Why Federer Must Wait For Nadal Until Being Proclaimed GOAT

First topic message reminder :

Some say physical, some will say mental. After today's performance there can be no shred of doubt that Federer cannot hold his focus and concentration when facing Nadal. Those who witnessed Federer mauling Nadal at WTF who thought just maybe Federer's career had a second wind blown into. Any chance of that happening has been thwarted here in Melbourne. Federer at 4-1 in the first set was coasting. Then a nervy service game at 4-2 handed Nadal a much needed route back into the match. At 7-6 and break up in the 3rd Federer against anyone else would have dispatched them at that point in the match and won in 3. 4-3 in the 3rd break once again, Federer loses his advantage. This isn't a case of stamina prevails over talent. Far from it. Nadal is far more comfortable at killing Federer off than Federer is killing Nadal off. Quite simply Nadal is the better hunter. Berdych will tell you the same thing, Nadal needs just 1 chance and he can take the match away from you. Why has Djokovic dominated Nadal? Because when Nadal gives out gifts, he doesn't give them straight back. Federer just doesn't seem to want to 'fight' out a match. Yes his game has the grace and beauty of a swan, but when he falters, it is like a platoon shooting the swan to bits. It is just that ugly, cruel and un-watchable. Take past greats. If Borg or Sampras were a set up against Nadal, they would've finished him brutally. There is no scarier proposition then facing Nadal on serve at 0-30 down because once that serve comes back, the pressure is on.

Back to the topic. Can Federer still claim his GOAT? In my opinion no. When Sampras retired he was hailed by many as the GOAT. Federer when he surpassed Sampras at Wimbledon 2009 he delightfully took that crown from Sampras. I think until Nadal retires, Roger will have to relinquish that crown for the time being. Yes he has 16 Slams, but look at how many more he could've had if hadn't been for Nadal? When Federer was being hammered on Clay I heard fans say well let's see on Grass, roll 2008. After that they said wait until Hard. Roll on 2009 and now today. Only the courts of Flushing Meadows remains un-tested for both. For me 7 defeats in Grand Slams, 6 Finals. Sampras never had such a blemish on his CV with Agassi. Borg didn't have the best record against McEnroe, but finished with more Slams and less brutal H2H.

For GOAT's they need to have had dominance over the field, and while Federer has at the Slams with Djokovic, Murray, Hewitt, Roddick, with Nadal, he doesn't. Nadal is now in another GS Final, we could be witnessing Slam number 11.

So the GOAT debate for me, rages on.

Was actually supposed to say 2nd in any argument between the 2. For me aswell as Fed the following would be above him Lendl, Sampras, Emerson & Laver.

For me the greatest of all time is extremely close between Fed & Emerson and whilst i always seem to tip towards Fed could hold no arguments if people said Emerson. A guy who won 28 slams in total (singles & doubles) and won all 4 slams twice.

Nadal has plenty of time to overtake them and I think he could well end up being 2nd..all depends how his body holds up. There is an argument to be made that he should be above Sampras as if you delve into the stats he is much more consistent when looking at all 4 slams and whilst Sampras has more Slam titles he never completed the whole set unlike Nadal.

legendkillar wrote:I agree that stats are just that stats and despite the merits, it makes the GOAT for me still debatable. One poster mentioned Borg. See the question I ask myself is Roger the best of his generation? And I say I don't know.

And I hope the 'weak' era does not rear it's ugly head here!

the best of his generation? the answer is yes!

reckoner wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I agree that stats are just that stats and despite the merits, it makes the GOAT for me still debatable. One poster mentioned Borg. See the question I ask myself is Roger the best of his generation? And I say I don't know.

And I hope the 'weak' era does not rear it's ugly head here!

the best of his generation? the answer is yes!

Your answer is yes.

Legend Killar who would you say is the best of his generation?

Like I said, I am not so sure. I will wait for this generation to go it's cycle and see.

I'm reluctant to label him GOAT as well just out of respect for what the previous players had. He hasn't overcome some of the challenges put to him. He should have at least played better today then we could have moaned about conditions and physicality if he lost. I think his is the greatest game but while his rivals games are too physically demanding perhaps his is too mentally demanding. The amount of mental focus required to base your game around hitting spectacular shots that are low percentage for others must be staggering. So if there is an ideal GOAT player then there's a chance he's not it for that reason. But that's just speculating.

Federer=legend

Is he GOAT?
Probably not, we'll have to see. As for people predicting Djokovic to beat Rafa in the final; Murray could reach the final.

Let's just put it this way; it's very easy to pick holes in anyone's record. Federer does not have a perfect record (of course) but if his record has holes in it then, by that same token, the other GOAT contenders must have craters in theirs.

A 8-2 Slam H2H against you biggest rival isn't great.
And those people who say its because now Fed is old; Nadal won the first match the played on HC in 2004, Dubai 2006 etc.
Outdoor hardcourt H2H also: 5-1 Rafa
Of course Rafa is also dominant on clay As Nadal fan I can't understand how Nadal always wins the key points.

Sampras for example, the only hole was no French Open title.

18 Slam finals. 4 defeats.

I don't see 'craters'

Very good point. Everyone has issues in their CVs.

Borg - No USO, beaten from the game by McEnroe
McEnroe - No French, not enough slams, Lendl overcame him
Lendl - no Wimbledon, Connrs had him
Sampras - No French, not even close

Don't remember those guys being out of the running. Feds gaps are minor in comparison, what with all this double 5 in a row, 18 finals out of 19 Slams, 427 semis in a row, etc.

legendkillar wrote:Sampras for example, the only hole was no French Open title.

18 Slam finals. 4 defeats.

I don't see 'craters'

That's a big hole, considering 1 semi was as close as he got. Fed has 1 French as hs worst, but has a massive final haul to back it up.

Agreed BB it is a big hole, but I wouldn't class it as a crater.

Oh these endless GOAT debates... I just hope Fed himself is not so pre-occupied with this, and instead continues to enjoy playing tennis and gives us some more years of pleasure watching him play. And if he manages to beat Nadal or Djokovic at some point again, that's only a nice bonus.

Most people, when talking about the GOAT, have a list of 4 or 5 players and don't put them in any order, precisely because you can pick holes in any one of them, and there is no definitive, agreed, set criteria for proclaiming the GOAT.

Personally, I'm curious as to why people feel the need to proclaim a definitive GOAT anyway - sometimes you can almost feel the desperation in the post. It might be an interesting discussion for half an hour in the pub, or on a forum, but I just don't get the idea that it makes someone feel better if the player they like is thought of as the GOAT. It's just not that big a deal is it - or do I just not take it seriously enough?

My top 3 fave ever players (Henman, Agassi, Connors) aren't even contenders, but it hasn't stopped me from enjoying watching them play any less. Surely the main enjoyment is just watching, isn't it?

legendkillar wrote:

reckoner wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I agree that stats are just that stats and despite the merits, it makes the GOAT for me still debatable. One poster mentioned Borg. See the question I ask myself is Roger the best of his generation? And I say I don't know.

And I hope the 'weak' era does not rear it's ugly head here!

the best of his generation? the answer is yes!

Your answer is yes.

... because I'm not including the next generation.

JuliusHMarx wrote: Surely the main enjoyment is just watching, isn't it?

Yes, the GOAT debaters can keep themselves occupied with that eternal question all the way to their respective graves, while the non-GOAT debaters can enjoy the sport.

LK, did not mean any disrespect to you for raising the question.

The GOAT question is the same as 'What is the meaning of life?' In my view, the 'journey' is the answer, not the 'goal', because the journey is itself the goal.

Enjoy Tennis.

I think if you look at the totality of circumstances Fed is the best all around player we have seen. If there was someone to be crowned GOAT it would be fed. If Nadal gets close to Fed's grandslam haul lets say gets to within a slam or two of fed I would then give it to Nadal because while I think right now fed's legacy is good enough for GOAThood, if Nadal lets say gets within a slam or two of fed and dominated fed in his prime when Nadal was still breaking onto the tour then I would give it to Nadal. The H2h isn't irrelevant like some Fed fans contend. I think between two great champions who were contemporaries of each other that if their overrall accomplishments are similar or close to one another than H2H can be a good tiebreaker. But right now there is no guarantee that Nadal will win 4 or 5 more slams to put himself on the pedestal. I think for Nadal to be considered goat, Fed will have to not win any slams and Nadal would have to win at least 4 more.

socal1976 wrote:I think if you look at the totality of circumstances Fed is the best all around player we have seen. If there was someone to be crowned GOAT it would be fed. If Nadal gets close to Fed's grandslam haul lets say gets to within a slam or two of fed I would then give it to Nadal because while I think right now fed's legacy is good enough for GOAThood, if Nadal lets say gets within a slam or two of fed and dominated fed in his prime when Nadal was still breaking onto the tour then I would give it to Nadal. The H2h isn't irrelevant like some Fed fans contend. I think between two great champions who were contemporaries of each other that if their overrall accomplishments are similar or close to one another than H2H can be a good tiebreaker. But right now there is no guarantee that Nadal will win 4 or 5 more slams to put himself on the pedestal. I think for Nadal to be considered goat, Fed will have to not win any slams and Nadal would have to win at least 4 more.

oh dear - why "close to" rather than exceed? I just had a quick "look at the totality of circumstances" for you and that is called movingt he goalposts.

I think it's a good article.

Federer's record against his younger nemesis is probably as good or better than Borg against Mcenroe, Connors agaist Lendl, Agassi against Sampras, and many others.

However I do think he needs something like a slam final win against Rafa and/or a French Open to be GOAT.

Federer is possibly marginally ahead in the GOAT states but not enough to stand alone.

I do think he is ahead of Sampras and probably Borg, but going back to Tilden, Gonzalez, Laver and Rosewall it's hard to compare. If Federer had taken 2 more slam wins against Nadal + 1 more FO you might have put him clear of all of those.

Henman Bill wrote:
I do think he is ahead of Sampras and probably Borg, but going back to Tilden, Gonzalez, Laver and Rosewall it's hard to compare. If Federer had taken 2 more slam wins against Nadal + 1 more FO you might have put him clear of all of those.

If he'd won last year's RG it would be time for tea and cakes, but if my Aunty had balls &c &c

Fed doesn't need to prove anything anymore.

It's a different era. The fact that Young Rafa played at peak Federer time and still troubled him is a bit irrelevant cause first he only troubled him on clay for so long, and secondly is that The conds from the time Fed learnt his tennis plus teh change in technology made it a completely different game for him.

It woudl have been fair to question Fed's reign had teh conds satyed the same as in teh 90s. But both teh slowing down of everything and the arrival of new strings complately changed the dynamic of the sport.

We thought Nadal was a great player? only because he was teh first to make the most of the conditions....but as soon other started to go that way we realise how limited his game is. At least Federer is still a top contender at 30. That is the amazing feat when you consider how much teh game has changed.

In teh 10 years that Pete played the conds changed very little. McEnroe, Federer unfortunately peaked at a time technique and technology made the game very different.

Federer is ahead of Borg and Pete in almost every department and even more miles ahead of the pre-open era players who were only a handful of real professionals sorting it out.

Fed doesn't need to prove anything anymore.

It's a different era. The fact that Young Rafa played at peak Federer time and still troubled him is a bit irrelevant cause first he only troubled him on clay for so long, and secondly is that The conds from the time Fed learnt his tennis plus teh change in technology made it a completely different game for him.

It woudl have been faire to question Fed's reign had teh conds satyed the same as in teh 90s. But both teh slowing down of everything and the arrival of new strings complately changed the dynamic of the sport.

We thought Nadal was a great player? only because he was teh first to make the most of the conditions....but as soon other started to go that way we realise how limited his game is. At least Federer is still a top contender at 30. That is the amazing feat when you consider how much teh game has changed.

In teh 10 years that Pete played the conds changed very little. McEnroe, Federer unfortunately peaked at a time technique and technology made the game very different.

Federer is ahead of Borg and Pete in almost every department and even more miles ahead of the pre-open era players who were only a handful of real professionals sorting it out.

Yeah that missed drop shot well and truly a turn the machines back on and blast your backhand cross court moment.