Mens Tennis Forums banner

21 - 40 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,250 Posts
Irelevet.
Federer lost to Seppi in AO and another clown at WImbledon and to Dimitrov and Robredo at USO.

This is between the big 3, and the topic really emphasis the fact that Federer cannot be the GOAT becuase Rafa and Nole (his main rivals) have the edge over him in slams.
Do none of you remember that most of Fed’s losses to them are due to being much older and well past prime while the other 2 were in their prime?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,956 Posts
So, 5 HC slams, 3 (the majority) of which beating the 2 guys (11 HC slams, each) who won a cumulative of 22 HC slams in the HC slam finals, does not put in HC GOAT category?

What, according to you, is a Tier 1 HC GOAT category?

How do you define Tier 2 HC GOAT?
Well.. You can't put Nadal on Fed/Nole/Pete/Agassi's level. Then you factor in there are probably at least 2 eras of players that were better HC's players than Nadal before that.

Nadal is arguably GOAT but no one is gonna say hes one of the best HC players to ever play the game
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
As of today, it's a tie at best between the two. You can only make a statement such as he will never be the best player after Fed retires.

Since you pointed specifically to "AO" in the title, need I remind you that the tally is 6-1 at that venue?!

Totally accept that. He is the most popular player ever. But he will never be the best player.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #26
As of today, it's a tie at best between the two. You can only make a statement such as he will never be the best player after Fed retires.

Since you pointed specifically to "AO" in the title, need I remind you that the tally is 6-1 at that venue?!
Well, you have a point. But unless fed win slams beating both Rafa and novak... And considering the last time he beat novak at a major was 2012, i find it very difficult. And i respect all opinions, but in my humble opinion considering just the number of slams for GOAT status, without considering the opposition faced, it's wrong. And you mention that at the AO fed has 6 titles and Rafa 1. So why Rafa is 3x1 there against the 6th time AO champion?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,950 Posts
Most of those matches were when Federer was past his prime and Rafole in their peak. The bad loss was against Nadal at the AO 2009, he choked pretty badly that match with an awful 5th set. AO 2008 was a normal loss, Novak is the AO GOAT and he was playing great tennis. Also, Federer had an insane streak at non-clay slams at that point and had to lose at some point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
563 Posts
Safin, Hewitt and Roddick were never the best opponents to Fed. Age is irrelevant, as all those guys failed for 12 years. Even Thiem’s more well-rounded and consistent (and nicer) than them.
Frauderer hasn’t done anything at the US Open against Bulldal but Bulldal’s very overrated on hardcourt, especially at the US Open as well. Fred’s 5 set record is abysmal, considering the poor chokers that he played for 15 years. However, he got 2 hardcourt 5 set wins against Bulldal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,697 Posts
Well.. You can't put Nadal on Fed/Nole/Pete/Agassi's level. Then you factor in there are probably at least 2 eras of players that were better HC's players than Nadal before that.

Nadal is arguably GOAT but no one is gonna say hes one of the best HC players to ever play the game
I have to disagree with you.

With respect to HC credentials, I'd not put Rafa below Sampras, and I'd put Rafa at least at par with Sampras. I'd put Rafa above agassi.

Clearly, Federer and Djokovic, with 11 HC slams each, are above Sampras's 7 HC slams and Agassi's 6 HC slams, in terms of HC greatness.

Sampras:
Who did Sampras beat to win his 7 HC slams? - Agassi (3), Pioline, Martin, Chang, Moya - the last 4 players never won a HC slam.
Who did Sampras lose to in HC finals? - Agassi (1), Edberg, Safin, Hewitt - all 4 were grand slam champions.

Basically, Sampras was 3-1 vs. Agassi, and 3-4 vs. multiple grand slam champions in HC grand slam finals. While Rafa was 3-3 vs. Federer and Djokovic, and 3-4 vs. multiple grand slam champions in HC grand slam finals, including loss to Wawrinka in AO'14 final. However, in 2 of the 3 HC slam final losses, Rafa pushed Federer and Djokovic to 5th set, which Sampras never did in his 4 HC slam final losses to Agassi, Edberg, Safin, and Hewitt. All Sampras's 4 HC slam final losses were 4 or 3 sets. For this reason, I'd not put Rafa below Sampras, but at least at par with Sampras, in terms of HC greatness.

Sampras won 9 big titles, outside slams, on hardcourts. Rafa won 10 big titles, outside slams, on hardcourts.

Agassi:
Who did Agassi beat to win his 6 HC slams? - Sampras, Kafelnikov, Stich, Martin, Clement, Schuttler - the last 4 never won a HC slam.
Who did Agassi lose to in HC finals? - Sampras (3) and Federer - both were grand slam champions.

Basically, Agassi was 1-3 vs. Sampras and 1-4 vs. multiple grand slam champions in HC grand slam finals. For this reason, I would put Rafa above Agassi, in terms of HC greatness.

By the way, I do think comparison between players of different eras is a futile exercise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: El_Toro

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,832 Posts
Gilles Muller as well.
Losses to Verdasco , Tsonga and Berdych at AO

Djokovic has 8 AOs but losses to Istomin, Chung, Roddick , Tsonga, Wawrinka.

Not to Mention losses against Melzer and Checchinato, Kohlscreiber at FO. Querrey, Berdych, Safin at Wimbledon.

All the big 3 have their share of losses.
Yet problem cannot be found??!!!

Jarkko Nieminen, possible goat?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #32
I have to disagree with you.

With respect to HC credentials, I'd not put Rafa below Sampras, and I'd put Rafa at least at par with Sampras. I'd put Rafa above agassi.

Clearly, Federer and Djokovic, with 11 HC slams each, are above Sampras's 7 HC slams and Agassi's 6 HC slams, in terms of HC greatness.

Sampras:
Who did Sampras beat to win his 7 HC slams? - Agassi (3), Pioline, Martin, Chang, Moya - the last 4 players never won a HC slam.
Who did Sampras lose to in HC finals? - Agassi (1), Edberg, Safin, Hewitt - all 4 were grand slam champions.

Basically, Sampras was 3-1 vs. Agassi, and 3-4 vs. multiple grand slam champions in HC grand slam finals. While Rafa was 3-3 vs. Federer and Djokovic, and 3-4 vs. multiple grand slam champions in HC grand slam finals, including loss to Wawrinka in AO'14 final. However, in 2 of the 3 HC slam final losses, Rafa pushed Federer and Djokovic to 5th set, which Sampras never did in his 4 HC slam final losses to Agassi, Edberg, Safin, and Hewitt. All Sampras's 4 HC slam final losses were 4 or 3 sets. For this reason, I'd not put Rafa below Sampras, but at least at par with Sampras, in terms of HC greatness.

Sampras won 9 big titles, outside slams, on hardcourts. Rafa won 10 big titles, outside slams, on hardcourts.

Agassi:
Who did Agassi beat to win his 6 HC slams? - Sampras, Kafelnikov, Stich, Martin, Clement, Schuttler - the last 4 never won a HC slam.
Who did Agassi lose to in HC finals? - Sampras (3) and Federer - both were grand slam champions.

Basically, Agassi was 1-3 vs. Sampras and 1-4 vs. multiple grand slam champions in HC grand slam finals. For this reason, I would put Rafa above Agassi, in terms of HC greatness.

By the way, I do think comparison between players of different eras is a futile exercise.
At least at the same level of Agassi for me on hard courts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
Most of those matches were when Federer was past his prime and Rafole in their peak. The bad loss was against Nadal at the AO 2009, he choked pretty badly that match with an awful 5th set. AO 2008 was a normal loss, Novak is the AO GOAT and he was playing great tennis. Also, Federer had an insane streak at non-clay slams at that point and had to lose at some point.
Considering the level Fed played at the AO SF against Rafa in 2012 and at WI 2015 final against Novak and many others matches after 2009, i don't agree. Because i've watched a lot of fed matches over the years. And i like fed, but Rafa and Novak are just a little better for me. Did you see fed vs Murray WI SF 2015? The level Roger played? If it wasn't for Novak, fed would have won a lot in 2015.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,697 Posts
At least at the same level of Agassi for me on hard courts.
Rafa would be above Agassi, easily.

Safin defeated 5-time USO champion 29-year old Sampras in straight sets at USO. Hewitt defeated 30-year old Sampras in straight sets at USO. While 33-year old Rafa defeated Medvedev in 5 sets (should have been in 3 straight sets) at USO. You would think young Sampras would defeat senior player Edberg at USO, but loses to Edberg at USO in 4 sets, while young Rafa would beat senior player Federer at AO in 5 sets. Rafa would at least be at par with Sampras.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
250 Posts
I have to disagree with you.

With respect to HC credentials, I'd not put Rafa below Sampras, and I'd put Rafa at least at par with Sampras. I'd put Rafa above agassi.
The only problem is that in the 1980s and early 1990s not all ATGs did show up at the Australian Open. McEnroe didn't play at all in Australia during his prime. Sampras and Agassi in the early years of their careers didn't show up in Melbourne as well. Moreover, some tournaments were played on carpet at times in that era including year-end championships. Devaluating Sampras-Agassi's slams cause of who they played in the finals without taking into consideration who they faced earlier in the tournament is a bit lazy approach. Sampras has to be clearly ahead of Nadal due to winning each major on hard + WTF at least twice. Pete won 5 WTF titles but three of them on carpet. So, what do we do? It sounds to me like some disadvantage.

How about Lendl, McEnroe? If you really look closer you might find it not so easy to put them behind Nadal. And I remember you saying that in order to enter the GOAT debate you need to at least win 20 majors. So, in that case majors are the only thing that counts but when Nadal trails Sampras and Agassi in hard majors you all of a sudden allow for other factors to be taken into consideration favoring Nadal and, of course, ignoring some of the factors that favor the Americans. Double standard to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,697 Posts
The only problem is that in the 1980s and early 1990s not all ATGs did show up at the Australian Open. McEnroe didn't play at all in Australia during his prime. Sampras and Agassi in the early years of their careers didn't show up in Melbourne as well. Moreover, some tournaments were played on carpet at times in that era including year-end championships. Devaluating Sampras-Agassi's slams cause of who they played in the finals without taking into consideration who they faced earlier in the tournament is a bit lazy approach. Sampras has to be clearly ahead of Nadal due to winning each major on hard + WTF at least twice. Pete won 5 WTF titles but three of them on carpet. So, what do we do? It sounds to me like some disadvantage.

How about Lendl, McEnroe? If you really look closer you might find it not so easy to put them behind Nadal. And I remember you saying that in order to enter the GOAT debate you need to at least win 20 majors. So, in that case majors are the only thing that counts but when Nadal trails Sampras and Agassi in hard majors you all of a sudden allow for other factors to be taken into consideration favoring Nadal and, of course, ignoring some of the factors that favor the Americans. Double standard to me.
Sampras missed only 2 years, i.e., 1991 and 1992 AO, while Agassi missed AO for quite a few years early on. The 1990 USO champion, Sampras, did not win 1991 USO and 1992 USO, so, it is reasonable to assume that he would not have won 1991 AO and 1992 AO, as well. The AO surface did not suit Sampras's game as much as it did Agassi.

There is no way for me to compare Rafa, in the context of carpet surface, with Sampras. Having said that, I'd not write off Rafa on any surface, since he is a 20-time grand slam champion, and can adapt his game to any surface. Rafa is too great and too determined a player, I'm sorry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
Sampras missed only 2 years, i.e., 1991 and 1992 AO, while Agassi missed AO for quite a few years early on. The 1990 USO champion, Sampras, did not win 1991 USO and 1992 USO, so, it is reasonable to assume that he would not have won 1991 AO and 1992 AO, as well. The AO surface did not suit Sampras's game as much as it did Agassi.

There is no way for me to compare Rafa, in the context of carpet surface, with Sampras. Having said that, I'd not write off Rafa on any surface, since he is a 20-time grand slam champion, and can adapt his game to any surface. Rafa is too great and too determined a player, I'm sorry.
The reality is that the big 3 are really good on all surfaces. And Rafa was really unlucky on that AO 14.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
250 Posts
There is no way for me to compare Rafa, in the context of carpet surface, with Sampras. Having said that, I'd not write off Rafa on any surface, since he is a 20-time grand slam champion, and can adapt his game to any surface. Rafa is too great and too determined a player, I'm sorry.
Only 13 of these 20 were won on clay and we are talking here about different surface. Nadal is certainly among all-time greats on hard but if you really take into consideration many factors I don't see how you can put him above Agassi and Sampras. If you can put Nadal ahead of Sampras, then you lack a bit of consistency mate with your condition of 20 majors to enter the GOAT debate. One could say that in order to enter the GOAT debate on hard you need 6 majors. You cannot have it both ways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,950 Posts
Considering the level Fed played at the AO SF against Rafa in 2012 and at WI 2015 final against Novak and many others matches after 2009, i don't agree. Because i've watched a lot of fed matches over the years. And i like fed, but Rafa and Novak are just a little better for me. Did you see fed vs Murray WI SF 2015? The level Roger played? If it wasn't for Novak, fed would have won a lot in 2015.
Yes, Federer in 2015 was at a very high level, good enough to beat almost everyone except for Djokovic. But he was 34, and clearly, nobody can be peaking at 34, even if they're at a very high level at that age like he was, or Nadal or Agassi are/were to name others.

As for who's better, well, there are a lot of variables in play. Like rival, surface, etc. I think Federer in 2004-2007 had an amount of weapons that made him almost unplayable and the match was almost always on his racket. His serve, his forehand, his variety, his footwork, etc. Attacking-wise he was almost unbeatable and he was incredibly consistent. But Nadal on clay could still beat him because he could exploit his high backhand which was a bit of a weakness. Djokovic at his best (2011/2015) wasn't as unplayable attacking-wise as Federer and could be outplayed (EJ Wawrinka games a few times) but he didn't have a weakness in his game pretty much to be exploited, and his game suited modern surfaces brilliantly. Nadal was never super dominant overall like Federer or Djokovic, but he was consistently dominant in a single surface in a way nobody ever came even close to being. 13 slams in a single event when nobody else surpasses 8 is insane, that ensured he didn't even need to win that often at others and still tie the slam record with only 1 AO and 2 Wimbledons. There are certainly arguments for the three of them.
 
21 - 40 of 44 Posts
Top