2019 Men’s Wimbledon SF: Roger Federer vs. Rafael Nadal

[El Dude]

To be honest, I do not think the H2H will determine about their legacies. Besides, Federer has A LOT more accomplishments over Nadal/Djokovic outside of the H2H records.

They are all great players, but honestly to say they are equal is a bit exaggerated.

I'll reply to these together as they're similar.

I agree that the H2H won't determine legacies, although it might prove to be a tiebreaker in case their final numbers are close.

As I said, I think they're co-GOATs - that this goes beyond statistics, beyond resumes. And my view is that no matter how the resumes end up looking when they're all retired, they've already all proved that they are "equally" great - or at least close enough that there will always be valid arguments to be made unless, of course, one of them goes on an absolute reign of terror for the next couple years.

There are numerous ways to support this "co-GOAT" view, but I'm just going with a holistic sense of things. It is almost like Rock-Paper-Scissors, although with each player having their own unique claim to GOATness.

Maybe a better analogy is that of Vanilla, Chocolate, and Strawberry ice cream. Roger is Vanilla: if you like the classic, pure flavor with subtle tastes, he's your guy. Rafa is Chocolate: when its good, it hits the spot like nothing else and can overwhelm any other flavor. Novak is Strawberry - not quite the "classic" that the other two are, but with its own distinct fresh flavor that, in a way, is better than either. But the point is, one is not better than the other; each are distinct, with their own "flavors of greatness" (and delicious!)

Now from a purely statistical perspective, right now Roger has the best resume, but that could change - especially when you factor in age. For the last 11 years Rafa has been closing the gap; for the last 8, Novak has joined him. The gap is there, but has narrowed and will almost certainly narrow further, if not disappear altogether.

I would argue that the three main statistical "factors of greatness," in terms of assessing career GOATness, are Slam titles, weeks at #1, and overall titles. Other things--like other big titles, special accomplishments, results at Slams in non-wins, H2Hs, etc--should factor in, but are less important.

Right now we have:

Roger: 20 slams, 310 weeks, 102 titles
Rafa: 18 slams, 196 weeks, 82 titles
Novak: 15 slams, 258 weeks, 74 titles

Or in terms of Open Era rankings:

Roger: 1st, 1st, 2nd
Rafa: 2nd, 6th, 4th
Novak: 3rd, 5th, 6th

Or vs each other:
Roger: 1st, 1st, 1st
Rafa: 2nd, 3rd, 2nd
Novak: 3rd, 2nd, 3rd

There is virtually no way that Rafa surpasses Roger's weeks at #1, but he has a good chance of doing so with Slams. Roger will probably have the title lead (and Open Era record) when all is said and done. Novak will be hard-pressed to win 6+ more Slams, but has a good chance at the weeks at #1 record.

Anyhow, there are numerous ways this could end. At this point, every year counts, every title counts, and especially every Slam counts. But regardless of the final numbers and rankings, they'll all be equally great players, in my view, because greatness goes beyond statistics.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Maybe Nadal doesn't have your geriatric mentality, which had you talking 7-8 years ago about Federer like he was 75 playing tennis for a little bit of exercise in Sarasota to enjoy his retirement.

Those little tactics by Nadal don't bother me that much.....they show he is passionate about winning and finding a way. That kind of grind-away mentality is a part of why he has the resume he does.

Hey Cali, how have you been?
The funny thing is 7-8 years ago (or thereabouts) Roger WAS playing like maybe he was ready for retirement. The extra gear he found to extend his career and win more slams is really not an everyday thing , no? If you want me to say "I am sorry, I could have never guess Roger would play another Wimbledon final at age 38 , I apologize" there you have it. And I am not sorry one bit .

 

[atttomole]

Dear Rafa Fans: The surface is slower than before. Looks like a mid paced hard court. No amount of Roger win or Rafa win will change that fact
Also, I am a Roger fan and never been a Rafa hater but some of the stuff he does, I shake my head because he does not have to resort to that stuff, he is already good enough. Like, the shoe (or the sock) that was good enough for the whole match has to be changed right before Roger serves for the match. Just don't do it man...Not necessary. Like the bathroom break in Miami. Not necessary. Your are good enough bro. Just play.

His behavior ticked me off. And he didn’t start there. In the second set after he served first, he kept Roger waiting to serve in the second game. The dirty tactic seemed to work because he breezed through the second set. I have lost all the little respect I had for the guy. He is a punk.

 

[Fiero425]

His behavior ticked me off. And he didn’t start there. In the second set after he served first, he kept Roger waiting to serve in the second game. The dirty tactic seemed to work because he breezed through the second set. I have lost all the little respect I had for the guy. He is a punk.

He's been pulling this crap for yrs! The sad thing is he not only does it against the elite players, he "games" 'also-rans' as well! :whistle:

 

[Carol]

This is not any secret so I think Nadal should do the same, everything helps!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/...derer-djokovic/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

 

[atttomole]

I'll reply to these together as they're similar.

I agree that the H2H won't determine legacies, although it might prove to be a tiebreaker in case their final numbers are close.

As I said, I think they're co-GOATs - that this goes beyond statistics, beyond resumes. And my view is that no matter how the resumes end up looking when they're all retired, they've already all proved that they are "equally" great - or at least close enough that there will always be valid arguments to be made unless, of course, one of them goes on an absolute reign of terror for the next couple years.

There are numerous ways to support this "co-GOAT" view, but I'm just going with a holistic sense of things. It is almost like Rock-Paper-Scissors, although with each player having their own unique claim to GOATness.

Maybe a better analogy is that of Vanilla, Chocolate, and Strawberry ice cream. Roger is Vanilla: if you like the classic, pure flavor with subtle tastes, he's your guy. Rafa is Chocolate: when its good, it hits the spot like nothing else and can overwhelm any other flavor. Novak is Strawberry - not quite the "classic" that the other two are, but with its own distinct fresh flavor that, in a way, is better than either. But the point is, one is not better than the other; each are distinct, with their own "flavors of greatness" (and delicious!)

Now from a purely statistical perspective, right now Roger has the best resume, but that could change - especially when you factor in age. For the last 11 years Rafa has been closing the gap; for the last 8, Novak has joined him. The gap is there, but has narrowed and will almost certainly narrow further, if not disappear altogether.

I would argue that the three main statistical "factors of greatness," in terms of assessing career GOATness, are Slam titles, weeks at #1, and overall titles. Other things--like other big titles, special accomplishments, results at Slams in non-wins, H2Hs, etc--should factor in, but are less important.

Right now we have:

Roger: 20 slams, 310 weeks, 102 titles
Rafa: 18 slams, 196 weeks, 82 titles
Novak: 15 slams, 258 weeks, 74 titles

Or in terms of Open Era rankings:

Roger: 1st, 1st, 2nd
Rafa: 2nd, 6th, 4th
Novak: 3rd, 5th, 6th

Or vs each other:
Roger: 1st, 1st, 1st
Rafa: 2nd, 3rd, 2nd
Novak: 3rd, 2nd, 3rd

There is virtually no way that Rafa surpasses Roger's weeks at #1, but he has a good chance of doing so with Slams. Roger will probably have the title lead (and Open Era record) when all is said and done. Novak will be hard-pressed to win 6+ more Slams, but has a good chance at the weeks at #1 record.

Anyhow, there are numerous ways this could end. At this point, every year counts, every title counts, and especially every Slam counts. But regardless of the final numbers and rankings, they'll all be equally great players, in my view, because greatness goes beyond statistics.

My criteria for greatest are similar to those used in soccer. It’s not the number of grand slam titles alone, but other achievements, such the way they play the game, weeks at number 1, versatility etc. For me Roger is the greatest because of how he plays the game and what he has achieved in his career, regardless of slam count.

 

[Moxie]

He didn't face anyone of that calibre till today.

Well, who IS of that calibre? Rafa himself, Roger and Nole. Period. Nadal really didn't play his best today, in the 3rd and 4th sets, as @don_fabio fairly pointed out. I'm sorry he didn't have it today, but Roger really picked up his level, after that mess of a 2nd set. Good win. Enjoy it.

 

[Carol]

Well, who IS of that calibre? Rafa himself, Roger and Nole. Period. Nadal really didn't play his best today, in the 3rd and 4th sets, as @don_fabio fairly pointed out. I'm sorry he didn't have it today, but Roger really picked up his level, after that mess of a 2nd set. Good win. Enjoy it.

Federer's fans are very bad losers but also bad winners, what a shame!

 

[Moxie]

Federer's fans are very bad losers but also bad winners, what a shame!

Not all of them, but the ones who are very much are. The rabid Feddies have been trying to make a bad guy out of Nadal for over a decade, now. They call him horrible names. (Some seriously horrible.) They set up the grass as terrible, just in case Roger loses. (Prophylactic forum invasion.) Now, they get what they want, and still they trash Nadal. (Again, not all, just the fanatics.) Grace notes have come from @shawnbm, @britbox, @GameSetAndMath (kudos for not totally towing the party line on players/surface.) But not a moment's graciousness from some.

 

[DarthFed]

I would like to sit between Rafa's sister and girlfriend. Just sit and watch the game, that's all. Nothing else. Good seats they have...

Let's flip a coin to determine which of us gets to console Ralph's sister and which gets to console his fiancé. I'm good with heads or tails.

 

[Moxie]

I'll reply to these together as they're similar.

I agree that the H2H won't determine legacies, although it might prove to be a tiebreaker in case their final numbers are close.

As I said, I think they're co-GOATs - that this goes beyond statistics, beyond resumes. And my view is that no matter how the resumes end up looking when they're all retired, they've already all proved that they are "equally" great - or at least close enough that there will always be valid arguments to be made unless, of course, one of them goes on an absolute reign of terror for the next couple years.

There are numerous ways to support this "co-GOAT" view, but I'm just going with a holistic sense of things. It is almost like Rock-Paper-Scissors, although with each player having their own unique claim to GOATness.

Maybe a better analogy is that of Vanilla, Chocolate, and Strawberry ice cream. Roger is Vanilla: if you like the classic, pure flavor with subtle tastes, he's your guy. Rafa is Chocolate: when its good, it hits the spot like nothing else and can overwhelm any other flavor. Novak is Strawberry - not quite the "classic" that the other two are, but with its own distinct fresh flavor that, in a way, is better than either. But the point is, one is not better than the other; each are distinct, with their own "flavors of greatness" (and delicious!)

Now from a purely statistical perspective, right now Roger has the best resume, but that could change - especially when you factor in age. For the last 11 years Rafa has been closing the gap; for the last 8, Novak has joined him. The gap is there, but has narrowed and will almost certainly narrow further, if not disappear altogether.

I would argue that the three main statistical "factors of greatness," in terms of assessing career GOATness, are Slam titles, weeks at #1, and overall titles. Other things--like other big titles, special accomplishments, results at Slams in non-wins, H2Hs, etc--should factor in, but are less important.

Right now we have:

Roger: 20 slams, 310 weeks, 102 titles
Rafa: 18 slams, 196 weeks, 82 titles
Novak: 15 slams, 258 weeks, 74 titles

Or in terms of Open Era rankings:

Roger: 1st, 1st, 2nd
Rafa: 2nd, 6th, 4th
Novak: 3rd, 5th, 6th

Or vs each other:
Roger: 1st, 1st, 1st
Rafa: 2nd, 3rd, 2nd
Novak: 3rd, 2nd, 3rd

There is virtually no way that Rafa surpasses Roger's weeks at #1, but he has a good chance of doing so with Slams. Roger will probably have the title lead (and Open Era record) when all is said and done. Novak will be hard-pressed to win 6+ more Slams, but has a good chance at the weeks at #1 record.

Anyhow, there are numerous ways this could end. At this point, every year counts, every title counts, and especially every Slam counts. But regardless of the final numbers and rankings, they'll all be equally great players, in my view, because greatness goes beyond statistics.

Thanks, as always, for the stats, and especially for the Neapolitan ice cream analogy. There is a reason they're always together. Nice!

 

[britbox]

Let's flip a coin to determine which of us gets to console Ralph's sister and which gets to console his fiancé. I'm good with heads or tails.

I'm sure the two ladies are playing the same game as we speak... Who shall we be consoled by from that tennis forum...Darth or Murat?

 

[Moxie]

I'm sure the two ladies are playing the same game as we speak... Who shall we be consoled by from that tennis forum...Darth or Murat?

 

[MartyB]

Not all of them, but the ones who are very much are. The rabid Feddies have been trying to make a bad guy out of Nadal for over a decade, now. They call him horrible names. (Some seriously horrible.) They set up the grass as terrible, just in case Roger loses. (Prophylactic forum invasion.) Now, they get what they want, and still they trash Nadal. (Again, not all, just the fanatics.) Grace notes have come from @shawnbm, @britbox, @GameSetAndMath (kudos for not totally towing the party line on players/surface.) But not a moment's graciousness from some.

Moxie I have the utmost respect for your posts and opinions. Always cogent well written and well presented. My feelings regarding Nadal have evolved over the years. I'm just a great fan of Fed's. These two giants of our sport have the utmost admiration and respect for each other. I do get a laugh at some of the silly and inane comments regarding Fed at times. I just move on and never respond.

 

[MikeOne]

My criteria for greatest are similar to those used in soccer. It’s not the number of grand slam titles alone, but other achievements, such the way they play the game, weeks at number 1, versatility etc. For me Roger is the greatest because of how he plays the game and what he has achieved in his career, regardless of slam count.

Roger is the most versatile, Novak is the more 'complete', IMO. I think Novak's A game is devoid of any weaknesses, you can't attack anything. Several have mentioned Novak's A game is the best ever. Nick Bolletieri has said it, players have said it. Players like Thiem, Nadal, Berdych have mentioned Djokovic's A game is probably best ever. Not because he is the most versatile but the player who technically is the best and capable to doing everything very very well.

Roger can do more but also is less tight... he can go through spells where he is sublime, then go through spells where he misses more and more. This is not age, same thing happened during 04-07 when Nadal started to beat him...Nadal was able to find holes. When Novak is in top gear, you can't find any holes. So it's a matter of opinion what greatness is, most complete with less ways to beat (Novak) or more versatile (more shots at disposal), they are two different things.

 

[DarthFed]

I'm sure the two ladies are playing the same game as we speak... Who shall we be consoled by from that tennis forum...Darth or Murat?

Being Darth I do have quite a good choke grip. It may separate me from @Murat Baslamisli

 

[Moxie]

Moxie I have the utmost respect for your posts and opinions. Always cogent well written and well presented. My feelings regarding Nadal have evolved over the years. I'm just a great fan of Fed's. These two giants of our sport have the utmost admiration and respect for each other. I do get a laugh at some of the silly and inane comments regarding Fed at times. I just move on and never respond.

Thank you for saying that @MartyB, and forgive me for not putting you in the hall of the Honorable, Gracious Fed fans. You are always elegant. To each his or her own fandom, right? Do we have to be horrible? Especially, as you say, when they have so much respect for each other. We are living in a time of Giants in men's tennis. We duke it out on the forums, and have our fun, but respect should also be paid. You're a mensch.

 

[Moxie]

Being Darth I do have quite a good choke grip. It may separate me from @Murat Baslamisli

Ick?

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Being Darth I do have quite a good choke grip. It may separate me from @Murat Baslamisli

My avatar used to be Yoda, if you remember...You may have the force choke but I trained all you guys

 

[britbox]

I'll reply to these together as they're similar.

I agree that the H2H won't determine legacies, although it might prove to be a tiebreaker in case their final numbers are close.

As I said, I think they're co-GOATs - that this goes beyond statistics, beyond resumes. And my view is that no matter how the resumes end up looking when they're all retired, they've already all proved that they are "equally" great - or at least close enough that there will always be valid arguments to be made unless, of course, one of them goes on an absolute reign of terror for the next couple years.

There are numerous ways to support this "co-GOAT" view, but I'm just going with a holistic sense of things. It is almost like Rock-Paper-Scissors, although with each player having their own unique claim to GOATness.

Maybe a better analogy is that of Vanilla, Chocolate, and Strawberry ice cream. Roger is Vanilla: if you like the classic, pure flavor with subtle tastes, he's your guy. Rafa is Chocolate: when its good, it hits the spot like nothing else and can overwhelm any other flavor. Novak is Strawberry - not quite the "classic" that the other two are, but with its own distinct fresh flavor that, in a way, is better than either. But the point is, one is not better than the other; each are distinct, with their own "flavors of greatness" (and delicious!)

Now from a purely statistical perspective, right now Roger has the best resume, but that could change - especially when you factor in age. For the last 11 years Rafa has been closing the gap; for the last 8, Novak has joined him. The gap is there, but has narrowed and will almost certainly narrow further, if not disappear altogether.

I would argue that the three main statistical "factors of greatness," in terms of assessing career GOATness, are Slam titles, weeks at #1, and overall titles. Other things--like other big titles, special accomplishments, results at Slams in non-wins, H2Hs, etc--should factor in, but are less important.

Right now we have:

Roger: 20 slams, 310 weeks, 102 titles
Rafa: 18 slams, 196 weeks, 82 titles
Novak: 15 slams, 258 weeks, 74 titles

Or in terms of Open Era rankings:

Roger: 1st, 1st, 2nd
Rafa: 2nd, 6th, 4th
Novak: 3rd, 5th, 6th

Or vs each other:
Roger: 1st, 1st, 1st
Rafa: 2nd, 3rd, 2nd
Novak: 3rd, 2nd, 3rd

There is virtually no way that Rafa surpasses Roger's weeks at #1, but he has a good chance of doing so with Slams. Roger will probably have the title lead (and Open Era record) when all is said and done. Novak will be hard-pressed to win 6+ more Slams, but has a good chance at the weeks at #1 record.

Anyhow, there are numerous ways this could end. At this point, every year counts, every title counts, and especially every Slam counts. But regardless of the final numbers and rankings, they'll all be equally great players, in my view, because greatness goes beyond statistics.

I can't agree with this co-GOAT theory. Right now, Roger is the GOAT for me. But, it's a fluid title and everything is still up for grabs while all three are active.