Critics have often said that Nadal would be physically shot after 29 and at age 35 he is still competing at the highest level. He changed his game to use the net more often and to play short points in stead of making every point a long rally.
federer hasnt been as dependent on his physical attributes per se. His movement and IQ were the main contributors to his success. His movement has been decreasing with the problems he had and at age 40 he might have reached the end of his career.
I give Novak at this stage of his career the best papers to win more GS’s and potentially surpassing the 20 GS’s mark. The only thing missing in his career is the Gold medal.
When discussing the ‘goat’ these type of things do weigh. in the end, they all have unique records on their name and they will always be remember as the best 3 tennis players ever.
He's confident because he points out that it's the same injury which had multiple doctors predicting a short career for him. He overcame all of that and managed to perform beyond what many thought was possible for him, so it's understandable that he's positive, regardless of the prognosis.
Federer seemed a little resigned to the fact that it's difficult to compete at the elite level at that age, and with his injuries.
I agree that Novak has the best chance to own the GrandSlam mark, and I think he may end up doing it with a 2 slam buffer.
How big a role the lack of a Gold Medal and the fact that his nearest rivals are older and were at an age disadvantage during their rivalry is another topic.
I'm not entirely sure most tennis fans get into those nuances, but i might be wrong. I'm curious to see what the general consensus will be when they're all retired.