Will Nadal pass Federer?

[Moxie]

Considering Murray can barely beat challenger opponents right now I'd say that's pretty damn unlikely. He's done.

That was rhetorical, basically. My point is I wouldn't write off Fed completely, but I do mostly. You have written him off yourself, Front...after this Wimbledon. In any case, it's an exaggeration to say he was playing great until he got hurt. He wobbled at the start of each of his first two rounds, he did look great v. Evans, and v. Goffin, but, as Broken pointed out above, Goffin was hampered...which you just have to admit, if we're going to say that Roger was hobbled in the next round.

 

[Front242]

That was rhetorical, basically. My point is I wouldn't write off Fed completely, but I do mostly. You have written him off yourself, Front...after this Wimbledon. In any case, it's an exaggeration to say he was playing great until he got hurt. He wobbled at the start of each of his first two rounds, he did look great v. Evans, and v. Goffin, but, as Broken pointed out above, Goffin was hampered...which you just have to admit, if we're going to say that Roger was hobbled in the next round.

Many including myself have written him off for years and he keeps proving us wrong so it's truly impossible to know. If the AO still plays fast then Roger will definitely have his chances, especially if Novak's physical state is still an issue next January. Federer would be 2nd favourite there after Djokovic, then Nadal and then Medvedev imo. Wimbledon is a long, long way away so who knows what way everyone will be playing by then and whether they'll be healthy. Roger will again have his chances there, with Novak the obvious favourite if healthy but not by a massive amount given what we saw this year. I expect Berrettini to do much better at Wimbledon next year too.

Goffin didn't appear to be badly hampered imo. Many players were a bit bashed up but didn't lose by such lopsided scorelines. I don't think it was the real reason he lost so badly. Federer was damn good that day and against Evans. At the end of day though it's irrelevant as people will just believe what they want and not what they saw.

 

[Moxie]

Goffin didn't appear to be badly hampered imo. Many players were a bit bashed up but didn't lose by such lopsided scorelines. I don't think it was the real reason he lost so badly. Federer was damn good that day and against Evans. At the end of day though it's irrelevant as people will just believe what they want and not what they saw.

In the interest of fairness, I don't think you can argue that Roger was hampered in the Dimitrov match, which he lost in 5, and not give some ground on the Goffin match, when he only won like 4 games. And we knew he had a hamstring issue (I think it was.) He did make Roger look like a genius, but we also know that Goffin is better than that. Even in the 2017 USO, Darth and you and others told us that you could see Roger was clearly hampered, because of how he struggled to certain players and even by the very fact of losing to del Potro, even though "he didn't appear to be badly hampered." Or at all. So you should apply the same rules and give Goffin benefit of the doubt.

 

[backhandslapper]

If Djokovic undergoes a surgery, sits out the rest of the season and returns next year, presumably out of shape, anything can happen, one of the scenarios being Federer winning both Australian Open and Wimbledon. Of course, even if this takes place, it won't mean Nadal does not catch on later, but it would at least delay him and it would somewhat boost the odds Nadal never overtakes Fed.

All in all, it's a lottery now. They (Fedalovic) are at the age when injuries become a strong possibility, and career-ending injuries all the more likely.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Roger might be the second favorite pat the AO...if he’s playing well. I think right now the biggest difference between him and Nadal is that the latter seems to be less prone to random upsets.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Even if they end at 20 & 19, they are now in the same category to everyone. Some will consider Fed as GOAT and some Nadal as GOAT. You can see after the USO how the narrative has changed. Gone are the days where Federer was seen as "special", everyone now realizes that Nadal is up there (and he reached such numbers by playing less and despite more injury setbacks). Also long gone are the days when Nadal was being put down concerning "non-clay", he's solid everywhere and if anything Federer would also need another clay slam.

With a 1 slam difference it's like Court vs Serena vs Graf, each one could arguably have a claim (although for me Serena is the GOAT because Court's tally is inflated due to the weak AO and Graf's tally is inflated due to the Seles stabbing). Nadal has many more Masters 1000, the h2h, 2 slams on each surface, a god-like dominant surface, gold medal, etc. Federer has 1 extra slam, wtfs and for now weeks at no.1… but his low success in slams vs Nadal & Djokovic will always be a question mark.

I feel that if Djokovic ends at 16, even though he would always be part of the Big Three he will not have a claim as GOAT because a 3-4 slam difference is substantial. That being said, chances that they will end up 20-19-16 are low, I think Nadal has a few more great years in him and I can see him reaching 24 slams total and being the undisputed GOAT. Right now if you make a poll, most people would pick Nadal to end up with the slam record.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Even if they end at 20 & 19, they are now in the same category to everyone. Some will consider Fed as GOAT and some Nadal as GOAT. You can see after the USO how the narrative has changed. Gone are the days where Federer was seen as "special", everyone now realizes that Nadal is up there (and he reached such numbers by playing less and despite more injury setbacks). Also long gone are the days when Nadal was being put down concerning "non-clay", he's solid everywhere and if anything Federer would also need another clay slam.

With a 1 slam difference it's like Court vs Serena vs Graf, each one could arguably have a claim (although for me Serena is the GOAT because Court's tally is inflated due to the weak AO and Graf's tally is inflated due to the Seles stabbing). Nadal has many more Masters 1000, the h2h, 2 slams on each surface, a god-like dominant surface, gold medal, etc. Federer has 1 extra slam, wtfs and for now weeks at no.1… but his low success in slams vs Nadal & Djokovic will always be a question mark.

I feel that if Djokovic ends at 16, even though he would always be part of the Big Three he will not have a claim as GOAT because a 3-4 slam difference is substantial. That being said, chances that they will end up 20-19-16 are low, I think Nadal has a few more great years in him and I can see him reaching 24 slams total and being the undisputed GOAT. Right now if you make a poll, most people would pick Nadal to end up with the slam record.

Holy shit, I don't agree with everything in this post, but this guy is making some sense. I'm shocked.

 

[britbox]

Even if they end at 20 & 19, they are now in the same category to everyone. Some will consider Fed as GOAT and some Nadal as GOAT. You can see after the USO how the narrative has changed. Gone are the days where Federer was seen as "special", everyone now realizes that Nadal is up there (and he reached such numbers by playing less and despite more injury setbacks). Also long gone are the days when Nadal was being put down concerning "non-clay", he's solid everywhere and if anything Federer would also need another clay slam.

With a 1 slam difference it's like Court vs Serena vs Graf, each one could arguably have a claim (although for me Serena is the GOAT because Court's tally is inflated due to the weak AO and Graf's tally is inflated due to the Seles stabbing). Nadal has many more Masters 1000, the h2h, 2 slams on each surface, a god-like dominant surface, gold medal, etc. Federer has 1 extra slam, wtfs and for now weeks at no.1… but his low success in slams vs Nadal & Djokovic will always be a question mark.

I feel that if Djokovic ends at 16, even though he would always be part of the Big Three he will not have a claim as GOAT because a 3-4 slam difference is substantial. That being said, chances that they will end up 20-19-16 are low, I think Nadal has a few more great years in him and I can see him reaching 24 slams total and being the undisputed GOAT. Right now if you make a poll, most people would pick Nadal to end up with the slam record.

Making polls right after grand slam events usually sees the winner awarded at least 5 majors. We have a "what did you do for me today" mentality. However, when you step back and look at it a little more pragmatically, a swing of a couple of points can determine major matches and massive swings in opinion.

I think it's unpredictable, so I'd be careful on betting anything on the basis of "a few years" because one thing I hope Medvedev's run will do, is to start dragging up his peers. I think there is still a gap... between the Big 3 and the rest but also that the window of opportunity for the Big 3 is beginning to shrink.

 

[isabelle]

If Djokovic undergoes a surgery, sits out the rest of the season and returns next year, presumably out of shape, anything can happen, one of the scenarios being Federer winning both Australian Open and Wimbledon. Of course, even if this takes place, it won't mean Nadal does not catch on later, but it would at least delay him and it would somewhat boost the odds Nadal never overtakes Fed.

All in all, it's a lottery now. They (Fedalovic) are at the age when injuries become a strong possibility, and career-ending injuries all the more likely.

no he won't, he said he"ll play the Asian tour

 

[El Dude]

Tales of Roger's demise are premature. Let's not forget that he was just one ace from winning #21 a couple months ago. You don't go from that to "done" in two months.

He is still the overall second best player on grass, and by this year's result, only by a hair. He and Djokovic are essentially equals on grass, but Novak's got the mental edge.

If he's not the second favorite at the AO, he's close to it. I'm guessing he's done on clay, and doesn't seem to be a real contender at the slow hards of the USO. But I'm not going to call him out at the AO or Wimbledon next year, unless he looks bad in Australia. But yeah, I'd say he probably has two more serious shots at a Slam.

Having a month plus off may do a lot to help Roger recuperate. I wouldn't even be surprised if he skips some tournaments to be fully rejuvenated for the new year. But let's see how he does at the AO before sticking a fork in him. As others have said, he has proved the naysayers wrong, time and time again.

 

[Jelenafan]

Tales of Roger's demise are premature. Let's not forget that he was just one ace from winning #21 a couple months ago. You don't go from that to "done" in two months.

He is still the overall second best player on grass, and by this year's result, only by a hair. He and Djokovic are essentially equals on grass, but Novak's got the mental edge.

If he's not the second favorite at the AO, he's close to it. I'm guessing he's done on clay, and doesn't seem to be a real contender at the slow hards of the USO. But I'm not going to call him out at the AO or Wimbledon next year, unless he looks bad in Australia. But yeah, I'd say he probably has two more serious shots at a Slam.

Having a month plus off may do a lot to help Roger recuperate. I wouldn't even be surprised if he skips some tournaments to be fully rejuvenated for the new year. But let's see how he does at the AO before sticking a fork in him. As others have said, he has proved the naysayers wrong, time and time again.

I don’t disagree The Old Man may have two more serious shots at a Slam.

The bigger problem is that Rafa could be ( huge IF ie no injuries) a contender on all 4 majors next year, obviously the French but he’s made the finals of his last 2 HC Majors and the SF’s in his last 2 grass.

I agree with whoever said that Methusaleh’s danger is keeping sharp mentally to make it to the latter rounds rounds on HC Majors. He’s missed the SF’s of the last 3.

FWIW, I don’t expect Rafa to be playing at age 38 , then again El Viejito may inspire him.

 

[atttomole]

I don’t disagree The Old Man may have two more serious shots at a Slam.

The bigger problem is that Rafa could be ( huge IF ie no injuries) a contender on all 4 majors next year, obviously the French but he’s made the finals of his last 2 HC Majors and the SF’s in his last 2 grass.

I agree with whoever said that Methusaleh’s danger is keeping sharp mentally to make it to the latter rounds rounds on HC Majors. He’s missed the SF’s of the last 3.

FWIW, I don’t expect Rafa to be playing at age 38 , then again El Viejito may inspire him.

With pretty much all the surfaces being so slow, Rafa has a shot. The slow playing conditions have turned Rafa into an all court player, which he isn't.

 

[Moxie]

With pretty much all the surfaces being so slow, Rafa has a shot. The slow playing conditions have turned Rafa into an all court player, which he isn't.

That doesn't seem sour grapes to you? They all play on the surfaces available. Nadal is a supremely talented player. If the surfaces were different, I think he'd have adapted to some extent. The fact that you don't think he's talented enough to adapt is your prejudice, not Nadal's failing.

 

[atttomole]

That doesn't seem sour grapes to you? They all play on the surfaces available. Nadal is a supremely talented player. If the surfaces were different, I think he'd have adapted to some extent. The fact that you don't think he's talented enough to adapt is your prejudice, not Nadal's failing.

I was responding to Jelenafan, who is overselling Rafa. Obviously, they have to play on whatever surface the authorities decide on, but it doesn't mean that they like it. If the US Open and Wimbledon were as fast as they used to be, I don't think Rafa would have so many titles at those slams. It is almost impossible for fast court players to win grand slam titles nowadays. I think, it is time for someone to speak out on surface homogenization

 

[Fiero425]

With pretty much all the surfaces being so slow, Rafa has a shot. The slow playing conditions have turned Rafa into an all court player, which he isn't.

The thing is history says Nadal's due for a fall; at least a niggling injury to cause some upsets this coming season! He's had a great 2017-19 which IMO's longer than most of his good runs! Look at it this way; '08 his 1st great season, supplanted Roger as #1! It didn't last with an '09 to forget, getting upset by Soderling at his beloved FO residence after 4 years of owning it! He recovered in '10 with a possibility of extending it thru 2012 but for the great run of Djokovic stopping him at final after final in Masters events and majors! Rafa had a great 2013 which led into a horrendous 2014-16 dropping FO's 2 of those seasons! No one could foresee both Nole and Murray dropping out of sight in 2017, but it gave Fedal their opening to take us "back to the future" with them owning it as they did a decade before! Roger stopped Nadal from having extended success, but he's still coming up fast just 1 major behind! I'm not sure Nadal can keep this going; tons of success usually leads to extended periods of ennui and possible complications due to injury since he's no spring chicken; none of the greats are! Things are up in the air with all of them right now, but I don't see any reason why the tour won't continue to be owned by Fedalovic regardless for the foreseeable future! :whistle: :cuckoo:

 

[Moxie]

I was responding to Jelenafan, who is overselling Rafa. Obviously, they have to play on whatever surface the authorities decide on, but it doesn't mean that they like it. If the US Open and Wimbledon were as fast as they used to be, I don't think Rafa would have so many titles at those slams. It is almost impossible for fast court players to win grand slam titles nowadays. I think, it is time for someone to speak out on surface homogenization

People have been speaking about surface homogenization for ages. If the USO and Wimbledon were as fast as they once were...oh, how long this has been sung in recent years. Do you even remember that the USO was played on grass and clay in recent memory? That certainly is no sacrosanct surface. And Wimbledon basically changed in 2001...meaning that it hasn't so much affected any of the players playing now. You think Jelenafan was "over-selling" Rafa? Heeheehee...just because you like to think he's not so great. Really??

 

[GameSetAndMath]

That doesn't seem sour grapes to you? They all play on the surfaces available. Nadal is a supremely talented player. If the surfaces were different, I think he'd have adapted to some extent. The fact that you don't think he's talented enough to adapt is your prejudice, not Nadal's failing.

Sure, Like he adapted himself to the indoor hard of the WTF.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

. And Wimbledon basically changed in 2001...meaning that it hasn't so much affected any of the players playing now.

Just because Wimbledon slowed in 2001, does not mean that it has not affected the players playing now. It would have suited Roger much better if it had not been slowed down. It actually favored Rafa because of the homogenization caused by slowing down of both Wimbledon and USO.

 

[Moxie]

Just because Wimbledon slowed in 2001, does not mean that it has not affected the players playing now. It would have suited Roger much better if it had not been slowed down. It actually favored Rafa because of the homogenization caused by slowing down of both Wimbledon and USO.

The notion of how the antique grass would have suited Roger is a non-conversation. You can't say how he'd have played on a surface that he basically didn't win on. You can imagine it, but you can't swear by it. Also, this doesn't allow for any number of players might have done better on it, especially early on. If you change one thing, you change everything.

 

[Moxie]

Sure, Like he adapted himself to the indoor hard of the WTF.

Rafa runs out of gas at the end of the year, and he runs into Roger and Novak. It's not that simple, really, is it?