re: Kornheiser: Nadal has removed Federer from the discussion of G.O.A.T

quote:

---

So Federer is probably in the top five for clay, top two for grass, and top two for hardcourts.

Nadal is without a doubt #1 for clay, but where does he rank on hardcourts and grass? His entire chapter hasn't been written yet, but he hasn't surpassed Federer as top dog yet.

---

Rafa is actually a really good grass court player. 5 Wimby Finals is no joke.

quote:

---

One last argument for Rafa: Rafa has been a part of all top three matches of this generation. Wimbledon 2008 (won), Australian open 2012 (lost in the longest grand slam final ever), and Roland Garros 2013 (won). He has won two of them. And 2007 Wimbledon is probably number 4, and he lost that one to Federer on his prime, on his best surface.

---

And 2009 Aussie

quote:

---

Where does Wimbledon 2009 (where Federer broke Pete's record) rank in this?

---

The entire 2009 season was a gift from Rafa to Federer. He felt so bad about the drubbing he gave him in the 2008 French Final, and then how he knocked him off his Wimby perch in the 2008 Wimby Final, and then how he made him cry after the 2009 Aussie Final, that he just decided to give the rest of 2009 to him.

Roger, from what I understand, was nice enough to send a thank you card. Which was thoughtful.

quote:

---

Where does Wimbledon 2009 (where Federer broke Pete's record) rank in this?

---

The only reason Andy reached the final was that Rafa was not there to defend his title. And honestly that match sucked. It was ace, ace, ace, ace. It was not high level tennis, with guys leaving everything on the line. I mean, when you lost a match because you failed to make a simple volley- geezzz Andy didn't deserve to win. Roddick cannot return as well as any of the top guys, and his serve was ON that day. All Roger had to do was hang in there and wait for Andy to fold, and that is what happened. Not great tennis.

quote:

---

So because he lost once in a slam on clay to Kuerten , he is not better? By that logic, I'll assume you'll agree that Ferrer is a better hard court player than Nadal (See 2007 US Open and 2011 Australian Open).

You can argue that Kuerten is a better clay court player because he won 3 French Opens vs. Federer's 1 (I would still disagree). But pointing to one matchup is just silly.

---

I don't understand why you would believe that to be silly.

Federer was in his prime in 2004. Kuerten was three years removed from his prime (Kuerten won his three FO's in 1997, 2000, and 2001) and two months away from retiring from the game because of a bum hip.

Kuerten beat him 6-4, 6-4, 6-4 in the third round.

That's a routine beating. Again, Fed was #1 in the world.

To even question whether the Kuerten of his prime was a better clay court player than Federer is silly. How do you arrive at that conclusion? Did you enlist the services of a team of remedial fourth graders to help you out with that one?

One question I've always wondered is why is Nadal so terrible at the year-end championships? I typically feel like this is great test for a player as they only play the best of the best. Yet Rafa has been just awful at this event (47% winning percentage) and is regularly trounced by the Davydenkos and Blakes of the world). Is he just tired at the end of the season?

I know I'm in the minority, but I actually give consider winning this event a prerequisite for GOAT consideration. Pretty much every player who is on the short list for GOAT has won the event (typically multiple times) whereas Nadal has played in exactly one final.

quote:

---

I don't understand why you would believe that to be silly. Federer was in his prime in 2004. Kuerten was three years removed from his prime (Kuerten won his three FO's in 1997, 2000, and 2001) and two months away from retiring from the game because of a bum hip. Kuerten beat him 6-4, 6-4, 6-4 in the third round. That's a routine beating. Again, Fed was #1 in the world.

---

And Nadal was in his prime in 2011 and was coming off three consecutive grand slam titles. And yet Ferrer beat him 6-4, 6-2, 6-3 in the AO QFs. That's a routine beating. Again, Nadal was #1 in the world.

See how that works?

I was just pointing out the absurdity of pointing to one match as proof that player x is better than player y. If you think Kuerten is a better clay court player than Fed, then fine. But don't use one match as the sole fact in your argument.

Regarding the indoor end of the year:

quote:

---

tank_job wrote:
indoors removes all the elements and intangibles which allows for a purer form of tennis where the intent of the shot more accurately matches reality.

Perhaps Nadal relies on the elements to reduce the level of his opponents so he can beat them, knowing that the topspin he puts on his shots makes them more stable in the wind.

This also would explain why he plays better on grass and clay than hard-court. Again, where his opponents can play a more pure game unaffected by bad bounces, their superior talent allows them to beat him.

Nadal relies on the elements and bad bounces to pin their level down so that he stands a shot of grinding them out.

---

I saw these comments somewhere else, and I think they are spot on.

quote:

---

And Nadal was in his prime in 2011 and was coming off three consecutive grand slam titles. And yet Ferrer beat him 6-4, 6-2, 6-3 in the AO QFs. That's a routine beating. Again, Nadal was #1 in the world.

See how that works?

I was just pointing out the absurdity of pointing to one match as proof that player x is better than player y. If you think Kuerten is a better clay court player than Fed, then fine. But don't use one match as the sole fact in your argument

---

Dude, stop with your shitty arguments.

nadal has beaten Ferrer approximately 39 times, and his onc loss to him he was hobbling around the court and the announcers were like begging for him to just retire.

Kuerten played Fed in one meaningful match on clay.

Your ferrer example blows and I think you know it.

I'm not trying to be a dick for the sake of it, I just think your argument is really bad.

So, how about this, you tell me why Fed is a better clay court player than Kuerten.