Your predictions for final Big 3 slam tally

[don_fabio]

I definitely don't see Novak retiring any time soon. Light schedule this year and 2020 probably helped his longevity. Will be interesting to see how he declines, but seeing how devoted he is to maintain physical and mental wellbeing I just don't see it happening in a next 2-3 years. Maybe he sticks around until 40 or maybe even more. Who knows, these ATG guys constantly try to prove something and that makes them push for more all the time.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

I think his grass game will be good, he lost to Sinner and Medvedev at Wimbledon the last 2 years. So it's not like he is losing to random low ranked players, he likes to come into the net too which will be a big advantage. Also with the new practice on show courts before the tournament begins rule at Wimbledon the courts are going to play in a way that could really suit him?

As I said he has the game to be good on grass, I think we all need to take a 'Big Breath' Carlos is just 19 years of age, and he has time on his side to improve in area's. I put up a post on the final between Carlos v Ruud, JFC thoughts on what is needed for Carlos to improve, which I agree with.When you have time please read it.

 

[Moxie]

2023 will be interesting, because I could see one of two narratives develop.

Narrative One: Revenge of the Big Two. With Roger gone, Rafa and Novak feel the weight of time's passing and go all in. Novak reclaims AO, Rafa wins RG. Novak storms back and takes Wimbledon, but it is grueling. Rafa gives it another go at USO, but is vanquished by a young pup, same with Novak. Year ends with both tied at 23, and winning 3 of 4 together. In 2024, Rafa loses at RG and decides to call it quits. Novak pulls out one more, and then loses the fire after Rafa is out and he's got his +1. 24, 23.

Narrative Two: Rise of the Younglings. Rafa and Novak find that the tour is more hostile to their presence, and end up being vanquished again and again. Novak manages to win one, but it isn't easy. But Rafa decides to move on to greener pastures and hangs up his racket. The year ends with them tied at 22. After spending the offseason in a Hyper-dimensional Nirvana Chamber orbiting the earth, Novak returns in 2024, wins the AO and retires at the ceremony finishing with 23. The younglings take over fully and the Era of Alcaraz begins in earnest (Or Alcarzinner?).

Possible Third Narrative: The Old Guys Refuse to Budge. Take Narrative Two, but after Novak retires at 2024 AO, Nadal makes a surprise comeback and plays--and amazingly wins--RG, tying Novak's "final" tally at 24. Novak says, "WTF?" And makes a comeback, trying to get that +1...With the help of advanced nano-technology, psilocybin micro-dosing, and blood boys aplenty, they play leap-frog for the next decade, winning a Slam a year each, until the asteroid strikes in 2033, during the RG final when they're tied at 32 Slams each, and tied in the 5th set...And then we all argue in the afterlife for eternity about who was going to win...

Don't get mad at me, but I note that you hypothesize no option whereby Nadal finishes with the most Majors. Let me fill in that gap.

I think what you say, and Kieran concurs with, is very probable: That Rafa makes a big push to defend the AO and win RG in 2023. However that goes, he may be done. He's going to have a new baby, and he's always said he wants to be home for that.

I also agree that, if Novak can, he will try hard to outlast Rafa by at least one. He has said as much. He wants to have the most toys when the music stops, and he's not even cagey about it.

One thing you don't allow for is that Novak may not play the coming AO, nor any of the next 3. Another is the conviction that Novak is fit and healthy and has a few more years in him. This is a truism of that last while, but not a surety. He is beginning to show the signs of age. In Rafa, the signs of age have always been physical, but in Roger, and, I would argue, Novak, they tend to be mental. As the windows close, the pressure mounts, and each opportunity seems more like one of the last. Of the 3, Rafa has shown he can withstand the pressure of "last opportunity." (2019 USO and 2022 AO.) Roger buckled at Wimbledon 2019 (sorry to bring that one up again,) and Novak buckled at OG and 2021 USO, with so much on the line. With the youngsters coming up, there is a chance that Rafa, given that, as Paul Annacone says, will be the favorite at RG even 8 years after he retires, may yet get #23 at RG, even if he doesn't defend the AO. Novak may not even play it. And, as the pressure mounts, and the competition starts to speak for itself, Novak might have a hard time adding to his total in 2023. What pressures on Novak if Rafa gets to 23 and he's still at 21?
Just saying that there is an argument that they could finish Nadal 23/24, Novak 21-22, Roger 20.

 

[Moxie]

There are too many unknown factors to get too far ahead of ourselves. I mean on one hand we can look at what Alcaraz has done and dream of someone who could eventually surpass even the Big Three, but that's assuming that literally nothing changes from the current context of the game and Alcaraz has the steadiness and champion's mentality--and health--to not only get better, but maintain a high level of dominance for the next 10-15 years.

I think it is important that Alcaraz has Juan Carlos Ferrero in his corner. IMO, it's like having an Uncle Toni. They seem to have a solid bond, and JCF is a really sturdy influence. I think this might be the deciding factor.

 

[El Dude]

There’s an interesting discussion to be had about chronologies here, in the sense that Borg is a first generation professional, one of those like Connors and Nastase who never experienced the amateur game, but who played under far greater scrutiny and pressure than the sepia-toned champs. It was an unexplored world. They’re were rock stars. They even began to use two-handed backhands, which were so rare in the old days, but suddenly became common. Why? Maybe because players became more aware of the stakes, and developed their defensive games differently? It’s hard to know, because really it was the coaches who developed the players this way, independently of influence from each other. The first generation professionals were rogues, stylistically and in their behaviour. Even Borg, the epitome of the old school gentleman player, was an astounding advance into the future, the ultimate tennis icon visually, who was an iconoclast in terms of technique.

Reading this I thought of a young Connors demolishing Ken Rosewall multiple times. It was like the 1970s vs the 1960s. Of course it isn't entirely fair, considering the 18-year age difference, but it was a clash of different tennis paradigms.

The next generation that came after then brought in power tennis, and a return to serve-volley too, but with important adaptations, and maybe Sampras was the ultimate end point of that culture?

I think that works, but also towards his weaknesses - especially on clay. The Big Three, in their primes at least, were all-courters. Sure, the courts were more homogenized than in Pete's day, but clay was still clay, grass still grass. Think of how Roger adapted to clay and even though he could never get by Rafa, he's still a great clay player for awhile. And think of how Rafa went from being a clay maestro to winning on all courts. And when Novak fully blossomed in 2011, he was the 1st or 2nd favorite everywhere, no matter the court.

I think you’re right about Pete, had he taken a break it might have helped him, but I also think he suffered from not having a co-great pushing him, a la Big 3. Pete didn’t like sharing space at the top and had he a Rafa chasing him, he might have found the resolve to continue. He certainly perked up in 1999 after Agassi won the French. Pete was so tired after 1998 he skipped the Australian.

The Big 3 are really playing on Pete’s terms, to an extent, if they’re chasing slams in order to prove their greatness. Pete was the first one to prioritise breaking the GS total record held by Emerson. This record meant nothing to Borg, who could easily have surpassed it, had he thought it important…

Yeah, that's very possible. But the Borg What If will forever be unknown. He could have won 5+ more, or stalled at 11. He would have needed to adapt - both to the changing nature of the sport, but also to McEnroe and the upcoming generation. He probably would have taken a Slam or two off Wilander's total, and maybe Connors too, but I wonder if he would have ended up being third wheel to McEnroe and, by the mid-80s, Lendl. But yeah, I'd love to see an early-mid 80s do-over with Borg present and revived.

 

[El Dude]

Don't get mad at me, but I note that you hypothesize no option whereby Nadal finishes with the most Majors. Let me fill in that gap.

I think what you say, and Kieran concurs with, is very probable: That Rafa makes a big push to defend the AO and win RG in 2023. However that goes, he may be done. He's going to have a new baby, and he's always said he wants to be home for that.

I also agree that, if Novak can, he will try hard to outlast Rafa by at least one. He has said as much. He wants to have the most toys when the music stops, and he's not even cagey about it.

One thing you don't allow for is that Novak may not play the coming AO, nor any of the next 3. Another is the conviction that Novak is fit and healthy and has a few more years in him. This is a truism of that last while, but not a surety. He is beginning to show the signs of age. In Rafa, the signs of age have always been physical, but in Roger, and, I would argue, Novak, they tend to be mental. As the windows close, the pressure mounts, and each opportunity seems more like one of the last. Of the 3, Rafa has shown he can withstand the pressure of "last opportunity." (2019 USO and 2022 AO.) Roger buckled at Wimbledon 2019 (sorry to bring that one up again,) and Novak buckled at OG and 2021 USO, with so much on the line. With the youngsters coming up, there is a chance that Rafa, given that, as Paul Annacone says, will be the favorite at RG even 8 years after he retires, may yet get #23 at RG, even if he doesn't defend the AO. Novak may not even play it. And, as the pressure mounts, and the competition starts to speak for itself, Novak might have a hard time adding to his total in 2023. What pressures on Novak if Rafa gets to 23 and he's still at 21?
Just saying that there is an argument that they could finish Nadal 23/24, Novak 21-22, Roger 20.

Fair enough - and I do think there is a scenario where Rafa comes out on top. I just think Novak will outlast him in terms of playing time, and will be focused on surpassing him. Whereas I think Rafa's window of opportunity to add to his total--both because of age and his family--is basically two more Slams, I could Novak at least being in contention, even if not a favorite, for another 10+ Slams.

If I had to put money on it, I'd say there's about 70% chance Novak ends up with the lead. Plus or minus. But that still gives Rafa a solid 30% chance, which is more than Roger has .

 

[Kieran]

I think that works, but also towards his weaknesses - especially on clay. The Big Three, in their primes at least, were all-courters. Sure, the courts were more homogenized than in Pete's day, but clay was still clay, grass still grass. Think of how Roger adapted to clay and even though he could never get by Rafa, he's still a great clay player for awhile. And think of how Rafa went from being a clay maestro to winning on all courts. And when Novak fully blossomed in 2011, he was the 1st or 2nd favorite everywhere, no matter the court.

I think there homogenising of the courts was accompanied by different balls, and a homogenising of styles too, to a very large extent. I’ll try remember where I read it, but it was probably on tennis.com, that Pete and Roger became close after their exo tour, around 2008. One time they were at dinner with Paul Annacone and Pete asked Roger, “wtf is going on with tennis?”

Roger asked him what he means, and Pete said, players staying back, at Wimbledon. They had a great chat, according to Annacone, but it highlighted the difference between the game they both played.

The point being, that the game changed enough that players could play and win with one style everywhere. Roger was winning Wimbledon from the baseline. It became a great and beautiful shock when Roger began to assault the net more, as he got older. But such an approach, of playing from rite back court every tournament was unheard of in Pete’s day. Likewise, the sport didn’t homogenise to fit his strengths. He actually began his tennis life with a two handed backhand but he dropped the second hand because it was considered far less likely for him to win Wimbledon with a two hander.

This is another reason why comparisons across eras are fraught with peril.

But the Borg What If will forever be unknown. He could have won 5+ more, or stalled at 11. He would have needed to adapt - both to the changing nature of the sport, but also to McEnroe and the upcoming generation. He probably would have taken a Slam or two off Wilander's total, and maybe Connors too, but I wonder if he would have ended up being third wheel to McEnroe and, by the mid-80s, Lendl. But yeah, I'd love to see an early-mid 80s do-over with Borg present and revived.

When Borg retired, Martina similarly hadn’t won the USO, but she persevered and won it the following year. I often thought about that. He left too soon, obviously, so we’ll never know what he could have achieved. In some ways, Borg is a unique tennis myth. He’s the Greta Garbo, the Franz Schubert of the game. He left too early but somehow his stature is unaffected by it. He never grew old on court, which is a welcome change, when you think about it..

 

[Kieran]

Fair enough - and I do think there is a scenario where Rafa comes out on top. I just think Novak will outlast him in terms of playing time, and will be focused on surpassing him. Whereas I think Rafa's window of opportunity to add to his total--both because of age and his family--is basically two more Slams, I could Novak at least being in contention, even if not a favorite, for another 10+ Slams.

If I had to put money on it, I'd say there's about 70% chance Novak ends up with the lead. Plus or minus. But that still gives Rafa a solid 30% chance, which is more than Roger has .

We can’t be too sure of any of this, now that they’re getting older. For now, Rafa’s the one on the lead, and it’s up to Novak to win more than him from now on, by 2 slams. It’s not so easy, and as @Moxie put it, Rafa is the one who’s stepped up. It’ll be interesting to see. I remember @DarthFed reassuring me years ago that Rafa was a hungry so and so, he projects niceness, and a careless attitude when it comes to records, but Rafa really wants to break the slam record and I think it’s possible that Darth might have been right. This was when Roger was well ahead of Rafa.

Rafa has only one reason to play now, when you think about it, and that’s to keep the record.

Personally speaking, I also suspect that Darth might have been wrong, and Rafa will retire soon. Old Darth was often wrong, far as I’m concerned..

 

[Moxie]

We can’t be too sure of any of this, now that they’re getting older. For now, Rafa’s the one on the lead, and it’s up to Novak to win more than him from now on, by 2 slams. It’s not so easy, and as @Moxie put it, Rafa is the one who’s stepped up. It’ll be interesting to see. I remember @DarthFed reassuring me years ago that Rafa was a hungry so and so, he projects niceness, and a careless attitude when it comes to records, but Rafa really wants to break the slam record and I think it’s possible that Darth might have been right. This was when Roger was well ahead of Rafa.

Rafa has only one reason to play now, when you think about it, and that’s to keep the record.

Personally speaking, I also suspect that Darth might have been wrong, and Rafa will retire soon. Old Darth was often wrong, far as I’m concerned..

Interesting point that Rafa has only one reason to keep playing, post-baby. He's never going to make a dent in weeks at #1, no matter what happens. YEC is almost surely never happening. So it's got to be about keeping space between himself and Novak in the Majors race. One thing we know is that Rafa is very competitive. I see why @El Dude and @don_fabio think Novak will play long, which is why the Dude gives Novak the edge in Majors 70/30. It's a fair point, and Novak has stated flat out that he wants to have the most Majors at the end of his career, so he'll do what it takes, if he can.

Here's where the benefit of being the best on clay trumps being the best on HC, IMO. On hards, you have all the competition. On clay, it's still a question. In fact, it's nearly time for our annual poll: who can beat Rafa at next year's Roland Garros? Astonishingly, it's still a fair question. The annual answer for many years has been Novak, and Rafa got him once again in 4 this year. Ruud? Alcaraz? Thiem? However, the list of serious contenders and spoilers on hard courts gets longer. Novak may have to start hoping that no one comes up to threaten on grass.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Interesting point that Rafa has only one reason to keep playing, post-baby. He's never going to make a dent in weeks at #1, no matter what happens. YEC is almost surely never happening. So it's got to be about keeping space between himself and Novak in the Majors race. One thing we know is that Rafa is very competitive. I see why @El Dude and @don_fabio think Novak will play long, which is why the Dude gives Novak the edge in Majors 70/30. It's a fair point, and Novak has stated flat out that he wants to have the most Majors at the end of his career, so he'll do what it takes, if he can.

Here's where the benefit of being the best on clay trumps being the best on HC, IMO. On hards, you have all the competition. On clay, it's still a question. In fact, it's nearly time for our annual poll: who can beat Rafa at next year's Roland Garros? Astonishingly, it's still a fair question. The annual answer for many years has been Novak, and Rafa got him once again in 4 this year. Ruud? Alcaraz? Thiem? However, the list of serious contenders and spoilers on hard courts gets longer. Novak may have to start hoping that no one comes up to threaten on grass.

Good question who can defeat Rafa at Roland Garos in 2023, I would dismiss Thiem, his level is still a long way off, going back to challengers at present is the best thing for him, needing to win smaller tournaments, Ruud is a good clay court player, even though he got a tennis lesson on clay from Rafa, at RG this year,Alcaraz has a good game on clay,....maybe a poll is a good idea at this point in time.

 

[don_fabio]

I see why @El Dude and @don_fabio think Novak will play long, which is why the Dude gives Novak the edge in Majors 70/30. It's a fair point, and Novak has stated flat out that he wants to have the most Majors at the end of his career, so he'll do what it takes, if he can.

I think @El Dude got the odds right with Novak's chances of passing Rafa in total slams won, but it does depend a lot on Rafa's chances of winning 1 or 2 more RGs. Rafa's biggest enemy for another RG title is his own body. If he remains good for the clay season number of players that could beat him is very low, maybe Alcaraz is the best bet and maybe Novak, but seeing how he dropped that 4th set lead this year is something to worry.

One more thing about Novak. I can see him regaining no.1 spot if he gets to play full schedule next year. He likely doesn't need to win more than 1 slam, but be consistent on others and add some masters win to it, looks doable.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Don't get mad at me, but I note that you hypothesize no option whereby Nadal finishes with the most Majors. Let me fill in that gap.

I think what you say, and Kieran concurs with, is very probable: That Rafa makes a big push to defend the AO and win RG in 2023. However that goes, he may be done. He's going to have a new baby, and he's always said he wants to be home for that.

I also agree that, if Novak can, he will try hard to outlast Rafa by at least one. He has said as much. He wants to have the most toys when the music stops, and he's not even cagey about it.

One thing you don't allow for is that Novak may not play the coming AO, nor any of the next 3. Another is the conviction that Novak is fit and healthy and has a few more years in him. This is a truism of that last while, but not a surety. He is beginning to show the signs of age. In Rafa, the signs of age have always been physical, but in Roger, and, I would argue, Novak, they tend to be mental. As the windows close, the pressure mounts, and each opportunity seems more like one of the last. Of the 3, Rafa has shown he can withstand the pressure of "last opportunity." (2019 USO and 2022 AO.) Roger buckled at Wimbledon 2019 (sorry to bring that one up again,) and Novak buckled at OG and 2021 USO, with so much on the line. With the youngsters coming up, there is a chance that Rafa, given that, as Paul Annacone says, will be the favorite at RG even 8 years after he retires, may yet get #23 at RG, even if he doesn't defend the AO. Novak may not even play it. And, as the pressure mounts, and the competition starts to speak for itself, Novak might have a hard time adding to his total in 2023. What pressures on Novak if Rafa gets to 23 and he's still at 21?
Just saying that there is an argument that they could finish Nadal 23/24, Novak 21-22, Roger 20.

"You hypnotize no option whereby Nadal finishes with the most majors "

@Moxie the poster was dormant the past 8 months when Rafa won Two Slams and made it too the semi's at SW19. Yet , he reemerges as a statistical tennis historian when Carlos wins his first slam.

 

[tented]

I think @El Dude got the odds right with Novak's chances of passing Rafa in total slams won, but it does depend a lot on Rafa's chances of winning 1 or 2 more RGs. Rafa's biggest enemy for another RG title is his own body. If he remains good for the clay season number of players that could beat him is very low, maybe Alcaraz is the best bet and maybe Novak, but seeing how he dropped that 4th set lead this year is something to worry.

One more thing about Novak. I can see him regaining no.1 spot if he gets to play full schedule next year. He likely doesn't need to win more than 1 slam, but be consistent on others and add some masters win to it, looks doable.

My question is what will be his mindset when he plays majors again? If he’s allowed to go to Melbourne in January, how will he handle it? He certainly won’t have good memories from his last time there, plus he’ll have to face either Alcaraz, Medvedev, or Rafa — all hugely motivated to take him down. He won’t enter as the de facto winner, either, as used to be the case, plus he’ll be 35.5 years old. We saw last year what happened at RG, when facing Rafa. Enough said. The USO has always been his biggest problem at majors, which leaves Wimbledon — still his best shot at a major next year.

 

[Moxie]

"You hypnotize no option whereby Nadal finishes with the most majors "

@Moxie the poster was dormant the past 8 months when Rafa won Two Slams and made it too the semi's at SW19. Yet , he reemerges as a statistical tennis historian when Carlos wins his first slam.

@Mrs. Malaprop: He's a Roger fan, it was hard to complain if the Fed fans haven't had much to be around for or enthusiastic about tennis for. And he basically made this thread because I goaded him into it. I don't think he intends to be biased against Rafa. I think he genuinely thinks he's not, and just can't help it. Anyway, I'm glad he's back.

 

[Moxie]

I think @El Dude got the odds right with Novak's chances of passing Rafa in total slams won, but it does depend a lot on Rafa's chances of winning 1 or 2 more RGs. Rafa's biggest enemy for another RG title is his own body. If he remains good for the clay season number of players that could beat him is very low, maybe Alcaraz is the best bet and maybe Novak, but seeing how he dropped that 4th set lead this year is something to worry.

One more thing about Novak. I can see him regaining no.1 spot if he gets to play full schedule next year. He likely doesn't need to win more than 1 slam, but be consistent on others and add some masters win to it, looks doable.

Novak never should have won the 3rd set last year, so it evened out. And that's not partisanship, I stole it from a commentator, who said he won the one he should have lost and lost the one he should have won. But just to say, chances of Novak taking Rafa out of RG have been exaggerated on this forum and in the press since 2011, when even Federer fans were hoping that Roger would lose that semi- so that Novak could play Rafa in the final. Some people, including one Rafa fan still insist Novak would have won that final that was never played. (They are wrong.) But you're right about Rafa's body: probably his most formidable opponent at Roland Garros.

 

[don_fabio]

Novak never should have won the 3rd set last year, so it evened out. And that's not partisanship, I stole it from a commentator, who said he won the one he should have lost and lost the one he should have won.

Fair statement. Rafa was definitely a better player for the majority of that match, but still we cannot say Novak didn't have a reasonable chance there.

But just to say, chances of Novak taking Rafa out of RG have been exaggerated on this forum and in the press since 2011

Maybe. Depends how you look at it. Rafa has insane record on RG and Novak is the only guy who won 2 times against him and played some close matches so Novak is as close as it gets to beat Rafa in RG. There is no denying that Rafa is dominant against Novak in RG and against anyone (including Roger who played toe to toe with Rafa in 2011), but I will always believe Novak has a chance against Rafa every time they meet in RG.

 

[don_fabio]

My question is what will be his mindset when he plays majors again? If he’s allowed to go to Melbourne in January, how will he handle it? He certainly won’t have good memories from his last time there, plus he’ll have to face either Alcaraz, Medvedev, or Rafa — all hugely motivated to take him down. He won’t enter as the de facto winner, either, as used to be the case, plus he’ll be 35.5 years old. We saw last year what happened at RG, when facing Rafa. Enough said. The USO has always been his biggest problem at majors, which leaves Wimbledon — still his best shot at a major next year.

He'll go through catharsis in AO final if he wins and cry like a baby during the ceremony

Joking aside, it will be tough for him if he gets a chance to play in AO. Plenty of players to worry about and his ranking is not the best so possible 4th round or QF he could get some landmine. I also think his best chances onwards and until the end will remain in Wimbledon.

His match against Rafa in RG was disappointing in many ways, but as much as he was nervous there he did not repeat the same mistake in Wimbledon and handled that final extremely well. Considering how much was on the line too and the opponent he had 0-2 h2h.

Next year will be new challenges and I guess we all look forward to how it all plays out including Rafa as well.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Anyways to me after watching the USO there's no doubt that the new generation will continue taking over in 2023.

Congratulations to Nadal and his fans on the slam record and the GOATness.

 

[El Dude]

Rafa has only one reason to play now, when you think about it, and that’s to keep the record.

Which is why the 2023 AO and RG are so important. I mean, if wins one or both, he pads his lead significantly, even enough to maintain the lead after retiring. If he doesn't, and Novak wins one or both, he might feel that it is inevitable that Novak passes him.

Either way, at this point in their respective lives and careers, I suspect that Novak is more up to a multi-year dogfight to get to +1 than Rafa is. So one or both of those Slams is key for Rafa to have a chance at maintaining that lead (assuming Novak comes back strong, which as Moxie said, isn't guaranteed).

 

[Kieran]

In bombing around the internet following the great cheating scandal in chess, I fell upon an interview with Garry Kasparov which I'd loved when it came out first. The interviewer is Lex Fridman, whose podcast is really worth checking out. But the topic here is what Garry thinks of Magnus Carlsen, and it segues into inevitable comparison territory. Kasparav is really interesting in this, but where I think he's relevant to what we're discussing here is around the 3 minute mark, when he discusses comparisons in other sports across lengthy time spans, and he says a really true and interesting thing: that Garry Kasparov at his best, in 1989, wouldn't compare with Magnus of 2019 because Magnus just knows so much more, that chess knowledge has accumulated in the meantime since 1989 - but if you equipped Kasparov of 1989 with that same knowledge, he would no longer be Garry Kasparov, he'd be someone else.

It's worth a listen, takes only about 3 minutes: