Why roger federer is still the GOAT.

[Xercen]

Even though the maestro was knocked out he is still the GOAT.

http://newyoungelite.com/?p=2440


If nadal gets more grandslams than roger, then and only then will nadal be the goat.

I have no idea why head 2 heads are so important in tennis. The strange and unique thing about tennis is that there are 4 difference surfaces in grand slams (aus and us open are both hard court but they r different types of HC) and those surfaces are very different so you might be good on clay but much weaker on grass. I won't explain details since i assume those who are reading know tennis. Therefore it's very hard to judge who is the GOAT except really with how many grandslams/majors he has earned over his career. think the link/article explains everything more in depth so have a good read.

The way i see it is a grandslam is like a world cup. The best country is brazil because they won the most world cups. You wouldn't say a team that has a winning record against brazil is the better team based on h2h records would you?

I think federer was unplayable when he was younger but now he is much more vulnerable. Now, let's see if rafa can catch fedex up. If he catches fed up then props to him and well deserved.

[cupocity303]

That's fair enough. He has built up a good lead, surpassing Sampras and others in total grand slams.

The long, long amount of totals days he was ranked # 1 to top it off, all of that should count for something.

But that's all he has got. If Nadal even so much as comes 1 grand slam away from tying him in totals, Nadal should be recognized as the greater one, if you add in the head to head's.

I used to defend Fed when the head to head argument was made a few year ago, citing the fact that the reason Nadal leads is because Federer always makes it to the finals on Nadal's favorite court (Clay), and Nadal doesn't do the same on grass and hard court. And if Nadal did make it to the finals of grass and hard court's as consistently as Fed did at the French, he would've lost a lot more to Fed than he did.

BUT NOW IT'S A DIFFERENT STORY, seeing how Nadal has started winning Wimbledon's (twice), U.S. Open's and Australian. He is no longer a one-trick pony, that's for sure.

[Xercen]

That's fair enough. He has built up a good lead, surpassing Sampras and others in total grand slams.

The long, long amount of totals days he was ranked # 1 to top it off, all of that should count for something.

But that's all he has got. If Nadal even so much as comes 1 grand slam away from tying him in totals, Nadal should be recognized as the greater one, if you add in the head to head's.

I used to defend Fed when the head to head argument was made a few year ago, citing the fact that the reason Nadal leads is because Federer always makes it to the finals on Nadal's favorite court (Clay), and Nadal doesn't do the same on grass and hard court. And if Nadal did make it to the finals of grass and hard court's as consistently as Fed did at the French, he would've lost a lot more to Fed than he did.

BUT NOW IT'S A DIFFERENT STORY, seeing how Nadal has started winning Wimbledon's (twice), U.S. Open's and Australian. He is no longer a one-trick pony, that's for sure.

Yeah i agree. Both players are amazing. They are both head and shoulders above the rest in terms of being complete players at their peak. If nadal surpasses federer (1 grandslam behind fed will make the h2h count for something) then he will be the goat, but until then fed is the GOAT. I hope nadal gives it a shot because he definately can be the goat and it's entirely up to nadal. But as far as im concerned, im gonna enjoy watching both of them play as well as djokovic and murray until all 4 of them retire.

But i'm watching with interest if it's gonna be a nadal/djokovic final. Recently, djokovic has had nadal's number so we'll see if djokovic can out play the master. Of course i would rather have murray play and murray can beat nadal so let's see what happens.

[The Monk]

Federer and Nadal: the two greatest players of all time. As a Murray fan I often wonder how many slams he would have if it wasn't for the dominance of these two players.

[SKULL DUCKED]

Imagine if Murray was around when Hewitt was winning sllams

But i was reading an article in the paper today.. which said winning say 1 slam in this era with Nadal/Fed even Djok> Winning 4-5 in a weak era.

[ƒallenloki]

Nadal is the greatest, imo.

Let's agree on something else. Their rivalry is likely the best in sports history.

[The Monk]

Imagine if Murray was around when Hewitt was winning sllams

But i was reading an article in the paper today.. which said winning say 1 slam in this era with Nadal/Fed even Djok> Winning 4-5 in a weak era.

I definitely agree with the argument put forward in that article. Look at Djokovic; he would have cleaned up if he was around in the 90s. This era is just ridiculously competitive.