Federer & Nadal: The Erasers

[Nadalfan2013]

I noticed that both Roger & Rafa have done the impossible, but in a different way. They both have "erased" tier 1 champions, please allow me to elaborate.

Federer has erased Sampras and Djokovic by matching or surpassing them in each slam. Basically, neither Sampras or Djokovic can say that they are better than Federer in any of the slams, he covers them everywhere.

Federer 6 AO, 1 RG, 8 WB, 5 USO
Sampras 2 AO, 0 RG, 7 WB, 5 USO

Federer 6 AO, 1 RG, 8 WB, 5 USO
Djokovic 6 AO, 1 RG, 4 WB, 2 USO

Nadal has erased Laver and Borg by matching their total career slams (AO, RG, WB, USO combined) with only one slam (RG). Kind of insane.

Nadal 11 RG
Laver 11 AO/RG/WB/USO
Borg 11 AO/RG/WB/USO

IMO, this eliminates Sampras, Laver, Djokovic and Borg from any claim to be the greatest of all-time. Federer and Nadal have managed to erase them, albeit in a different but equally impressive fashion. I just find it to be such an incredible feat.

Even if Djokovic wins the USO again he will still be erased by Federer. He will really need to win another AO or RG to have any decent claim over Federer.

 

[DarthFed]

Interesting way to look at it. I do give Djokovic the tiebreak over Roger at AO due to H2H there and overall dominance. Similarly I give Federer the tiebreak for best player ever at USO for winning 5 in a row though you could argue Connors since he won it on multiple surfaces. But I agree with the idea that Borg, Sampras and Djokovic are far away from GOAT candidates. Maybe Djokovic can still get there but it's a big ask at this point.

Laver's case is more interesting as he wasn't able to compete for majors for a large portion of his career and he also has the calendar year slam during the Open Era.

Of course you won't agree but I think Rafa is clearly not as great as Federer as of now but he is close and has been for awhile and is 5 years younger. We will see where they are when it's all said and done.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Interesting way to look at it. I do give Djokovic the tiebreak over Roger at AO due to H2H there and overall dominance. Similarly I give Federer the tiebreak for best player ever at USO for winning 5 in a row though you could argue Connors since he won it on multiple surfaces. But I agree with the idea that Borg, Sampras and Djokovic are far away from GOAT candidates. Maybe Djokovic can still get there but it's a big ask at this point.

Laver's case is more interesting as he wasn't able to compete for majors for a large portion of his career and he also has the calendar year slam during the Open Era.

Of course you won't agree but I think Rafa is clearly not as great as Federer as of now but he is close and has been for awhile and is 5 years younger. We will see where they are when it's all said and done.

If both retire today sure Federer would be ahead of Nadal for most people. But the fact that Rafa is 5 years younger shows me that they are pretty much in the same category. Federer leads a little bit but that's normal because he's played several more years and entered several more slams. The next few years will be interesting for Rafa, he's currently no.1 and very strong so the sky is the limit. IMO, if he hadn't had many injury setbacks during his career, missing slams and always having to start over and regain his form, he would already have the record.

But he might still get it as Serena despite her injuries still managed to pass Graf. (Graf would have never had 22 if it weren't for the Seles stabbing but Serena still passed Steffi's inflated career). I feel that Nadal is like Serena, he will be the man to beat for a few more years. Both started winning as teenagers, then in their 20's and are still strong in their 30's.

 

[Jelenafan]

Borg is the big What if enigma to me.

God he was a freak winning the Channel Double ( FO and Wimbledon) 3 Times when W grass truly was slick, fast and had a million bad bounces and Roland Garos was slow like molasses. The man had 6 FO and 6 W ( winning 5 straight) finals in 8 years. Another thing : the AO was a joke back than , an afterthought to the top players. Borg didn’t even play it from 1975 until his retirement in 1981. Total Majors won wasn’t as big back back then as it really was only the big 3 ( W, FO, USO) and in some years with World Team Tennis only 2 Majors.

Nobody could beat Borg on red clay ; still has the record for least games lost in the tourney, so even when he walked away from tennis it’s not like his game had fallen off a cliff. Of course his bet noire was the USO losing the final 4 times . Just somehow it never went his way, even when it wAs 3 years on that greenish quasi clay and then Johnny Mac came around,

Plus the cool Sweedish bearded look with headband and stoic ice in his veins persona made him such an iconic figure of the times.

Borg falling on his knees when he’d win Wimbledon yet again...

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Borg is the big What if enigma to me.

God he was a freak winning the Channel Double ( FO and Wimbledon) 3 Times when W grass truly was slick, fast and had a million bad bounces and Roland Garos was slow like molasses. The man had 6 FO and 6 W ( winning 5 straight) finals in 8 years. Another thing : the AO was a joke back than , an afterthought to the top players. Borg didn’t even play it from 1975 until his retirement in 1981. Total Majors won wasn’t as big back back then as it really was only the big 3 ( W, FO, USO) and in some years with World Team Tennis only 2 Majors.

Nobody could beat Borg on red clay ; still has the record for least games lost in the tourney, so even when he walked away from tennis it’s not like his game had fallen off a cliff. Of course his bet noire was the USO losing the final 4 times . Just somehow it never went his way, even when it wAs 3 years on that greenish quasi clay and then Johnny Mac came around,

Plus the cool Sweedish bearded look with headband and stoic ice in his veins persona made him such an iconic figure of the times.

Borg falling on his knees when he’d win Wimbledon yet again...

Yeah but when McEnroe had his big run and started beating Borg, he kind of decided that he wasn’t up to the challenge. But when Djokovic had his big run in 2011 and beat Nadal many times, Rafa didn’t chicken out and retire, he cameback stronger and is still winning slams many years later. That’s what a GOAT champion does. So no “what if” from me for Borg. A “what if” would be for me Seles/Graf.

 

[Jelenafan]

Yeah but when McEnroe had his big run and started beating Borg, he kind of decided that he wasn’t up to the challenge. .

I don’t think it was fear of Mac, it certainly wasn’t as if Mac had dominated him forever. Their last Wimbledon basically hinges on 2 TB.

Borg has said, and I don’t have any reason to doubt him that at that point in his career he was simply burned out. 1981 he said he played on mental fumes and even then he made 3 major finals winning 1. He had already played an insane amount of tennis in his career, if I’m not mistaken Borg played DC for Sweden at 15 years old. He truly was a prodigy.

Plus he had a superstar profile that involved mobs wherever he went.
At the last USO he had received death threats that people took serious.

What happened was he wanted to play a lighter ATP schedule, which included the 3 Majors and the ATP was insistent he play a full schedule and if not , play qualifiers to get into tournies like Monte Carlo. WHat the .. ? Can you imagine doing that to Today’s stars?


To me that is the “What if “ about his career, if the ATP hadn’t pissed him off would a short sabbatical have recharged his batteries. As it was
Borg said “screw this” and walked away.

The irony is he retired at 26 and his rival Mac never won a Major past the age of 26, being himself eclipsed by Lendl and others. I just find it way too simplistic to say Mac pushed him off the stage, as Nadal just said a few days ago, retirement is a personal thing and if you don’t have the motivation that’s all they wrote.

Much as I like Rafa, not going to trash Borg on an apples to oranges comparison.

 

[Jelenafan]

Similarly I give Federer the tiebreak for best player ever at USO for winning 5 in a row though you could argue Connors since he won it on multiple surfaces.

I think the USO is the toughest one because you have 3 very worthy candidates. Plus they all played in successive eras so H2H isn’t a factor.

Where I would give Pete the edge is with the spectrum of his wins; ie winning as a teenager in 1989 and finishing his career with his 5th USO title in 2002 over a span of 13 years. He has the highest winning percentage with a 71-9 W/L record there for an 88.75 % success rate, higher than both Connors and Federer. In addition he made 3 more finals for 8 finals ( again over Connors/Federer) totals and he never went more than 3 years without making a Finals. The other 2 had longer droughts.

 

[atttomole]

I would give it to Coonors as well because he won it on different surfaces, which is more difficult to do. With respect to Sampras vs Federer, Federer has had to deal with changes in playing conditions, which have not helped his game.

 

[atttomole]

If both retire today sure Federer would be ahead of Nadal for most people. But the fact that Rafa is 5 years younger shows me that they are pretty much in the same category. Federer leads a little bit but that's normal because he's played several more years and entered several more slams. The next few years will be interesting for Rafa, he's currently no.1 and very strong so the sky is the limit. IMO, if he hadn't had many injury setbacks during his career, missing slams and always having to start over and regain his form, he would already have the record.

But he might still get it as Serena despite her injuries still managed to pass Graf. (Graf would have never had 22 if it weren't for the Seles stabbing but Serena still passed Steffi's inflated career). I feel that Nadal is like Serena, he will be the man to beat for a few more years. Both started winning as teenagers, then in their 20's and are still strong in their 30's.

We have had these discussions before on these boards. Nadal had injury setbacks because of his playing style, which has helped him win the slams that he has now.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

We have had these discussions before on these boards. Nadal had injury setbacks because of his playing style, which has helped him win the slams that he has now.

Not really, it's also luck. Federer had a back injury because he was giving a bath to his daughters or was it while walking with them in a park? It depends which story you believe. Yet throughout his career even in grueling clay court matches he never got injured. You also have players like Tommy Haas or Nick Kirgios or even Del Potro who have battled throughout many injuries despite being power players. It's really about being lucky more than anything else.

Djokovic has been doing splits and running as fast as Nadal and overall he's been much luckier with injuries until very recently late in his career. Rafa even in his prime years barely played full seasons, he missed a lot of opportunities when he would have been a big favorite. The list about injuries in tennis is endless, it has nothing to do with the style of play and everything to do with luck. Many servebots have been injured too.

 

[DarthFed]

We have had these discussions before on these boards. Nadal had injury setbacks because of his playing style, which has helped him win the slams that he has now.

Yep, you live by the sword you die by the sword. Give Rafa's physique to Federer and he'd probably lose 1 or 2 matches a year.

 

[atttomole]

Not really, it's also luck. Federer had a back injury because he was giving a bath to his daughters or was it while walking with them in a park? It depends which story you believe. You also have players like Tommy Haas or Nick Kirgios or even Del Potro who have battled throughout many injuries despite being power players. It's really about being lucky more than anything else.

Djokovic has been doing splits and running as fast as Nadal and overall he's been much luckier with injuries until very recently late in his career. Rafa even in his prime years barely played full seasons, he missed a lot of opportunities when he would have been a big favorite. The list about injuries in tennis is endless, it has nothing to do with the style of play and everything to do with luck. Many servebots have been injured too.

There are two things here. One thing is Rafa used to miss the hard court season because he was cooked after playing the entire clay season, in some cases making a clean sweep of the titles. The other thing is that his grueling style also affected his knees. With Nadal, the injuries have been more regular, so I don't think you can compare with Federer's injuries. Federer's back injuries came a bit later in his career.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

. I feel that Nadal is like Serena,

Does Nadal also have a panic room in his house? Has Nadal also sent away testers back by pulling strings? Just asking. May be you know.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Yep, you live by the sword you die by the sword. Give Rafa's physique to Federer and he'd probably lose 1 or 2 matches a year.

If Federer had Nadal's physique he would have a completely different game, maybe not based on serve and short points. The same for the opposite, if Nadal had Federer's physique he would have changed his style, shortened the points, bigger serve, etc. The point is, many players who are grinders have not been injured and many players who are power players have been injured whether it's shoulder or twist an ankle or whatever, it's all luck. Nadal again was unlucky yesterday. This injury could have happened after the USO but it happened during it, that's another form of bad luck. The same for 2016 FO when he had to pull out while playing great tennis, or many times at the AO, or skipping so many slams throughout his career due to injury, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. x 10000. And this time he was wise enough to skip Cincinnati but again injured. He should have 100000000000000 slams by now. B-)

 

[DarthFed]

If Federer had Nadal's physique he would have a completely different game, maybe not based on serve and short points. The same for the opposite, if Nadal had Federer's physique he would have changed his style, shortened the points, bigger serve, etc. The point is, many players who are grinders have not been injured and many players who are power players have been injured whether it's shoulder or twist an ankle or whatever, it's all luck. Nadal again was unlucky yesterday. This injury could have happened after the USO but it happened during it, that's another form of bad luck. The same for 2016 FO when he had to pull out while playing great tennis, or many times at the AO, or skipping so many slams throughout his career due to injury, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. x 10000. And this time he was wise enough to skip Cincinnati but again injured. He should have 100000000000000 slams by now. B-)

You see this is part of the problem with this discussion with Rafa fans...if you can't see how this injury isn't a matter of "bad luck" then it is a pointless conversation. Nadal was being run ragged by 3 straight opponents heading into yesterday. When you play like that it is eventually going to catch up to you.

Bad luck is stepping on a ball during warmups and spraining an ankle. Having sore knees after being forced to run around like a madman and grind for 13 hours over 3 matches is not bad luck.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

You see this is part of the problem with this discussion with Rafa fans...if you can't see how this injury isn't a matter of "bad luck" then it is a pointless conversation. Nadal was being run ragged by 3 straight opponents heading into yesterday. When you play like that it is eventually going to catch up to you.

Bad luck is stepping on a ball during warmups and spraining an ankle. Having sore knees after being forced to run around like a madman and grind for 13 hours over 3 matches is not bad luck.

But Federer has a lot of good luck to never have been injured during his prime, any type of injury. Anyways back to the topic which is about Fedal being erasers.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Nothing changes for Novak in terms of having a claim as GOAT. He is still erased by Federer. B-)

Federer 6 AO, 1 RG, 8 WB, 5 USO
Djokovic 6 AO, 1 RG, 4 WB, 3 USO

 

[El Dude]

Interesting idea. I think Novak has a chance of eclipsing Roger at AO and RG this year, but will likely never do so at Wimbledon or the USO.

 

[Jelenafan]

Nole has 3 USO , don’t see why he can’t win 3 more. As of now I think it’s the Major most suited to his game.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Nole has 3 USO , don’t see why he can’t win 3 more. As of now I think it’s the Major most suited to his game.

He would need 6 USO since Federer has 5. His best bets are winning another AO or FO in order to seperate himself from eraser Federer.