The Official Tennis Thread

[Angelo]

Slam's, One Grass, two hard court and one Clay.. If Nadal can't play on hard court, 65% of his wins show he's a better clay court player, should they change it just for him? Brilliant

When he started out the tours were in place and they had the courts that were available, a good tennis player will develop his game, he won't divide all his attentions on to one surface, if he does he's a limited player, That's like saying the best golfer in the world will win 65% of his tours on Links courses and may pop up every now and again and win on the other surfaces...

On top means 21 slams, at the minute they are equal, he should get by that come the French open though, then he'll be the best.

86: Career singles titles for Nadal, the fourth-most in the Open era.

103: Career titles for Federer, the second-most, behind Jimmy Connors' 109.

You're focusing a lot there on lesser tournaments.

Does anyone consider Jimmy Connors the greatest player of his generation nevermind the greatest of all time? No.

Lesser tournaments? Ok we'll focus on Slams... 20 each! equal

But lets forget about the other lesser titles as they don't show anything

Jimmy Connors was a legend growing up, he was never liked too much by his fellow professionals but a damn good player

20 each and Nadal reached his no 20 far quicker than Federer did and dominates their head to head record (20/61 v 20/79)
Has 5 Davis Cup wins.
The Golden slam.
Won multiple slams on all surfaces, has beaten Federer on all surfaces on all slams.
Has the highest win % at slams
Also has these factors on Djokovic too.

And he has all those factors in his favour:
DESPITE the fact he has been savaged by injuries and had to reinvent his game due to that.
DESPITE the fact that the tennis calendar unfairly discriminates against clay court players.

Unfortunately when you trust the data, it will only point to Nadal as the GOAT.

[Angelo]

1. Novak
2. Nadal
3. Fed

Simples 

Nadal has also had the massive advantage of being a right hander playing left handed which because of the scoring system favours southpaws way more

Is that not natural talent that has him like that?

Djokovic still has a losing record to Nadal at slams and is heavily favoured with 50% of slams on his favourite surface.

[Estimator]

Slam's, One Grass, two hard court and one Clay.. If Nadal can't play on hard court, 65% of his wins show he's a better clay court player, should they change it just for him? Brilliant

When he started out the tours were in place and they had the courts that were available, a good tennis player will develop his game, he won't divide all his attentions on to one surface, if he does he's a limited player, That's like saying the best golfer in the world will win 65% of his tours on Links courses and may pop up every now and again and win on the other surfaces...

On top means 21 slams, at the minute they are equal, he should get by that come the French open though, then he'll be the best.

86: Career singles titles for Nadal, the fourth-most in the Open era.

103: Career titles for Federer, the second-most, behind Jimmy Connors' 109.

You're focusing a lot there on lesser tournaments.

Does anyone consider Jimmy Connors the greatest player of his generation nevermind the greatest of all time? No.

Lesser tournaments? Ok we'll focus on Slams... 20 each! equal

But lets forget about the other lesser titles as they don't show anything

Jimmy Connors was a legend growing up, he was never liked too much by his fellow professionals but a damn good player

20 each and Nadal reached his no 20 far quicker than Federer did and dominates their head to head record (20/61 v 20/79)
Has 5 Davis Cup wins.
The Golden slam.
Won multiple slams on all surfaces, has beaten Federer on all surfaces on all slams.
Has the highest win % at slams
Also has these factors on Djokovic too.

And he has all those factors in his favour:
DESPITE the fact he has been savaged by injuries and had to reinvent his game due to that.
DESPITE the fact that the tennis calendar unfairly discriminates against clay court players.

Unfortunately when you trust the data, it will only point to Nadal as the GOAT.

Don't think they've met in the US Open.

[Milltown Row2]

Slam's, One Grass, two hard court and one Clay.. If Nadal can't play on hard court, 65% of his wins show he's a better clay court player, should they change it just for him? Brilliant

When he started out the tours were in place and they had the courts that were available, a good tennis player will develop his game, he won't divide all his attentions on to one surface, if he does he's a limited player, That's like saying the best golfer in the world will win 65% of his tours on Links courses and may pop up every now and again and win on the other surfaces...

On top means 21 slams, at the minute they are equal, he should get by that come the French open though, then he'll be the best.

86: Career singles titles for Nadal, the fourth-most in the Open era.

103: Career titles for Federer, the second-most, behind Jimmy Connors' 109.

You're focusing a lot there on lesser tournaments.

Does anyone consider Jimmy Connors the greatest player of his generation nevermind the greatest of all time? No.

Lesser tournaments? Ok we'll focus on Slams... 20 each! equal

But lets forget about the other lesser titles as they don't show anything

Jimmy Connors was a legend growing up, he was never liked too much by his fellow professionals but a damn good player

20 each and Nadal reached his no 20 far quicker than Federer did and dominates their head to head record (20/61 v 20/79)
Has 5 Davis Cup wins.
The Golden slam.
Won multiple slams on all surfaces, has beaten Federer on all surfaces on all slams.
Has the highest win % at slams
Also has these factors on Djokovic too.

And he has all those factors in his favour:
DESPITE the fact he has been savaged by injuries and had to reinvent his game due to that.
DESPITE the fact that the tennis calendar unfairly discriminates against clay court players.

Unfortunately when you trust the data, it will only point to Nadal as the GOAT.

Before you go off on a rant, I think they are equal and there won't be an outright winner until the dust settles on their career's.

More career wins in all tournaments and surfaces, it's Fed by a good distance, and he's managed the same Slams and a better spread of slams.

Nadal, 65% of his slams are on clay, is that not worrying?

[Angelo]

Slam's, One Grass, two hard court and one Clay.. If Nadal can't play on hard court, 65% of his wins show he's a better clay court player, should they change it just for him? Brilliant

When he started out the tours were in place and they had the courts that were available, a good tennis player will develop his game, he won't divide all his attentions on to one surface, if he does he's a limited player, That's like saying the best golfer in the world will win 65% of his tours on Links courses and may pop up every now and again and win on the other surfaces...

On top means 21 slams, at the minute they are equal, he should get by that come the French open though, then he'll be the best.

86: Career singles titles for Nadal, the fourth-most in the Open era.

103: Career titles for Federer, the second-most, behind Jimmy Connors' 109.

You're focusing a lot there on lesser tournaments.

Does anyone consider Jimmy Connors the greatest player of his generation nevermind the greatest of all time? No.

Lesser tournaments? Ok we'll focus on Slams... 20 each! equal

But lets forget about the other lesser titles as they don't show anything

Jimmy Connors was a legend growing up, he was never liked too much by his fellow professionals but a damn good player

20 each and Nadal reached his no 20 far quicker than Federer did and dominates their head to head record (20/61 v 20/79)
Has 5 Davis Cup wins.
The Golden slam.
Won multiple slams on all surfaces, has beaten Federer on all surfaces on all slams.
Has the highest win % at slams
Also has these factors on Djokovic too.

And he has all those factors in his favour:
DESPITE the fact he has been savaged by injuries and had to reinvent his game due to that.
DESPITE the fact that the tennis calendar unfairly discriminates against clay court players.

Unfortunately when you trust the data, it will only point to Nadal as the GOAT.

Don't think they've met in the US Open.

Beaten him on all surfaces in slams though as I've said - grass, clay and hard. Federer has never beaten Nadal on clay in a slam.

Nadal leads 3-1 on hard and 6-0 on clay. Federer is 3-1 on grass.

[Angelo]

Slam's, One Grass, two hard court and one Clay.. If Nadal can't play on hard court, 65% of his wins show he's a better clay court player, should they change it just for him? Brilliant

When he started out the tours were in place and they had the courts that were available, a good tennis player will develop his game, he won't divide all his attentions on to one surface, if he does he's a limited player, That's like saying the best golfer in the world will win 65% of his tours on Links courses and may pop up every now and again and win on the other surfaces...

On top means 21 slams, at the minute they are equal, he should get by that come the French open though, then he'll be the best.

86: Career singles titles for Nadal, the fourth-most in the Open era.

103: Career titles for Federer, the second-most, behind Jimmy Connors' 109.

You're focusing a lot there on lesser tournaments.

Does anyone consider Jimmy Connors the greatest player of his generation nevermind the greatest of all time? No.

Lesser tournaments? Ok we'll focus on Slams... 20 each! equal

But lets forget about the other lesser titles as they don't show anything

Jimmy Connors was a legend growing up, he was never liked too much by his fellow professionals but a damn good player

20 each and Nadal reached his no 20 far quicker than Federer did and dominates their head to head record (20/61 v 20/79)
Has 5 Davis Cup wins.
The Golden slam.
Won multiple slams on all surfaces, has beaten Federer on all surfaces on all slams.
Has the highest win % at slams
Also has these factors on Djokovic too.

And he has all those factors in his favour:
DESPITE the fact he has been savaged by injuries and had to reinvent his game due to that.
DESPITE the fact that the tennis calendar unfairly discriminates against clay court players.

Unfortunately when you trust the data, it will only point to Nadal as the GOAT.

Before you go off on a rant, I think they are equal and there won't be an outright winner until the dust settles on their career's.

More career wins in all tournaments and surfaces, it's Fed by a good distance, and he's managed the same Slams and a better spread of slams.

Nadal, 65% of his slams are on clay, is that not worrying?

Nope, that is all the more impressive.

The dominance Nadal has on clay will never be repeated in the sport, ever. Now the big thing this is, clay courters are discriminated by the calendar. There should be two clay court slams a year. Grass and hard play an awful lot more similar than either do to clay so it's clear certain players are advantaged by the calendar.

Drop each players' weakest hard court slam and swap it for a clay slam.

Nadal would then move to 32 slams, dropping his one Australian Open for 13 additional clay titles.
Djokovic would move back to 16 slams, dropping his three US Opens for 1 additional clay title.
Federer would move back to 16 slams dropping his five US Opens for 1 additional clay title.

So if clay courters were not discriminated against that is likely how it would fare out.

[Milltown Row2]

So your argument is that the Clay court specialist is being discriminated against? FFS it is what it is and has been for so long, longer that Nadal has been about ffs. he knew this when he was starting out so continued to discriminate himself from these other surfaces!

Enough on the surfaces now


Fed, 103 career wins to Nadal's 86 career wins in tennis tournaments. that's not one or two of a difference

If the GOAT competition was for the best on Clay one winner, if it was for grass, one winner and if it was for Auusie Open one winner..

Its how you play in all tournaments over all surfaces.

[nrico2006]

The surfaces argument is invalid, as mentioned here that is the way the game has been structured from before he started playing so that can't be used as an excuse.

The slams are recognised as the unit of measurement with regards to the greatest, therefore as it stands its tied between two.  If Djokovic exceeds their total then he is the best.  Additionally, he has a winning record against both Nadal and Federer.

[Angelo]

The surfaces argument is invalid, as mentioned here that is the way the game has been structured from before he started playing so that can't be used as an excuse.

The slams are recognised as the unit of measurement with regards to the greatest, therefore as it stands its tied between two.  If Djokovic exceeds their total then he is the best.  Additionally, he has a winning record against both Nadal and Federer.

It's entirely valid.

25% of the season is for clay courters and 75% is for hard/grass courters. It discriminates against clay courters.

Djokovic has a losing record against Nadal in slams. Nadal leads 10-6 overall. Nadal lead 7-1 at RG and 2-1 at the US Open. Djokovic leads 2-1 at Wimbledon and 2-0 at Australia.

[nrico2006]

The surfaces argument is invalid, as mentioned here that is the way the game has been structured from before he started playing so that can't be used as an excuse.

The slams are recognised as the unit of measurement with regards to the greatest, therefore as it stands its tied between two.  If Djokovic exceeds their total then he is the best.  Additionally, he has a winning record against both Nadal and Federer.

It's entirely valid.

25% of the season is for clay courters and 75% is for hard/grass courters. It discriminates against clay courters.

Djokovic has a losing record against Nadal in slams. Nadal leads 10-6 overall. Nadal lead 7-1 at RG and 2-1 at the US Open. Djokovic leads 2-1 at Wimbledon and 2-0 at Australia.

But Djokovic has a winning record against Nadal overall.  They have played a lot more than 16 times and the overall head to head cant be discounted - its as you say, a fact.

[Milltown Row2]

The surfaces argument is invalid, as mentioned here that is the way the game has been structured from before he started playing so that can't be used as an excuse.

The slams are recognised as the unit of measurement with regards to the greatest, therefore as it stands its tied between two.  If Djokovic exceeds their total then he is the best.  Additionally, he has a winning record against both Nadal and Federer.

It's entirely valid.

25% of the season is for clay courters and 75% is for hard/grass courters. It discriminates against clay courters.

Djokovic has a losing record against Nadal in slams. Nadal leads 10-6 overall. Nadal lead 7-1 at RG and 2-1 at the US Open. Djokovic leads 2-1 at Wimbledon and 2-0 at Australia.

You are either fucked up in the head or just dumb. The courts are the courts. They have been like that well before Nadal was born.

So Nadal didn't bother perfecting his tennis ability on other court surfaces as well, his fault. No one else's

[Estimator]

GOAT: Novak Djokovic closes Grand Slam gap on Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/56146799

[Angelo]

The surfaces argument is invalid, as mentioned here that is the way the game has been structured from before he started playing so that can't be used as an excuse.

The slams are recognised as the unit of measurement with regards to the greatest, therefore as it stands its tied between two.  If Djokovic exceeds their total then he is the best.  Additionally, he has a winning record against both Nadal and Federer.

It's entirely valid.

25% of the season is for clay courters and 75% is for hard/grass courters. It discriminates against clay courters.

Djokovic has a losing record against Nadal in slams. Nadal leads 10-6 overall. Nadal lead 7-1 at RG and 2-1 at the US Open. Djokovic leads 2-1 at Wimbledon and 2-0 at Australia.

But Djokovic has a winning record against Nadal overall.  They have played a lot more than 16 times and the overall head to head cant be discounted - its as you say, a fact.

But as you said "The slams are recognised as the unit of measurement with regards to the greatest"

So why would you then ignore slams when it comes to head to head record?

Nadal clearly has a very commanding lead over Djokovic in their H2H meetings in slams at 10-6. It's 10-4 v Federer. 7-2 v Murray.

He leads all his contemporaries in slam stats. He is the GOAT, the data says so.

[Angelo]

The surfaces argument is invalid, as mentioned here that is the way the game has been structured from before he started playing so that can't be used as an excuse.

The slams are recognised as the unit of measurement with regards to the greatest, therefore as it stands its tied between two.  If Djokovic exceeds their total then he is the best.  Additionally, he has a winning record against both Nadal and Federer.

It's entirely valid.

25% of the season is for clay courters and 75% is for hard/grass courters. It discriminates against clay courters.

Djokovic has a losing record against Nadal in slams. Nadal leads 10-6 overall. Nadal lead 7-1 at RG and 2-1 at the US Open. Djokovic leads 2-1 at Wimbledon and 2-0 at Australia.

You are either fucked up in the head or just dumb. The courts are the courts. They have been like that well before Nadal was born.

So Nadal didn't bother perfecting his tennis ability on other court surfaces as well, his fault. No one else's

He did a much better job at it as he is the only player with multiple slams on all surfaces.

And you seem to be getting a little bit angry at dealing with the facts.

When you follow the facts you end up with Nadal as the GOAT.

[Milltown Row2]

You can move goal posts all day long, 20 slams each is the only stat that really matters!

I can't change your preferences nor do I want to, until the dusts settled on their collective careers then you can show me the data.

65% of his slams are on one court, one tournament. That stat is impressive