re: Do you think Nadal passes Federer in Grand Slam victories?

quote:

---

I think the craziest thing is Novak was going to have a great shot at the most Grand Slams ever just a few years ago. He was looking unbeatable. Fed and Nadal were essentially done in most people's minds. Then Novak's body broke down. If he had stayed healthy, we probably have three guys between 16-20 Grand Slams right now.

---

But it does go to show just how dicey it is to predict future slams for these guys as if they were a sure thing.

Turn back the clock to June 2016:
Novak had just won the French Open. He had just turned 29 years old. He had 12 majors total and had won the past four and five out of the past six. (if not for Stan going into full-blown God Mode in that 2015 RG final, he would had six in a row.)
- 2016 French
- 2016 Oz
- 2015 US Open
- 2015 Wimbledon
- 2015 Oz

Rafa, on the other hand, had just turned 30. He had to withdraw from RG with yet another injury, and he hadn't won a major since RG 2014. He was sitting at 14 majors.

Fed was sitting at 17 majors, but he hadn't won one since Wimbledon 2012 and he was gonna turn 35 in a few months. One would have been unreasonable (or just a fanboy) to think he would win more majors.

And look at where we are now. Novak will almost certainly not catch Rafa, and will definitely not catch Fed. It's questionable whether he will even catch Pete Sampras. (I actually don't think he will -- I think he'll win one more hard-court major.)

quote:

---

There was a great stat a few years ago (like nobody has won more than three majors after 29?), but I think Djoker, Nadal, and Fed have blown by that. Looks like 538 delved into these issues a bit:
LINK /

---

That means there are no young great players as much as anything else.

3 older guys! all at the same time! hmmmmmmmmm

quote:

---

That means there are no young great players as much as anything else.

3 older guys! all at the same time! hmmmmmmmmm

---

No great players from ages 18-29? In an international sport?

It speaks more to how great those three are. It might seem improbable that three of the greatest players who have ever walked the earth were all playing at the same time, but randomness is a thing.

I don't think he'll get to 14.

I'm setting the upper bound at 13, and my money is on 12.

I'll take Nadal, I think he gets a couple more French Open's and one or two more Aus/US opens. I think Wimbledon might be Fed's last chance.

quote:

---

I am constantly all "insert I feel like I'm taking crazy pills gif" when people conflate Federer beating Andy Roddick

---

Roddick is criminally underrated, fricking criminally

He was top 5 all time grass court player, but had the unfortunate circumstance as being the same age as the grass court and overall GOAT

Roddick is a 3-4 time wimby champ and 5-7 time grand slam champ in and other time

quote:

---

He definitely doesn't get those numbers in the current era (or when it seemed like Fed and Rafa were done).

---

Djok wouldnt have beaten prime andy on grass.

At least not on the grass courts that were actually grass courts

quote:

---

Djok wouldnt have beaten prime andy on grass. At least not on the grass courts that were actually grass courts

---

Roddick never played on “actual grass court” grass courts

My understanding is the recipe changed in 2002, which is why you went from Rafter/Ivanesevic in 2001 to Hewitt/Nalbandian in 2002. But, Roddick made a semi and three finals after that, so he still did well.

In any event, I agree with you that he and Hewitt probably end up looking like Mac/Lendl/Edberg/Wilander/Becker/Connors or at least Courier if not for Fed.

Fed serve and volleyed almost every point in 2003 and 2004

I feel like the change happens in 05 and 06