Twenty Slams For Roger Federer!

[The Gemini Method]

I am also a tennis novice. I would place the over/under at 1 more major title for Roger and I predict 2 I can see him return to winning form at Wimbledon. I see Rafa winning the French again. However, Thiem got close the last couple of times, so who knows. Maybe Federer at the U.S. can be a force to be reckon with. Joker is though a tough out as well.

[DAF86]

I am also a tennis novice. I would place the over/under at 1 more major title for Roger and I predict 2

Chances of Roger winning another slam are pretty slim, tbh.

[Spurtacular]

Chances of Roger winning another slam are pretty slim, tbh.

Not that slim, tbh.

[Reck]

Nadal went out like a chump. The dude is streaky. He's either playing like a stud or he's barely scraping by.

He lucked out through at least 2 matches in the Australian Open. Thiem simply put him out of his misery.

[DAF86]

Nadal went out like a chump. The dude is streaky. He's either playing like a stud or he's barely scraping by.

He lucked out through at least 2 matches in the Australian Open. Thiem simply put him out of his misery.

He lost 3 tie breaks against the number 5 guy in the World. How is that going out like a chump that was put out of his misery? :lol

[DAF86]

Not that slim, tbh.

At this stage of his career a lot of things need to align for him to get another one.

[Spurtacular]

At this stage of his career a lot of things need to align for him to get another one.

He's gotten to two finals in the last six months. He's clearly still playing at a top five level. Him winning another final is not far fetched at all.

[Reck]

Gotta agree with derp here.

[DAF86]

He's gotten to two finals in the last six months. He's clearly still playing at a top five level. Him winning another final is not far fetched at all.

Which two finals?

[Spurtacular]

Which two finals?

Wimbledon and Aussie.

[DAF86]

Wimbledon and Aussie.

The final is played on sunday.

[Dverde]

If Nadal and Fed end up with the same number of major titles...best ever goes to Nadal, right?

[FrostKing]

https://i.ibb.co/cF2d7BL/Screenshot-2020-02-02-09-46-13-1.png

[FrostKing]

If Nadal and Fed end up with the same number of major titles...best ever goes to Nadal, right?
Preference. Id go with Federer

[Kawhitstorm]

To make it to the semifinal at his age and be pretty competitive the past couple years is impressive. Do you see this being the last go round for Federer?

He needs to luck out with the draws & have Nadal/Novak get Ko’d by others or play them while they’re less than 90%

[Kawhitstorm]

If Nadal and Fed end up with the same number of major titles...best ever goes to Nadal, right?

Nadal has won more than half his slams on one surface, not exactly as versatile

[Dverde]

Nadal has won more than half his slams on one surface, not exactly as versatile

Nadal has two gold medals and better head to head stats against Fed. Novak probably going to pass both of them quietly:lol

[Jules_Winnfield]

Nadal has won more than half his slams on one surface, not exactly as versatile


Nadal

Clay: 12

Hard court: 5

Grass: 2

Federer

Hard court: 11

Grass: 8

Clay:1

Djokovic

Hard court: 11

Grass: 5

Clay: 1


https://media.giphy.com/media/qrURsXtrfKGek/giphy.gif

[DAF86]

Nadal has two gold medals and better head to head stats against Fed. Novak probably going to pass both of them quietly:lol

Nadal is pretty far behind in terms of number of weeks at numbers 1 and season end number 1 (which basically means winning the season). Those are iomportant stats that shouldn't be overlooked.

[Spurtacular]

Yes or no?

Rog has a better chance at getting another major than Serena Williams?

Having Det baby and gettin off the PED's to do it has really exposed her hasn't it? Of course, nobody writes about it or will.

Allegedly having that baby.

A 40-year-old man on steroids gonna still have a shot against dainty twenty-five-year-old females.

[Spurtacular]

https://i.imgur.com/r3RJztv.gif

https://66.media.tumblr.com/7057f2820ee560cef6ed210572572e5c/tumblr_ok263cZ28w1s9d3cdo3_r1_250.gifv

:lol Why aren't the snowflakes saying Jim Carey is homophobic?

[Spurtacular]

https://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Jim-Carrey-artwork-main.jpg


His virtue signaling is apparently some type of repellent.

Yep. I knew that answer. :lol

[spurraider21]

Allegedly having that baby.

A 40-year-old man on steroids gonna still have a shot against dainty twenty-five-year-old females.
:lmao still on this

[Spurtacular]

:lmao still on this

You can't tell me you don't think something is amiss, Lite.

[spurraider21]

You can't tell me you don't think something is amiss, Lite.
other than your neural connections?

[GAustex]

Serena be a brickhouse
Strong gal he is.

[Spurtacular]

other than your neural connections?

Deflect all you want.

[Spurtacular]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sgu_Jcsdhx4

[i'm_still_beta]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sgu_Jcsdhx4
Nadal is going for the Slam №21. Does it make him the GOAT?

[Spurtacular]

Nadal is going for the Slam №21. Does it make him the GOAT?

13 are on clay (French Open), which is the surface that deviates the most from the norm IMO. So, I can't give him that.

RN definitely the best clay player of all-time.

[Dverde]

Novak will pass them both. They are clutching their pearls thinking it was one or the other for all time :lol

[Spurtacular]

Novak will pass them both. They are clutching their pearls thinking it was one or the other for all time :lol

Not a lock. He's not going to be on the right side of 35 for much longer. If Fed or Nadal stretch their lead from two to three or four, it could be an uphill battle for him.

[DAF86]

13 are on clay (French Open), which is the surface that deviates the most from the norm IMO. So, I can't give him that.

RN definitely the best clay player of all-time.

That's one of the most retarded takes I've read and it reeks of racism and prejudice, tbh. What's the norm for you? Hard courts? How does clay deviate from hard courts any more than grass? Furthermore, did you know that hard courts weren't always the norm? There was a time where the grand slams were played twice on grass and twice on clay. Imagine if Nadal played on that era, he would have twice as many grand slams.

As a Federer fan and a Nadal hater, I can't believe people are making me argue in favour of the Spaniard, but you leave me no choice with ignorant comments like these, tbh.

[lefty20]

That's one of the most retarded takes I've read and it reeks of racism and prejudice, tbh. What's the norm for you? Hard courts? How does clay deviate from hard courts any more than grass? Furthermore, did you know that hard courts weren't always the norm? There was a time where the grand slams were played twice on grass and twice on clay. Imagine if Nadal played on that era, he would have twice as many grand slams.

As a Federer fan and a Nadal hater, I can't believe people are making me argue in favour of the Spaniard, but you leave me no choice with ignorant comments like these, tbh.

Let's be honest here, Clay ain't real tennis. It's basically a track meet. So yeah, no question about it. Rafa is the GOAT track & field player in Men's Tennis, by a lot.


But srsly, it's safe to say the Fed is done winning slams and Rafa has one more FO in him b4 he's done. This means that Novak has a couple years of farming titles allowing him to build a safe lead before finally hanging it up. I just don't see how he stays below ~23 titles.

[DAF86]

Let's be honest here, Clay ain't real tennis. It's basically a track meet. So yeah, no question about it. Rafa is the GOAT track & field player in Men's Tennis, by a lot.


But srsly, it's safe to say the Fed is done winning slams and Rafa has one more FO in him b4 he's done. This means that Novak has a couple years of farming titles allowing him to build a safe lead before finally hanging it up. I just don't see how he stays below ~23 titles.

To win in clay you need to be skilled, be solid with all your shots, and actually think the game and come up with a game plan. You can't win by just serving and trying to mindlessly overpower your oponent, tbh.

[lefty20]

To win in clay you need to be skilled, be solid with all your shots, and actually think the game and come up with a game plan. You can't win by just serving and trying to mindlessly overpower your oponent, tbh.

You can win on clay by overpowering your opponents with a non-stop barrage of heavy top spin forehands backed by elite defense. That's literally how Nadal does it.

[DAF86]

You can win on clay by overpowering your opponents with a non-stop barrage of heavy top spin forehands backed by elite defense. That's literally how Nadal does it.

You are oversimplying the shit out of that but, for the sake of argument, let's say you are right. You still need to be able to hit every shot at an above average level to pull it off. You can win a grass tournament with just a serve and a few lucky bounces.

[Spurtacular]

That's one of the most retarded takes I've read and it reeks of racism and prejudice, tbh. What's the norm for you? Hard courts? How does clay deviate from hard courts any more than grass? Furthermore, did you know that hard courts weren't always the norm? There was a time where the grand slams were played twice on grass and twice on clay. Imagine if Nadal played on that era, he would have twice as many grand slams.

As a Federer fan and a Nadal hater, I can't believe people are making me argue in favour of the Spaniard, but you leave me no choice with ignorant comments like these, tbh.

You just go right there like a triggered bitch. Okay, I'll call you out, then; what did I say exactly that reeks so much of racism?

[lefty20]

You are oversimplying the shit out of that but, for the sake of argument, let's say you are right. You still need to be able to hit every shot at an above average level to pull it off. You can win a grass tournament with just a serve and a few lucky bounces.

Djoker is either equal to or better than Rafa in pretty much every other category. But that forehand is in a league of it's own and is absolutely the #1 reason behind Rafa's dominance on Clay.

[DAF86]

You just go right there like a triggered bitch. Okay, I'll call you out, then; what did I say exactly that reeks so much of racism?

Clay is known to be the surface of the "latinos". Knowing your posting history, I'm pretty sure your dislike for the surface has something to do with that, because there's no other reason to believe clay "deviates from the norm" more than any other surface. Heck, the tennis that we know today started with grass and clay. The first grand slams were played on those surfaces. So, if anything, these modern hard courts are the ones that deviate the most from what originally percieved as "the norm".

[DAF86]

Djoker is either equal to or better than Rafa in pretty much every other category. But that forehand is in a league of it's own and is absolutely the #1 reason behind Rafa's dominance on Clay.

Yeah well, that forehand it is what is because of it's unique technique, tbh.

Also, what does bringing Djokovic to the equation accomplish for your cause? It sure as hell doesn't adress my argument that one trick ponys usually do better on faster courts than on clay, tbh.

[Spurtacular]

Clay is known to be the surface of the "latinos".

This is news to me. But even if it were, I'm supposed to base my opinions on Latino attachment to clay? That's pretty stupid when you think about it.


Knowing your posting history

You mean your triggered history apparently.


Knowing your posting history, I'm pretty sure your dislike for the surface has something to do with that, because there's no other reason to believe clay "deviates from the norm" more than any other surface.

It does deviate from the norm. Lefty said it on the very next post. Is he racist too? Or is this designation just for the people on your enemies list?


Knowing your posting history, I'm pretty sure your dislike for the surface has something to do with that, because there's no other reason to believe clay "deviates from the norm" more than any other surface.

Are you this ignorant to not know how much more different clay is than the other surfaces?

[DAF86]

This is news to me. But even if it were, I'm supposed to base my opinions on Latino attachment to clay? That's pretty stupid when you think about it.



You mean your triggered history apparently.



It does deviate from the norm. Lefty said it on the very next post. Is he racist too? Or is this designation just for the people on your enemies list?

Don't flatter yourself son, I don't consider yourself an enemy, tbh. And yeah, if you want, I can call lefty's second brand an ignorant too, for saying that ignorant shit. :lol

You forgot the last part of my post. How can clay "deviate from the norm" when it was one of the surfaces where grand slam tennis started? Way before modern hard courts were invented.

[DAF86]

Are you this ignorant to not know how much more different clay is than the other surfaces?

I know exactly how much more different clay is to grass and hard courts. I also know exactly how much more different grass is to clay and hard courts. And how much more different hard courts are to clay and grass. Each surface has its own unique characteristics and they are very different from each other. You are the ignorant one if you think grass is somehow more similar to hard courts than clay courts are. Specially these new hard courts.

[Spurtacular]

Don't flatter yourself son, I don't consider yourself an enemy, tbh. And yeah, if you want, I can call lefty (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=6896)'s second brand an ignorant too, for saying that ignorant shit. :lol

You forgot the last part of my post. How can clay "deviate from the norm" when it was one of the surfaces where grand slam tennis started? Way before modern hard courts were invented.

I didn't mean the norm in terms of usage or history but rather for effect on play. Grass is neutral. Concrete increases the speed of the ball and the height on the bounces but is otherwise not so much varied. Though it can certainly be argued that it is artificial for the purist who think grass is true surface for tennis; and I could absolutely give credence to that. But nonetheless, I consider the effect at least somewhat muted. Clay on the other hand is a total game changer. The players traction and subsequently his playing style is greatly altered. Or do you think it's just a coincidence that Nadal has 2/3 of his grand slams on a surface that is only at 1/4 of grand slams?

[Spurtacular]

I know exactly how much more different clay is to grass and hard courts. I also know exactly how much more different grass is to clay and hard courts. And how much more different hard courts are to clay and grass. Each surface has its own unique characteristics and they are very different from each other. You are the ignorant one if you think grass is somehow more similar to hard courts than clay courts are. Specially these new hard courts.

Concrete courts do add advantages for players with faster serves especially. But it's not an all encompassing game changer like clay apparently is. Many players are night/day clay vs. other surfaces.

[lefty20]

Yeah well, that forehand it is what is because of it's unique technique, tbh.

Also, what does bringing Djokovic to the equation accomplish for your cause? It sure as hell doesn't adress my argument that one trick ponys usually do better on faster courts than on clay, tbh.

My point is that one trick pony can also dominate Clay if that trick is good enough, say like Rafa's forehand.

[DAF86]

I didn't mean the norm in terms of usage or history but rather for effect on play. Grass is neutral. Concrete increases the speed of the ball and the height on the bounces but is otherwise not so much varied. Though it can certainly be argued that it is artificial for the purist who think grass is true surface for tennis; and I could absolutely give credence to that. But nonetheless, I consider the effect at least somewhat muted. Clay on the other hand is a total game changer. The players traction and subsequently his playing style is greatly altered. Or do you think it's just a coincidence that Nadal has 2/3 of his grand slams on a surface that is only at 1/4 of grand slams?

Concrete is faster than grass? What? :lol

And no, clay isn't any more different to hard courts than grass. If anything, the most different surface is precisely grass. The ball bounces lower than in clay and hard courts. You have to move differently than in clay and HC because you will slip if not. On the later stages, the grass burns out and the court becomes a mixture of sand and grass, giving you plenty of weird bounces. If anything, grass is the "oddball surface".

[DAF86]

My point is that one trick pony can also dominate Clay if that trick is good enough, say like Rafa's forehand.

Are you implying Rafa is a one-trick ponny? :lol

Give any player Rafa's forehand with a weak backhand and he wouldn't win one RG, let alone 13 (or how many are that Rafa has).

[lefty20]

Are you implying Rafa is a one-trick ponny? :lol

Give any player Rafa's forehand with a weak backhand and he wouldn't win one RG, let alone 13 (or how many are that Rafa has).

Were you implying that Fed is a one trick pony for dominating grass? Cuz, it kinda seemed that way. My apologies if not.


Idk how one can ignore the fact that 65% of Rafa's Slam success is all on same damn court. There's no getting around that. If he really was as good of an all around player as Djoker and Fed he wouldn't be getting out classed so badly on grass, hard courts and indoor courts. For this reason he will always stay below Fed and eventually Djoker in the eyes of the most fans. There's just no getting around that.

He's welcome to try and change that narrative by winning something other than RG but I don't see that happening, tbh.

[DAF86]

Were you implying that Fed is a one trick pony for dominating grass? Cuz, it kinda seemed that way. My apologies if not.


Idk how one can ignore the fact that 65% of Rafa's Slam success is all on same damn court. There's no getting around that. If he really was as good of an all around player as Djoker and Fed he wouldn't be getting out classed so badly on grass, hard courts and indoor courts. For this reason he will always stay below Fed and eventually Djoker in the eyes of the most fans. There's just no getting around that.

He's welcome to try and change that narrative by winning something other than RG but I don't see that happening, tbh.

Of course I'm not saying Federer is one dimensional, I'm a huge Federer fan. I'm just saying one dimensional players do better on grass than on clay. Folks with a good serve and nothing else can get by on grass, they can't get by on clay.

About Nadal, the due has like 8 or 9 grand slams outside of clay. That's more than what many all-time greats have combined. The fact that he dominates clay like no other player before has dominated a surface shouodn't take away from his all-around game.

[lefty20]

Of course I'm not saying Federer is one dimensional, I'm a huge Federer fan. I'm just saying one dimensional players do better on grass than on clay. Folks with a good serve and nothing else can get by on grass, they can't get by on clay.

About Nadal, the due has like 8 or 9 grand slams outside of clay. That's more than what many all-time greats have combined. The fact that he dominates clay like no other player before has dominated a surface shouodn't take away from his all-around game.

Nadal has 7 slams outside Clay. And about 75-80% of tour tennis is played away from that surface. So 7 is simply not good enough to be in contention for the GOAT title, he'll have to settle for #3.

We haven't even talked about how his game basically falls apart when it comes to indoor tennis. I don't understand how a player of his caliber can fail to adjust to a condition change like that.

[DAF86]

Nadal has 7 slams outside Clay. And about 75-80% of tour tennis is played away from that surface. So 7 is simply not good enough to be in contention for the GOAT title, he'll have to settle for #3.

Why? :lol If anything, the fact that only 20% of the tour is played on Nadal's favourite surface adds to his legacy. Imagine how much more dominant he would be if the % were reversed, or even if they were 50/50 (like it was at one time).

Under the premise that Nadal can't be on the GOAT conversation because only 7 of his grand slams came outside of his favourite surface, then the same can be said about Djokovic because only 6 of his GS came outside of his favourite surface (hard courts). Do you see how retarded this take is?

The fact that hard courts is the surface where the tour is played the most (only because it is the cheapest option) doesn't take anything away from Nadal, in fact it adds to it, because he still dominates in a tour where 80% of the time is played outside his favourite surface.

[lefty20]

Why? :lol If anything, the fact that only 20% of the tour is played on Nadal's favourite surface adds to his legacy. Imagine how much more dominant he would be if the % were reversed, or even if they were 50/50 (like it was at one time).

Under the premise that Nadal can't be on the GOAT conversation because only 7 of his grand slams came outside of his favourite surface, then the same can be said about Djokovic because only 6 of his GS came outside of his favourite surface (hard courts). Do you see how retarded this take is?

The fact that hard courts is the surface where the tour is played the most (only because it is the cheapest option) doesn't take anything away from Nadal, in fact it adds to it, because he still dominates in a tour where 80% of the time is played outside his favourite surface.

But it's not reversed and nor is it 50/50.

US Open and Aussie open are not the exact same surface. Djoker's/Sampras' success in one compared to other does a lot to prove this.

Sure, he dominates non clay. But only when compared to everyone not named Fed/Nole. That doesn't mean much when those two happen to be the only peers he's actually judged against.

I honestly don't know why putting him #3 is view as a grand insult his legacy. That being said he still has a shot to change it, he's not retired yet.

[DAF86]

But it's not reversed and nor is it 50/50.

US Open and Aussie open are not the exact same surface. Djoker's/Sampras' success in one compared to other does a lot to prove this.

Sure, he dominates non clay. But only when compared to everyone not named Fed/Nole. That doesn't mean much when those two happen to be the only peers he's actually judged against.

I honestly don't know why putting him #3 is view as a grand insult his legacy. That being said he still has a shot to change it, he's not retired yet.

Right now, the clear #3 is Djokovic. When it's all said and done the Djoker might end #1, but right now he's the clear #3. And between Roger and Rafa, the fan in me wants to say Roger is #1 still but after this year's RG it will be hard to keep saying that.

And the fact that 80% of the tour is played on HC means nothing, why do you insist with that take? :lol

The tour used to be played 90% on grass, then 50% on grass and 50% on clay, now 80% on hard courts, we don't know what the future will hold. Using this as an argument makes no sense, specially when it could be used in favour of Nadal. Imagine if Nadal was born on the era that the tour was played 50% on Clay, he would have 30 grand slams right now.

It is almost like, for you, real tennis is played in hard courts and grass, while tennis on clay isn't real tennis. That's a biased view with no logical support. Clay it's just one of the surfaces where tennis is played, and it isn't more or less than any of the other two.

[Spurtacular]

Concrete is faster than grass? What? :lol

Bruh.

[Spurtacular]

And no, clay isn't any more different to hard courts than grass.

You're going full retard (again).

[Spurtacular]

If anything, the most different surface is precisely grass. The ball bounces lower than in clay and hard courts. You have to move differently than in clay and HC because you will slip if not. On the later stages, the grass burns out and the court becomes a mixture of sand and grass, giving you plenty of weird bounces. If anything, grass is the "oddball surface".

The tennis experts will tell you for various reasons that clay favors defensive players. Rafa's style on clay simply cannot be duplicated on the other surfaces. He's an all-time specialist, not GOAT. He's not even in the running even if he does break the slams record.

[Spurtacular]

Why? :lol If anything, the fact that only 20% of the tour is played on Nadal's favourite surface adds to his legacy. Imagine how much more dominant he would be if the % were reversed, or even if they were 50/50 (like it was at one time).

Under the premise that Nadal can't be on the GOAT conversation because only 7 of his grand slams came outside of his favourite surface, then the same can be said about Djokovic because only 6 of his GS came outside of his favourite surface (hard courts). Do you see how retarded this take is?

The fact that hard courts is the surface where the tour is played the most (only because it is the cheapest option) doesn't take anything away from Nadal, in fact it adds to it, because he still dominates in a tour where 80% of the time is played outside his favourite surface.

Are 50 percent of the non pro courts clay? No, it's about 99.9999 percent non clay. So, you're basically wishing for special treatment for Nadal because he is the best slide guy. :lol

[DAF86]

The tennis experts will tell you for various reasons that clay favors defensive players. Rafa's style on clay simply cannot be duplicated on the other surfaces. He's an all-time specialist, not GOAT. He's not even in the running even if he does break the slams record.

Sure, that's why he has won every single slam and has 7 grand slams outside of clay. That's just one less than Agassi's total. :lol

You talk about tennis experts, dude, I am a tennis expert, listen to me, tbh.

[Spurtacular]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IihBn_3LYXk

https://i.ibb.co/LncbjwF/13.png

[DAF86]

Are 50 percent of the non pro courts clay? No, it's about 99.9999 percent non clay. So, you're basically wishing for special treatment for Nadal because he is the best slide guy. :lol

Yes, at one point, clay courts made about 50% of the ATP tournaments. Australia and Wimbledon were played on grass and Roland Garros and the US Open were played on clay. Imagine if Rafa played on tha era. It would have been game over for the GOAT discussion. :lol

And the fact that, like you said, 99.99999 percent of tournaments aren't played on clay it's actually an argument in favour of Nadal. Only 00.000001 of the tour is played on his surface and he still holds the all-time record for slams won.

[DAF86]

Bruh.


You're going full retard (again).

Way to show you have no argument to make. :lol

[Spurtacular]

Sure, that's why he has won every single slam and has 7 grand slams outside of clay. That's just one less than Agassi's total. :lol

You talk about tennis experts, dude, I am a tennis expert, listen to me, tbh.

Seven of 3/4 vs thirteen of 1/4.

Do you not realize how major a discrepancy that is?

If it's been say 20 years, then that means he wins roughly ten percent of the time on non-clay surface vs. sixty-five percent on clay. That's just a rough estimate, but that's a huge disparity. You can't just write that off.

[Spurtacular]

Yes, at one point, clay courts made about 50% of the ATP tournaments. Australia and Wimbledon were played on grass and Roland Garros and the US Open were played on clay. Imagine if Rafa played on tha era. It would have been game over for the GOAT discussion. :lol

And the fact that, like you said, 99.99999 percent of tournaments aren't played on clay it's actually an argument in favour of Nadal. Only 00.000001 of the tour is played on his surface and he still holds the all-time record for slams won.

No, the 99.999 percent number is just based on all tennis courts in the world. People don't train on them or compete on them, so it doesn't make sense to drastically change the parameters for the ATP.

Clay vs other surfaces is like beach soccer vs. regular soccer. Nadal is better at navigating the extreme condition than others. Put him on the more fluid surface and he's no longer dominant.

[DAF86]

Seven of 3/4 vs thirteen of 1/4.

Do you not realize how major a discrepancy that is?

If it's been say 20 years, then that means he wins roughly ten percent of the time on non-clay surface vs. sixty-five percent on clay. That's just a rough estimate, but that's a huge disparity. You can't just write that off.

And how does that take anything away from Nadal? :lol

Agassi is considered by everybody an all-time great and he has 8 slams on almost 20 years of career. And that's 8 of 4/4 becuase we aren't taking any slam away from Agassi like we are doing with Rafa's RGs.

Agassi 8 of 4/4 - Rafa 7 of 3/4 = Rafa being greater than Agassi on non clay courts.

[DAF86]

No, the 99.999 percent number is just based on all tennis courts in the world. People don't train on them or compete on them, so it doesn't make sense to drastically change the parameters for the ATP.

Clay vs other surfaces is like beach soccer vs. regular soccer. Nadal is better at navigating the extreme condition than others. Put him on the more fluid surface and he's no longer dominant.

That's just a bullshit argument full of lies. :lol

There are millions of more clay courts than grass ones, yet you are discriminating against clay but not grass. What's the logic behind that other than plain bias? :lol

Also, the beach soccer argument is such a bullshit comparisson. Beach soccer and regular soccer are different sports, that's why Messi and Ronaldo don't have to play on sand. Clay is one of the surfaces used on the ATP, just like grass and hard courts.

[Spurtacular]

Sure, that's why he has won every single slam and has 7 grand slams outside of clay. That's just one less than Agassi's total. :lol

You talk about tennis experts, dude, I am a tennis expert, listen to me, tbh.


Agassi is considered by everybody and all-time great and he has 8 slams on almost 20 years of career. And that's 8 of 4/4 becuase we aren't taking any slam away from Agassi like we are doing with Rafa's RGs.

Agassi 8 of 4/4 - Rafa 7 of 3/4 = Rafa being greater than Agassi on non clay courts.

Agassi lost valuable years in his competitive window by living the party boy lifestyle. And it even bled into his ability to win directly. He boycotted Wimbledon some number of times on their stance that players not be forced to wear white. That's bad ass and not something a ring chaser like Nadal would ever do.

When Agassi finally got full-on serious, he was arguably as good as anyone.

[Spurtacular]

That's just a bullshit argument full of lies. :lol

There are millions of more clay courts than grass ones, yet you are discriminating against clay but not grass. What's the logic behind that other than plain bias? :lol



Because grass is just a softened version of cement. It doesn't add crazy aspects to the game like clay does with sliding.

[Spurtacular]

Also, the beach soccer argument is such a bullshit comparisson. Beach soccer and regular soccer are different sports, that's why Messi and Ronaldo don't have to play on sand. Clay is one of the surfaces used on the ATP, just like grass and hard courts.

If soccer was mostly played on sand, Messi would be out of the running for GOAT. Some specialist would be in the running. Yes, your argument is along those lines. Bull shit as you might say.

[DAF86]

Because grass is just a softened version of cement. It doesn't add crazy aspects to the game like clay does with sliding.

Dude, is clear you know nothing about the sport, tbh. Go do some research if you want to keep arguing with me.

[DAF86]

If soccer was mostly played on sand, Messi would be out of the running for GOAT. Some specialist would be in the running. Yes, your argument is along those lines. Bull shit as you might say.

And if it was played on lava, everh player would die. :lol

That's just a retarded argunent. :lol What part of field soccer and beach soccer are completely different sports don't you get? :lol. Tennis is a sport that is played on grass, clay and hard courts and the Grand Slams are all worth the same, no matter the surface. Deal with it.

[Spurtacular]

Dude, is clear you know nothing about the sport, tbh. Go do some research if you want to keep arguing with me.

I know the game is drastically more different on clay than any other utilized surface. Your arguments to the contrary are desperate.

[Spurtacular]

And if it was played on lava, everh player would die. :lol

That's just a retarded argunent. :lol What part of field soccer and beach soccer are completely different sports don't you get? :lol. Tennis is a sport that is played on grass, clay and hard courts and the Grand Slams are all worth the same, no matter the surface. Deal with it.

The difference between grass/cement and clay is striking as well. And Rafa's numbers attest to this fact. Deal with it.

[DAF86]

The difference between grass/cement and clay is striking as well. And Rafa's numbers attest to this fact. Deal with it.

The difference between grass and hard courts is about the same as clay and hard courts. Here, educate yourself.

https://www.myactivesg.com/Sports/Tennis/How-To-Play/Tennis-Facts/Differences-between-tennis-courts

Hard courts being faster than grass. :lmao

[i'm_still_beta]

Let's be honest here, Clay ain't real tennis. It's basically a track meet. So yeah, no question about it. Rafa is the GOAT track & field player in Men's Tennis, by a lot.


But srsly, it's safe to say the Fed is done winning slams and Rafa has one more FO in him b4 he's done. This means that Novak has a couple years of farming titles allowing him to build a safe lead before finally hanging it up. I just don't see how he stays below ~23 titles.

Let's be honest here, it's bad take. One can argue that clay is, in fact, real tennis because of longer rallies that require point construction. Nadal abuses top spin and defense? Good. Because Sampras like many others, for example, abused serve and volley on grass and fast court in general and played significantly worse on clay and slow hard. He couldn't servebot his way to win on clay.

[i'm_still_beta]

13 are on clay (French Open), which is the surface that deviates the most from the norm IMO. So, I can't give him that.

RN definitely the best clay player of all-time.

To be fair it's not true. Hard courts have different type of speed (Cincinnati vs Miami masters for example). Grass unlike other surfaces (clay, hard) has unpredictable bounce and because of that you can make the argument that it's surface that deviates from others the most.

But I think clay and grass differ from hard equally. Sliding, movement, high bounce and slow speed on clay vs unpredictable slow bounce, fast speed on grass. And movement plays role on grass too. Watch how well prime Federer moved on grass and how some other players move much worse on grass than on hard.

[DAF86]

"Grass is for cows". That's the saying among many ATP players. But the "odd ball" surface is clay. :lol

[i'm_still_beta]

"Clay is not real tennis narrative created by Nadal haters because of his dominance on that surface. He has always beaten fan and media darling Fed and then another goat candidate Novak Djokovic. Fans of latter 2 created this narrative.

Overall, all 3 surfaces (clay, hard and grass) are real tennis.

[DAF86]

"Clay is not real tennis narrative created by Nadal haters because of his dominance on that surface. He has always beaten fan and media darling Fed and then another goat candidate Novak Djokovic. Fans of latter 2 created this narrative.

Overall, all 3 surfaces (clay, hard and grass) are real tennis.

The worst part is I'm a huge Federer fan and, as consequence, a big Nadal hater. I'm realizing Fed might not win another slam so I'm at the point of starting to root for Djokovic just so that Nadal doesn't end up as the winningest slam player. But when the argument gets so fucking dumb, one has to stand for objectivity and facts.

[Spurtacular]

"Clay is not real tennis narrative created by Nadal haters because of his dominance on that surface. He has always beaten fan and media darling Fed and then another goat candidate Novak Djokovic. Fans of latter 2 created this narrative.

Overall, all 3 surfaces (clay, hard and grass) are real tennis.

I don't say it's not real tennis. But I do say that it does drastically alter play and results. That has to be taken into account one way or another. Sliding all over the place on one surface and not the others is a very fundamental difference.

[lefty20]

Let's be honest here, it's bad take. One can argue that clay is, in fact, real tennis because of longer rallies that require point construction. Nadal abuses top spin and defense? Good. Because Sampras like many others, for example, abused serve and volley on grass and fast court in general and played significantly worse on clay and slow hard. He couldn't servebot his way to win on clay.
This is why neither is considered the GOAT. Fed has the title for now and Djoker will likely snatch it from him at some point.

[i'm_still_beta]

This is why neither is considered the GOAT. Fed has the title for now and Djoker will likely snatch it from him at some point.

I have the same opinion. Fed and Djoker 1a and 1b. Nadal and Sampras are 3 and 4 (2nd tier because of the their limitations on different types of courts)

Slight edge to Federer because of his versatility. Djoker's net game (Djokosmash) is much weaker than Fed's and today's tennis lacks fast courts. Fed plays noticeably better on fast courts than Novak

But tennis pundits have Fed and Nadal as 1a and 1b because of slam race. And Big Three themselves agree that it's all about slam race

[i'm_still_beta]

I don't say it's not real tennis. But I do say that it does drastically alter play and results. That has to be taken into account one way or another. Sliding all over the place on one surface and not the others is a very fundamental difference.
Agree to disagree on that one. All three surfaces are equally different imo

[Spurtacular]

Still standing is Djokovic, who has gone 38-5 in 2021 on his way to three straight Grand Slam titles, and is knocking on the door of the first Calendar Year Slam since Rod Laver in 1969.

https://sports.yahoo.com/tennis-us-open-2021-mens-preview-novak-djokovic-tries-for-history-204322873.html