GOAT: Rafa vs Roger

[Total Power]

Rafael Nadal:

1. Grand Slam winner
2. Olympic Gold medal winner
3. Davis Cup champion
4. 18 masters series titles
5. Owns Federer head to head.
6. 3 consecutive slams in a calender year

vs

Federer

1. Grand Slam winner
2. 16 slams


Sure if you compare the number of slams, Federer is the best.But if you consider the quality, specially he has beaten federer in the finals of 3 slams surely that gives Rafa the edge.I think Rafa surely needs to included in the future GOAT arguments.He will win a few more slams from here and will probably finish with 14+ slams.

Brad Gilbert made the point of CBS the other day that if Rafa beats Roger in the final of the US open this year then Roger is not the GOAT.

This is a serious thread so please dont start a flame war thanks

 

[hans moleman]

Lol @ calling for a serious thread.
C'mon TP, you're the biggest, most biased Nadal fanboy on BigFooty. You gotta make sure you keep yourself in check first.
(Like making sure you sure create a comprehensive list of achievements in the OP instead of short-changing Federer's list)

Every time Rafa wins a slam it's fine to celebrate, but the way you insist on doing this at the expense of demeaning Federer shows that you got some personal grudges/issues.


Anyways, here's a sample of arguments for and against that are sure to be rehashed:

• Rafa got most of his titles on clay
• Rafa has owned him in head-to-head matches
• It's not Fed's fault that Rafa never made slam finals in the mid 00's
• "Transition period"

Taking a step back and actually looking at tennis ability rather than records, each has outstanding qualities and it is hard to claim one is definitively better than the other.

It's easy to say Federer has the more 'natural' ability and a better all-court game, but this doesn't mean much if you can't/refuse to execute that all-court game against big hitting opposition.

Also, I think we tend to associate Nadal with just being a non-thinking, big-hitting brute due to the muscles and the livelier on-court persona in relation to Fed.

This is a misconception and does a disservice to Nadal and the way he's developed his game. All you had to do was watch today's match against Djokovic - the backhand is solid (if you think you're better off approaching the net on Nadal's backhand you're in for a surprise), the serve is faster, the defense and court coverage is magnificent.
The mental side has always been outstanding, not in a stubborn way like Hewitt, but more in a self-belief kind of way.

On the other hand, Federer's defense and court-coverage is just as good.
His serve and return of serve are underrated - why do you think he always has out-aces Roddick whenever they face off. Consequently, he struggles in matches when his first serve isn't working like it didn't against Djokovic in the semi.
When on song, the forehand is probably the best in tennis and like Nadal, he too has improved the backhand.

Differing styles and a lot of differing strengths in each of their games. Hard to separate which is why I guess we tend to judge on records.


My quick take on it is that if Rafa doesn't match Fed's 16 slams then you can make an argument for either player.
But once Rafa reaches 16, then given the head-to-head record, the Masters Series titles, etc then you have to give the nod to Rafa.

Until then, enjoy the flame war.

 

[Total Power]

so you are saying its all about quantity and quality? he is only 24 and to acheive a career grandslam at the age of 24 is something only 1 person has achieved before.

I repeat, Federer is yet to beat anyone at their prime.The last legitimate Fed win against Nadal came in 2007, while Nadal has beaten federer consistently at his peak Federer was unable to to do.

He is 24 and will surely get to 12 plus slams..but nadals unique achievements makes him better than Federer.

Also do you have multiple personality syndrome or something? in the other thread u said this

We gotta start including him in the conversation now when we talk about the GOAT.

and now you are saying he cant be including in GOAT conversations? hell in your opinion then Samras >>>>> Borg??

 

[berner]

so you are saying its all about quantity and quality? he is only 24 and to acheive a career grandslam at the age of 24 is something only 1 person has achieved before.

I repeat, Federer is yet to beat anyone at their prime.The last legitimate Fed win against Nadal came in 2007, while Nadal has beaten federer consistently at his peak Federer was unable to to do.

He is 24 and will surely get to 12 plus slams..but nadals unique achievements makes him better than Federer.

Also do you have multiple personality syndrome or something? in the other thread u said this




and now you are saying he cant be including in GOAT conversations? hell in your opinion then Samras >>>>> Borg??

Nadal beats Federer virtually every time they play- if you can't beat someone you can't be the greatest- possibly the second greatest.

Counting Grand slams just means longevity

Laver still shines as a beacon as the GOAT

 

[hans moleman]

Also do you have multiple personality syndrome or something? in the other thread u said this

We gotta start including him in the conversation now when we talk about the GOAT.

And that's what we're doing now...discussing Nadal in relation to being the GOAT. He's well on his his way to claiming that unofficial title.

and now you are saying he cant be including in GOAT conversations?

Never said that, never insinuated that.
Perhaps you mistakenly inferred that from my reply, perhaps you're looking for anti-Nadal bias where there is none

Counting Grand slams just means longevity

It also reflects the ability to come through with the goods in the most important tennis events on the calendar.
To some extent longevity should be a criteria when deciding who is the greatest of all time anyways.

That said, it can be misleading to base judgements solely on Grand Slam numbers.
To expand on the last paragraph of my previous post, just cos someone has more Slams doesn't automatically mean they're better, but it does give them a foothold in debating the issue.

 

[dynamite kid]

Federer is the most talented player i've ever seen. His effortless consistency and ease of destroying quality opponents is second to none. His is the greatest of the open era.

Rafa however is my favourite player. Why? Because he beats the best. He has less skill with a racquet but as much heart, guts and mental determination. Plus balls to pull off ridiculously good shots at crucial moments.

Fed is the greatest, but Rafa is my favourite. Love them both, the sport is blessed to have them.

 

[matt_897]

Lol @ calling for a serious thread.
C'mon TP, you're the biggest, most biased Nadal fanboy on BigFooty. You gotta make sure you keep yourself in check first.
(Like making sure you sure create a comprehensive list of achievements in the OP instead of short-changing Federer's list)

Exactly, I mean, you mention 18 Masters 1000 events for Rafa but don't mention 16 Masters 1000 events for Roger (plus 4 TMC/WTF wins). Has won a Olympic gold medal himself. Plus Roger has won 3 slams in a row twice. Your bias is obivous, TP.

 

[Power King]

Sure if you compare the number of slams, Federer is the best

No.

At age 24 years and 3 months:

Federer - 6 grand slams
Nadal - 9 grand slams

 

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

Federer

1. Grand Slam winner
2. 16 slams

Let me help.

16 Grand Slams (record)
17 Masters 1000 (equal 2nd)
4 Year-End Championships (equal 3rd)

285 total weeks #1 (1 week short of the record)
237 consecutive weeks #1 (record)

22 total GS Fs (record)
10 consecutive GS Fs (record)
23 consecutive GS SFs (record)
26 consecutive (and counting) GS QFs (1 win off the record)

3 GS won in 3 different years (2004, 2006 & 2007 | equal record)
Made final of every GS in 3 separate years (2006, 2007 & 2009 | record)

Won 3 different GS at least 4 times each (record)

Won 2 different GS at least 5 times each (equal record)

Won at least 2 GS for 4 consecutive years (record)

Won at least 1 GS for 8 consecutive years (equal record)

65 consecutive grass court wins (record)

56 consecutive hard court wins (record)

26 consecutive top 10 wins (record)

24 consecutive finals won (record)

36 consecutive grand slam sets won (record)

Best 3 seasons by W/L:

2005: 81-4 (95.3% | 3rd overall)
2006: 92-5 (94.8% | 4th ovreall)
2004: 74-6 (92.5% | 6th overall)

Career Earnings - $57,439,704 (record)

 

[Hodgepodge]

Roger Federer leads the head to head over Nadal on neutral surfaces.

The only surface where Nadal is ahead is on clay, where he has the distinct advantage.

 

[Hodgepodge]

I repeat, Federer is yet to beat anyone at their prime.The last legitimate Fed win against Nadal came in 2007, while Nadal has beaten federer consistently at his peak Federer was unable to to do.

Only on clay.

I don't remember Nadal beating Federer on a neutral surface when Fed was in his prime.

Federer hasn't been in his prime for a while now.

 

[amer]

That's been the problem with the Nadal-Fed rivalry. They're not quite at opposite ends of their careers, but they're in that awkward range where they've just missed each other's primes. Nadal wasn't getting to slam finals on the non-clay surfaces when Fed was dominant, and now that he is, Fed is pushing 30 and probably only has another slam or two in him.

They're obviously both great players. For mine, Federer is the genius, all talent. Nadal is full of grit, has refined his conditioning to an insane level, and has forced improvement from himself through unadulterated hard work. Aussies love to see those qualities in a sportsperson, I think that's why he's got so many rabid fanboys on here. People will remember Nadal for his intensity, his fight, and for raising the bar in terms of what's required physically from a tennis player. We'll remember Federer for being an artist on the court, for making the impossible look easy, all flair.

 

[Total Power]

Only on clay.

I don't remember Nadal beating Federer on a neutral surface when Fed was in his prime.

Federer hasn't been in his prime for a while now.

Wimbledon 2008 breaking rogers streak at wimbledon on supposedly his best surface and rafas worst surface.

In other grandslam finals including Australian Open.While roger is unable to beat rafa in any slams other than wimbledon...even where he face tough challenges compared to the complete spanking at F.O 61 62 60

 

[Total Power]

No.

At age 24 years and 3 months:

Federer - 6 grand slams
Nadal - 9 grand slams

yep.

 

[SBI]

Look if both were to retire today, Federer would go down as having had the better career through sheer number of Slams won.

That being said, I think Nadal will end his career as the more successful but perhaps not being universally accepted as such. That's possible a combination of his English not being all that great and Federer at his peak probably being a more attractive player to watch.

I like watching both play, though, for different reasons so it doesn't really matter to me who is better outside of the times they meet each other.

 

[Total Power]

Look if both were to retire today, Federer would go down as having had the better career through sheer number of Slams won.

That being said, I think Nadal will end his career as the more successful but perhaps not being universally accepted as such. That's possible a combination of his English not being all that great and Federer at his peak probably being a more attractive player to watch.

I like watching both play, though, for different reasons so it doesn't really matter to me who is better outside of the times they meet each other.

that is the point...at this point of time, if you take age into factor rafa is clearly ahead of federer. If rafa can keep this going for the next couple of years he will indeed be the GOAT.

 

[Dipper]

If Nadal wins a similar amount of GS titles as Federer it will be hard for him to receive acknowledgement as GOAT as a lot of the judges, journalists etc are in that kind of age group where they love the classical style of Federer, it's a bit like in cricket where they go mad over certain players like Azhurradin or Gower.

Personally I think that kind of thing is nonsense, it's about being better not the subjectivity of aesthetics.

Just the other day a sports journalist writing in a paper over here made the comment that 'in the minds of the sane Federer is the greatest ever', so if you don't believe it then apparently you're insane.

On the Wimbledon coverage they unashamedly talk about Federer as the GOAT like the debate's been had and there's no argument anymore.We're all Federer deniers if we don't accept 'the facts'.

The main reason why I think that the debate is not only still open but why Federer clearly isn't the GOAT is when you compare his record with the other 3 players who would be shortlisted for the GOAT accolade.

I think pretty much we're looking at Laver, Borg and Sampras.

And those 3 were all pretty much clearly the best player of their eras and dominated the competition and then you've got Federer who is meant to be a candidate for best ever but he's been dominated by one of his main rivals head to head to a degree where every 3 times they play he loses 2 of them.

Added to this the main rival is 5 years younger and came onto the scene at a time when Federer was at the start of his absolute peak and the younger bloke dealt with him head to head although Federer still dominated the slams and then slowly bit by bit the younger guy improved, beat Federer in the final of Wimbledon on his own favourite surface and became number 1 in the world, had a bad injury that let Federer back in but then came back to dominate again.

Nadal has 9 GS titles now, how many did Federer have at the same age(yeah I know 6)?He's won all 4 at 24 and he's done all this with the apparently greatest player ever on the scene, I think by definition Federer can't be the greatest player ever if whilst stillo in his peak years some kid by the age of 24 has done all that Nadal has done.

Nadal has lost at least 2 GS by having Federer on the scene, who did Federer have in his way? He came into a vacuum inhabited by Hewitt and Safin etc.


Hopefully Nadal will eclipse Federer's GS total.Barring injuries I believe that he will.

You can probably mark him down for another 4 French at least and he's clearly the man to beat at Wimbledon right now, so he could easily get another 2 or 3 there.
I don't think the hard courts will ever be his favourite and there's always going to be a vulnerability to the likes of Del Potro, Soderling and Murray but he's still better, smarter and tougher than any of them.

So I'm backing him to move past Federer's 16.

The great thing with Nadal is how he clearly works on his weakenesses and overcomes them.

He dominated the French every year and smashed Federer in a couple of finals but he lost a couple of Wimbledon finals to him but he gave him a good fight and got better from 2006 to 2007 and then by 2008 he had passed Federer on grass.

He then said that the next step was to improve on the US hard courts, so he worked on flattening his strokes and this year he comes out with 10-15mph more on his serve and he takes the US Open home.He just keeps getting better and now with this 130mph+ serve it just got a lot harder for everyone else because he never had that luxury of taking our cheap service points like Federer.

If you remember the 2008 Wimbledon final he won the first 2 sets breaking Federer and then lost the next 2 on tie breaks and Federer's serve really helped him in the ite breakers but now you can imagine Nadal being even tougher to overcome in tie breakers.

He's not the GOAT but he's better than Federer.

I think he's clearly mentally stronger too, 2008 Wimbledon last set showed that and Federer's break down at the Aussie Open wasn't because the Australian Open was so important to him, it was because he couldn't kid himself anymore that it was bad luck or some other reason, Nadal had been owning him and he couldn't do anything about it.Anyone who saw the 2008? French Open final where Nadal absolutely destroyed him will know what I'm talking about.

So no to Federer as GOAT and a big possible to Nadal ending up with that accolade by the end of his career.

 

[Total Power]

fantastic post dipper...well said

 

[Total Power]

Nadal has lost at least 2 GS by having Federer on the scene, who did Federer have in his way? He came into a vacuum inhabited by Hewitt and Safin etc.

lol the point i have been trying to make all along.Even fed fans know this is true.

 

[Hodgepodge]

Wimbledon 2008 breaking rogers streak at wimbledon on supposedly his best surface and rafas worst surface.

2007 was when his dominance ended. The drop off in form started with the Australian Open 2008 and continued throughout the year. I think he picked up one GS title that year. His period of absolute dominance ended in 2007. The dominance for Federer has ended now, particularly as he is turning 30 next year, but he will probably still picked up two or three more GS titles in my opinion. To be honest it just looks like he's lost a bit of the passion to play the game and thus we are seeing a lot more unforced errors from him. I would recommend a switch to a serve and volley game. While it's more taxing, it's at least a change and may freshen him up a little mentally.

In other grandslam finals including Australian Open.While roger is unable to beat rafa in any slams other than wimbledon...even where he face tough challenges compared to the complete spanking at F.O 61 62 60

Not unable, it's just that he hasn't. Grass is considered a neutral surface for the two players, as they have both won GS titles on it. Same with hardcourt surfaces. Federer isn't a serve and volley player so grass provides no real advantage for him.

Again, on neutral surfaces, Federer is in front, so you can't argue that he can't beat him unless it's at Wimbledon . . .

There's no doubt that Nadal is the King of Clay though.

 

[Drummond]

If Nadal wins a similar amount of GS titles as Federer it will be hard for him to receive acknowledgement as GOAT as a lot of the judges, journalists etc are in that kind of age group where they love the classical style of Federer, it's a bit like in cricket where they go mad over certain players like Azhurradin or Gower.

Personally I think that kind of thing is nonsense, it's about being better not the subjectivity of aesthetics.

Just the other day a sports journalist writing in a paper over here made the comment that 'in the minds of the sane Federer is the greatest ever', so if you don't believe it then apparently you're insane.

On the Wimbledon coverage they unashamedly talk about Federer as the GOAT like the debate's been had and there's no argument anymore.We're all Federer deniers if we don't accept 'the facts'.

The main reason why I think that the debate is not only still open but why Federer clearly isn't the GOAT is when you compare his record with the other 3 players who would be shortlisted for the GOAT accolade.

I think pretty much we're looking at Laver, Borg and Sampras.

And those 3 were all pretty much clearly the best player of their eras and dominated the competition and then you've got Federer who is meant to be a candidate for best ever but he's been dominated by one of his main rivals head to head to a degree where every 3 times they play he loses 2 of them.

Added to this the main rival is 5 years younger and came onto the scene at a time when Federer was at the start of his absolute peak and the younger bloke dealt with him head to head although Federer still dominated the slams and then slowly bit by bit the younger guy improved, beat Federer in the final of Wimbledon on his own favourite surface and became number 1 in the world, had a bad injury that let Federer back in but then came back to dominate again.

Nadal has 9 GS titles now, how many did Federer have at the same age(yeah I know 6)?He's won all 4 at 24 and he's done all this with the apparently greatest player ever on the scene, I think by definition Federer can't be the greatest player ever if whilst stillo in his peak years some kid by the age of 24 has done all that Nadal has done.

Nadal has lost at least 2 GS by having Federer on the scene, who did Federer have in his way? He came into a vacuum inhabited by Hewitt and Safin etc.


Hopefully Nadal will eclipse Federer's GS total.Barring injuries I believe that he will.

You can probably mark him down for another 4 French at least and he's clearly the man to beat at Wimbledon right now, so he could easily get another 2 or 3 there.
I don't think the hard courts will ever be his favourite and there's always going to be a vulnerability to the likes of Del Potro, Soderling and Murray but he's still better, smarter and tougher than any of them.

So I'm backing him to move past Federer's 16.

The great thing with Nadal is how he clearly works on his weakenesses and overcomes them.

He dominated the French every year and smashed Federer in a couple of finals but he lost a couple of Wimbledon finals to him but he gave him a good fight and got better from 2006 to 2007 and then by 2008 he had passed Federer on grass.

He then said that the next step was to improve on the US hard courts, so he worked on flattening his strokes and this year he comes out with 10-15mph more on his serve and he takes the US Open home.He just keeps getting better and now with this 130mph+ serve it just got a lot harder for everyone else because he never had that luxury of taking our cheap service points like Federer.

If you remember the 2008 Wimbledon final he won the first 2 sets breaking Federer and then lost the next 2 on tie breaks and Federer's serve really helped him in the ite breakers but now you can imagine Nadal being even tougher to overcome in tie breakers.

He's not the GOAT but he's better than Federer.

I think he's clearly mentally stronger too, 2008 Wimbledon last set showed that and Federer's break down at the Aussie Open wasn't because the Australian Open was so important to him, it was because he couldn't kid himself anymore that it was bad luck or some other reason, Nadal had been owning him and he couldn't do anything about it.Anyone who saw the 2008? French Open final where Nadal absolutely destroyed him will know what I'm talking about.

So no to Federer as GOAT and a big possible to Nadal ending up with that accolade by the end of his career.

Exceptional post.

 

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

Wimbledon 2008 breaking rogers streak at wimbledon on supposedly his best surface and rafas worst surface.

In other grandslam finals including Australian Open.While roger is unable to beat rafa in any slams other than wimbledon...even where he face tough challenges compared to the complete spanking at F.O 61 62 60

2008? You're dreaming. Take a look at highlights of his actual peak (2004-2006). His forehand was absolutely brutal. Scary good. It was probably the most feared shot in tennis history. Nowadays, whilst still good, it's incredibly inconsistent and can often flat out cost him matches (see Djokovic '10 US Open).

Nadal won't get anywhere near most of the records I posted above because he simply won't dominate the world like Federer did in his peak. No one will.

 

[Jono B]

2008? You're dreaming. Take a look at highlights of his actual peak (2004-2006). His forehand was absolutely brutal. Scary good. It was probably the most feared shot in tennis history. Nowadays, whilst still good, it's incredibly inconsistent and can often flat out cost him matches (see Djokovic '10 US Open).

Nadal won't get anywhere near most of the records I posted above because he simply won't dominate the world like Federer did in his peak. No one will.

Nadal is as dominant now as Fed was at his peak. 3/4 grand slams in a year is as good as Fed got at his peak and when you consider the French and US were won with only 1 set lost combined, you can see how dominant he is now. In fact he leads the rankings by almost 2 to 1 despite playing less tournaments.

The excuse that Fed is 29 does not cut it IMO. Nadal was at a greater disadvantage at Feds peak than Fed is at the moment in terms of how common top level players win slams at particular ages. Agassi won 5 majors after the age of 29 and did not win a major before he turned 22. Sampras won 2 after he was 29 and did not win a major before he turned 22. Admittedly Borg did win 5 titles before the age of 22 but this was 30 years ago.

 

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

Nadal is as dominant now as Fed was at his peak. 3/4 grand slams in a year is as good as Fed got at his peak and when you consider the French and US were won with only 1 set lost combined, you can see how dominant he is now. In fact he leads the rankings by almost 2 to 1 despite playing less tournaments.

Seriously? Using Federer's 2006:

Federer won 3/4 slams and made the final of the other (Nadal didn't).

Federer 92-5 (94.8%) vs Nadal currently 67-9 (88.2%)

Federer won 12 titles (Nadal has 6 and won't get near 12).

Federer made the final of 16/17 tournaments (Nadal is 6/13).

The last stat is probably the most amazing one. It's possible that Nadal could do even better in 2011, but he hasn't dominated nearly as much as Federer did in his peak.

 

[Total Power]

Seriously? Using Federer's 2006:

Federer won 3/4 slams and made the final of the other (Nadal didn't).

Federer 92-5 (94.8%) vs Nadal currently 67-9 (88.2%)

Federer won 12 titles (Nadal has 6 and won't get near 12).

Federer made the final of 16/17 tournaments (Nadal is 6/13).

The last stat is probably the most amazing one. It's possible that Nadal could do even better in 2011, but he hasn't dominated nearly as much as Federer did in his peak.

Cherrypicking stats i see , not surprised..how about this

21 straight slam wins and 3 slams in a row(federer didnt)

sweeping the entire clay court season (federer didnt)

losing only 1 set to win the US open (Federer never did that)

over 5,000 points ahead of Federer (when was federer that much ahead of nadal, unless he was injured?)


Federer was extremely lucky that rafa was injured last year, if he wasnt, you could have counted 2 slams less.But nevertheless lets not get into what could have been or should have been.


EDIT: In 2006, rafa still led fed head to head 4-2 with 1-1 in hardcourts and fed winning the wimbledon slam final.You still refuse the see the truth