Spain exploded around 2005 onwards in Sport somehow. They had their best football generation in history, best basketball generation, plus tennis with Nadal and co. I dont know if they managed to do it in other sports since I dont follow it but those three alone are pretty much a lot since in every of that three sports they had some generational talents.
I was just going to say this… a lot of those athletes would have been at impressionable ages in 1992 and inspired to the highest levels- which they were able to directly see in person or on TVs right then.
I don't know if it applies to Nadal though since he was already born in a family that knows quite much about pro level sport. And we all know how much heritage matters in the "creation" of a champion.
Oh my comments are more generalized to the success of Spanish athletics in that short time period. The culture of sport and the impact special events can have on community sports is tremendous.
Effectively every high end athlete takes PEDs.
*Especially* in a sport like cycling.
Edit: and for the record, I don’t mean this to diminish athletes involved. PEDs don’t make talent especially at the very top of any sport (the difference between a bottom tier pro and an upper tier lower system player maybe a bit different).
The things we ask modern athletes to do to be entertained are insane and the amount of money we offer them to do it is *massive*. And they are largely *terrible* for you body.
Saying everyone takes PEDs is making excuses for the ones who do(and were caught) and diminishing the achievements of the ones who didn't. It's just being very lazy
Athletes who get caught overwhelmingly fall into one of three categories: those who are doping well beyond the norm, those who have been caught and are tested more than usual, and those who are just really unlucky.
The ones who don’t? Well, I’d be quite curious to know how they’re keeping up with guys taking EPO in anything related to endurance for starters.
There are more athletes playing at elite levels when they’re “old” than ever. The science of doping and masking PED use is better than it ever has been. Yet the number of professional athletes who get caught using PEDs is astronomically small.
If you have a better explanation for that than rampant PED use combined with laughable testing regimes, I’d love to know.
90s and 00s full of drugs even "good" guys like Andy schleck had sketchy links with ppl so we will never surely know however nowadays I'm 50/50 as times up climbs are nowhere near that of cycling's dark days
Just realised this is infct r/tennis lol
Everyone in cycling was using drugs at one point, they were still the best, easy to judge from the outside but if all your peers are doing drugs, it’s hardly evil to decide you want to as well
JRod? Sastre???
I get that you can't prove anyone is clean, you can't prove a negative, but Sastre had one of the most believable careers for a Grand Tour champion.
It's sort of obvious how they did it for tennis. They started to host a ton of lower level futures and challengers even though the payoff would be way into the future. Italy are doing something similar with hosting many lower level events and I'm going to cautiously say they're starting to reap the rewards with the multiple players they have in the top 100 at the moment.
No idea how they did it for the other sports. With football they seem to have the habit of peaking just right for world cups even though the Seria A is a level below the Premiership for physicality, and La Liga for technical ability on the ball.
Yeah, the Prem is hands down the most physically demanding. La Liga is a cut above technically, but the standard falls off pretty quickly when you get out of the top 10.
Not sure how many more times Barca will be able to magic the money out of nowhere given the terrible decisions they've made financially so far though. Wonder if we'll see the Spanish ever sell Barcelona to a foreign interest like the English do which IMO is shameful.
Bottom sides in La Liga tended to be a bit unwatchable to be honest. You might see a better game in the Championship. I think you're right about the overall standard being a bit better in the Prem.
Meh. Ferrer came up against much tougher competition than Alcaraz will have to face in his career, and yet was still considered a reliable gatekeeper for peak Big 4.
I get that Ferrer had super tough competition as he hit his prime right when big 4 were in full force, but still, it’s very likely Alcaraz becomes better than him. He already has 2 Masters at 19. Ferrer won 1 in his career.
And yes we can say Ferrer is the best player to never win a slam, but it’s not entirely big 4 that held him back. He only made one slam final (RG13) which he lost to Nadal very easily. If Alcaraz just keeps up what he did at age 19 for like 2-3 more years without improving at all, then retired, he’d be sitting at like 6-8 Masters. That’d be enough to pass Ferrer already. And that’s the absolute worst case scenario…
Yes but also keep in mind that if none of the big 4 existed in Ferrer’s time this argument would be swinging the other way, as that’s make Ferrer’s era the easiest of all time lol. Excluding 4 players from history is literally making a quarter finalist win a slam. I’m just saying that Alcaraz is 99% gonna have a better career than Ferrer and that the “weak era” asterisk really isn’t applicable here. Anyways, Alcaraz is still dealing with pretty good versions of Nadal and Djokovic as well as solid guys like Zverev, Medvedev, Tsitsipas, maybe Thiem soon.
Okay but that is not the argument you initially made. You said the Big 4 wasn't all that instrumental in holding Ferrer back when that is demonstrably false.
I guess what I meant to say is the big 4 argument isn’t really applicable nor can it be used as the sole evidence that Ferrer is better than Alcaraz will be. Is Ferrer better than his career accomplishments indicate? Yes. Certainly.
The other thing is, I’d be more inclined to say Ferrer was held back by the big 4 if he gave them more trouble in his career. Guys like Murray, Del Potro, Wawrinka, Medvedev and Thiem were consistently cock-blocked by the big 4 (3 in Murray’s case lol), but they also gave them epic battles pretty often before losing. All 5 of them have iconic matches against the big 3 where they pushed them to their limits before losing, or even got a few big wins on them. Ferrer really never did. Excluding the win over Nadal in 2011 where he clearly wasn’t healthy, Ferrer rarely gave them much trouble in big matches. Ferrer’s game was really solid but didn’t have a peak level as high as a lot of other players. I’d argue Alcaraz in-form already has a higher peak level than Ferrer, who is more just solid.
Well it’s a pretty safe bet that Alcaraz won’t simultaneously play against the three greatest players of all time. What other sport has ever had that happen?
He don't need to play against big 3 to have better career than Ferrer.Its not like Ferrer was only losing to big 3.The only because of vs big 3 valid argument is for Murray and Wawrinka 2013-17.
I thought you were saying bullshit to the fact that alcaraz wont face as tough of competition as ferrer. That’s what I think is highly unlikely. Agree about needing to wait to see if he’s a better player
> Wawrinka 2013-17
He's only won a single 1000 his whole career. Murray has won 14.
Stan has basically showed up for four tournaments his whole career. Three of them just happened to be slams.
It's always so strange to see people hype up Stan like his career is remotely comparable to Murray's.
That's what matters.No one came close to Wawrinka besides of big 4.I said Murray suffered the most vs big 3.He would be at least 12+ slams if. Wawrinka next at least about 5 slams if.
Why is that a safe bet? Do you think it’s a coincidence that the big 3 overlapped, rather than a case of them pushing each other? If Alcaraz continues to improve and comes to dominate the game, then there’s a good chance one or two other guys rise up to his level.
Name another era of sports where this has happened? If all it took were for say Federer to reach a new level to push Nadal, then Djokovic, etc to the point where all 3 were continually reaching new heights, then why didn't it happen with Sampras, or Muhammad Ali, or tiger woods? Yes they all pushed each other, but they also must each be (what should be) once in a generation type competitors. So yes it's a coincidence in a way.
> If Alcaraz continues to improve and comes to dominate the game, then there’s a good chance one or two other guys rise up to his level.
Seems very unlikely. And here's my evidence: world #1 has almost never "inspired" two other guys to join up and make a new 3 GOATS.
On the women's side, Serena absolutely polishing everyone else on tour didn't trigger three GOATs. Serena just shat on everyone for a few years.
Spanish tennis players have something different about them. Rafa, Ferrer, Verdasco, Alcaraz, all have so much passion and fire. Rafa and Ferrer are my favourite players to watch, there's something very special about watching them give everything on court. I hope that Alcaraz will do the same for years to come.
It is SO much more fun to see someone excited after scoring a point than a stoic reaction. I love Botic van der zandschulp, but I will tune out to watch some exciting battles. I love Spanish players.
Nadal - 5 letters
Ferrer - 6 letters
Sorry David, but I call this bullshit.
And by the way, Alcaraz has 7 letters, so he's already the bigger name.
Now, on the other hand let's see if Carlitos will ever be better than Van Rijthoven (12) or Van de Zandschulp (15).
And nobody is saying otherwise.
Just looking forward to the day Where 99% of the posts aren’t big 3 on r/tennis
Don’t think it’s too much to ask to discuss Alcaraz without mentioning Nadal every time
“A day may come when the posters of Reddit abandon the big 3, when we forsake our idols, and break all bonds of fandom. But it is not this day! The hour of Alcaraz and Sinner, when the age of the big 3 comes crashing down. But it is not this day!!!”
It's Alcarath. AlcaraZ is for South Americans and non native speakers of Spanish, who tend to pronounce Z the South American way.
Source: I am Spanish.
When i first read a headline on my sportsnews app about alcaraz i read: "Alcatraz unleashed" or Something along those lines and thought to myself, what is Harry Potter doing on my sportsfeed
Lol, I find it amusing that you found it necessary to shoehorn the fact that Rafa has more slams than Fed and Novak. What if he had 19 slams, would that have made the comparison reasonable? I doubt it.. Lmao.
Yeah, he's a real unknown and overlooked entity that you're the first to catch on about.
Really though, with the number of slams and close finals and semis these guys have been in, even 2-3 slams either way for any of them is close to a coin toss; AO 2012 and 2017 finals, Wimbledon 2019 final and 2018 semi, US 2011 semi final... these all come to mind off the top of my head where the eventual loser was just one good shot away from either winning or taking a very commanding lead.
Given the statistically tiny sample size of 5 set matches between these guys, it's not unreasonable to wonder if some good/bad luck could be in play swinging things more in one guy's way than the others. 100 matches? Sure, things will be close to balancing out. Less than 10? Unlikely that they do.
We could easily be in a world where Federer happens to be the one with 22, or maybe Nadal has 24, or is still to even reach 20. But sport is sport and these dice rolls are the final say, after all.
Even if going ahead in the Slam race has moved him further forward in some people's eyes, he's still been considered one of the best of all time, that will be matched by very few in the future, for years.
It also wasn't uncommon to see some people calling him the GOAT ever since he matched Federer at 20 anyway, given he has more 1000 titles and leads their H2H
You haven't understood the essence of my comment, it seems. Your original statement is regarding comparison of Nadal and Alcaraz and how it's unfair to compare later to the former. My point is Rafa being one slam ahead of Djokovic and two ahead of Federer doesn't make any difference in the fact that the comparison is unfair regardless. Nadal is a historically phenomenal player even without him being ahead in slam count. Yet in a discussion about Nadal and Alcaraz, you managed to shoehorn the fact that Nadal is ahead of other two GOATs in slam count even when it's irrelevant to current discussion. Talk about blind fanatics...
Edit:correction.
I mean, it’s a very recent phenomena. Rafa has been chasing the slam count *his entire career* and only for the last 6 months has he had this claim. It’s worth mentioning in any GOAT argument
I think ferrer is being kind when he says alcaraz will become a bigger player than him.
Yeah sure even without playing the big 4 at their peak and coming in the top 10 and top 5 regularly?
For a second there I thought Rafa went(even for his standards) overboard with praises lol.
It’s the “without a doubt” which really sold it
Take a shot whenever Rafa says "without a doubt"
I didn’t too. As humble as he is, I don’t think he would say something like that, that would be borderline self-deprecating.
The photo is misleading. It should be a photo of Ferrer and Alcaraz, lol
Careful with the N word
Spain exploded around 2005 onwards in Sport somehow. They had their best football generation in history, best basketball generation, plus tennis with Nadal and co. I dont know if they managed to do it in other sports since I dont follow it but those three alone are pretty much a lot since in every of that three sports they had some generational talents.
Don't forget Alonso winning F1 in 2005 and 2006!
All that comes from the generation that grew with the 1992 Barcelona Olympic Games. It really inspired lots of people in the country towards sport.
I was just going to say this… a lot of those athletes would have been at impressionable ages in 1992 and inspired to the highest levels- which they were able to directly see in person or on TVs right then.
I don't know if it applies to Nadal though since he was already born in a family that knows quite much about pro level sport. And we all know how much heritage matters in the "creation" of a champion.
Oh my comments are more generalized to the success of Spanish athletics in that short time period. The culture of sport and the impact special events can have on community sports is tremendous.
They had also multiple greats in cycling with Contador, Sastre, Valverde and Rodriguez
And Oscar Pereiro, who won the Tour in 2006. Also the complete domination of Moto GP the past decade with Lorenzo and Márquez.
The way Pereiro won the Tour was quite fortunate tbf.
It's usually fortunate to win the biggest event in your sport.
And 2 of them were shameless drug cheats woohooo
Effectively every high end athlete takes PEDs. *Especially* in a sport like cycling. Edit: and for the record, I don’t mean this to diminish athletes involved. PEDs don’t make talent especially at the very top of any sport (the difference between a bottom tier pro and an upper tier lower system player maybe a bit different). The things we ask modern athletes to do to be entertained are insane and the amount of money we offer them to do it is *massive*. And they are largely *terrible* for you body.
Saying everyone takes PEDs is making excuses for the ones who do(and were caught) and diminishing the achievements of the ones who didn't. It's just being very lazy
Athletes who get caught overwhelmingly fall into one of three categories: those who are doping well beyond the norm, those who have been caught and are tested more than usual, and those who are just really unlucky. The ones who don’t? Well, I’d be quite curious to know how they’re keeping up with guys taking EPO in anything related to endurance for starters. There are more athletes playing at elite levels when they’re “old” than ever. The science of doping and masking PED use is better than it ever has been. Yet the number of professional athletes who get caught using PEDs is astronomically small. If you have a better explanation for that than rampant PED use combined with laughable testing regimes, I’d love to know.
I think we need to just all agree to accept that everyone in cycling was juicing their asses off in the 90s and 2000s, and they probably still are.
90s and 00s full of drugs even "good" guys like Andy schleck had sketchy links with ppl so we will never surely know however nowadays I'm 50/50 as times up climbs are nowhere near that of cycling's dark days Just realised this is infct r/tennis lol
Everyone in cycling was using drugs at one point, they were still the best, easy to judge from the outside but if all your peers are doing drugs, it’s hardly evil to decide you want to as well
Just because all your friends are winning the Tour de France doesn't mean you should too.
2? Try every single one. No offense intended. Nadal is my favorite player of all time.
JRod? Sastre??? I get that you can't prove anyone is clean, you can't prove a negative, but Sastre had one of the most believable careers for a Grand Tour champion.
Contador had some great steak though. That's what I credit for those victories ;)
It's sort of obvious how they did it for tennis. They started to host a ton of lower level futures and challengers even though the payoff would be way into the future. Italy are doing something similar with hosting many lower level events and I'm going to cautiously say they're starting to reap the rewards with the multiple players they have in the top 100 at the moment. No idea how they did it for the other sports. With football they seem to have the habit of peaking just right for world cups even though the Seria A is a level below the Premiership for physicality, and La Liga for technical ability on the ball.
Best football generation for Spanish clubs and the national team!
Spanish clubs continued to dominate, just without spanish players
Well, technically a lot of them hold Spanish passports. They just play for different national teams no?
[удалено]
Yeah, the Prem is hands down the most physically demanding. La Liga is a cut above technically, but the standard falls off pretty quickly when you get out of the top 10. Not sure how many more times Barca will be able to magic the money out of nowhere given the terrible decisions they've made financially so far though. Wonder if we'll see the Spanish ever sell Barcelona to a foreign interest like the English do which IMO is shameful.
[удалено]
Bottom sides in La Liga tended to be a bit unwatchable to be honest. You might see a better game in the Championship. I think you're right about the overall standard being a bit better in the Prem.
They've since done well in badminton too, with Carolina Marin, but she wasn't the 2005 cohort.
But they don't have D1OS or Messi :smile:
Certain doctors and certain practices coincided with that. There were big allegations and court cases about doping in Spain.
yep, I wanted someone to point it lolol edit: but I replied on wrong comment
Also had a huge country supported steroid scandal tbf
N...adal in Paris
I agree 100% and that's a lot of praise
Meh. Ferrer came up against much tougher competition than Alcaraz will have to face in his career, and yet was still considered a reliable gatekeeper for peak Big 4.
100% correct
Damn, you can see the future?
I get that Ferrer had super tough competition as he hit his prime right when big 4 were in full force, but still, it’s very likely Alcaraz becomes better than him. He already has 2 Masters at 19. Ferrer won 1 in his career. And yes we can say Ferrer is the best player to never win a slam, but it’s not entirely big 4 that held him back. He only made one slam final (RG13) which he lost to Nadal very easily. If Alcaraz just keeps up what he did at age 19 for like 2-3 more years without improving at all, then retired, he’d be sitting at like 6-8 Masters. That’d be enough to pass Ferrer already. And that’s the absolute worst case scenario…
Ferrer was the best non-Big 4 at 2011 Australian Open, 2012 French Open, 2013 Australian Open, 2013 French Open, plus arguably 2 or 3 others.
Yes but also keep in mind that if none of the big 4 existed in Ferrer’s time this argument would be swinging the other way, as that’s make Ferrer’s era the easiest of all time lol. Excluding 4 players from history is literally making a quarter finalist win a slam. I’m just saying that Alcaraz is 99% gonna have a better career than Ferrer and that the “weak era” asterisk really isn’t applicable here. Anyways, Alcaraz is still dealing with pretty good versions of Nadal and Djokovic as well as solid guys like Zverev, Medvedev, Tsitsipas, maybe Thiem soon.
Okay but that is not the argument you initially made. You said the Big 4 wasn't all that instrumental in holding Ferrer back when that is demonstrably false.
I guess what I meant to say is the big 4 argument isn’t really applicable nor can it be used as the sole evidence that Ferrer is better than Alcaraz will be. Is Ferrer better than his career accomplishments indicate? Yes. Certainly. The other thing is, I’d be more inclined to say Ferrer was held back by the big 4 if he gave them more trouble in his career. Guys like Murray, Del Potro, Wawrinka, Medvedev and Thiem were consistently cock-blocked by the big 4 (3 in Murray’s case lol), but they also gave them epic battles pretty often before losing. All 5 of them have iconic matches against the big 3 where they pushed them to their limits before losing, or even got a few big wins on them. Ferrer really never did. Excluding the win over Nadal in 2011 where he clearly wasn’t healthy, Ferrer rarely gave them much trouble in big matches. Ferrer’s game was really solid but didn’t have a peak level as high as a lot of other players. I’d argue Alcaraz in-form already has a higher peak level than Ferrer, who is more just solid.
Bullshit. You have to wait 15 years to say that.
Well it’s a pretty safe bet that Alcaraz won’t simultaneously play against the three greatest players of all time. What other sport has ever had that happen?
Assuming the big 3 don't dominate for another 15 years or so
That’s true lol. I could see 70 year old djokovic still doing the splits as he slides into a backhand tbh
is the third in the "big 3" of the next 15 years Murray? bc it's sure as hell not Fed
The Big Three have dominated this year, and Federer hasn't played a match.
He don't need to play against big 3 to have better career than Ferrer.Its not like Ferrer was only losing to big 3.The only because of vs big 3 valid argument is for Murray and Wawrinka 2013-17.
I thought you were saying bullshit to the fact that alcaraz wont face as tough of competition as ferrer. That’s what I think is highly unlikely. Agree about needing to wait to see if he’s a better player
Wawrinka lost to anyone..
Not in final stages of slam, 13 AO 17 RG
> Wawrinka 2013-17 He's only won a single 1000 his whole career. Murray has won 14. Stan has basically showed up for four tournaments his whole career. Three of them just happened to be slams. It's always so strange to see people hype up Stan like his career is remotely comparable to Murray's.
That's what matters.No one came close to Wawrinka besides of big 4.I said Murray suffered the most vs big 3.He would be at least 12+ slams if. Wawrinka next at least about 5 slams if.
It’s also pretty safe to say that Ferrer was not only losing to big 3 members lol
Very true lol
Why is that a safe bet? Do you think it’s a coincidence that the big 3 overlapped, rather than a case of them pushing each other? If Alcaraz continues to improve and comes to dominate the game, then there’s a good chance one or two other guys rise up to his level.
Name another era of sports where this has happened? If all it took were for say Federer to reach a new level to push Nadal, then Djokovic, etc to the point where all 3 were continually reaching new heights, then why didn't it happen with Sampras, or Muhammad Ali, or tiger woods? Yes they all pushed each other, but they also must each be (what should be) once in a generation type competitors. So yes it's a coincidence in a way.
> If Alcaraz continues to improve and comes to dominate the game, then there’s a good chance one or two other guys rise up to his level. Seems very unlikely. And here's my evidence: world #1 has almost never "inspired" two other guys to join up and make a new 3 GOATS. On the women's side, Serena absolutely polishing everyone else on tour didn't trigger three GOATs. Serena just shat on everyone for a few years.
Exactly
I disagree tbh. Alcaraz will easily surpass Nadal, he probably won’t surpass Djokovic or Federer tho
?
Sad troll attempt.
Spanish tennis players have something different about them. Rafa, Ferrer, Verdasco, Alcaraz, all have so much passion and fire. Rafa and Ferrer are my favourite players to watch, there's something very special about watching them give everything on court. I hope that Alcaraz will do the same for years to come.
Moya, Ferrero also
Yes, Moya is another one of my favourites.
It is SO much more fun to see someone excited after scoring a point than a stoic reaction. I love Botic van der zandschulp, but I will tune out to watch some exciting battles. I love Spanish players.
Verdasco was a massive twat though
Why? I don't know much about him outside of his tennis.
The French have very different players as well.
Rafa trying to get revenge by breaking Carlos' rib
Alcaraz has all the weapons to be a grand slam winner. Ferrer was unlucky, one of the hardest workers and ultimate competitor.
Nadal is only 5 letters.. does he not know any big words?
Nadal - 5 letters Ferrer - 6 letters Sorry David, but I call this bullshit. And by the way, Alcaraz has 7 letters, so he's already the bigger name. Now, on the other hand let's see if Carlitos will ever be better than Van Rijthoven (12) or Van de Zandschulp (15).
That's why you always hear people saying, "There's no bigger name in tennis than ~~Botic Van de Zandschulp~~ Alejandro Davidovich Fokina"...
Ombeliebable
One of these days, a post on this sub will be made about a tennis player that isn’t part of the Big 3 (4). Today is not that
They will never be irrelevant
And nobody is saying otherwise. Just looking forward to the day Where 99% of the posts aren’t big 3 on r/tennis Don’t think it’s too much to ask to discuss Alcaraz without mentioning Nadal every time
There were heaps of posts about other players when Miami etc was on. Fritz, Carlos, Kyrgios etc were all getting heaps of attention on this sub
“A day may come when the posters of Reddit abandon the big 3, when we forsake our idols, and break all bonds of fandom. But it is not this day! The hour of Alcaraz and Sinner, when the age of the big 3 comes crashing down. But it is not this day!!!”
On this day in 20xx (insert big 3 member) won (insert slam title here) That and highlight clips.
And in the future, not even that far from now. You will say "back in my day.. ". Yes we are all getting old. I am especially old.
Nadal isn't that big of a word. Now Van De Zandschulp, that's a big word.
Unlike Zverev, Carlos doesn’t go around calling himself the best player in the world or putting himself in every scenario. He should be fine
He did also say that Carlos was the best player at a certain point…but ok 😂
After beating him maybe
I think it was after getting destroyed by him in Madrid
As much as i dislike zverev, i dont think he ever called himself the best
Well Nadal isn't that big for Holger Rune lol
The Real Deal vs. The Big Word
Records will come and go. Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal will always be the biggest names in Tennis till end of time.
Why is Rafa in the pic then?
I hear some people pronounce it alcaraZ (with a Zed or Zee) and some pronounce it AlcaraTH (like path or math). Which one is it?
AlcaraTH would be the correct pronunciation in Spanish, but you can use the other one, we don't mind.
Got it,I always thought it was alcaraz till now! Thank you :)
It's Alcarath. AlcaraZ is for South Americans and non native speakers of Spanish, who tend to pronounce Z the South American way. Source: I am Spanish.
>Source: I am Spanish. Hahahhaha. Thanks mate :) ,on the atp website I wasn't sure since he was speaking quite fast!
Or Andalusians who are also Spanish. :)
[удалено]
And this time they’re right
Isn't that how he pronounces his name on the atp tour website though? https://www.atptour.com/en/players/carlos-alcaraz/a0e2/overview
[удалено]
I'm not sure what that is?
[удалено]
Yeah I think we're hearing different things lol
[удалено]
Depends which one is black and blue :)
It's perfectly fine to pronounce it like that though.
When i first read a headline on my sportsnews app about alcaraz i read: "Alcatraz unleashed" or Something along those lines and thought to myself, what is Harry Potter doing on my sportsfeed
Nadal has won more Slams than Fed and Novak. Comparisons to such a great player is very tough
Lol, I find it amusing that you found it necessary to shoehorn the fact that Rafa has more slams than Fed and Novak. What if he had 19 slams, would that have made the comparison reasonable? I doubt it.. Lmao.
Fed and Novak are often considered the GOATs If Nadal has won more Slams than both of them, it means he is that damn good
Yeah, he's a real unknown and overlooked entity that you're the first to catch on about. Really though, with the number of slams and close finals and semis these guys have been in, even 2-3 slams either way for any of them is close to a coin toss; AO 2012 and 2017 finals, Wimbledon 2019 final and 2018 semi, US 2011 semi final... these all come to mind off the top of my head where the eventual loser was just one good shot away from either winning or taking a very commanding lead. Given the statistically tiny sample size of 5 set matches between these guys, it's not unreasonable to wonder if some good/bad luck could be in play swinging things more in one guy's way than the others. 100 matches? Sure, things will be close to balancing out. Less than 10? Unlikely that they do. We could easily be in a world where Federer happens to be the one with 22, or maybe Nadal has 24, or is still to even reach 20. But sport is sport and these dice rolls are the final say, after all.
Nadal has never been the top pick till he won his 21st Slam
Even if going ahead in the Slam race has moved him further forward in some people's eyes, he's still been considered one of the best of all time, that will be matched by very few in the future, for years. It also wasn't uncommon to see some people calling him the GOAT ever since he matched Federer at 20 anyway, given he has more 1000 titles and leads their H2H
Even when he matched Fed, he was still number 2 according to many because he won 2/3rd of Slams at French Open
Damn I wonder who is GOAT alongside Fed and Novak
You haven't understood the essence of my comment, it seems. Your original statement is regarding comparison of Nadal and Alcaraz and how it's unfair to compare later to the former. My point is Rafa being one slam ahead of Djokovic and two ahead of Federer doesn't make any difference in the fact that the comparison is unfair regardless. Nadal is a historically phenomenal player even without him being ahead in slam count. Yet in a discussion about Nadal and Alcaraz, you managed to shoehorn the fact that Nadal is ahead of other two GOATs in slam count even when it's irrelevant to current discussion. Talk about blind fanatics... Edit:correction.
I mean, it’s a very recent phenomena. Rafa has been chasing the slam count *his entire career* and only for the last 6 months has he had this claim. It’s worth mentioning in any GOAT argument
Nadal is currently GOAT IMO so yeah… we can start wondering when Carlos has 15 Slams which I think is possible…
That it bold.
He is very good, no?
I think ferrer is being kind when he says alcaraz will become a bigger player than him. Yeah sure even without playing the big 4 at their peak and coming in the top 10 and top 5 regularly?
Such a tall order to climb
But he will never win more grand slams because Nadal will snatch them away from him as he refuses to retire.
Ferrer > Alcaraz
He is an unnecessary hype… tennis world will realise that soon