Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 130
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #91
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,075
    Quote Originally Posted by jazzcyclist View Post
    I did too but then they showed the stat that Nadal was 208-1 when winning his first two sets and the other guy was 0-4 when going losing the first two sets. I don't know who the GOAT is in men's tennis but IMO, he's definitely an active player, not a retired player.
    Interesting counter-intuitive stat.
    I agree on the GOAT, but I keep rotating through Fed - Djo - Nad!
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Atticus View Post
    Interesting counter-intuitive stat.
    I agree on the GOAT, but I keep rotating through Fed - Djo - Nad!
    I think it will remain an open question until all 3 hang up their racquets for good. If the jury had to come back with a decision today it would declare a mistrial.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #93
    If I needed one match to win the world I'd still go with Sampras, unless it was clay then I'd go Nadal.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #94
    There was an interesting commentary in the booth last weekend between matches. It was Chris Fowler, Patrick McEnroe and Brad Gilbert and they were discussing who was the GOAT. All 3 picked Federer. They Fowler asked, "One match with your life on the line - who do you want to play it?" All 3 picked Nadal. In the discussion their reasoning was, he will never quit, he will compete 100% on every shot, and he will never give up.

    I agree on the 2nd one - hard to call the GOAT I think, and I think jazzy is right that it's too close and too early to call. However, Nadal has been my favorite athlete, any sport, and maybe of all-time, for up to 10 years now - my wife says I have a bromance with him. He reminds me of Connors with his effort but much more talent than he had.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #95
    Nadal can be remembered for how he fought, and Federer can be remembered for how he played. But I think Djokovic will only be remembered for what he achieved.

    Here is one example on how Federer will be remembered regardless of titles and rankings.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScKo..._&index=4&t=0s

    On another note, there is a noticeable gap in Nadal's career. He has never won the Tour Final, which is considered as the "fifth Slam" by many people. Federer has six and Djokovic has five of them.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #96
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,075
    Quote Originally Posted by TN1965 View Post
    Here is one example on how Federer will be remembered regardless of titles and rankings.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScKo..._&index=4&t=0s
    Unbelievable.
    If nothing else, Federer was the GOAT of credibility-defying shots!
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #97
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    west of Westeros
    Posts
    61,837
    I don't follow tennis well enough to make an informed judgment, but logic tells me that to have the 3 GOAT playing a whole lot at the same time doesn't make sense.

    Lot of it based on piling up majors (which eliminates the amateur-era superstuds like Laver).

    And also wonder if in the past talent was more evenly spread so more people were sharing in the titles and today's big 3 is benefitting from a lack of real competition other than among themselvves.

    Just saying'.....


    (ps—I've seen more impressive stuff from Federer through the years than anybody else has shown me, fwiw)
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #98
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    2,103
    Quote Originally Posted by TN1965 View Post
    Nadal can be remembered for how he fought, and Federer can be remembered for how he played. But I think Djokovic will only be remembered for what he achieved.

    ...
    Wow ... very well said.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #99
    Quote Originally Posted by gh View Post
    I don't follow tennis well enough to make an informed judgment, but logic tells me that to have the 3 GOAT playing a whole lot at the same time doesn't make sense.

    Lot of it based on piling up majors (which eliminates the amateur-era superstuds like Laver).

    And also wonder if in the past talent was more evenly spread so more people were sharing in the titles and today's big 3 is benefitting from a lack of real competition other than among themselvves.
    The reason Federer has racked up so many Grand Slams is because he's played at such a high level for such a long time and though longevity isn't essential to being a GOAT, it certainly helps. It's not his fault that other great tennis players retired at relatively young ages compared to him. Guys like Sampras and Borg shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt just because they burned out at a younger age than the current big 3. However, I do think Laver should be given special consideration for the same I think Jesse Owens should be given it because they were both victims of the era they played in and they would no doubt racked up more hardware had they played in different eras.
    Last edited by jazzcyclist; 09-10-2019 at 01:53 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    ???? ???? in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.
    Posts
    11,648
    Quote Originally Posted by gh View Post
    I don't follow tennis well enough to make an informed judgment, but logic tells me that to have the 3 GOAT playing a whole lot at the same time doesn't make sense.

    Lot of it based on piling up majors (which eliminates the amateur-era superstuds like Laver).

    And also wonder if in the past talent was more evenly spread so more people were sharing in the titles and today's big 3 is benefitting from a lack of real competition other than among themselvves.

    Just saying'.....


    (psI've seen more impressive stuff from Federer through the years than anybody else has shown me, fwiw)
    True ....there are no American men worth much these days and 20 years ago....dominant, with the best among them Sampras....who should be in any goat talk.

    And the game has changed so much from 30 years ago....now it primarily is having a huge serve....
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •