I am a huge tennis fan and believe Roger in the GOAT by a mile - I know folks will say Nadal is better because of H2H, etc but that's a different topic. Question is what defines a better player/career:
RF has virtually every record except H2H versus Nadal. He's 5 years older and most of his losses to Nadal came when he was in his late 20s and beyond which in tennis years is ancient. However, he's been a model of health and a Top 3 player for virtually 10+ years now and not looking to slow down either. Like I said, he has all the records, a family, is healthy and seems to really love the game. Furthermore, he has had success on every single type of surface.
Nadal on the other hand - the man is falling apart. When he plays at his best he is unstoppable but incredibly inconsistent. He has made his entire claim to fame from really one Grand Slam and really one surface - French Open and Clay respectively - take that away and he's average at best. He's owned Roger and is relentless. However, the game is a grind for him and he's pretty much been falling apart since he was 25.
Which one would you rather? Personally I say Fed. Clearly if Nadal could have figured out how to stay healthy, he would have shattered every Fed record but at the end of the day being an amazing athlete is not just about potential but consistency, longevity, and the ability to play at a sustained high level as you get surrounded by youth. Incredible to think that at 33 years old RF has made it to the Finals in 8 of his 12 tournaments (66%) and won 3 of them (25%). Came within a few points from winning 3 more as well. This might be his most impressive performance yet.
Also, Novak may end his career as potentially a Top 5 player when all is said and done or better. He's incredibly fit, a health freak and I can see him playing at a high level of tennis for another 3-4 years and potentially win another 6-8 Slams.
This post was edited on 8/19 12:38 AM by tarun262
RF has virtually every record except H2H versus Nadal. He's 5 years older and most of his losses to Nadal came when he was in his late 20s and beyond which in tennis years is ancient. However, he's been a model of health and a Top 3 player for virtually 10+ years now and not looking to slow down either. Like I said, he has all the records, a family, is healthy and seems to really love the game. Furthermore, he has had success on every single type of surface.
Nadal on the other hand - the man is falling apart. When he plays at his best he is unstoppable but incredibly inconsistent. He has made his entire claim to fame from really one Grand Slam and really one surface - French Open and Clay respectively - take that away and he's average at best. He's owned Roger and is relentless. However, the game is a grind for him and he's pretty much been falling apart since he was 25.
Which one would you rather? Personally I say Fed. Clearly if Nadal could have figured out how to stay healthy, he would have shattered every Fed record but at the end of the day being an amazing athlete is not just about potential but consistency, longevity, and the ability to play at a sustained high level as you get surrounded by youth. Incredible to think that at 33 years old RF has made it to the Finals in 8 of his 12 tournaments (66%) and won 3 of them (25%). Came within a few points from winning 3 more as well. This might be his most impressive performance yet.
Also, Novak may end his career as potentially a Top 5 player when all is said and done or better. He's incredibly fit, a health freak and I can see him playing at a high level of tennis for another 3-4 years and potentially win another 6-8 Slams.
This post was edited on 8/19 12:38 AM by tarun262