grand Slam in RG.

My problem is people saying he is GOAT right now and that he doesn’t play and win all year long as Roger did in the past.

IS the same question Skeeze replied t9o Michal above, when evaluating GOAT we all know that there is a lot of intangibles and the question has to be by elimination. Who form all the all time greatest of the past has the most complete resume or lacks the least in the main categories?!

The answer is ROger, because even the ones he is not the leader he is usually in top 3.

- Most Grand Slam: Federer
- Most weeks as #1: Federer
- Most Year End #1: Smnapras, Federer in second
- Most titles: Connors, Federer in third
- Most Masters CUP / WTF: Federer
- Most Masters: Nadal, Federer is second
- Career Slam: Federer, Nadal, Agassi and a few other
- Olympics Gold: Nadal, Agassi, Fed has 2 medals and Silver
_ Davis Cup (should not even be considered due to being a team effort): Sampras has more than Nadal
All the pother record are specifics and if we evaluate the consecutive ones he has more.

If we look the main 2 records Nadal has on his own, Fed comes right after:
- Nadal won Slams for 10 consecutive years but Fed won for 8 consecutive years and 9 different years as well, so Top 2 achievement
- Nadal has 9 Slams at the same Slam (RG), Fed is tied with Sampras with 7, so top 3 again.

But the same is not true regarding the unique Records Federer have that Nadal doesn’t even come close to:
- 237 consecutive weeks as Number 1. Nadal has 150 and no one knows if he will ever return to #1, can do it this year
- 23 consecutive semis, Nadal best is 5
- 10 Slams final in a row, Nadal’s best is 5. Probably a top 5 achievement, I know Lendl has more
And few other more
-


Hippy Chic Says:

your not saying he isnt a great champion,yet your not saying he is either?your sending in a long post telling us what he hasnt got,youve never said what he has got,i get that he hasnt achieved what Federer has hook line and sinker ,but he has got records of his own is all im saying,why oh why cant he just be given credit for that for a change,its not enough for some to have Federer as the GOAT,Nadal isnt allowed the luxury of been regarded as an all time great,but i do get that some people in this world cannot possibly be 100% happy,unless everyone else in the world is 100% miserable,well i get it and you will be happy to know you have succeeded in making me feel miserable?


Margot Says:

@Hamza
You can bet your sweet life that in 20 years time this topic will still be going strong and 50. 60. 70. 80 year old Fedal fans will still be hurtling facts, opinions, insults and probably their false teeth at each other.
And if Fedal should have tennis playing kids, well we can all guess what 22 year olds will be discussing…;)
@Patson
Ya couldna/wouldna/shouldna but ya just hadta didna ya! :)
And I agree, the jury must be still “out” on who owns this decade. Hope Andy spoils the Nadok party btw. Well…a gal can hope..;)


Gee Says:

Playing overrated nobodies like roddick & hewitt would easily give you year end #1.

Novak destroyed fedal & roddickhewitt’s egoes. That’s what everyone remembers, whether they like it or not. Whining weeping liar federer is no GOAT. He’s not even close to being sportsmanlike. It was easy for him to fake kindness but when tough competition came, he treated them like “unimpressive or one dimensional players”.


Hippy Chic Says:

One of the reasons Michael is such a fantastic poster,even though he has Roger and Novak as his favorites, is that he doesnt seek to belittle other players achievements,im sure he can speak for himself,but he seems to respect the players as all time greats,rather than having one GOAT?….


kjb Says:

@Gee

hahaha. Roddick won 32 career titles, he was in the top 10 for over 10 straight years and he has a winning record over Djokovic!
Hewitt has more slams than anyone other than the big four on tour right now.

You sir, don’t know what you are talking about.


Polo Says:

Daniel, I’d say that it only the majors that really count. The majors is the most coveted by any tennis professional. The rest only serve as consolation prize. It does not matter if you have become number one and for how many weeks (think Rios, Safina, Wozniaki who have been ranked as number ones but none of them are regarded so highly because of the absence of a majors victory). The Olympics don’t count either (think Rosset, Massu. Sampras on the other hand who does not even have a medal and was regarded at the greatest for a long time). Not even the Masters. These events outside the majors can only be invoked in case there is a tie in the amount of majors titles.


Daniel Says:

HC,

I posted the two impressive records he achieve this year and in my book, he is third all time great, open era behind Sampras because I regard #1 records Sampras has more higher than some do.

My only problem is placing him ahead of Federer prematurely and if he ties 17 that will be a lot to consider still. Only if he surpass 17 (if the number stays the same, Fed can still win more majors).

Polo,

You mention Sampras in your list and he was considered GOAT because of his #1 dominance as well, not only for major titles. It is one of the most important measures of dominance, not the case you posted of people that were #1 for shorten times and WTA is not the same level of ATP, sorry. We also have a bunch of Slam wonders who are not great players. IS not just winning a Slam that make you a great player is a complete body of achievements.
Lately we are only looking at Slams because we had Sampras breaking the record, 10 years later Federer and now Nadal is getting closer, so the race is hitting up.


Hippy Chic Says:

OK Daniel its probably the closest thing he will get to a compliment anyway?FYI i never said he was the GOAT ,its always been good enough for me that hes regarded as, an all time great,it just seems sometimes with some people hes not even allowed that luxury,ie focusing on the negatives in his career rather than his positives,Federer is the GOAT no to ways about it,i just cannot see why Rafa cant have some records that are his and his alone?and im done on the subject now….


skeezer Says:

“Who’ll Finish Higher Ranked In 2014, Roger Federer Or Rafael Nadal?”
Well that jacked up this thread with Rafa’s wrist injury news……..or not?


Wog boy Says:

@skeezer,
I was waiting for you to come up with that comment, it didn’t take you long:)
This thread is active again.


Michael Says:

Alison, Giles – Thanks !!

The GOAT issue still rages on. As Margot rightly said, it might end only with the end of this World !!


Michael Says:

The main problem with this GOAT discussion is that it has become so much compressed and only involves Roger and Rafa. Why come other Greats are not involved in this discussion ? That is because they are contemporary players and people never fancy history which are forgotten. 20 years from now, not many may remember Roger or Rafa when a new sensation emerges on the Tennis scene. For then, Roger and Rafa may end up as history.


Hippy Chicl Says:

Michael exactly id Jimmy Conners in the conversation ,ATM he has more career wins than any other player i believe?

Top story: Andy Murray Reportedly Engaged To Girlfriend Kim Sears, Makes Coaching Changes
  • Recent Comments
Rankings
ATP - Nov 24 WTA - Nov 24
1 Novak Djokovic1 Serena Williams
2 Roger Federer2 Maria Sharapova
3 Rafael Nadal3 Simona Halep
4 Stan Wawrinka4 Petra Kvitova
5 Kei Nishikori5 Ana Ivanovic
6 Andy Murray6 Agnieszka Radwanska
7 Tomas Berdych7 Eugenie Bouchard
8 Milos Raonic8 Caroline Wozniacki
9 Marin Cilic9 Angelique Kerber
10 David Ferrer10 Dominika Cibulkova
More: Tennis T-Shirts | Tennis Shop | Live Tennis Scores | Headlines

Copyright © 2003-2014 Tennis-X.com. All rights reserved.
This website is an independently operated source of news and information and is not affiliated with any professional organizations.