Don't see why it was a travesty, Fed really blew it more than anything.
Greatest mens tennis player of all time
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
Yes, he threw it away. The better player lost the match in 3 tie breaks, the result didn’t fairly reflect the match.
He must have seen my post
I'm also a Federer fan, and i too would rather Nadal have it than Djokovic, and it isn't even close. Nadal is as classy as Novak is off-putting and classless at times. He's as humble as Novak is arrogant. Even if we focus solely on tennis, I prefer watching Nadal than Djokovic.
Remarkable accomplishment to win the 21st slam on his worst surface at nearly 36, after being injured the entire year, and to come back from 2 sets down to set the all time slam mark by winning after 5 hrs and 3 minutes.
Tennis after AO2010:
Federer 16 slams
Nadal 6 slams
Djokovic 1 slam
Tennis after AO2022
Nadal 21 slams
Federer 20 slams
Djokovic 20 slams
Nadal and Djokovic have been on a right roll this decade +
Federer 16 slams
Nadal 6 slams
Djokovic 1 slam
Tennis after AO2022
Nadal 21 slams
Federer 20 slams
Djokovic 20 slams
Nadal and Djokovic have been on a right roll this decade +
Last edited:
Wanted to say that. Nadal is one of the most humble and respectful dudes on tour (or so it seems from when ever I hear him talk).
In terms of my personal preference though, give me Safin or Medvedev any day.
It's Roger, it just is, and this is from a huge Rafa fan. Watching Roger play back in them day was literally the definition of watching the perfect sportsman. JesusFed transcended the sport in a way the others didn't.
Nadal is ahead right now in the GOAT race. 2 slams at least on each grand slam + 21 slams + Olympic gold. Djokovic isn't done yet. He has at least 2 decent years of tennis if he stops sabotaging himself and let tennis speak vs own ideology that majority disagrees with.
It's still going to be Novak but Nadal has given himself a much stronger chance than if he did not have that Career Double Grand Slam locked down. He's better than Novak at the USO and better at RG than Novak is at AO. Novak is better off at the H2Hs, the Wimbledon and ranking. Nadal atleast has a better chance now than he did earlier and I think Roger will definitely go down to 3rd now.
I mean we can all have our own definition of "greatest" but when it is all said and done, Federer will not have a single meaningful record ahead of Djokovic and Nadal. The only record Federer has, and that neither Nadal nor Djokovic can break is "consecutive weeks as number one". Nadal has more slams, Djokovic has more weeks at number one. Federer really needs another slam if he wants to enter the GOAT race again.
You can take them.
I could definitely kick Daniil's arse. 60 pound praying mantis looking motherfecker.
This is the thing with this kind of thing. People will point to his genuine influence on the other two and the game in general - almost anyone elite is reasonably capable on any surface now, this wasn't the case pre-Federer, the Australian and French Opens weren't massive events pre-Federer etc...
If you took it from a statistical point of view with a bit of context, it's probably always going to lead to Novak at this point outside of the Grand Slam lead. But he's Novak.... and he's a bit of a loon, which has cost him 2 strong chances in the past 18 months? (US20, AO22 - he also would of been red hot favourite for the cancelled W20). The other 2 have also taken full advantage of the chances he's given them, Federer shouldn't even be close if it wasn't for Djokovic being out of sorts in 2017 and well Nadal this year/anytime Novak blows the US.
There is another argument that Djokovic would not be anywhere near 20 if he wasn't a bit of a loon. Yeah, Federer is one of the greatest, no doubt about it, but homogenization of surfaces started in 90s. Agassi is a holder of all 4 as well. I remember debates in early 2000s if Agassi is greater than Sampras just because he is a holder of all 4 and Sampras never made it to even a final of Roland Garros.
Nadal, Djokovic and Federer are the greatest of all time, it is clear. Which one is the greatest is almost pointless. Federer might have made Nadal, and them together might have made Djokovic into the player he has become. Ridiculous pursuit of greatness has propelled all 3 into stratosphere no other tennis player might ever reach.
I saw a stat that Nadal has made 44 quarter finals in grand slams... and he's won 21 slams.... not far of saying if he makes the quarters he's 50-50 to win the whole tournament
That's pretty incredible
I thought novak could really make a claim for the goat status this year... given his actions on covid I'm glad it's falling apart
I hope none of the slams let him in till he's vaccinated and I suspect he's going to loose his no1 status soon
RG finalists pre-Nadal.... Coria, Gaudio, Ferrero, Costa, Corretja, Kuertan.... 1 other GS final between them - hell only 1 other SF between them too - both Ferraro. Even the 3 other semi's in Agassi's year never made another run elsewhere. Basically Cecchinato is only ultra clay specialist to make a run since 2005 really.... this was common place previously. Maybe this is down to more than how the surface is presented, but it's a bit convenient both the RG and AO start to genuinely attract the attention of fans and elite players more since Federer.
Anyone who doesn’t think it’s Tim Henman knows very little about tennis tbf
I think we need to distinguish the race for the most GS from the more tedious GOAT discussion.
It is very clear, and even Medvedev said that in the presentation, the players only really care about the GS race.
Federer, Nadal and Djokovic aren’t going to be sitting around a fire 20 years from now arguing about who had the most YE #1s, or the most consecutive weeks at #1, or the Olympics Gold, or best H2H, or the best H2H at Grand Slams, or the biggest fan following.
That’s for the nutter fan bases to keep arguing to eternity. With their kind of records, it is an argument for who can use selection bias better.
It is very clear, and even Medvedev said that in the presentation, the players only really care about the GS race.
Federer, Nadal and Djokovic aren’t going to be sitting around a fire 20 years from now arguing about who had the most YE #1s, or the most consecutive weeks at #1, or the Olympics Gold, or best H2H, or the best H2H at Grand Slams, or the biggest fan following.
That’s for the nutter fan bases to keep arguing to eternity. With their kind of records, it is an argument for who can use selection bias better.
His community manager has.He must have seen my post
I'm a Federer fan but the more the other two will pull away in the GS race (and I think both of them will be ahead by at least 2 when all is said and done), the more Federer fans will have to revert to the "eye test" argument imo. You can take some stats here and there, throw in influence on the game, etc. but the other side of the argument will always be that he's won less GS, simple as (and less tournaments overall than Djokovic and Nadal as well). 15 of his 20 GS titles came between '03-'09, the early ones when the competition was questionable (although can't be held against him imo). Never won the OS which Nadal has, didn't win each GS twice which both of the other two did, and the list goes on and on at this point.
Watching Federer at the top of his powers was just something else though, a bit like watching Ronaldinho 2005-2006 for me, just bewildering.
Watching Federer at the top of his powers was just something else though, a bit like watching Ronaldinho 2005-2006 for me, just bewildering.
Easy yes or no question if you don't mind answering, are you a Federer fan?
Nadal
John Lloyd > Tim Henman
Well that didn't work out as intended
Looks like Rafa still has a few projects ahead of him. Check out my boy Ivan Lendl.
Well looks like it did.
Yes. I mean No.
I find it strange how three current players are the three highest in history when it comes to winning Majors or Opens as I like to call them (less confusing).
I realise an individual can come in at a higher level and that will raise the level of the group but it had been for so long and now we are seeing Federer taper off which was inevitable really.
I can remember all the rivalries of ; Connors/Borg Borg /McEnroe McEnroe/Lendl and even Sampras/Agassi but the longevity of the current three is freakish.
I realise an individual can come in at a higher level and that will raise the level of the group but it had been for so long and now we are seeing Federer taper off which was inevitable really.
I can remember all the rivalries of ; Connors/Borg Borg /McEnroe McEnroe/Lendl and even Sampras/Agassi but the longevity of the current three is freakish.
I think the eye test is a legitimate argument. Federer elevated the sport in a way no one else ever did.
Though I think Nadal is the best (personal favourite so biased) I do think Federer had more of an aura of invincibility. Even 2 sets down, you just know he would win it in the end. Despite the final just gone, I haven’t overly felt that with Nadal.
I agree, and I've been trying to use that argument and praying no-one overtook him. However, in my heart of hearts, I feel like if they were all at their peaks, Roger would lose out against either Nadal or Novak. It hurts me to say because Roger just played tennis from another planet at times and I've never enjoyed watching anyone play even half as much.
Isn't this proven by the Head 2 head records? Gun to head, you would pick either of the other 2 to beat him in a one off.
You are choosing Federer when the criteria is coming back from behind, really? I hate the cnut but Djokovic has pretty much patented the ability to turn any game around on its head at any stage. It's pretty much one of his greatest traits at which he's clear a cut above the rest.
Unless he’s overtaken him, Federer had ten comebacks from 2 sets down which was joint top of the criteria. Maybe Djokovic has more now, I’m not sure.
His peak came before the two guys who are probably leading him in the GOAT debate, had the ages switched, they would have elevated the sport in a similar way and maybe even more.
It's all hypothetical, they might have never veen as good if not for Federer/Nadal, but they had to face more difficult opposition during their career than Federer and might have dominated even more.
Federer is 5 years older than Nadal, so not really.
@Pexbo won't be happy about this...he thinks its another ronaldo v messi thread 