Mens Tennis Forums banner
41 - 60 of 67 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,653 Posts
Nadal was never the GOAT or even the greatest of the Open Era. He needs at least 3 more Slams than either Djokovic or Federer because of his significantly inferior resume in multiple barometers of excellence over his peers. If I wasn't being obvious with my previous sentence, Nadal lacks in absolute dominance over the field such as him having significantly fewer weeks at #1, having 0 titles at an event that requires facing top players in the Year End Championship event, having only one 3-Slam season compared to the other 2, and never defending titles on a surface other than clay until very, very recently. Federer at least has a few measures where he is ahead of Djokovic, such as having 5+ titles at 3 Grand Slams, leading in Year End Championship titles, and consistently making it to the semifinals at the Year End Championship event, but Djokovic has an overall more balanced resume as of now. Nadal is not just a little bit behind Djokovic and Federer but a considerable distance away.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,724 Posts
Looking at his progression curve, it is obvious to me Tsitsipas was supposed to win FO 2022. In the same way that it was not so hard to predict Medvedev winning USO 2021.
The elbow surgery changes absolutely everything. Nadal is now a clear favorite, fresh of a 6+ months break and with, i believe, Djokovic not putting as much effort during the clay season as in 2021.

So, if Djokovic doesn't win AO (or skip it) he will be in a chasing position at Wimbledon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
Good post except that you made a small error because Nadal is already the GOAT with his Career Golden Slam, Slam H2H, multiple decimas, etc. But yes in 2022 he will end all doubt. (y)
Sinner is winning RG next year. You sound like age has no effect on the Bull. At RG 2021 he was obviously a shadow of the force he once was. All good things come to an end.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
935 Posts
All he needs to do is to win RG 2022 which seems very likely, and Djokovic to remain slamless which is not impossible considering his aging and youngsters getting better.

Djokovic is the current GOAT, but I would say we should dial down recency bias and we should count on the proven warrior to get back to fighting for the throne. This epic Big 2 battle is not over yet.
Not happening. He is still the main favourite at RG, simply due to track record, but even that's not a near sure lock anymore like it used to be.

None of the big3 will ever be GOAT, but Nadal will win more slams than Djokovic, that I can tell you.
Not happening either. Djokovic is the more versatile player, and his body is holding up much better too. He is also less prone to be upset, and he is still a threat on all surfaces. Nadal's clay prowess might allow him to bag another RG (or two), but that's it. Realistically, Djokovic has much more Slams in him, no question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,530 Posts
Not happening. He is still the main favourite at RG, simply due to track record, but even that's not a near sure lock anymore like it used to be.



Not happening either. Djokovic is the more versatile player, and his body is holding up much better too. He is also less prone to be upset, and he is still a threat on all surfaces. Nadal's clay prowess might allow him to bag another RG (or two), but that's it. Realistically, Djokovic has much more Slams in him, no question.
Agree. But the real Djoker is nobody knows which is the last one. A few ATG examples:

Bjørn Borg FO 1981. 25 years old.
John McEnroe USO 1984. 25 years old.
Mats Wilander USO 1988. 24 years old.

Not even the mighty Justiciar with his allround historic tennis professorship would have predicted that.

Nadal and Joker are 34 and 35 years old.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,380 Posts
He needs to win two slams next year and Djokovic to win zero to claim this title, but that is highly unlikely. If he only wins RG, some people will make the argument so Djokovic will absolutely want to win AO, but IMO there is no debate until Nadal creates a two slam gap
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,170 Posts
Looking at his progression curve, it is obvious to me Tsitsipas was supposed to win FO 2022. In the same way that it was not so hard to predict Medvedev winning USO 2021.
The elbow surgery changes absolutely everything. Nadal is now a clear favorite, fresh of a 6+ months break and with, i believe, Djokovic not putting as much effort during the clay season as in 2021.

So, if Djokovic doesn't win AO (or skip it) he will be in a chasing position at Wimbledon.
Yep!

Who knows maybe Nadal knows in the back of his mind when it's all said and done that Djokovic will indeed retire with more slams ahead of him ... but.... as long as Nadal can say he for a period actually held the overall slam record outright that might be quite enough to at least make him content.

That is extremely important for Nadal.Federer has held it outright and Djokovic most likely will... but if Nadal doesn't then how can anybody declare someone as the GOAT when they've never ever been on the top of the tree all on their own.

Djokovic missed a golden chance to almost shut the door on Nadal in New York and if he bypasses the Australian Open this will be Nadal's biggest career chance and a huge favorite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,472 Posts
He needs to win two slams next year and Djokovic to win zero to claim this title, but that is highly unlikely. If he only wins RG, some people will make the argument so Djokovic will absolutely want to win AO, but IMO there is no debate until Nadal creates a two slam gap
People would try to make the argument, but 21 slams alone couldn't make Nadal greater than Federer, because Federer has amassed 100 weeks @ no.1 more, 6 more YEC titles, 1-2 slam finals more, and because he is a considerably greater HC, GC & Indoors player (i.e. out of clay) with better resume at 10 out of 14 big tournaments (at 3 slams + yec + 6 masters), let alone Djokovic, with his weeks @ no.1, y.e. no.1, H2H, Masters, YEC, DCGS, DCGM, NoleSlam, two & three wins over Nadal & Federer @ their best slam respectively, despite being the youngest in the trio.

Even in the case of 22 slams it would be pretty weird to really consider Nadal to be a greater player overall than 20 slam winner Federer, who would still be a considerably greater HC player + GC player + Indoors player, currently it is: Wimb 8:2, AO/USO 11:5, YEC 6:0 i.e. 6+ titles advantage on the grass, HC and indoors, and it is a similar case with the recent goats Sampras & Djokovic who are also greater GC, HC, Indoors players with a greater weeks & y.e. no.1 resume.

Rosewall has got four majors more than Laver (23:19), better H2H at the majors (7:5), and 20 years span between the first and the last major title, to Laver's 10 years span, i.e. teenager Rosewall was winning amateur majors when Laver was 14 y.o. kid, five-six seasons later young Muscles was almost invincible at the pro-majors (9 consecutive pro majors titles, that he entered) when young Rocket was winning majors vs depleted amateur tour, and finally when Laver had stopped reaching slam finals after 1969 despite being top-5 player, older Rosewall has entered six more finals winning three slams.

So, if Nadal ends up with 2 slams more than Djokovic without amassing two more y.e. no.1 and 90-100 more weeks @ no.1, he can only be an OE slam record holder and co-goat with Djokovic, as well as all-time co-goat with Rosewall.

Djokovic & Laver would still be the most successful/accomplished players overall.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
560 Posts
I hope dull wins AO and RG. If dull wins AO, then croctards will be in complete and utter ruins.

The alliance fully supports dull.
If he wins Australian OPEN then it means that Djokovic will be there. So he will get some points and Nadal will help him to keep the gap between himself and Medvedev/Zverev. 400+ weeks will be locked in that case :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,084 Posts
The OP is a false premise: you have to have owned something to regain it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
If Nadal wins the slam race, there will be no goat. Novak has a strong case now, but if he ends up behind Nadal in slam race, Nadal's resume with lots of holes will make situation a stalemate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
He already is. Can you imagine Djokovic having as many Slam titles as Nadal and only 1 Masters title less if 2/4 Grand Slams, 6/9 Masters events and Yer-End-Championship were played on clay and if prime Djokovic skipped or hasn't finished 7 Majors where he was a top 2 favourite?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,472 Posts
He already is. Can you imagine Djokovic having as many Slam titles as Nadal and only 1 Masters title less if 2/4 Grand Slams, 6/9 Masters events and Yer-End-Championship were played on clay and if prime Djokovic skipped or hasn't finished 7 Majors where he was a top 2 favourite?
I can, e.g. on the faster clay courts like those at Madrid (because of an altitude or the blue clay), American HarTru clay (ex-USO that Borg has failed to win), ex-Hamburg clay conditions (Federer has better resume at Hamburg/Madrid clay masters-1000 than Nadal), with faster balls overall, lower bounces at the half of events, strict 25 seconds rule instead of former 35-40, with a much deeper/stronger clay fields in that case etc.

But instead of the red clay and slower HCs, three non-clay slams & quite a few masters could again be played on the grass & indoors carpet + faster Har-Tru clay, no.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
62,445 Posts
He already is. Can you imagine Djokovic having as many Slam titles as Nadal and only 1 Masters title less if 2/4 Grand Slams, 6/9 Masters events and Yer-End-Championship were played on clay and if prime Djokovic skipped or hasn't finished 7 Majors where he was a top 2 favourite?
There is no bonus for skipping events you could just as well have played. He played a training match with Hewitt on grass before Wimbledon 2009 and decided not that he couldn't play, but that he couldn't win. And so he didn't play. You should take his word for it, he wouldn't have won. Same for the others on fast courts, only RG 2016 was a potential win but then Djokovic has one of those also, hasn't he?

And there is no reason to imagine a tour with more clay. Nor to imagine one entirely without clay, when Nadal would be pushed quite a bit further down the order. There is as much clay as there is. Everyone playing today has had complete knowledge of the amount, it hasn't changed materially since US Open stopped being held on clay in the 70s (it was only held on clay for three years anyway).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,103 Posts
He played a training match with Hewitt on grass before Wimbledon 2009 and decided not that he couldn't play, but that he couldn't win. And so he didn't play. You should take his word for it, he wouldn't have won.
This

#48 · 7 mo ago

Facts:

Rafael Nadal lost his first match on grass this season at Hurlingham Club to Lleyton Hewitt with a 6-4, 6-3
Nadal is now going to face Stanislas Wawrinka on Friday at the same club

Rafael Nadal will not defend his Wimbledon crown this year
The Spaniard announced his decision at Wimbledon this evening after losing an exhibition game 4-6 7-6 (8-6) 10-3 to Stanislas Wawrinka in the BNP Paribas Fortis Tennis Classic at the Hurlingham Club in Fulham.


#31 · 9 mo ago

Federinka said:
Thanks for giving the facts. So indeed Soderling did one of the biggest performance ever. Though still need to say that Nadal didn't play his best tennis that day, maybe his gameplan went wrong.
Another fact, Nadal was the title holder at Wimbledon, number one, but was not supposed to have the same margin, and no more today, on grass than on clay.
He had already had to play there often matches in 5 sets.


For more information, being beaten in exhibitions by Hewitt and Wawrinka was no shame, at the time, although it further diminished Nadal's confidence and decided him finally to withdraw.
After losing his favorite title to RG, the hypothesis of losing second in less than a month was perhaps a lot to bear.

Roddick (finalist) and Murray (loses against Roddick in 1/2) needed 5 sets to beat them.

Results at Wimbledon 2009.

Hewitt

RoundRankOpponentW-LScore
Quarter-Finals6Country Flag
Andy Roddick
L36 7610 671 64 46
Round of 1623Country Flag
Radek Stepanek
W46 26 61 62 62
Round of 3255Country Flag
Philipp Petzschner
W75 763 63
Round of 645Country Flag
Juan Martin del Potro
W63 75 75
Round of 128107Country Flag
Robby Ginepri
W64 61 61

Wawrinka

RoundRankOpponentW-LScore
Round of 163Country Flag
Andy Murray
L62 36 36 75 36
Round of 32133Country Flag
Jesse Levine
W57 75 63 63
Round of 6457Country Flag
Martin Vassallo Arguello
W63 62 62
Round of 128108Country Flag
Eduardo Schwank
W75 64 61
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,384 Posts
We'll have to wait and see what happens in Australia, as Rafa's performance there will show us whether he successfully recovered from a very problematic injury that might have been a career-threatening one. Whenever he had a successful run at AO (bar 2013 when he skipped it) he almost always won RG and either won or came close to winning the USO. His AO result will also show us how much can he compete with players like Medvedev, Zverev, and Tsitsipas on a surface not advantageous to him. If he beats one of them then it's a good signal.
 
Joined
·
918 Posts
Lol at thinking Dull has any chance at surpassing the other 2. The other 2 have mostly complete resumes whereas Dull has 0 WTF, has done jack shit on grass since 2011, has lost 20 straight sets to Faker on hard, and was getting his ass handed to him by 5 year older Federer off clay since 2015. Best clay player I’ve ever seen, but overall, a very distant third out of the big 3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
85 Posts
There is no bonus for skipping events you could just as well have played. He played a training match with Hewitt on grass before Wimbledon 2009 and decided not that he couldn't play, but that he couldn't win. And so he didn't play. You should take his word for it, he wouldn't have won. Same for the others on fast courts, only RG 2016 was a potential win but then Djokovic has one of those also, hasn't he?

And there is no reason to imagine a tour with more clay. Nor to imagine one entirely without clay, when Nadal would be pushed quite a bit further down the order. There is as much clay as there is. Everyone playing today has had complete knowledge of the amount, it hasn't changed materially since US Open stopped being held on clay in the 70s (it was only held on clay for three years anyway).
Nadal didn't play or retired from matches because he was getting injured again and again in his prime seasons:

Wim-2009 - the main favourite 4 weeks before the start of the event
US Open 2012 and 2014 - a top-2 favourite 6 weeks before the start of the event
AO-2014 - a very very big favourite the day before the finals
AO 2010 and 2018 - a top-2 favourite before the start of the quarterfinals
FO-2016 - a top-2 favourite before the start of the round 3

How possible is it that a healthy Nadal would have won none of these? 5%? 2%? 1%? So, it's clear that the weight of 20 Slam titles with a huge amount of opportunities missed due to injuries is bigger than the weight of 20 Slam titles with almost no injuries got.

There is a clear reason to imagine tour with more clay. If player A has 10/10 level on hard courts and 5/10 on clay and player B has it vice versa, the former will have higher ranking because of hard court skewed calendar, but he should not be considered the better player for obvious reasons.
 
41 - 60 of 67 Posts
Top