Nadal: "To really be satisfied, I have to become the best player of all time" [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Nadal: "To really be satisfied, I have to become the best player of all time"

andy neyer
06-08-2010, 11:32 PM
"There are still a lot of things missing. I must continue to improve. To really be satisfied, I have to become the best tennis player of all time. That'd be really great," Nadal said Sunday evening, a few hours after completely dominating Robin Soderling to win the French Open final 6-4, 6-2, 6-4.

"That's why I try to progress every day. I try to improve my serve, my forehand, my backhand, even my volley," the Spaniard said. "That makes me happy."

http://www.thedailynewsonline.com/articles/2010/06/08/sports/6821236.txt
__________________________________________________

I am surprised at how much work and dedication Nadal puts in his tennis. You'd think that after winning a GS and having a perfect clay season, you'd see him more relaxed and less concerned about improving his tennis but it seems to be just the opposite. Just a day after winning RG he was in London practicing on the grass courts of Queens under the rain and uncle Toni was speaking to the press about the different approaches they were trying to improve Rafa's serve.

I've to give it to Rafa. He's a hard worker and a tinkerer at heart. However, I don't want him to become the GOAT at all.

Montego
06-08-2010, 11:33 PM
These are the words of a real champion.

@Sweet Cleopatra
06-08-2010, 11:37 PM
:worship::worship::worship::worship:

I didn't think I would love Rafa more but I do now. Hope he achieves what he wants.

prima donna
06-08-2010, 11:38 PM
Right.

MalwareDie
06-08-2010, 11:39 PM
It's not going to happen.

andy neyer
06-08-2010, 11:41 PM
but plz andy dont put a link to this bad forum full of Rafa haters, it is against the rules also.

My bad. Corrected now.

Har-Tru
06-08-2010, 11:41 PM
It's not going to happen, but I like that attitude.

@Sweet Cleopatra
06-08-2010, 11:45 PM
My bad. Corrected now.

thx :hug:

elessar
06-09-2010, 12:05 AM
Good for you Rafa :hug:

Reminds me of a quote by a little Italian painter: "Lord, grant that I might always desire more than I can accomplish"

DwyaneWade
06-09-2010, 12:43 AM
Striving to max-out his ability, which is all anyone could ask of him. Much like Federer has.

It still won't make him the greatest player of all time, but he might as well pour everything he has into it. Better than guys who don't take it seriously and waste their god-given talent.

moon language
06-09-2010, 12:48 AM
Barring the fact that there is no measure for "greatest of all time" this kind of attitude is necessary for top players. Similar to how they go into slams believing they can win. Very few players who reach the top are surprised to find themselves there.

Pirata.
06-09-2010, 12:54 AM
It's not going to happen but it's a positive attitude for an already great player.

Tutu
06-09-2010, 12:54 AM
:worship: I believe.

Arkulari
06-09-2010, 01:11 AM
Rafa's finally speaking his mind, I LOVE it :yeah:

coonster14
06-09-2010, 01:17 AM
good on u rafa, that is why you are my favourite player. always willing to improve and such a hard worker, respect!!! :worship:

Filo V.
06-09-2010, 01:35 AM
No words needed just :worship:

Belief like this is what really separates great players from legendary ones.

Filo V.
06-09-2010, 01:35 AM
Never say never, everybody. You never know what might just happen.

guga2120
06-09-2010, 01:39 AM
That must be a misquote, or he messed up the English. That does not sound like him at all.

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 01:42 AM
No words needed just :worship:

Belief like this is what really separates great players from legendary ones.

He's expressing ambition and desire rather than belief.

Filo V.
06-09-2010, 01:45 AM
He's expressing ambition and desire rather than belief.
It's also a belief too, a belief that he can be the best, a belief that if he puts in the work and continues to improve, he can reach highs no-one else has ever achieved. I guess ambition is the best word though, In any case, that statement to me is definitely honorable.

guga2120
06-09-2010, 01:48 AM
Even if he said that, which I doubt he did. He has to know his knees would never last long enough for him to get that. He already is the clay GOAT, thats a pretty good legacy to have.

Mjau!
06-09-2010, 01:49 AM
Ja, his dedication to the game and always striving to improve and be the best he can be is certainly admirable.

Persimmon
06-09-2010, 01:56 AM
I don't think he will win more than 10 slams.

lurker
06-09-2010, 02:05 AM
Never say never, everybody. You never know what might just happen.
:yeah:
Many people thought Sampras' record could never be beat. Or be beaten so soon. I didn't think Fed's could be beat...it would be very difficult. But seeing Nadal say THAT, certainly makes tennis more exciting again with the prospect that he can be beat. Nadal's always managed to accomplish things that I thought were very difficult or impossible.

Johnny Groove
06-09-2010, 02:17 AM
Respect.

careergrandslam
06-09-2010, 02:21 AM
my wish for rafa is that he gets in the top tier of players with federer, laver, sampras and borg.

i would love if rafa can finish his career with 12+ slams, perfect scenario for me would be if he fininshed like this(2AO,2US,3WIM,8FO), 200+ weeks at number 1, 3 year end number 1 ranked, 2 WTF titles, olympic singles gold, 5 davis cup titles, 30 masters series(winning each masters 1000 atleast twice).

i can always dream cant i.
:lol:

MrChopin
06-09-2010, 02:53 AM
http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a223/Mr_Chopin/George_Takei_LOLs.gif?t=1276051916

Elbarto
06-09-2010, 02:59 AM
be careful about this interview, Rafa gave this interview to french television and he talked in spanish but the live translation ( in french ) was not accurate, the lady who made the translation made a mistake ( probably ),

I think Rafa never said "I want to become the best player of all time", it was not his exact words,

in fact Rafa probably said in spanish "I have to improve myself to become better all the time" ( better for winning US Open for example )

we know that the big problem for Rafa is to be competitive all the season ( from january to november ) but the game level of Rafa can drop dramatically after Wimbledon/Toronto ( injuries, bad game style on hardcourts ), that's why Rafa wants to become better in order to be competitive at the end of the season ( US Open - Shangai - Masters Cup London )

careergrandslam
06-09-2010, 03:25 AM
be careful about this interview, Rafa gave this interview to french television and he talked in spanish but the live translation ( in french ) was not accurate, the lady who made the translation made a mistake ( probably ),

I think Rafa never said "I want to become the best player of all time", it was not his exact words,

in fact Rafa probably said in spanish "I have to improve myself to become better all the time" ( better for winning US Open for example )

we know that the big problem for Rafa is to be competitive all the season ( from january to november ) but the game level of Rafa can drop dramatically after Wimbledon/Toronto ( injuries, bad game style on hardcourts ), that's why Rafa wants to become better in order to be competitive at the end of the season ( US Open - Shangai - Masters Cup London )

these french cant even translate a simple thing.

2003
06-09-2010, 03:31 AM
Who says he can't become the Greatest Of All Time?

A career slam is more than possible at the United States Open with a good draw. He could pick up another Olympic Singles Gold medal in 2 years. He could easily go 12+ slams. And he could have a positive h2h against everyone from his era.

Who says he couldn't be GOAT?

Clowns :o

nastoff
06-09-2010, 03:36 AM
He'll easily be the best on clay as he's got another 3 to 5 French titles for sure but for hard courts his game is not strong enough.
Having said that he's won the 3 out of 4 grand slams and he's only missing the US Open. If he comes close at accomplishing that, people might change their perspective. It'll take a radical change of his game for that to happen though.

MIMIC
06-09-2010, 04:22 AM
Wait, wait, wait......is Nadal talking about OTHER people being satisfied with him (in a kind of eye roll, sarcastic sort of way)....OR him being satisfied with HIMSELF?

collo1978
06-09-2010, 04:55 AM
I don't think he will win more than 10 slams.

I assume your saying that in regards to how he plays, the toll on his body.

HKz
06-09-2010, 05:47 AM
inb4morepeopledrooloverrafaasifheistheonlyonethatt riestoimproveorgiveshis100%

NADALbULLS
06-09-2010, 06:29 AM
Greatest 23-year-old of all-time, greatest 24-year-old of all-time, and getting better.

Castafiore
06-09-2010, 06:31 AM
Even if he said that, which I doubt he did. He has to know his knees would never last long enough for him to get that. He already is the clay GOAT, thats a pretty good legacy to have.
Well, he did say it but I don't think that it is in the sense of wanting the legacy of being the GOAT but in the sense of striving for perfection or at least, get as close as possible.

What he says (and says often) is that he's never satisfied with his game, he always wants to improve and for him, to be satisfied would mean that he's the best player (of all time) and that he has reached perfection. In other words: he's never going to be fully satisfied and he'll aways want to improve.

Macbrother
06-09-2010, 07:01 AM
"There are still a lot of things missing. I must continue to improve. To really be satisfied, I have to become the best tennis player of all time. That'd be really great," Nadal said Sunday evening, a few hours after completely dominating Robin Soderling to win the French Open final 6-4, 6-2, 6-4.

"That's why I try to progress every day. I try to improve my serve, my forehand, my backhand, even my volley," the Spaniard said. "That makes me happy."

Regardless of the correction translation this is the attitude I would expect any great champion to have.

Greatest 23-year-old of all-time, greatest 24-year-old of all-time, and getting better.

There's a certain Swede you've seemed to overlook who was greater at both of these ages, and in all likelihood will be better at 25 as well.

born_on_clay
06-09-2010, 07:48 AM
champion :D

FairWeatherFan
06-09-2010, 08:54 AM
Only a fool could regard Nadal as the GOAT, no matter what he wins in the future.

Acer
06-09-2010, 09:10 AM
Good for you Rafa :hug:

Reminds me of a quote by a little Italian painter: "Lord, grant that I might always desire more than I can accomplish"

I'm preparing the WHEELCHAIR as we speak.

bokehlicious
06-09-2010, 10:04 AM
fat head Nadal at it again... :yawn: :zzz: :zzz:

Nidhogg
06-09-2010, 10:06 AM
The context of what he's saying is that he's always striving to improve.

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 10:24 AM
Sounds unlike him & suspect something was lost in translation. Certainly Federer has never said anything so arrogant.

Vaccine
06-09-2010, 10:52 AM
he isn't so full of himself to actually call himself a GOAT, come on :lol: I think what he meant was to always be ready to get better and not consider his game perfect because you just cant be perfect no matter what.
There is nothing in this world that can be asumed 'perfect' so there isn't anyone that can be called GOAT too :shrug:

FormerRafaFan
06-09-2010, 11:09 AM
I like this new Nadal. He isn't afraid to speak his mind anymore. I do think he could be TOO humble in the past.. Him saying this and the stuff he said about Federer is good IMO. He seems more confident than ever too :)

AsGoodAsNew
06-09-2010, 11:55 AM
Look a tthe responses in this thread. You can't please all the people all the time. You can't even please some of the people all of the time. Some people you can never please.

What he said seems pretty innocuous to me with nothing wrong with it at all.

Puschkin
06-09-2010, 12:02 PM
That must be a misquote, or he messed up the English. That does not sound like him at all.

I am not his closest follower, but I share this impression. This does not sound "original".

Daniel123
06-09-2010, 12:02 PM
Rafa :angel:

careergrandslam
06-09-2010, 12:14 PM
Only a fool could regard Nadal as the GOAT, no matter what he wins in the future.

well nadal is 24 years old and he is the clayGOAT and is in the tier 3 of allround GOAT.
nadal is already an icon of tennis, his popularity around the world is huge.
there is absolutely nothing u can do about it.
his reputation will only enhance the more majors he wins.

as they say, haters gonna be haters and hate!

Orka_n
06-09-2010, 12:51 PM
Nadal won't ever become GOAT.

Hater or fan, that's the truth.

Matt01
06-09-2010, 01:00 PM
Nadal won't ever become GOAT.

Hater or fan, that's the truth.


You're a hater, that's for sure :lol:

Diprosalic
06-09-2010, 01:07 PM
win 10 GS more and we can talk. :)

and not just 10 more RG :)

careergrandslam
06-09-2010, 01:15 PM
Nadal won't ever become GOAT.

Hater or fan, that's the truth.

maybe not better than federer or laver, but i think rafa has a good shot at being better than borg and sampras if he can win more slams outside of the FO.

Filo V.
06-09-2010, 01:26 PM
Only a fool could regard Nadal as the GOAT, no matter what he wins in the future.

You are simply a biased hater though, so it isn't like your opinion is actually valid.

Filo V.
06-09-2010, 01:33 PM
He'll easily be the best on clay as he's got another 3 to 5 French titles for sure but for hard courts his game is not strong enough.
Having said that he's won the 3 out of 4 grand slams and he's only missing the US Open. If he comes close at accomplishing that, people might change their perspective. It'll take a radical change of his game for that to happen though.

It would take a good draw and him playing well and not being physically damaged by that time of year. Because he still is one of the better hard court players today, and no matter the surface it's difficult to beat him in 5 sets.

If he wins the US, gets a few more RG and Wimbledon titles, another AO title, he's already got a few Davis Cup titles, Olympics Gold, he's #1 in most Masters series (and would be improved if he won Miami and Cincinnati finally), several doubles titles, a positive H2H vs. Federer, he stays #1 for a few years running, and his accomplishments are right up there with the best. I don't know how likely it is, but you can never say never. If he believes he can do it with hard work, that's nothing but commendable.

UsD.AnDreS
06-09-2010, 01:40 PM
Don't care if it is misquote or not, just a huge respect for the fact of him already being at Queens and improving his game in spite of everything (meaning rain and a clay season which ended only a couple of days ago for him)

ufiors
06-09-2010, 01:55 PM
From Federer fan, I admit that Nadal has a real chance to become the GOAT. Why? Why have 24 years Nadal has already won seven Grand Slams, Masters Series has the record, won three times the Davis Cup and the Olympic medal. For me, may well exceed the record of Sampras weeks at No. 1.
I remember Roger at 24, ie in 2005 he won six Grand Slam. So do not say that he can not, he can!

Matt01
06-09-2010, 03:11 PM
win 10 GS more and we can talk. :)

and not just 10 more RG :)


10 more RG and + 1 USO title would seal the deal :D

Pirata.
06-09-2010, 03:18 PM
won three times the Davis Cup

I don't really think the Davis Cup is something that makes a person a GOAT. It's a good thing to have on a resume, but it doesn't add any weight to the GOAT argument, imo. Davis Cup is a team effort, you need a strong team and Rafa is one of the best players in the world, but if his Spanish compatriots were not as good as they are, Spain would not have won so much this decade.

I think most of the current teams would kill to have one current and one former world #1s on their team, let alone three guys currently or formerly ranked inside the top ten.

Certainly Rafa helped, but it was very much a team effort and so often the other Spanish players barely get recognised for their contribution to Spain's DC wins.

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 03:32 PM
A player's individual Davis Cup record is probably more important.

star
06-09-2010, 03:43 PM
From Federer fan, I admit that Nadal has a real chance to become the GOAT. Why? Why have 24 years Nadal has already won seven Grand Slams, Masters Series has the record, won three times the Davis Cup and the Olympic medal. For me, may well exceed the record of Sampras weeks at No. 1.
I remember Roger at 24, ie in 2005 he won six Grand Slam. So do not say that he can not, he can!

From a Nadal fan, I have to disagree. I don't think Nadal will pass Federer's number of GS titles. I would be pleased if he gets a USO title, but I don't count on that either. I don't see Nadal as a ueber dominant player -- except on clay of course. :worship: He's going to be a force in every tournament he enters, but he's never going to be unstoppable. His nemesis might come back healthy. If both are healthy, it will be interesting to see how the match up plays out.

joplin
06-09-2010, 04:32 PM
It's not going to happen.already a fortune tellers
come on, i dont really know if majors are the only criterium for GOAT. I mean Emerson has 12, and he is not even close to the discussion.
we ll have to wait for another 5 years or so to reopen this discussion

guy in sf
06-09-2010, 04:34 PM
First of all I think that attitude is what it takes to become such a champion and I find it somewhat surprising that he said that because he's pretty humble most of the time. However I don't think he will become the best in history and for sure he won't break Fed's GS record. Also I'm not a fan of his style of heavy topspin but a huge fan of his fighting spirit on the court!

Everko
06-09-2010, 04:38 PM
Classic Rafa:worship: This is why he is the champion

Corey Feldman
06-09-2010, 04:52 PM
good to know he admits he'll be a complete failure when he ends his career with less GS than Federer

Orka_n
06-09-2010, 05:02 PM
You're a hater, that's for sure :lol:Obviously, but who cares? :shrug: I said it was irrelevant, my point remains true anyway.

Classic Rafa:worship: This is why he is the championWhat kind of joke is this? You're supposed to be banned. Mods, what's going on here? ...I was looking forward to 3 months of peace. I'm seriously angry now. :banghead:

connectolove
06-09-2010, 05:03 PM
That must be a misquote, or he messed up the English. That does not sound like him at all.

No, no, that is what he really said and thinks. And who knows, Nadal's era just started.

raahaat7
06-09-2010, 05:26 PM
I m not a Nadal fan. But having won 7 G.S. he deserves all our respect and admiration. After all not many people have 7 G.S or 5 F.O. titles to their credit. He is just 24. He surely can win many more slams in the next few years. Remember Agassi won 5 G.S. titles after having turned 29. One U.S.O. win for him, and every body will be discussing whether he was a G.O.A.T candidate.

peribsen
06-09-2010, 06:18 PM
come on, i dont really know if majors are the only criterium for GOAT. I mean Emerson has 12, and he is not even close to the discussion.

But Emerson is not usually counted in the discussion because he won his slams in the pre-open era, when many of his best rivals (Laver, Rosewall) couldn´t play because they had turned pros. By the way, Emerson's achievement was anyhow impressive, not only did he win 12 majors, but he did so in all 4 (6 AO + 2 each of FO, WB, USO). That puts him miles above other great achievers from early dates like Tilden, who got 10 majors but 'only' in Wimby and NY (both grass back then).

If Nadal ends up with >10 slams but say 80% are on clay, you could say he did a Tilden. But if he wins several out of clay, especially if they include some more on both grass and hard, then he will deserve to be ahead of Emerson.

For me, this should be about number of slams AND balance between different surfaces. That's what places Laver's 11 majors (3-2-4-2 in AO/FO/W/USO) way ahead of Emerson and arguably of Sampras (who never won FO) and even may justify somebody choosing Laver over Fed (4-1-6-5, with the single FO meaning he hasn´t been exactly dominant in every surface). Though Fed may still improve that result and I guess than putting Laver's 11 over Fed's 16 is stretching it too far.

tektonac
06-09-2010, 06:24 PM
while one has to respect his attitude and professionalism i would have to add that it would be sad for tennis if his play style took him there :shrug:

Sillyrabbit
06-09-2010, 06:26 PM
Well there's a huge chance that won't happen, so I really hope this statement doesn't mean if it doesn't, he'll end his career filling "unfulfilled".

rafa_maniac
06-09-2010, 06:33 PM
Well there's a huge chance that won't happen, so I really hope this statement doesn't mean if it doesn't, he'll end his career filling "unfulfilled".

I'm sure he won't as he's repeatedly stated how "lucky" he feels to have had the success he's had already, and unlike Federer doesn't seem remotely interested in his place in the history books.

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 06:49 PM
I'm sure he won't as he's repeatedly stated how "lucky" he feels to have had the success he's had already, and unlike Federer doesn't seem remotely interested in his place in the history books.

Yeah, although to be fair, somebody with Nadal's manifest lack of facility with languages is unlikely to be much of an historian either.

peribsen
06-09-2010, 06:53 PM
.. and unlike Federer doesn't seem remotely interested in his place in the history books.

Wouldn´t be so sure of that, he does care. Difference is he insists he'll think about his place in history when he is over, won't lose time and effort worrying about that while he has a job to do.

And despite all the fanfare on MTF around the Fed-Rafa comparison, Rafa knows that history is not only about Fed and who ends up GOAT. He knows he is reaching the heights of other great players (McEnroe with 7 majors, for example) and seems to enjoy the ride without becoming obsessed with Fed.

peribsen
06-09-2010, 06:57 PM
while one has to respect his attitude and professionalism i would have to add that it would be sad for tennis if his play style took him there :shrug:

For me, the fun in being a Nadal fan has always been in seeing if he can pull it out once more, rather than on enjoying the beauty of his tennis. If Nadal simply outshone all his rivals, it would get kind of boring after a time. Its the grit and the fight that keep me glued to the TV set.

rafa_maniac
06-09-2010, 07:10 PM
Yeah, although to be fair, somebody with Nadal's manifest lack of facility with languages is unlikely to be much of an historian either.

I'm sure he's learnt enough in his native language to know a bit about tennis history :o

andy neyer
06-09-2010, 07:15 PM
Yeah, although to be fair, somebody with Nadal's manifest lack of facility with languages is unlikely to be much of an historian either.

haha funny but uncalled for...

I'm sure there are history books in Catalán too.

Matt01
06-09-2010, 07:25 PM
good to know he admits he'll be a complete failure when he ends his career with less GS than Federer


You're good at twisting other people's words, no?

Filo V.
06-09-2010, 07:46 PM
while one has to respect his attitude and professionalism i would have to add that it would be sad for tennis if his play style took him there :shrug:

Tennis is about victories, not style of play or who is the flashiest. And, since Rafa is already popular world wide, I don't see that as being an issue at all. There is no set rule a player has to play a certain way and that's what makes someone great.

SetSampras
06-09-2010, 08:06 PM
Had he not been on injury reserve every season.. i see no reason why he couldn't come close to being the best.. Afterall he has shitted on the supposed GOAT time and time again on damn near every surface

paschan
06-09-2010, 08:44 PM
nalbandianesque attitude...

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 09:09 PM
I'm sure he's learnt enough in his native language to know a bit about tennis history :o

You're assuming he can read.

Obviously I'm joking ffs.

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 09:09 PM
Had he not been on injury reserve every season.. i see no reason why he couldn't come close to being the best.. Afterall he has shitted on the supposed GOAT time and time again on damn near every surface

How come Krajicek was never the GOAT?

star
06-09-2010, 09:25 PM
How come Krajicek was never the GOAT?

Maybe because 6-4 is not as impressive as 14-7. Maybe because Richard only beat Sampras one time at a GS, and Nadal has beaten Federer what? 5 times at a GS?

I think that's the distinction. :)

peribsen
06-09-2010, 09:27 PM
How come Krajicek was never the GOAT?


Because he only won once?

Sophocles
06-09-2010, 09:29 PM
Maybe because 6-4 is not as impressive as 14-7. Maybe because Richard only beat Sampras one time at a GS, and Nadal has beaten Federer what? 5 times at a GS?

I think that's the distinction. :)

I repeat, how come Krajicek wasn't the GOAT before Nadal?

HKz
06-09-2010, 09:30 PM
Maybe because 6-4 is not as impressive as 14-7. Maybe because Richard only beat Sampras one time at a GS, and Nadal has beaten Federer what? 5 times at a GS?

I think that's the distinction. :)

Clay

Corey Feldman
06-09-2010, 09:31 PM
Had he not been on injury reserve every season.. i see no reason why he couldn't come close to being the best.. Afterall he has shitted on the supposed GOAT time and time again on damn near every surfacewho won 2 out of the 3 finals they played in the most important tournament of all, the tournament that dwarfs RG, AO, USO (USO which Nadal has not won yet btw) ?

Thx.

M4RC
06-09-2010, 10:30 PM
Clay

Wimbledon and AO are also played on clay or only when Nadal wins? Wimbledon 2008 = clay / 2009 = grass / 2010 = clay or grass, depends on the outcome.

who won 2 out of the 3 finals they played in the most important tournament of all, the tournament that dwarfs RG, AO, USO (USO which Nadal has not won yet btw) ?

Thx.

You have no clue, so don't try to hide that fact behind biased statements. 3 RG F + SF, 1 Wimbledon F + 1 AO F = 3/4 Slams finals. I don't think Fed wants to face Nadal on the USO.

luie
06-09-2010, 11:12 PM
Who says he can't become the Greatest Of All Time?

A career slam is more than possible at the United States Open with a good draw. He could pick up another Olympic Singles Gold medal in 2 years. He could easily go 12+ slams. And he could have a positive h2h against everyone from his era.

Who says he couldn't be GOAT?

Clowns :o
Nadull cannot ever,ever be GOAT,regardless of what he accomplishes or his h2h with federer,& the other members of the top ten. A moonballing dirtballer with no serve can't ever be the GOAT.His primitive game would not transcend to other eras.:sad:

luie
06-09-2010, 11:14 PM
Only a fool could regard Nadal as the GOAT, no matter what he wins in the future.
+1

luie
06-09-2010, 11:16 PM
well nadal is 24 years old and he is the clayGOAT and is in the tier 3 of allround GOAT.
nadal is already an icon of tennis, his popularity around the world is huge.
there is absolutely nothing u can do about it.
his reputation will only enhance the more majors he wins.

as they say, haters gonna be haters and hate!
Nope.:wavey: Not yet anyway.

luie
06-09-2010, 11:20 PM
10 more RG and + 1 USO title would seal the deal :D
Nothing will seal the deal even if he win 1,000 slam.It is illogical for a player with NO serve & a moonballing forehand to be the GOAT. IT would mean the era has become extremely weak if this were to happen.Nothing against nadull personally but his game & skill level is the issue not his accomplishments.

luie
06-09-2010, 11:27 PM
Had he not been on injury reserve every season.. i see no reason why he couldn't come close to being the best.. Afterall he has shitted on the supposed GOAT time and time again on damn near every surface
Nope the H2H off clay is 5-4 your analysis is factually inaccurate.He is able to beat fed on every surface but federer is also able to beat him on every surface. Bottom line Nadull owns federer on clay ,while federer is able to edge him off clay for most of their careers to date. Based on cold had facts.
Total H2H 14-7 Major advantage nadull
Clay 10-2 OWNAGE
OFF clay (all other surfaces) 5-4 edge federer.

Fiberlight1
06-09-2010, 11:28 PM
Nothing will seal the deal even if he win 1,000 slam.It is illogical for a player with NO serve & a moonballing forehand to be the GOAT. IT would mean the era has become extremely weak if this were to happen.Nothing against nadull personally but his game & skill level is the issue not his accomplishments.

Have you even seen Borg play on clay?

Unfortunately, the only appropriate measure of GOATness is accomplishments, not "game" and "skill level".

If those were the measurements, someone like Berdych or Davydenko who have great games and high peaks could be considered better than Nadal or Borg.

luie
06-09-2010, 11:41 PM
Maybe because 6-4 is not as impressive as 14-7. Maybe because Richard only beat Sampras one time at a GS, and Nadal has beaten Federer what? 5 times at a GS?

I think that's the distinction. :)
Their is a distinction,nadull is a moonballing dirtballer who RULES clay, including the ownage of federer,3-0 in FO finals, while off clay its 2-2 & federer owns a 5-4 advantage off clay.I can be mistaken but Richard & Pete never met on clay so if we go by that criteria federer is greater than nadull 5-4. However in overall h2h then nadull has the advantage so in essence it not a good eg. Also lets not get into why nadull NEVER made a final @ cincy,US OPEN or beat federer A YEC. :sad:

andy neyer
06-09-2010, 11:45 PM
Unfortunately, the only appropriate measure of GOATness is accomplishments,

Actually, there is no appropriate measure for GOATness.

luie
06-09-2010, 11:48 PM
Have you even seen Borg play on clay?

Unfortunately, the only appropriate measure of GOATness is accomplishments, not "game" and "skill level".

If those were the measurements, someone like Berdych or Davydenko who have great games and high peaks could be considered better than Nadal or Borg.
Borg has a better SERVE than nadull that for sure.
All the GOAT contenders have GREAT/GOOD SERVE, Pancho Gonzalez,Laver,Samprass,federer,BORG.
With NO serve nadull will be BLASTED-OFF court in any era off clay. EVEN his CHIEF RIVAL who he has a match-up advantage over edges him 5-4 off clay,with-out mentioning his match-up issues with the tall 2 handed bh players with more lopsided H2H with him off clay.

Wolfy
06-09-2010, 11:54 PM
Win USO and 8 more slams.
Rafa is capable of doing this.

Fiberlight1
06-09-2010, 11:59 PM
Actually, there is no appropriate measure for GOATness.

Accomplishments are the best we have.. Without a doubt..

Matt01
06-10-2010, 12:45 AM
Nothing will seal the deal even if he win 1,000 slam.It is illogical for a player with NO serve & a moonballing forehand to be the GOAT. IT would mean the era has become extremely weak if this were to happen.Nothing against nadull personally but his game & skill level is the issue not his accomplishments.


1.123 posts of spreading incompetent crap about Nadal and his game. That's quite an achievement, even for MTF standards. Congrats! :yeah:

luie
06-10-2010, 12:50 AM
1.123 posts of spreading incompetent crap about Nadal and his game. That's quite an achievement, even for MTF standards. Congrats! :yeah:

Nope, Alot has been spread about , the man in your aviator.

jenanun
06-10-2010, 01:02 AM
wow so many haters here..

i think he has got a good attitude... thats how he is motivated to improve his tennis... I don't see there is anything wrong.. it doesn't mean he will be become one...

@Sweet Cleopatra
06-10-2010, 02:46 AM
wow so many haters here..

i think he has got a good attitude... thats how he is motivated to improve his tennis... I don't see there is anything wrong.. it doesn't mean he will be become one...

I don't think they are haters, I think they are Federer or other player fans that think another great player is not a pleasing thing. Which is a childish attitude.

As for me I don't like how everyone either a fan or a hater is pressuring Rafa and every things he says, he is free person and he can say whatever he wants whether we like it or not, plus he is a phenomenon already with all accomplishments at younger age than most players in history so he has the right to hope for being the best.

Mr. Oracle
06-10-2010, 04:41 AM
If Nadal stays healthy, he will surpass frauderer. Way more heart for the spaniard.

christallh24
06-10-2010, 04:55 AM
Nothing will seal the deal even if he win 1,000 slam.It is illogical for a player with NO serve & a moonballing forehand to be the GOAT.

Illogical? In 15-20 years, tennis history books will not care what kind of game he has, but that and what he won.

IT would mean the era has become extremely weak if this were to happen.Nothing against nadull personally but his game & skill level is the issue not his accomplishments.

So for you game & skill level matter, but Rafa's accomplishments are exactly what will decide his legacy. I felt/feel the same about Sampras and Roger. I didn't/don't care what or how many slams they won, for me quantity doesn't equal greatness.

Their is a distinction

No, you make a distinction. I doubt the books will. Numbers will tell the story. Rafa has some good ones. And he's not even done yet.

Also lets not get into why nadull NEVER made a final @ cincy,US OPEN or beat federer A YEC. :sad:

You're just bobbing and weaving. 3 events? You pull only 3 events out of how many ATP tournaments? Oh, and I love how you conveniently left off the hard court tounaments that he did get to the finals or won.

As for beating Roger...who knows. Why did Del Potro beat him at last year's USO? Why didn't he win last years' YEC? Why did his GOATiness lose to Rafa 14 times?:sad:

Actually, there is no appropriate measure for GOATness.

Agree. The only athlete I'm comfortable saying is the greatest of all time, is Micheal Jordan. And I get wavery even with that.

Borg has a better SERVE than nadull that for sure.
All the GOAT contenders have GREAT/GOOD SERVE, Pancho Gonzalez,Laver,Samprass,federer,BORG.
With NO serve nadull will be BLASTED-OFF court in any era off clay. EVEN his CHIEF RIVAL who he has a match-up advantage over edges him 5-4 off clay,with-out mentioning his match-up issues with the tall 2 handed bh players with more lopsided H2H with him off clay.

:confused: What lopsided H2H? And yeah, so what Fed edges him 5-4 off clay? What shame is that stat? I see you are choosing to have selective memory when it comes to Rafa, so there really is no point to me trying to make a case. There is no sense in comparing Rafa to Roger, who is five years older than him, or any other player. Ultimately, only time will tell.

Oh, but Luie, I'd like to know how those great/good serves and games of their's helped Borg and Sampras with the slams they DIDN'T win?

careergrandslam
06-10-2010, 07:23 AM
u know when rafa is doing well because thats when the hatred of nadal intensifies.

careergrandslam
06-10-2010, 07:55 AM
Nope.:wavey: Not yet anyway.

NADAL CLAY STATS:

- 6 FO played.
- 5 FO won.
- 4 consecutive FO won.
- 5 FO finals.
- 5-0(100%) win-loss record in FO finals.
- 4 consecutive FO finals.
- 2 FO won without losing a set.
- 3 times reached FO final without losing a set.
- 115-10(92%) sets win-loss record in FO.
- 32 consecutive sets won in FO.
- 38-1(97%) matches win-loss record in FO.
- 31 consecutive matches won in FO.
- 6 monte carlo titles(6 consecutive).
- 5 rome titles.(3 consecutive)
- 5 barcelona titles(5 consecutive).
- 2 hamburg/madrid titles.
- winning 'CLAY SLAM' in one season(monte carlo + rome + madrid + french open in one season).
- 29 clay titles.
- 13 clay titles won without dropping a set.
- 29-2(94%) win-loss record in clay finals.
- 81 clay winning streak.
- 57-1(98%) win-loss record in best of 5-set matches on clay.
- won his first 48 matches in best of 5-set matches on clay.
- 203-16(93%) win-loss record on clay(best winning percentage on clay).
- quickest player (losing fewest matches) in the Open Era to reach 200 claycourt wins (200 out of 216 ).


the ones in bold are world records!





:wavey::wavey::wavey::wavey::wavey::wavey::wavey:

borg who?

nadal is clayGOAT, deal with it!

thanks for coming bjorn borg.

born_on_clay
06-10-2010, 08:08 AM
thanks for bringing up these stats :D

careergrandslam
06-10-2010, 08:40 AM
thanks for bringing up these stats :D

no problem.

im gathering the data and preparing bjorn borg's clay stats.
so we can compare them both, but i can tell u that nadal is leading borg on pretty much every category that i have mentioned except for a couple of them.

nadal is the clayGOAT.

ShotmaKer
06-10-2010, 09:33 AM
u know when rafa is doing well because thats when the hatred of nadal intensifies.

that's also when his tards can't shut it with the gloating, so all in all one sort of causes the other. on topic, if his knees leave him the eff alone (which i don't think they will, unfortunately for him) he might as well have a shot at it - or at least, i can't see why he should not think he could.

Sophocles
06-10-2010, 09:49 AM
If we're talking about surpassing Federer's slam count, & assuming he wins Wimbledon this year (a big assumption), Nadal will have to win 2 slams a season for the next 4 seasons, plus another slam, taking him up to the age of 28. I'm sure I don't have to explain why this is unlikely.

This, of course, is assuming Federer fails to win another slam, ever.

careergrandslam
06-10-2010, 10:03 AM
If we're talking about surpassing Federer's slam count, & assuming he wins Wimbledon this year (a big assumption), Nadal will have to win 2 slams a season for the next 4 seasons, plus another slam, taking him up to the age of 28. I'm sure I don't have to explain why this is unlikely.

This, of course, is assuming Federer fails to win another slam, ever.

nadal can become 2nd best of all time after federer if he stays healthy.

bokehlicious
06-10-2010, 10:07 AM
that's also when his tards can't shut it with the gloating

They will vanish as always as soon as Rafa starts losing (read: when he gets his next injury :o) :shrug:

careergrandslam
06-10-2010, 10:17 AM
They will vanish as always as soon as Rafa starts losing (read: when he gets his next injury :o) :shrug:

so ur praying he gets injured?

class!

paseo
06-10-2010, 10:27 AM
- winning 'CLAY SLAM' in one season(monte carlo + rome + madrid + french open in one season).
[/B]

I may be wrong here, but among those tournaments, I think only French Open is a slam :D

gorgo1986
06-10-2010, 10:29 AM
nadal can become 2nd best of all time after federer if he stays healthy.

I agree with this, I think Nadal has it in him to become the second best player of all time.

Federer and Nadal are the next Sampras and Agassi, only more dominant.

End of their careers total slams:

Federer: 19
Nadal: 14/15

Hey, it could happen.

bokehlicious
06-10-2010, 10:30 AM
so ur praying he gets injured?

class!

Learn to read and come back to me ;)

Ales_Alessandra
06-10-2010, 11:05 AM
:eek: Way to go Rafa! I wish I have 20% of his determination! :worship:

JolánGagó
06-10-2010, 11:07 AM
End of their careers total slams:

Federer: 19
Nadal: 14/15


unlikely.

FormerRafaFan
06-10-2010, 11:18 AM
I'd say Nadal has a shot at 10-11 slams in his career. More than that is kinda unlikely..

Matt01
06-10-2010, 12:00 PM
They will vanish as always as soon as Rafa starts losing (read: when he gets his next injury :o) :shrug:


So you think that Rafa will lose his next match only when he is injured?

I always knew that you are a closeted Rafa fan :bowdown:

bokehlicious
06-10-2010, 12:36 PM
So you think that Rafa will lose his next match only when he is injured?

I always knew that you are a closeted Rafa fan :bowdown:

It's common MTF knowledge that a healthy Rafito is unbeatable :shrug:

@Sweet Cleopatra
06-10-2010, 01:01 PM
unlikely.

I think Rafa can win more 10 slams actually. So he can win 17 overall.

Johnny Groove
06-10-2010, 01:03 PM
He'll get 11.

Same as Borg.

Lleyton_
06-10-2010, 02:00 PM
Then you won't be really satisfied. Learn how to be content with your career greedy punk.

sco
06-10-2010, 02:04 PM
Greatest 23-year-old of all-time, greatest 24-year-old of all-time, and getting better.

I think Borg was the greatest-23-year-old of all-time (3W, 4FO). Or did he turn 24 during his 4th FO? Even so, 3W 3FO (+2 USO finals) > 4FO 1W 1AO. I also think Borg is the greatest-24-year-old of all-time (4W, 4FO, 3 USO finals) unless you think Nadal is going to win the next W, USO and AO.

sco
06-10-2010, 02:19 PM
For me, this should be about number of slams AND balance between different surfaces. That's what places Laver's 11 majors (3-2-4-2 in AO/FO/W/USO) way ahead of Emerson and arguably of Sampras (who never won FO) and even may justify somebody choosing Laver over Fed (4-1-6-5, with the single FO meaning he hasn´t been exactly dominant in every surface). Though Fed may still improve that result and I guess than putting Laver's 11 over Fed's 16 is stretching it too far.

Laver's 3-2-4-2 is 2 on clay and 9 on grass. Federer's 4-1-6-5 is 1 on clay, 6 on grass and 9 on hard courts.

I suspect that if all the other Grand Slams (except FO) were on grass that Federer would win much more. This, however, must be balanced with Laver not being able to play the GS when he turned pro.

tae04
06-10-2010, 02:34 PM
You can do it Rafa. If he can steal Wimbledon and get on a big roll in 2011 anything is possible.

Waterfox
06-10-2010, 05:56 PM
he has always believed it...!!!
and it will always come true...
especially coming back from Injury to be at the top again !!!

Silvester
06-10-2010, 06:01 PM
I don't see it happening. He is 24 now right? So in reality he would need AT LEAST 10 more slams to surpass Federer's GS total taking into consideration that Fed doesn't win anymore. He would also need to win at least 1 USO. Everyone keeps saying that Federer is on the down-side of his career, so given Nadal's playing style he would also be on the downside of his career in 4 years but probably less. Basic math tells me he needs at least 2 GS a year for the next 5 years to get 10 more. I just don't see it happening but anything is possible.

maskedmuffin
06-10-2010, 06:14 PM
He wont sniff the conversation. Partly because to be the best of all time your game has to be able to translate to eras across time


Nadal, andreev, roddick, theses babolat guys who can basically use the racquet technology to impose themselves , does not matter if they win a million grand slams in this "era"

They would not be able to play in a standardized era (put everyone with an equal frame thickness equal beam thickness, equal headsize racquet).

Roger's game translates to the older era. He can slingshot balls and hit through backhands solidly with a racquet that is the closest racquet to the classic racquets of the 80's (and even then is a long distance away from wood racquets in 70s).

Technology is what enables rafa to basically get away with the shit he does on court.


Don't believe me?


Just go out and hit with an APDC for about 5 minutes, and try to compare hitting against a 4.5 or 5.0 player versus the 90 square inch blx / kfactor/ ncode


Try playing the same exact style.


Ask yourself which "comes" easier..which actually promotes bad technique because it is so damn simple to whip through , be lazy and still get the ball into the corners



The answer is very simple and very obvious.


His game does not translate to the earlier eras, therefore he cannot be the best of all time.

Best of his technological era? absolutely (his era proceeds fed's/roddicks/ "era")

ShotmaKer
06-10-2010, 10:48 PM
He wont sniff the conversation. Partly because to be the best of all time your game has to be able to translate to eras across time


Nadal, andreev, roddick, theses babolat guys who can basically use the racquet technology to impose themselves , does not matter if they win a million grand slams in this "era"

They would not be able to play in a standardized era (put everyone with an equal frame thickness equal beam thickness, equal headsize racquet).

Roger's game translates to the older era. He can slingshot balls and hit through backhands solidly with a racquet that is the closest racquet to the classic racquets of the 80's (and even then is a long distance away from wood racquets in 70s).

Technology is what enables rafa to basically get away with the shit he does on court.


Don't believe me?


Just go out and hit with an APDC for about 5 minutes, and try to compare hitting against a 4.5 or 5.0 player versus the 90 square inch blx / kfactor/ ncode


Try playing the same exact style.


Ask yourself which "comes" easier..which actually promotes bad technique because it is so damn simple to whip through , be lazy and still get the ball into the corners



The answer is very simple and very obvious.


His game does not translate to the earlier eras, therefore he cannot be the best of all time.

Best of his technological era? absolutely (his era proceeds fed's/roddicks/ "era")

i'm having a better serve off my 90inch 4D 100 than with an APDC :shrug:

Mjau!
06-10-2010, 11:02 PM
He wont sniff the conversation. Partly because to be the best of all time your game has to be able to translate to eras across time


Nadal, andreev, roddick, theses babolat guys who can basically use the racquet technology to impose themselves , does not matter if they win a million grand slams in this "era"

They would not be able to play in a standardized era (put everyone with an equal frame thickness equal beam thickness, equal headsize racquet).

Roger's game translates to the older era. He can slingshot balls and hit through backhands solidly with a racquet that is the closest racquet to the classic racquets of the 80's (and even then is a long distance away from wood racquets in 70s).

Technology is what enables rafa to basically get away with the shit he does on court.


Don't believe me?


Just go out and hit with an APDC for about 5 minutes, and try to compare hitting against a 4.5 or 5.0 player versus the 90 square inch blx / kfactor/ ncode


Try playing the same exact style.


Ask yourself which "comes" easier..which actually promotes bad technique because it is so damn simple to whip through , be lazy and still get the ball into the corners



The answer is very simple and very obvious.


His game does not translate to the earlier eras, therefore he cannot be the best of all time.

Best of his technological era? absolutely (his era proceeds fed's/roddicks/ "era")

:yeah: Yes, this is why Borg is the greatest player of all time ahead of Federer.

luie
06-10-2010, 11:06 PM
Illogical? In 15-20 years, tennis history books will not care what kind of game he has, but that and what he won.



So for you game & skill level matter, but Rafa's accomplishments are exactly what will decide his legacy. I felt/feel the same about Sampras and Roger. I didn't/don't care what or how many slams they won, for me quantity doesn't equal greatness.



No, you make a distinction. I doubt the books will. Numbers will tell the story. Rafa has some good ones. And he's not even done yet.



You're just bobbing and weaving. 3 events? You pull only 3 events out of how many ATP tournaments? Oh, and I love how you conveniently left off the hard court tounaments that he did get to the finals or won.

As for beating Roger...who knows. Why did Del Potro beat him at last year's USO? Why didn't he win last years' YEC? Why did his GOATiness lose to Rafa 14 times?:sad:



Agree. The only athlete I'm comfortable saying is the greatest of all time, is Micheal Jordan. And I get wavery even with that.



:confused: What lopsided H2H? And yeah, so what Fed edges him 5-4 off clay? What shame is that stat? I see you are choosing to have selective memory when it comes to Rafa, so there really is no point to me trying to make a case. There is no sense in comparing Rafa to Roger, who is five years older than him, or any other player. Ultimately, only time will tell.

Oh, but Luie, I'd like to know how those great/good serves and games of their's helped Borg and Sampras with the slams they DIDN'T win?
You are entitled to your opinion but If you think a player with NO SERVE & a MOONBALLING FOREHAND can transcend eras,like the 80s/90s & still win or go deep in GS off clay then RESPECT.IMO nadull will not be so successful.
I brought up the h2h to illustrate if nadull truly wants to be the GOAT he will have to win outside clay, So his h2h with federer & the other members off the top ten is relevant not to diminish nadull's accomplishments over fed & fakervic overall which is positive but to high light its too CLAY heavy currently.
I mentioned the 3 tourny to high light what I see as a DOUBLE stanard where-by federer is penalized for making the finals on every CLAY tourny under the planet consistantly resulting in nadull having the advantage consistently but nadull is not penalized for making the finals of these tournys consistantly. WHY these 3 tourny simply because it the FASTEST surfacing under the planet currently.

bandabou
06-11-2010, 06:44 AM
I don't really see rafa challenging Fed's record. Fed should've at least 2 more Wimbledons left in him and perhaps another u.s.open. Rafa's game is still mostly clay-court based and he's vunerable on the faster surfaces.

We'll see.

@Sweet Cleopatra
06-11-2010, 07:26 AM
He wont sniff the conversation. Partly because to be the best of all time your game has to be able to translate to eras across time


Nadal, andreev, roddick, theses babolat guys who can basically use the racquet technology to impose themselves , does not matter if they win a million grand slams in this "era"

They would not be able to play in a standardized era (put everyone with an equal frame thickness equal beam thickness, equal headsize racquet).

Roger's game translates to the older era. He can slingshot balls and hit through backhands solidly with a racquet that is the closest racquet to the classic racquets of the 80's (and even then is a long distance away from wood racquets in 70s).

Technology is what enables rafa to basically get away with the shit he does on court.


Don't believe me?


Just go out and hit with an APDC for about 5 minutes, and try to compare hitting against a 4.5 or 5.0 player versus the 90 square inch blx / kfactor/ ncode


Try playing the same exact style.


Ask yourself which "comes" easier..which actually promotes bad technique because it is so damn simple to whip through , be lazy and still get the ball into the corners



The answer is very simple and very obvious.


His game does not translate to the earlier eras, therefore he cannot be the best of all time.

Best of his technological era? absolutely (his era proceeds fed's/roddicks/ "era")

Of course Sports change with time, in gymnastics for example you can't compare Tourischeva, Comneci, Mukhina, etc with Silivas, Khorkina, Miller, etc. Both are completelly two different eras, styles with different equipments and different scoring. But all gymnasts mentioned are true class and of the greatest gymnasts. The change in tennis is not that dramatic compared to other sports and we can still tell who are great players.

superslam77
06-11-2010, 08:25 AM
Re: Nadal: "To really be satisfied, I have to become the best player of all time" the best clay player of all time

ossie
06-11-2010, 08:42 AM
id say he is well on his way with his slam count still rising and his h2h vs the so called goat

superslam77
06-11-2010, 08:45 AM
titles come from clay. means long timeframe, retriever=short time.

hard to separate fact from desire for Nadalasians.

superslam77
06-11-2010, 09:04 AM
id say he is well on his way with his slam count still rising and his h2h vs the so called goat

Nadal dissed you and all h2h noobies that according to him: know nothing about tennis.

Forehander
06-11-2010, 11:47 AM
Nadal dissed you and all h2h noobies that according to him: know nothing about tennis.

Very nice :lol:

born_on_clay
06-13-2010, 08:24 PM
id say he is well on his way with his slam count still rising and his h2h vs the so called goat

what does h2h to do with GS titles ?

Wolfy
06-13-2010, 08:28 PM
what does h2h to do with GS titles ?

exactly When Mugray is leading FedGoat and he has zip Slams.
i mean at one point 6-2 :haha:

Rafa will WIN ALL THE SLAM IN DUE TIME and prove something

Sunset of Age
06-14-2010, 03:31 AM
exactly When Mugray is leading FedGoat and he has zip Slams.
i mean at one point 6-2 :haha:

Rafa will WIN ALL THE SLAM IN DUE TIME and prove something

Eh, wot? :p

star
06-14-2010, 03:46 AM
Eh, wot? :p

Pay no attention.

Probably a double account.