Is Rafa in Decline?

[Kirijax]

Maybe we need to start a new updated forum for this topic but when we talk about the women's Top 5, It's pretty clear who are the top 5. But as to who is the actual No. 1 is impossible since all five of these champions bring something to the table or have something that others did better. There is no answer to the debate but it is fun to speculate.

For me, Chris Evert's consistency is just mind-boggling. Her ability to avoid let downs and keeping her level up so high for so long makes me want to say she's No. 1.

 

[auto-pilot]

Women's GOAT discussion is the main focus of Nadal's decline :laydownlaughing now I've seen it all :lolz:

 

[brokenshoelace]

What I don't get is, why do Federer fans keep calling him goat?
Isn't that disrespectful to past greats (including Laver)?
Since you can't prove Federer is goat, why say it?
Its just very bizarre and inappropriate.

What's so disrespectful about considering someone, in this case, Laver, a top 5 player of all time?

 

[mrzz]

Anyhow, one thing to consider about the GOAT and "subjective criteria" is that not all subjective criteria or perspectives are equal - some take into account more factors, are based on more research and logical thinking. I can tell you that when I come up with "some crazy complex criteria" it isn't just random - I try to weigh and balance as best as possible.

When I mentioned you directly, it was exactly to emphasize this point -- research and logical thinking -- as opposed to what was being discussed then. The "crazy" was an adjective to "complex", not to "criteria", but I see now that it wasn't clear.

But remember that, once you weigh things, it becomes subjective, as in the end you chose the weights some way. Nevertheless, I agree with you: it can be done, though it is not easy. But is surely good fun.

 

[El Dude]

Kirijax, not to hi-jack this thread--OK, to hi-jack it a bit--I agree that there are five greats (six if we want to include Moody) and each has an argument for being #1, but it rally is a baton-passing thing: Court to Evert to Navratilova to Graf to Serena (with some hiccups and transitions in there). The big unknown is whether Seles would have slotted in there between Graf and Serena if she hadn't been stabbed.

Anyhow, it is a very different picture in men's tennis with far less dominance by single players. But you still have what could be called the Big Eight, the "Herd of GOATs" (good title for a blog) that stand out above the rest: Tilden, Gonzales, Rosewall, Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer, and Nadal. Novak could be joining that group, but he needs to win at least a couple more and also needs to diversify more from the AO.

But how to arrange those eight is debatable. I think it is safe to put Borg #8 because he retired so young and doesn't have the overall career accomplishments of the others. But the rest, well, there are any number of ways to order them.

 

[Kirijax]

Kirijax, not to hi-jack this thread--OK, to hi-jack it a bit--I agree that there are five greats (six if we want to include Moody) and each has an argument for being #1, but it rally is a baton-passing thing: Court to Evert to Navratilova to Graf to Serena (with some hiccups and transitions in there). The big unknown is whether Seles would have slotted in there between Graf and Serena if she hadn't been stabbed.

Anyhow, it is a very different picture in men's tennis with far less dominance by single players. But you still have what could be called the Big Eight, the "Herd of GOATs" (good title for a blog) that stand out above the rest: Tilden, Gonzales, Rosewall, Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer, and Nadal. Novak could be joining that group, but he needs to win at least a couple more and also needs to diversify more from the AO.

But how to arrange those eight is debatable. I think it is safe to put Borg #8 because he retired so young and doesn't have the overall career accomplishments of the others. But the rest, well, there are any number of ways to order them.

Commencing hi-jack...

For me, the pre-Open greats have their own place in history and the only one I usually include is Laver because he overlapped a bit. My top five are below with Djokovic an outside chance to make it six.

Federer deserves the number one spot. Just an amazing career and he might not be done yet. He would destroy end any talk of Nadal or Djokovic as the greater player if he actually wins another FO.

 

[Fiero425]

Kirijax, not to hi-jack this thread--OK, to hi-jack it a bit--I agree that there are five greats (six if we want to include Moody) and each has an argument for being #1, but it rally is a baton-passing thing: Court to Evert to Navratilova to Graf to Serena (with some hiccups and transitions in there). The big unknown is whether Seles would have slotted in there between Graf and Serena if she hadn't been stabbed.

Anyhow, it is a very different picture in men's tennis with far less dominance by single players. But you still have what could be called the Big Eight, the "Herd of GOATs" (good title for a blog) that stand out above the rest: Tilden, Gonzales, Rosewall, Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer, and Nadal. Novak could be joining that group, but he needs to win at least a couple more and also needs to diversify more from the AO.

But how to arrange those eight is debatable. I think it is safe to put Borg #8 because he retired so young and doesn't have the overall career accomplishments of the others. But the rest, well, there are any number of ways to order them.

Yeah, Borg is my all time favorite, who had an aura about him, but as you said, there were limits and he retired early; #8 is about right if we're only going with the TOP 8 of all time! I'm glad you extended the greats back to Tilden; without him, I'm not sure tennis would be where it is today! There was disrepute for obvious reasons for a while, but he single-handed put the sport in the news back in the 20's winning tons of majors and multiple Davis Cups! Rosewall was supposedly the best, but like Nadal, I think traveling and befriending the best players in the world that happened to train with him helped! Laver thought of as the consensus #1 of all time with 2 calendar year Grand Slams and almost 6 years lost due to turning pro in '63! So that gives us the bottom 4 so far:

- 8) Bjorn Borg
- 7) Bill Tilden
- 6) Ken Rosewall
- 5) Rod Laver

Now I have to give some credit to Sampras for passing them all and holding onto the top spot with 14 majors before the latest crop! He didn't play a French Open final so I'll leave him in 4th! I can only go by reputation that Gonzales is a true great who holds all kinds of records even setting one as an old man of 41 winning a 1st round marathon Wimbledon match vs Charlie Pasarell! I wouldn't put Nadal in the top 10, but if you go by # of majors as a yard stick, he'll probably earn a few more before retiring so I'll put him in 2nd place for now! The reason I have little respect for Nadal is due to his inconsistent record; more a force on clay even though he has a career GS! He's never defended a title off clay with frequent absences from the tour! IMO Roger Federer reigns supreme holding most of the records with a consistency over the years unmatched by anyone in the history of the game! Just off the CUFF; opinion, ramblings! uzzled :angel: :dodgy: :nono

- 4) Pete Sampras*
- 3) Poncho Gonzales
- 2) Rafa Nadal
- 1) Roger Federer

* This could change rather easily if Novak Djokovic become steadier and takes titles he should! :angel:

 

[Federberg]

Wait, Navratilova is the GOAT? What about Graf? And isn't Serena in the mix?

Anyhow, one thing to consider about the GOAT and "subjective criteria" is that not all subjective criteria or perspectives are equal - some take into account more factors, are based on more research and logical thinking. I can tell you that when I come up with "some crazy complex criteria" it isn't just random - I try to weigh and balance as best as possible.

I think I'll have to write a GOAT blog at some point, because while I agree that the question is inherently problematic and very difficult (if at all possible) to answer definitively, I do think it is possible to approach it, to make a best guess.

I also think a lot of issues around the term "GOAT" have to do with making it more than it is as if we need to know how that player would fare in every era, against any opponent. The key is contextualizing players, comparing their greatness within the context of their own era with the greatness of others players in their own eras.

Yada yada yada.

I don't even think it's close! I'm sorry but have you seen how much Navratilova has won. Completely different league. I don't want to use GOAT, but there isn't a tennis player male or female that more closely fits the bill than Navratilova. And she didn't even need her major rival stabbed to achieve what she did :snicker

 

[britbox]

^ Margaret Court won 192 titles and 24 singles majors, so if you're just going on stats alone - she trumps Martina in the stats department.

The tour wasn't structured to anything like the degree it is now or even to the extent it was in Graf's era. There were a lot more tournaments with (often) tiny fields.

 

[Federberg]

^Yup. That's a good point about Court Britbox. But I think you've pointed out the issue with her stats.

 

[britbox]

^Yup. That's a good point about Court Britbox. But I think you've pointed out the issue with her stats.

But the same issue could also be applied to Martina's stat count, particularly during the 70s.

 

[Federberg]

Sadly we can say the same about WTA tennis until well into the 90s. No one is clean in that regard. At least Navratilova had Evert to play against. One of the problems with Court is that she traverses the open era

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

talking of frauline forehand, she made her wta tour debut in October 1982 age 13yrs 4m in a german tourney. I think she lost to tracy Austin (?).. ironically Steffi graf was on hand to destroy Austin in 1994 ? (bakery produce was handed out ?) when Austin was on her 2nd comeback (bad car accident halted 1st comeback in 1989).

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Finally, I understand why Rafa is in decline.

He got distracted by looking at all the goatesses mentioned in the last two pages of this thread.

 

[Fiero425]

^ Margaret Court won 192 titles and 24 singles majors, so if you're just going on stats alone - she trumps Martina in the stats department.

The tour wasn't structured to anything like the degree it is now or even to the extent it was in Graf's era. There were a lot more tournaments with (often) tiny fields.

Not to mention many top players just didn't go down to Australia; slow boat and to get support, the USTA player was compelled to stay a couple months to make the trip worth the effort! Court was unopposed "down under" until Evonne Goolagong came along! :nono :angel: :dodgy:

 

[nehmeth]

Nadal fans are happy at how far the thread has gone off topic.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Nadal fans are happy at how far the thread has gone off topic.

Give me WTA GOAT discussions over ridiculous denials any day of the week, so yes.

 

[Riotbeard]

Nadal fans are happy at how far the thread has gone off topic.

Give me WTA GOAT discussions over ridiculous denials any day of the week, so yes.

At 30, Nadal will hit his carpet peak...

 

[nehmeth]

At 30, Nadal will hit his carpet peak...

Ralf looks distinguished without the straggly hair.

 

[auto-pilot]

Nadal fans are happy at how far the thread has gone off topic.

Give me WTA GOAT discussions over ridiculous denials any day of the week, so yes.

I'm the biggest Nadal fan in the world, and I know Nadal peaked on clay/grass in 2008.