8 Things I Think I Thought About Rafael Nadal, The GOAT And The Australian Open
by Sean Randall | February 1st, 2022, 8:51 pm

It’s never too late to wrap up what was an incredible finish to the 2022 Australian Open.

It’s undeniable. Rafael Nadal is now the GOAT (Great of All Time). There’s no debate.

He’s at 21, he’s got two career Slams.

Novak Djokovic is 20.

21 > 20.

You can argue Djokovic has more weeks at No. 1 or more non-clay Slams, etc. But 21 > 20 and since the next best tiebreaker is Career Slams — they are both even — that’s as far as I’ll go.

Plus, Nadal just beat the guy who beat Novak at the US Open, when the Serb had so much on the line. Nadal didn’t have as much, but he battled back. Djokovic didn’t.

And at the US Open, Djokovic wasn’t coming off 5 months away from the game for an injury like Nadal.

Nadal is also a year older. Was playing on his least favorite surface, his worst Slam, the court on which he’s suffered the most on, he just had COVID a month earlier and a of course had a foot issue that nearly forced him to retire for good.

On top of that, he had to beat Medvedev, who was now a Grand Slam champion, and do it from two sets down and three break points down in the third.

Remember, Nadal hadn’t come from two sets down since 2007 and hadn’t won the Australian Open in 13 years since 2009!

This was not supposed to happen! Nadal was not and is not in peak form. And yet he still won.

Truly remarkable. One of the greatest feats in tennis history.

I thought before the match that Medvedev should win and should win easily – even in straight sets. And he was on his way.

Once Nadal saved those break points in the third, Medvedev lost his game. Too many drop shots, poor shot selection and awful net play cost him. Nadal, who was left for dead, rose up like champions do and took advantage of Medvedev’s stupidity.

Medvedev was impenetrable early on but for whatever reason, he went away from his gameplan as a wall.

For him, it was a really bad loss. Maybe even career-changing. We’ll see in time how he rebounds. Look at Stefanos Tsitsipas, he still hasn’t recovered from the French Open.

Medvedev, while he already has a Slam, might be stuck at one for a some time longer.

Remember the lost boys — Milos Raonic, Grigor Dimitrov, Pablo Carreno Busta, etc.


So much for the NextGen guys like Medvedev, Tsitsipas, Alexander Zverev, Andrey Rublev, Denis Shapovalov, Felix Auger-Aliassime and Matteo Berrettini. They might end up as the sequel.

They’ve all had heartbreak — Medvedev, Tsitsipas and Zverev — losing from two sets up in a Slam final. Think about that.

Zverev hasn’t made a Slam final since. Nor has Tsitsipas. Recall Guillermo Coria had to quit the game. Who knows the long term effects.

It looks like again the French will go to Nadal if he can stay healthy. Then Djokovic gets Wimbledon and maybe the US Open. But bottom line, faith is lost again for these young guys.

From getting deported to then watching your rival win your event to take the lead. Ouch.

And again, Rafa did it on his worst surface and beat the guy you lost to in New York.

Talk about rubbing it in.

Last August, there was no way Djokovic would go into the 2022 French behind in the Slam tally. It was almost a given he’d be at least up by one, maybe two. But now he’s down one and looking at Rafa getting another.

Projecting ahead, I think it will take a few Slams for these young guys to get over the Medvedev loss — yes, his loss means the rest of them also lost. They hope they had after New York…gone! Poof!

Nadal, 10 years older than Medvedev, proved he’s tougher, stronger and smarter than the wise-ass Russian.

So if I give Nadal the French, Novak Wimbledon and maybe Medvedev gets New York.

But honestly, for the 7th time in the last 7 years, this could be and should be the last year the Big 3 win Slams. (Feel free to roast me in 2025!)

And Djokovic is going to lose No. 1. Probably this month. That probably isn’t a big deal to him, but was is is who knows how many events he’ll be able to play going forward. Being unvaccinated is going to prevent him from playing some if not many events.

I’m really souring on Zverev, Rublev and Berrettini. Even the Canadians. Zverev should be winning Slams, but that serve is hit-and-miss. Berrettini has some major flaws — namely his backhand and return game. Rublev’s has poor shot selection and his serve isn’t great.

Canadians kids have combined to win one title.

As I said, let’s see how Medvedev recovers. Tsitsipas is still recovering and still only 23.

Someone like Carlos Alcaraz could turn out better than them all. He’s much younger, but already suffered some crushing defeats.

Jannik Sinner needs to get better in best-of-5. Sebastian Korda and Casper Ruud are also solid. So this younger trio of Sinner-Korda-Alcaraz could pass the Medvedev-Tsitsipas-Zverev-Berrettini-Rublev bunch.

Why not?

It’s been 3-4 years since we’ve seen a true No. 1 in the women’s game. Ash Barty has changed that with her incredible title run.

And she’s a joy to watch. A unique game for this day and age, and she’s a true champion and true role model.

While she won’t be a mega-international star like Serena Williams, I think she’ll be a good ambassador for the game and solid No. 1 for a few more years.

The women’s tour has been rife with opportunity and well, she’s seized it. Outside of Naomi Osaka and Coco Gauff in a few years, I don’t see anyone as a real threat to her No. 1 ranking and she’ll likely get her own calendar Slam sooner rather than later.

Good on ya, Ash!

You Might Like:
Fedal Wars: In The GOAT Debate, Are Nadal Fans Rooting Against Federer To Win His First Davis Cup?
Rod Laver: Novak Djokovic And Roger Federer Are Equals In The GOAT Debate
Team GOAT? Bryans Set Doubles Record With 62nd Career Title
Pete Sampras On GOAT Debate: Federer’s The Greatest, But Nadal’s Now In The Conversation
Fedal Wars: Nadal Well Ahead Of Federer In Masters Titles, But Does It Matter In The GOAT Discussion?

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

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

123 Comments for 8 Things I Think I Thought About Rafael Nadal, The GOAT And The Australian Open

Andy Mira Says:

Whoooo!!…Awesome writing Sean!…Esp no 1 & 2!!…Thank u,thank u,thank u Sean!!

Siddy Says:

“Last August, there was no way Djokovic would go into the 2022 French behind in the Slam tally. It was almost a given he’d be at least up by one, maybe two. But now he’s down one and looking at Rafa getting another.”

How is that going to happen exactly? Will France deport Djokovic and hand Nadal the victory? Otherwise, Nadal has to contend with Djokovic 3-6 6-3 7-6 6-2. And hopefully, Djokovic will be kind enough not to follow Nadal to Spain this time after the defeat since he has a tendency to be a poor winner. At least Novak has gracious loser down. Something Nadal could learn from.

Patson Says:

Not taking anything away from Rafa but this Guardian article sort of indicts Sean’s post, and there does seem to be some truth to this.


Zed Says:

Sean Randall seems like a simple sort of fellow.

skeezer Says:

Great write up Sean, way to tell it like it is!!

Zed Says:

Hey Skeezer, are your parents first cousins?

robert Says:

There are serious problems with this GOAT narrative. Djoker has the better of Nadal in the H2H and the year end, while also sharing the H2H advantage over Federer, and has the better run at no.1 and all the masters and 4 slams in a row.

The GS advantage Nadal currently has is only because of politics, not his superiority. This slam victory will always have an asterisk over it. That is because Djoker was banned from the country solely because he was considered a political threat, as the official government statement basically admitted, denying him the opportunity to defend his title at a place he’s been more successful than anyone and was the favourite to win. That has never happened before.

The reality is that Djoker has the edge over Nadal on hardcourts and even though Nadal can and has won, Djoker would likely have beaten him this year at the Australian Open. Any realist would admit this.

So without being blocked from the country [not even the tournament], Djokovic would likely have the 21 right now, as well as the other advantages. As good as Nadal is, Djokovic turned out to be the better player in the end.

Anto Says:

Hey Zed, where you dropped on your head when you were a baby?

John Says:


This Old man is throwing his toys out the cot again.


Giles Says:

I agree with Skeezer. Great write up SEAN.
What’s up Zed? The disappointment of Rafa reaching 21 too much for you? Accept it man, it happened last Sunday! Don’t be a sore loser. It’s funny, you were all buoyant and mouthy last week and now you seem to be very subdued,
Which is a good thing cos some of us are tired of all the cr@p you put out there.

Montecarlo Says:

So many ifs and buts but the fact remains currently Nadal is the leader in GOAT race. Things become even more interesting when you consider he has missed playing 10 slams due to injury. Also Djokovic’s favorite surface is hard and hard got twice the number of slams per year than Clay. By chance two slams were on clay and only one on hard then May be Nadal would be having about 30 slams by now and Djokovic will be at 15 or less.
So Nadal is clearly way ahead.

Joca Says:

Wow, wow… wait! Even #1 is totally wrong. No way Nadal can be the GOAT ahead of Djokovic, for soooo many reasons, just to list the most important ones:

0. Djokovic has won 4 consecutive Grand Slams, something NOBODY has done ever since we have more than two surfaces – hard, grass, clay.
1. Djokovic has owned Nadal for years now, hardcourts, grass, indoors – this is like 90-10% on Djokovic side. On clay, where Nadal IS the greatest ever, Djokovic served him two heavy defeats on RG, with several more interesting and tough matches.
2. Djokovic has the H2H edge over Nadal, Rafa is better only on clay, but even there, not by a huge margin.
3. Djokovic has won THE Masters (year-end) 5 times (Nadal: zero!). This is THE most prestigious event after the GS.
4. Number of weeks as #1 – beyond compare.
5. Djokovic has won EACH ATP Masters 1000 tournament – every one of them!
6. Djokovic has won more ATP Masters 1000 than Nadal.

Giles Says:

I see there are a few new Novax fans here leaping out of their prams! Rafa has 21, 21, 21, 21, 21, 21,

chrisford1 Says:

This slam victory will always have an asterisk over it.

Not so, Robert.
Novax was his own undoing. Rafa had nothing to do with how Djoko and his large support team failed to ensure he was good to go. Apparently, everyone else on his team was vaccinated and cleared Customs with no problem. Just like all the other players and officials that showed up, save some confused Slovakian woman in quallies.

Giles Says:

Cif. Lol. Asterisk? If that makes you happy carry on asterisking. It won’t change the result. TWENTYONE!!

Madmax Says:

I thought before the match that Medvedev should win and should win easily – even in straight sets. And he was on his way.


Whilst I have, and always will, enjoy your write ups, you were flat out wrong, and need to acknowledge this. It’s okay, we won’t hold it against you.

Yeah, yeah, we know about predictions.


I think you are here to humour us, and you do, so all tennis fans should smile when they see you, and see ZEN rather than ZED.

It helps if you are balanced Zed, because no question, right now, RAFA is THE undeniable GOAT based on the number of slams whether you agree or not. It’s a fact.

Rafa fans should be partying on down for quite some time.
Well deserved I say.

Madmax Says:


Thank you for sharing the clip about Roger. 12 minutes. I absolutely watched the whole clip. 12 minutes.

Any Federer fan needs to watch this.

“Twins in the tummy”, winning the FO – the cutest ever phrase Giles!


Roger talked about Rafa winning the record 21st Grand slam and he also talked about his return to tennis and share some thoughts about his retirement.



Federer talks about coming back – hoping to – “interesting and important” months ahead of me. He will know in April…

Now he can RUN! Back in the gym TOMORROW! 3RD FEBRUARY!



Madmax Says:




Giles Says:

Madmax. Lol. You are making me blush!! When I saw this video I thought of you and skeezer. So happy you enjoyed it. Here’s hoping we will see Fed back on court very soon.

Zed Says:

All, I found this very interesting as it shows the origin of the smear campaign against the great man. For those who care about justice this will be eye opening for those who don’t it won’t matter.


Raj Says:

Alphabetically Novak, N comes first before R(Roger, Rafa) . So Novax is the goat

Zed Says:

I find it strange how many people are now saying that the number of Grand Slams alone is the measure of who is the greatest. It’s yet another example of the shifting goal posts.

I remember back in 2006 and 2007 (yes I am that old) when it looked like Roger may hold all four grand slams at once the media was ejaculating over their desks screaming “OOOHHHH This is amazing, he is like a God!!!”

Of course it never happened, he was thwarted by the French Open eluding him.

But the same media, when Novak actually achieved holding all 4 slams, were like “Ho Hum, unless he gets them all in one calendar year it’s no big deal”. These people are without honour.

And when Novak won his 20th slam, all three players tied at 20, and it was clear that Roger was too old to ever win another slam then it was “OHHHH, no you can’t judge who is the greatest by the number of slams alone, no, no, no, that just will NOT do”.

But now that Rafa has 21 well that’s a totally different story, NOW you decide by that metric alone, it is exhausting to see the twists and turns of dishonest people.

So, here’s something to think about. It is inevitable that Novak will win more grand slams, you know it, I know it. What happens then? Do you twist in the wind again? Another pirouette?

The truth, and this is only for honest people, (lying scum need not get involved in this), the truth is that there are multiple metrics which compare players and compare them across time. I have helpfully given you all the links.

In the fan clubs a lot of mutual-pleasuring can take place, there is nothing stopping that, I mean that’s what fan clubs are for right?

However, the sober judgment of the sport cognoscenti, the sports historians, is what ultimately decides these things for posterity. Those people will use empirical evidence to make their decisions, something that fans cannot seem to do.

And we all know how that empirical evidence will turn out don’t we?

Zed Says:

p.s. here are Novak’s thoughts on Roger vs Rafa


skeezer Says:

Are you by chance related to Djoker? Asking for a friend…

Zed Says:

Skeezer, no not related but he would be a very interesting family member to have.

I write this stuff because I believe it, also because I love tennis.

I grew up watching and being in awe of the Borg/McEnroe matches, I remember thinking “nothing can ever top this” but found out that an even greater era of tennis was to come.

Nolo Says:

So most tournaments, from slams to olympics to master series to year finals are played on hard courts yet the dirt baller has the record!!! Imagine the opposite: Nadal would have won 40 grand slams by now…

Zed Says:

Nolo, interesting idea.

Imagine if the French had colonised as much of the globe as the English, imagine that their legal, bureaucratic and military systems had been as efficient as that of the British.

We could have had clay courts as the standard throughout the Western World and we would all be typing in French right now! Je Mapelle Zed!

In that parallel universe Rafael Nadal would not just have a statue at Roland Garros, he would have statues all over the world!!

But if that happened, then we would have the problem of Antifa tearing his statues down along with all the other statues they have destroyed. That, or he would be the target of millions of pigeons.

Giles Says:

ROFL. Seems like 21 has hit a nerve. Am talking about Zed. Does the man ever stop rambling? I guess not! Carry on Zed. Just remember TWENTYONE!

Ezorra Says:

I hope Novak will also play in Laver Cup this year so that we will have the big 3 in one team. Tennis world will be united afte all!

Tennis Vagabond Says:

“It’s undeniable. Rafael Nadal is now the GOAT (Great of All Time). There’s no debate.”

This is one of the silliest things I’ve seen on this website in a long time. OK, I take that back, the competition is fierce.

But still… If Rafa is GOAT because he has 21 Slams, presumably Novak was GOAT last week when they were tied in Slams, but Novak had every other record? So, one tournament Novak didn’t play, and now Rafa is “undeniable” “no debate” The Goat?

That’s… weird. Its weird that the “undeniable” Greatest Of All Time has only spent 3.5 years total in his 20 year career at #1. Novak has been almost 7 years at number 1, the most of any player ever. That’s just such a vast gulf.

In terms of All Time Dominant Seasons: Rafa had 1, 2010, 3 Slams and a QF. Novak has had 3 seasons with 3 slams (all more dominant than Raf’s 2010. So Novak has 3 seasons better than Rafa’s best season.

5 Masters to 0.

So, if you look at a few of the major metrics, we all agree Slams are most important, then most would agree time at #1 would be next, and then we’d probably argue the relative importance of the others but lets break it down.

*SLAMS: 21 v 20 for Nadal. i.e. a tiny lead. (5%) (But, Novak has held all 4 at once)
*Weeks at #1: Novak has almost double the time at #1. (70% diff)
*Year End Masters titles: Novak 5, Rafa 0
*H2H: slight lead to Novak
*Masters Tournaments: Slight lead to Novak, BUT Novak has the career sweep of all Masters
*Olympics: 1 Gold for Rafa, 0 Novak

Rafa has a 1-Slam lead, and is behind, far behind, in the other major categories (excepting Olympics and Davis Cup).

Yeah, I could hear a 2 way or 3 way tie for number one, but if you have to pick one? Novak.

And why do you force me to do this? I’m not even a Novak fan! I usually cheer for Rafa against him. And Roger against either.

But this is nonsense! I couln’t even read the other 7 things!

Giles Says:

I know TV it’s hard to accept but it is the truth! Rafa 21 Rafa 21 Rafa 21

chrisford1 Says:

Sean’s just stirring up some GOAT controversy, seeing who it rousts into comment.
As Tennis Vagabond says, can’t just base that on 1 Tournament where Novax self-deported himself, (and Fed was an injured no-show.)

It could be over soon, though, if Novax refuses to become Novak again. If he embraces quack science that will stop his ability to travel internationally and compete.
If Novax decides his “pure blood” must remain Unvaccinated because he cannot mentally purify it as he claims to be able to do with dirty water.

He got pretty fringe as many thousands of others on Tour were able to get into Australia with no problem. Including everyone on his own team. Only he and a low ranked female Slovene doubles player. (Who said she got confused but never asked advice on what to do as an Unvaccinated from the WTA, the travel agency used, the Australian Customs and Immigration people.) Both Novax and the Slovenian gal had received regular urgent messages warning both ATP and WTA players that most countries were adding vaxx visa stipulations and that they had better get vaccinated if they wanted to travel and make a living.

chrisford1 Says:

As Rafa said at the start of this Australian Open, “They make the rules. If they say players must be vaccinated or they can’t come then I must be vaccinated or I can’t play. No?

Giles Says:

Rumour has it that Novax is going to get vaccinated. True or false?

Zed Says:

Tennis Vagabond, very good presentation of factual information, however:

1) When I was doing the same thing as you, WogBoy warned me that I was talking to a person who is mentally unhinged (I have since learned that he was correct).

2) The unhinged person is attention-seeking. Even though you present reasoned argument in your first serve, the return to your serve will have no relationship with what you have said, the return to your serve will be inflammatory jibberish, the return to your serve will come from the mentally unhinged person Wogboy correctly diagnosed as mentally unhinged.

In any case, it’s all fun for a while but the subject matter is restrictive, there’s only so many ways we can have this circuitous argument.

In the end we are left with “time will tell” and that time is within the next few years when Rafa and Novak follow Roger into retirement.

SG Says:

I’m a huge Rafa fan and I personally don’t care much for Novak but I think the main problem here is the definition of GOAT.

Maybe a better solution is to think of GOAT as a subjective metric which encompasses qualities that are more than just numbers and achievements and not confuse with a more objective “BOAT” (Best of All Time) which is more number centric.

To me, GOAT is whom we personally feel is the greatest in our hearts whereas BOAT just looks at the overall stats. And again I stress, I’m a huge Rafa fan and really dislike Novak… however I feel that Novak is undeniably the BOAT. GOAT in my mind belongs to either Rafa or Roger because of the legacy they will leave behind. Novak is the best player ever based on performance but he will not achieve the greatest of the other two.

Just my two cents worth.

Zed Says:

SG, very interesting comment, it actually might explain much of the divide, you’re saying it’s a semantic issue.

Probably the most worthwhile explanation I have seen thus far.

You’re basically saying that (to you) “greatness” cannot be measured entirely by empirical data, that it has an additional subjective layer where a more personal assessment is made.

Fair enough. I don’t say that I agree with your allocation of that subjective layer to Rafa and Roger but I respect your right to make your own subjective assessment for that component.

Zed Says:

This is such a vexing question.

Who amongst us can rest before this is resolved?

Until we have the answer, can we look the people we live with in the eye?

Our wife, our girlfriend or in Giles’s case, his Mum?

We need an answer!

Patson Says:

As for the COAT – the Cutest of All Time – I nominate Anna Kournikova.
As for the MOAT – the Manliest of All Time – I nominate Benoît Paire.

Zed Says:

It’s a tough call for COAT Patson, I’m leaning towards Maria Sharapova but it’s line ball between her and Anna.

I spoke to Giles before and his vote for COAT goes to Berrettini apparently.

Giles Says:

Zed. I used to think CF1 was FOS but I was wrong. I am going to delegate that honour to you. You really are so full of it, it stinks in here when you’re around. Go wash yourself man!

Giles Says:

I see Bog Boy and VP are hiding under rocks. Lol

chrisford1 Says:

*Nadal story: Iga Swiatek can be fairly endearing. Major Nadal crush. Not afraid to show her geeky side at times. Young star did a podcast with US multigold medalist and tennis fanatic Mikaela Shiffrin while they were stuck at their homes in America and Poland due to Covid cancellations last spring. Showed Mikaela her proudest souvenir and only tennis thing on her bedroom wall – had to move the monitor. And there it was, in a huge under-glass frame, the signed T shirt she got from Rafa. And two her&Rafa photos in the display.
PS – You could do worse if you watch the upcoming Winter Olympics than tuning in to woman’s skiing and see Shiffrin. Great champion and personality and of course, throw in she’s a good-looking blonde.

*On Daniil Medvedev – People that like him, may appreciate him more when they look at his ranking history. He has been on Tour 8 years and he didn’t have the rapid rise in rankings other superstars have had, but slow and steady rise. He stuck with it and through his effort and improvement he will almost certainly take over #1 from Djokovic this spring. If it happens, it will be well deserved!

*Giles, you are not wrong. I am full of shit at times. We all are. Only thing I can add is take it all with a sense of humor. We aren’t going to change the world of what happens in pro tennis itself with views here. To me it’s more than a sport. It’s an individualistic sport so you see how heart and character and will can impact a performance so much. You get to see (more apt in my earlier days) how young people making a lot of money and how the journeymen and women on Tour struggling to survive doing it on tight money spend on what lifestyle. Learn attitudes and values of athletes from different nations.

*COAT – You can go back 100 years and more to confirm good looking young women have always played competitive tennis, so good luck picking one. And these days, any discussion could get huffy from “objectifying” any of the gals. (no matter how hot they are now, or were back in their tennis era)
To me, in Sharapova’s peak stardom days, there were 5-6 others that were not the 6’2″ Glamazon but looked nicer to me. Led by Russian Maria Kirilenko.
My “rare sort of beauty” award would go to Ajla Tomjanovic, the tennnis star that “he could be a movie star if he could act” Matteo Berrettini is dating and doing the Tennis Channel podcasts with. The arrestingly featured Ajla is the woman I see as most likely to grow a moustache and yet still be a hot-looking lady.

Tennis Vagabond Says:

Gabriela Sabatini
Amelie Mauresmo
Eugenie Bourchard
and of course Ana Kournikova
plus Steffi in her thirties, and Serena

Maria was beautiful, but they were the COATS.

Tennis Vagabond Says:

There was a very cute American girl who made a run at the USO, maybe 10 years ago, became an insta-star, and then disappeared. Anyone remember?

Raj Says:

Another COAT candidate: Daniela Hantuchová

Zed Says:

Ana Ivanovic is also a looker, beautiful smile.

Zed Says:

Tennis Vagabond, are you thinking of Tracey Austin? Maybe Jennifer Capriati?

Alison hodge Says:

Our Colin who hasn’t blogged for a while liked Tsvetana Pironkova

Alison hodge Says:

Thanks for sharing that Giles, makes for lovely rea….

Alison hodge Says:


skeezer Says:

+1 on the link 👍

Okiegal Says:

@Giles…..Thanks for the link…..great read! Whether you like Rafa or you don’t like Rafa, if you’re a sports enthusiast, you gotta love his fighting spirit. I have never seen another athlete quite like him. I have been watching tennis for many years, and this has been a special era. So glad I got to be around to enjoy it. I ❤️ tennis!

Andy Mira Says:

Yeah!….Great read Giles!…Thanks!…I also hope Roger will get his 21st!…He maybe get fired up after Rafa got his..It seems unlikely..but,u never know with this great champion!

As for Rafa…Vamos!…#22ispossible!

Alison hodge Says:

Hi Andi Mira, and Okiegal loving your positivity xx

Giles Says:

You’re welcome guys! 😊

Okiegal Says:

@Giles…..You’re welcome! So glad to see after all these years, you’re still digging up “bones”…… LOL!

@Al…… After the first two sets, tbh, I had just about given up. I ask myself “why” would I let myself go to the negative side?? Never again, my friend!! Positive vibes 4ever when it come to our guy! What a warrior!! Take care, my friend!

Andy Mira Says:

Hey back Al!…Hope u’re over the moon this past week Al!..like me & okie!😁…Bout positivity…well…what can i say Al!…positivity is Rafans middlename!..hehe😁

Giles Says:

Oki. ROFL. “ digging up bones”. I’ve been following this guy since he was 15 years old. Never a dull,moment with him. Vamos Rafa!

Alison hodge Says:

Was at work so only saw bits of the match, had to keep checking the scores on my phone, was gutted when he was two sets down, had my doubts, then when came back, and made it two all, I started to think hmm maybe just maybe, serving for the match getting his serve broken, I though Noooooo, then he breaks Medvedevs again, serves for the match again, 3 MPs, I’m thinking pleeeaase, then I start jumping up and down, I was lucky nobody was around to see me lol

Alison hodge Says:

Anyway have it on record, and have watch the full match, amazing achievement, still can’t believe it, Vamos Rafa, Vamos ladies, yiiiipppppeeee 🏆

Alison hodge Says:

https://media.tenor.com/images/a7863300c57715d455bbf3ab6c5900ca/tenor.gif How about 22 in 22,hope Novak kept it clean, its only on loan lol

Okiegal Says:

@Giles 10:39
I started watching tennis back in the days of Borg. Got away from it after the era of Borg, Mac, Sampras etc. Then one day I was channel surfing and happened on to the FO finals where I saw this kid in clam diggers (what they were called when I was a kid lol) win his first grand slam. All I can say is ……I was hooked on this guy from the get go. When it’s been possible for me to watch him, I’ve never missed match. Watched a lot of matches online. What an athlete!!!

I can always depend on you for the “bones” of this chat room! Lol

Giles Says:

Oki. I can always rely on you for your wit. Nice to hear from you . Hope you’re taking care of yourself. And don’t be a stranger.

Alison hodge Says:

Sorry didn’t know where to put this, but Delpo is retiring from tennis….

Okiegal Says:

@Giles….Thanks! I have been a stranger. I still read TX, just don’t comment much. But I had to chime in on our guy’’s 21st slam! What a match. I can’t wait for Laver Cup. I really enjoyed the one I got to watch. I have got the Rafa/Roger dubs match recorded and when I get bored I watch it.

I’m doing pretty good for an old “heifer”…. Lol! I’m managing to make all of my doctor’s appointments….😛😛
Thanks for asking. You take care.😊😊😊

giles Says:

Rafa’s trophy museum together with the 21st . A sight to behold!

lylenubbins Says:

Nice column and comments! My $.02:

1.The asterisk on Rafa’s win due to Novak’s absence was/is overridden by the way Rafa won.


lylenubbins Says:

2. Medvedev is the real deal, you could see on his face how much he heated losing that match. I don’t see that with Zverev or even Tsitsipas.

Okiegal Says:

Yep, a sight to behold!

Alison hodge Says:

Awesome Giles many thanks for that, I think he will need a bigger cabinet sooner or later though lol

Zed Says:

This Love-In is beautiful.

However, not a single one of you is honest.

If Novak was not prevented from playing you all know (but will not admit) what the result would have been.

The Asterisk remains in place until the end of time.

Alison hodge Says:

Oh god talk about a broken record

Zed Says:

Hey Alison, yes broken record but that does not mean it is not true. My point is you people know it’s true but you are not honest enough to say so.

chrisford1 Says:

Zed, go away. There will be no asterisk. Novak again DQ’d himself, own-goaled himself – however you want to put it. Thousands came, all got in, even Novak’s own team. Only Djokovic and some confused Slovakian woman’s doubles players botched it.
Without him, the AO didn’t suffer. Great matches, some of the younger players showing they are on a future star track. One of the best Finals ever at the AO. Well played and historical for Rafa and Medvedev, who will soon be the 1st new #1 Player after over 18 years of only the Big 4 as #1.
Rafa will look back on his hours in that match among the finest he has ever played on court. I was rooting for Medvedev but I am really happy after 13 years of futility, Rafa gets his 2nd Australian Open title.

Zed Says:

Not going away ChrisFord1, at least not for a while.

I will remain and act as your conscience, I will try to keep you honest and on the straight and narrow path.

Think of me as your guardian angel.

Anto Says:


I thought you wised up when i pointed out the french open win of djokovic in 2016 where rafa had to withdraw with injury. I guess that was a simply a fleeting moment eh?

Also even if djokovic was there and won the ao (this is no guarantee either – i would say he most likely would have defeated nadal in semis and would have an extremely tough final against medvedev where the likelihood of him losing is not very small), that discussion is moot given that he chose to get disqualified. It was an own gaol like cf1 said

Zed Says:

Anto, agreed.

However one has to react when f-wits say things like “Rafa 21, Novak 20, therefore Rafa GOAT”. For example, that tool who did the 21 > 20 posting that the morons gleefully distributed.

I mean seriously? Can you seriously let rubbish like that simply lie there unchallenged?

Most def it is a character flaw of mine that I cannot suffer fools silently, I just can’t. I feel compelled to give them a good smack (figuratively speaking of course).

Zed Says:

Anto, agreed.

However I simply cannot ignore things like “21 > 20 therefore Rafa GOAT” without challenging the moronic nature of it.

In any case, my focus is on dishonesty.

I have agreed with you and said it was fair enough to point out that in 2016 Rafa’s withdrawl meant Novak had the chance. Back then Novak was not ready to take down Rafa in the French.

Why can’t others be as honest? You seem to be able to pull it off, why can’t others?

In 2022 we have a different Novak. Whilst it will be very, very, very hard to beat Rafa again in the French this year I think Novak is the only person on Earth who can (and I think will) do it.

Last year when he beat Rafa there was the usual “Rafa was injured” stuff which probably had a lot of truth to it but when does Novak get similar latitude?

Last year he won 3 of 4 slams and lost to Medvedev in the final of the US Open. This after the Olympics and a hard draw in the US but from the Rafa/Roger fanboys no such latitude for Novak, no, no, no, they can’t be gracious and acknowledge the incredible achievements, that is asking too much.

In any case, I will be here to remind people to at least try to be honest even if it isn’t in their DNA.

Okiegal Says:

What happened to Joker at the USO??? Number 21 on his racquet and he didn’t deliver. Why??

Zed Says:

Okiegal, there are a few reasons.

1) What a year, three grandslams and in the final of the fourth.

2) He made a mistake attending the Olympics and yet another mistake playing in the doubles as well. It was too much. His father advised against the Olympics but he didn’t want to let his country down. I felt it was a mistake at the time but understood.

3) To get to the USO final he had a much tougher draw than Medvedev, playing tougher opponents and longer matches whilst Medvedev had a relatively easier run.

4) You put all that together and it was too much, he’s human after all is said and done.

Zed Says:

Anto, I have responded to you twice but both times my posts did not appear. Not sure what the issue is as I didn’t use any offensive language and didn’t have multiple links. Maybe the posts will appear later.

Giles Says:

Zed. Just shut it, you ain’t going to win this one.
The AO was a resounding success even without the 9 time champion. Packed stadiums everyday, fans happy, fantastic matches and especially the final with Rafa coming back after a 2 sets to love deficit against the future #1 player. It really was a magical final. You can stick your asterisk where the sun don’t shine! 21 is 21. You cannot change the result!

Zed Says:

You can’t win, Giles. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.

skeezer Says:

Obi wan you are not. More like Vader you are.

Zed Says:

Skeezer I wondered whether anyone would pick that up.

Giles Says:

This is a funny vid. It was when fedal played their Exo match for Africa.

Zed Says:

Roger has pulled out of Indian Wells claiming injury.

I will watch with interest to see how long he can keep this pretense up before the sponsors twigg to what he’s doing.

If he is somehow forced to venture out onto a court again and if he must play anyone in the top 50 then it will be worth watching for a laugh.

John Says:


He cant. He is still stinking this place up.

Truly a vomit inducing person.

Zed Says:

Seems like I have once again upset the fan boys, this is so delicious :)

I think I will enjoy 2022!

Zed Says:

Skeezer, good news for Rafa fans because preventing Novak from playing at all is the only way Rafa can ever win a tournament.

Not much honour in it but then that’s just how you people roll.

Andy Mira Says:


chrisford1 Says:

Some Medvedev-Djokovic talk about #1. Medvedev is supremely motivated after the AO Final to prove he is a champion all over again. And Novak is chasing some significant historical stuff related to #1. He wants to win in Dubai, badly.
Who is #1 on Feb 28th is in Medvedevs hands. He wins in Acapulco, he’s #1, regardless of what Djokovic does in Dubai – the first outside the Big 4 in 18 YEARS!
Djokovic is chasing this:
He will be at 360 weeks at #1 on Valentines Day Feb 14th.
361 will be his last week as #1 if Medvedev does better
He would exceed Federal in time as #1 a full year at 362 weeks.
At 364 weeks as #1 – he would not only be the only man to make 6 years as #1, he would be the only one with 7 years as #1.
And if he got to 365 weeks – well – that would be 3 years longer than Rafa was #1.

This is the 2nd big hammer to fall on Novax unless he gets his head straight and can rationally assess risk again. He appears to be more at risk from a plane flight to and from a place, a day’s skiiing – and what he can lose is some pretty GOATY arguments to support his legacy
[Rafa’s the best! “Oh Yeah, how come Novak had 3 Freaking whole years longer than Rafa’s still impressive 209 weeks??]

chrisford1 Says:

The ATP race for #1 scenarios based on how Medvedev and Djokovic do at Acapulco and Dubai:


If Novax stays Novax-inated, then he will never again be #1.
And Rafa will end up with more Slams and Masters and ATP 500s than Novak.
Even if he gets vaccinated, no certainty he will reclaim #1 or get more Slams and Masters. He’s not just battling Rafa.

Zed Says:

ChrisFord1, Yep, from day one he should have done exactly as Rafa has done and fake the vaccination. It’s so easy when you’ve got money, either the contents of the syringe get squirted on the floor or if there are many eyes around the syringe only contains a saline solution.

Either way, the certificate of vaccination is handed over and the cunning weasel Rafa can preach to Novak via the obsequious media.

Novak decided to be honest and that has hurt him.

They say honest is the best policy but like so many rules we always see exceptions.

Anto Says:


Do you have any proof as to how Nadal has faked his vaccination? Or are you just making shit up because your tiny little mind cant fathom the obvious- that what is happening to djokovic has nothing to do honestly but everything to do with stupidity?

Well I am not holding my breath for a real response from you. I would be glad to be proven wrong. Something I am not sure you are willing to do I am afraid.

Anto Says:

Typo – nothing to do with honesty

Zed Says:

Anto, no proof of course, just logical deduction. If I had solid proof such as whistle-blower etc of course I’d be making the fan boys aware of it.

My reasoning is, why would an elite sportsman risk an experimental injection when he must be aware of the high number of adverse reactions? By far, the lowest risk path is to claim vaccination but not actually take the unnecessary risk.

It would cost a few bucks and a willing nurse or similar. I am sure Spain would be over-flowing with willing participants.

I am disappointed Novak did not do the same thing as I’m sure he’d have no trouble at all getting a Serbian participant.

p.s. if my mind is tiny that does not bode well for your mind don’t you think? I haven’t accused you of being unintelligent because stating the obvious is unnecessary.

Andy Mira Says:

Whoo!!…I am AMAZED!!😯..Ado jugok oghe mace ni atah dunio nih!🤣🤦‍♀️

Giles Says:

It would seem Zed has a very active and depraved mind!
Zedddd. Rafa won 21. Can you not get your head around that? Poor you. In the words of Bog Boy let it go, let it go man! Lololol

Anto Says:


This will be the last I will speak to you about vaccines (it feels like you mind is set on this one). This “logical deduction” only works if your premise is correct. The premise being “risk an experimental injection when he must be aware of the high number of adverse reactions”. And herein lies the problem with your logic, this premise is wrong. ` There are two parts to your premise. The first one being the high number of adverse reactions. And the second being that Rafa is aware of this. Since we can never really know the second part, let’s focus on the first part which is demonstrably wrong.

This so called adverse reactions to the vaccines, the biggest one being myocarditis,(where you can even die from it in some cases), can be caused by the covid virus itself and can be magnitudes to times worse. This is unsurprising when you think about the fact that the vaccines tries to mimic the virus so as to produce the antibodies for it.

I am linking you an article which explains this in detail. This article references many peer reviewed articles where ever necessary.

Also I am sorry to have personal attacked you. You don’t have a tiny mind. You are mostly likely misinformed.

Btw given that you think Rafa faked his vaccination status, do you think almost every top level athlete did the same? Ie not just in tennis, but in football, basketball etc?

While you are at it I encourage you to really think through the things you are advocating or believing here. Try to imagine the other side of your thinking. What if you are dead wrong about everything vaccine related. What if the elites are not controlling every aspect of the world (this so called elites probably are controlling a huge percentage of the whole world economy probably). What if sometimes they do good for the society as a whole (maybe that in turn will indirectly help them more?). I implore you to ponder about this and about the kinda of sources from which you get your information from.

*NB- I may have wrongly attributed an anti-elite (not just in world elites, but also tennis elites) sentiment for you. Sorry if that is the case.

ChrisM Says:

@Zed “Why would an elite sportsman risk an experimental injection when he must be aware of the high number of adverse reactions”

Hilarious question. Ever heard of Barry Bonds? Lance Armstrong?

As far as Rafa goes, he’s on record respecting the science behind vaccines. That alone does not automatically mean Rafa or anyone sharing his position is definitely right (although most people who understand the scientific method and vaccine science specifically confirm that he’s among the people spreading correct information as opposed to misinformation), but this isn’t about fact vs opinion, but rather what’s being done with opinions. Anyone can have an opinion, about anything at all, and you’re entitled to yours. The danger is that some people with opinions are interested in participating in campaigns of misinformation or even slander. I won’t get into the reasons for this. Only the misinformation-spreader can really explain the whys as they pertain to the individual and their motivations.

A little advice for you, which I’m sure you won’t take: lay off smearing, especially without proof. The worst I’ve written about Novak is that he’s used the CVAC device (which WADA confirmed was against the spirit of fair competition in sport) and that I felt he should be held accountable for this. My opinion about him is based on fact. There are plenty out there disagreeing with me, but there’s truth in my lack of regard for his approach to his career. What you’ve done with your comments about Rafa and vaccination is considerably different. Rafa would be within his rights to ask you for an apology.

More generally, anti-vaccination stances are not science-based, so as a broad rule, if anyone participates in anti-vaccination opinion promotion, they reveal certain things to others about the development of critical thinking skills. Enjoy that final thought if you can.

Giles Says:

Novax reaction after Rafa’s 21st! That’s not very sporty now is it?

Zed Says:


It does get tiresome so I agree it should be the last we will speak of “vaccines” which in fact are new and insufficiently tested drugs which have been misleadingly categorised as vaccines.

My premise of adverse reactions has been added further weight by the “unexplained” and unprecedented 40% increase in deaths over previous years. This is most pronounced in those aged 18-49, with a similar but less pronounced increase in the 49-65 range. Note that this is after one excludes deaths attributed to COVID.

The deaths seem to be partially explained by an increase in murder and drugs & alcohol related deaths but even with those deaths excluded the “unexplained” increase is dramatic. There are an increasing number of health professionals who are becoming brave enough to link these deaths to mandating the RNA modifiers (I repeat that it is misleading to call them vaccines).

I know, I know, I know, you don’t want to hear it but this is real-world, real-financial impact on insurance companies. It is costing them real money that their actuaries did not budget for. One can choose to stick with what “approved” media releases report, that is one’s right in a currently-free country, but even if the media decides to not report this information it makes it no less accurate.

Here is one report on this phenomena which (as expected) is not being discussed in “approved” media channels.


Thanks for your apology about the size of my mind but then you decide to state I am misinformed and by implication that you are informed. This assumption of yours would be a function of the media you choose to listen to and the media you choose not to acknowledge.

I have little choice but to be aware of the reports in the media you choose to acknowledge, they are after all the mainstream and blanket all forms of communication. However, you may be unaware of reporting that is not line with the current narrative (stories such as the one I provided above). That is not unusual, in fact it puts you in the majority. All I’m saying is that you may want to entertain the possibility that you have not been given the full story or that some of what you have been given is inaccurate. If you decide that it’s impossible then so be it.

FYI, I saw the mainstream media completely and utterly ignore things like Hunter Biden’s laptop and its contents (it’s one example only). That was not something I imagined. It was not unusual for this to happen but it was worthy of note because even outlets which are supposedly competitors fell in line and refused to even acknowledge the story existed.

On the reverse side, I see the exact same phrasing (often word for word) on most outlets on whatever the current narrative is. I see the exact same emphasis for some stories and the exact same lower emphasis on other stories across most outlets as well. This leads me to conclude that there is centralised decision-making and centralised distribution of what the script should be.

This observation is given added weight when I see that 6 companies in the USA control (I think) 90% of commercial media and I see that the major shareholders in those 6 companies are the same (most notably Blackrock and Vanguard). I also note that the same company names are the funders of the World Economic Forum, a private entity.

In the end, being aware of all this makes not a scratch of difference. It’s actually a negative as it makes one concerned about things one can do nothing about. I can understand why someone would regret taking the red pill, life would have been easier if one remained blissfully unaware.

You seem to be a reasonable sort of bloke, I sincerely wish you good fortune and happiness, I extend the same wishes to your family and loved ones. I don’t think we’ll have agreement on these matters, I guess it doesn’t really matter whether we do or not.

Zed Says:


ChrisM said “Hilarious question. Ever heard of Barry Bonds? Lance Armstrong?”

I think Lance Armstrong and others were using performance enhancing drugs. I think the drugs they used were well known to increase performance (albeit at the risk of peripheral damage). I don’t see that there is any suggestion of these RNA modifiers increasing sporting performance so the same motivation is not there. The best you could argue when comparing the two is that Rafa and others truly believe they are “safer” after accepting the RNA modifier.

It’s a matter of risk vs reward. Armstrong won (I think) 5 Tour-De-France races, that was his reward, the risk would be things like kidney damage later in life. He was trading off potential future illness for sporting immortality. If we hadn’t been proven to be a cheat he’d still be in the record books.

What’s the risk vs reward with these RNA modifiers? Rafa is young and extremely fit so the risk of death from COVID is miniscule. However, these RNA modifiers are not sufficiently tested and (despite attempts to suppress the information) it is known that adverse reactions have killed some people, permanently disabled others and have increased instances of heart disease and blood clots.

It’s now not even disputed that incidents of myocarditis and pericarditis are increased (although the the WHO hold to the word “rare” when acknowledging this). Please note that at first it was literally banned to even make such a connection. People who made this suggestion were banned from Social Media platforms and banned from mainstream media but now with overwhelming evidence forcing their hand it has to be grudgingly acknowledged.

We need to remember that. We went from an emphatic and knee-jerk reaction of “you’re all anti-vaxxers and liars, you’re banned from any outlet where you can talk about your conspiracy theories” to “well, maybe there are some people, particularly young people who have developed heart disease due to our new wonder drug”. It’s important to not shove that down the memory hole. It’s important to ask “what else has been rejected but may be true?”

Here are the CDC’s and the WHO’s admissions (finally):


So the greater risk for Rafa seems to be with taking the RNA modifier. On balance, he has less risk from damage to his body if he contracts COVID than he does by being injected. It would be a perfectly logical decision to only pretend to have been injected.

ChrisM said “Vaccine science”

FYI, I am a happy vaxxer myself. My family have all been vaccinated from birth to adulthood and annually we update with the current flu vaccination as Winter approaches. This is proven technology.

However, it’s a trick to lump these RNA modifiers in with vaccines. You have been mislead Chris. The object of the deception is to increase trust for the new drug by categorising it under a name that has wide community acceptance.

The CDC went as far as changing its definition of vaccine.

The original definition was “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease”.

The new definition is “a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”

Note the move from “specific disease” to “diseases”. Note the removal of the word “immunity”.

These changes have been made because the RNA modifiers do not work like traditional vaccines and they produce different results from traditional vaccines. Under the original definition they are not vaccines.

All of that is to tell you that labeling people as anti-vax is unfair. They may be fully supportive of traditional vaccines but be hesitant to accept a new drug that is different and has not been as thoroughly tested. Surely that’s a reasonable concern?

Furthermore, even if someone is quite happy to be injected with the new experimental drug (as hundreds of millions have been) they may still not support MANDATORY injections. If someone is happy to be injected but supports the right of others to refuse said injection surely it is unfair and inaccurate to label those people as anti-vax? And yet, I see people label Canadian truckers this way even though they have risked the experimental drug themselves.

Clearly, all of these labels are designed to divide and conquer and they are applied to people with the collusion of the media and our political leaders.

But why? Why go to these lengths to set people against each other?

Also, how is it that they are all so aligned? Is it that they are all in full agreement? How is that even possible?

My instincts tell me that something else is afoot, something else is influencing all of this. You simply cannot have this level of coordinated attack on people unless there is a central control of communications.

ChrisM said “lay off smearing, especially without proof”

As I’ve said before, absent a whistle-blower there can be no proof. I’m just weighing up the risks vs the rewards that Rafa would calculate and concluding that he would assess it is less risky to fake the jab. Of course I could be totally wrong and he may have risked it and (thankfully) come through unscathed.

It looks like Novak will be forced to take this risk. What happens if he’s unlucky enough to have an adverse reaction as many others have? I’m pretty sure there will be a small number of people who would cheer his misfortune, I can name a few on this web site.

Of the others, how many of the sheep will feel regret that one of the greatest athletes of all time was forced to damage himself to satisfy their own howling demands for universal compliance? I suspect very few will feel even a pang of regret.

Anto Says:


I guess this is it then. Let’s agree to disagree.

“It looks like Novak will be forced to take this risk. What happens if he’s unlucky enough to have an adverse reaction as many others have?”.

This doesn’t look like happening as he is sticking to his decision of not getting vaccinated even if at the expense of not being the record holder for the most grand slams.

As a tennis fan I am sad that he is talking this route. I hoped he might actually give into the pressure and take the jab. I guess he have a huge level of integrity, something to be admired if it was under different circumstances.

But maybe some tournaments will actually start removing the restrictions and we might indeed get to see one of the GOATs play more and more matches and in turn possibly breaking more and more records.

Zed Says:

Anto, where did you read he was sticking to his decision?

Last I read, the reports were that he was wavering.

Zed Says:

p.s. I thought the UK was removing restrictions well in advance of Wimbeldon. Apologies if I have that wrong, I still cannot get Boris’s dancing skills out of my head.

Zed Says:

Never mind, I just searched and found Novak has done an interview with the BBC where he has said that for now his decision is to not accept these current vaccinations.


He emphasises something which he has always said. He is not anti-vax, he is not pro-vax, he is simply for a person’s right to choose.

Okiegal Says:

I am now watching a news broadcast and Novak just now said he is willing to give up defending his tiles at Wimby and the Frenchie if he’s required to get the jab……he’s refusing…. not budging. I heard him say it! It’s still a good while until both of these tournaments and the requirements could change unless a new variant pops up.

Anto Says:


Yes i was referring to that bbc interview. For some reason i forgot to mention that in my post

Giles Says:

The guy is playing for time He knows full well that restrictions all over the world will end sooner or later.

Top story: WTA Miami Masters Preview: Swiatek, Sabalenka, Rybakina, Gauff Lead Field
Most Recent story: ATP Miami Masters Preview: Alcaraz In First Big Title Defense; Medvedev, Sinner, Americans In Chase