Results 91 to 100 of 130
-
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Posts
- 18,425
-
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Posts
- 336
09-09-2019 03:41 PMIf I needed one match to win the world I'd still go with Sampras, unless it was clay then I'd go Nadal.
-
- Join Date
- Jun 2008
- Posts
- 3,659
09-09-2019 03:46 PMThere 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.
-
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- Posts
- 2,366
09-10-2019 01:50 AMNadal 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.
-
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
- Location
- on task
- Posts
- 12,079
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- west of Westeros
- Posts
- 61,839
09-10-2019 04:12 AMI 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)
-
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Location
- Sacramento
- Posts
- 2,105
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Posts
- 18,425
09-10-2019 01:44 PMThe 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.
-
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- ???? ???? in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.
- Posts
- 11,650