It's Djokovic/Nadal > Federer. That much is obvious.

yep, if they all retired today novak/nadal would both have an argument. but given how pathetic the new generation looks i think novak is still a favorite to get 3-4+ more and take the throne.

Covid tho

Best post so far. Also:

H2H in GS events:
Nadal 10-7 Djokovic
Nadal 10-4 Federer

Scoreboard baby. 21 > 20. When Djokovic gets past Nadal I'll crown him. Otherwise it's moot to argue the point.

Fixed

Are there other examples of clear GOATs-by-a-mile being surpassed as GOAT before they even retire? Brutal as hell for Fed. I mean it would be kind of like somebody blowing Gretzky away after he had shattered everything before he was even done. Or Ruth.

21 is a counting number, 21* is not.

Closest I can think of is Willie Mays. He had the best chance to catch Ruth but slowed considerably in his mid-late 30s. Aaron, a bit younger, actually improved a bit as he got older. By the time Mays was ready to retire Aaron stole all his thunder.

It's incredible. He went from clear GOAT to 3rd in about 8 years, while still mostly playing at a high level and adding slightly to his legacy in that time.

No definitely not. That's why I feel so privileged to watch these guys battle it out. It would be like Ruth, Bonds, and Trout trading the season home runs title year after year in their prime. Or LeBron, Jordan, and Kareem trading for the most title's in the modern NBA year after year facing each other in the finals. It's an outlier of an outlier.

I've grown up as a Nadal fan, but it's been ten years and as much as I want him to end up as the best I've matured enough to recognize and appreciate this moment in sports to watch the GOATS battle it out. Enjoy it for what it is because it won't happen again in our lifetime.

Relax, I conceded 21* is bigger than 20

And Mays missed almost two full years military, Korea I guess. Aaron didn't. Mays was ahead for years, Aaron caught him late and had some big years late. He also move into Fulton County launching pad those late years, which in retrospect seemed a part of it. He hit about 60 more homers at home than on the road those years in that stadium. Freaky: age 39 he hit 27 homers the first half and almost hit .400 the second half, slugging .737 the second half. Seemed park illusory. There are weird atmospheric things. When Davey Johnson came over there and hit 40+, it was because of a weird atmospheric thing.

Anyway I was there for that, Aaron was my favorite player during the chase, Mays was my older brother's. Cool times. I tracked everybody with a shot at Aaron since. Pujols is the last dying chance.

Federer
Nada
Djokovich

in that order

Can't really see any rational argument that has fed > Nadal except longevity.

The clay court specialist argument ... at least as GOAT candidate qualifications go. 8 non-clay slams is great but not GOATish. Leans too heavily on clay is the argument, of course. This criticism doesn't apply to any other GOAT candidate, man or woman, I don't think, so it's a thing, an oddity.

The argument would be they aren't playing the same game. Federer was GOAT of a relatively short and awkward transition period where 80s/90s era rackets were still largely in use but people started switching to hybrid strings (c.2002) while court surfaces were made slower to produce "exciting rallies." He dominated for several years but was eventually overtaken by the biggest beneficiaries of these changes, i.e., the power baseline spinners who could run down every ball. There's a reason why Agassi (1999) was the first male player to win a career slam since Roy Emerson in 1964 and it's not because there were no good tennis players. It's because the surfaces played far more different from each other compared to today where they are more homogenized. If those changes aren't as extreme and tennis plays more like the late 90s era, Nadal is merely a guy who wins French Opens and Federer runs deep into the 20s on slams. Djokovic is probably a better version of Agassi or Agassi / Chang hybrid. Serve & volley is extinct, the Pro Staff 85/90 are extinct, and the 1hbh is an endangered species. Totally different games which is why this debate is pointless.

Great post. If tennis stayed the way it was in the pre 2005 era, Federer would still be GOAT, and by a lot. Sampras prob 2nd best.

Better sport now. The 90s was an era where John Isner would have surpassed Sampras. Horribly boring tennis.

Agreed.

Federer on non-grass

GS Finals: 19
GS Wins: 12
GS Finals Wins vs Nadal/Djokovic: 4
Overall Record vs Nadal/Djokovic: 5-17

Nadal on non-clay

GS Finals: 16
GS Wins: 8
GS Finals Wins vs Federer/Djokovic: 4
Overall Record vs Federer/Djokovic: 7-9

The only thing separating Federer from "grass court specialist", apparently, is a few years of domination prior to Nadal/Djokovic hitting their peaks.

Death, taxes, and Nadal winning Roland Garros

I have Nadal over Novak in the GOAT power rankings for now. Novak should be a huge favorite for Wimbledon so he could regain the #1 spot soon

What's djokovic non AO record?

Kinda crazy Nadal has had the best longevity when early on seemed people were thinking the opposite. And at least one major in fifteen different years? Two different resurgences when it seemed he was done.

Seems obviously close between Nadal and djok. Career record within fractions of a percent.

Drugs man

As far as majors won? 6 Wimbledon's, 3 US Opens, 2 French Opens.

My guess is he'll win at least 2 more Wimbledon's, 1 more Aussie Open and 1 more French. So he'll end up with 24 at least, maybe one or two more.