Tennis: French Open/2020

[MeowLeafs]

And with this GS win, Nadal catches up with Federer at 20 grand slams. Insane. And Nadal has something that Federer does not... a gold medal at the Os in single.

On the other hand, Nadal's resume is seriously lacking ATP Finals, which imo, is on the same tier as Olympics.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

On the other hand, Nadal's resume is seriously lacking ATP Finals, which imo, is on the same tier as Olympics.

No it is not.

ATP finals is every year.

Olympics are every 4 years AND the greatest sporting event in the world.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

On the other hand, Nadal's resume is seriously lacking ATP Finals, which imo, is on the same tier as Olympics.

Personally, I've never ever watched ATP or WTA finals. But I did watch the Os when it was possible. One thing being every 4 years and about your country while the other is every year and means nothing ... I would not put them on the same level.

There's the golden grand slam... and there's not much focus on the ATP grand slam.

But to each their own.

 

[Maestro84]

Personally, I've never ever watched ATP or WTA finals. But I did watch the Os when it was possible. One thing being every 4 years and about your country while the other is every year and means nothing ... I would not put them on the same level.

There's the golden grand slam... and there's not much focus on the ATP grand slam.

But to each their own.

Talking about Olympics, I'm honestly not sure when the next time that'll be hosted. The host country earns money by having mass crowds from all over the world come in to watch, but the prospect of having full/close to full crowds doesn't seem plausible anytime soon.

 

[MeowLeafs]

No it is not.

ATP finals is every year.

Olympics are every 4 years AND the greatest sporting event in the world.

Personally, I've never ever watched ATP or WTA finals. But I did watch the Os when it was possible. One thing being every 4 years and about your country while the other is every year and means nothing ... I would not put them on the same level.

There's the golden grand slam... and there's not much focus on the ATP grand slam.

But to each their own.

"Olympics are every 4 years AND the greatest sporting event in the world". By that logic, an Olympic Gold would mean even more than a grand slam, which it clearly not true.

The ATP Finals and Olympics are definitely two completely different tournaments but I believe they are roughly the same tier (below grand slam level and above masters). With ATP Finals you have only the best 8 players in the world so there's no chance you'll be playing a bunch of nobodies they way you will with the Olympics in the early rounds. With Olympics, lower ranked players can even make the tournament over higher ranked players due to restrictions on the number of players per country.

I frequent several tennis message boards and I'd say the most common belief is that the two are roughly equal. If anything, the Finals is weighted slightly more. And it's usually Fed/Djokovic fans that weigh Finals more and Nadal fans who weigh Olympics more.

Olympics being only every 4 years does give it a special quality, but it also makes it understandable if a player (like Fed/Joker) doesn't ever win it since they have so few opportunities. Meanwhile the Finals are every year so if you haven't been able to win one in your career (Nadal) despite so many opportunities, it will be used against you.

Finals win:
Federer - 6
Djokovic - 5
Nadal - 0

Olympics win:
Nadal - 1
Federer - 0
Djokovic - 0

Nadal's zero Finals compared to 6 & 5 is at least as glaring as their zero Olympics compared to 1.

 

[Maestro84]

"Olympics are every 4 years AND the greatest sporting event in the world". By that logic, an Olympic Gold would mean even more than a grand slam, which it clearly not true.

The ATP Finals and Olympics are definitely two completely different tournaments but I believe they are roughly the same tier (below grand slam level and above masters). With ATP Finals you have only the best 8 players in the world so there's no chance you'll be playing a bunch of nobodies they way you will with the Olympics in the early rounds. With Olympics, lower ranked players can even make the tournament over higher ranked players due to restrictions on the number of players per country.

I frequent several tennis message boards and I'd say the most common belief is that the two are roughly equal. If anything, the Finals is weighted slightly more. And it's usually Fed/Djokovic fans that weigh Finals more and Nadal fans who weigh Olympics more.

Olympics being only every 4 years does give it a special quality, but it also makes it understandable if a player (like Fed/Joker) doesn't ever win it since they have so few opportunities. Meanwhile the Finals are every year so if you haven't been able to win one in your career (Nadal) despite so many opportunities, it will be used against you.

Finals win:
Federer - 6
Djokovic - 5
Nadal - 0

Olympics win:
Nadal - 1
Federer - 0
Djokovic - 0

Nadal's zero Finals compared to 6 & 5 is at least as glaring as their zero Olympics compared to 1.

It’s hard to compare the two. One is played every 4 years so no one will be able to win it 5/6 times, while the other is an end of year event usually played every year.

With Rafa at the WTF, it’s a bit similar to Pete Sampras at RG. They never really prioritized it and a partial reason to that is they know the conditions don’t suit their games at all and they’d be better off trying to peak at other events.

 

[Beau Knows]

If Rafa retired tomorrow Federer is still ahead of him in my opinion. They're tied in slams and he's got more of most everything else except Olympics. He's got more weeks at #1, more titles, ATP finals titles, more GS finals, semi-finals, quarter-finals, etc.

 

[Maestro84]

If Rafa retired tomorrow Federer is still ahead of him in my opinion. They're tied in slams and he's got more of most everything else except Olympics. He's got more weeks at #1, more titles, ATP finals titles, more GS finals, semi-finals, quarter-finals, etc.

I'd probably say the same, but if I'm being honest, I think Djokovic is the one Rafa is really trying to hold off because I think Nadal has a lot more arguments for Federer than he does with Djokovic.

With Federer, Rafa can say he has more Masters, Olympics, H2H advantage, similar longevity, better win percentage, winning 2+ slams on each surface, and his age group was tougher than Fed's original generation. They're tied with 5 Year-End Number One's but Rafa is the one more likely to add to it in the future. There's probably more as well but those are the few that pop into mind. Especially if Rafa wins another non-RG, it’s gonna be a VERY uphill battle for Roger trying to argue being greater than Rafa.

With Novak, a lot of the above can't be used in his favor. Also, it is sadly more than likely that Fed is essentially done adding to his resume for the most part as he's approaching 40 (!!!) while Novak is far from being finished.

 

[Beau Knows]

I'd probably say the same, but if I'm being honest, I think Djokovic is the one Rafa is really trying to hold off because I think Nadal has a lot more arguments for Federer than he does with Djokovic.

With Federer, Rafa can say he has more Masters, Olympics, H2H advantage, similar longevity, better win percentage, winning 2+ slams on each surface, and his age group was tougher than Fed's original generation. They're tied with 5 Year-End Number One's but Rafa is the one more likely to add to it in the future. There's probably more as well but those are the few that pop into mind.

With Novak, a lot of the above can't be used in his favor. Also, it is sadly more than likely that Fed is essentially done adding to his resume for the most part as he's approaching 40 (!!!) while Novak is far from being finished.

Of for sure, I think Novak ends up with the most slams, and the GOAT in most peoples minds.

 

[Maestro84]

Of for sure, I think Novak ends up with the most slams, and the GOAT in most peoples minds.

Agree with the first part but not so sure about the second. Unless Novak wins the race by 4/5 slams its gonna be hard for the majority of the public to view him as the GOAT.

Fedal both have a lot more supporters than he does worldwide, they’re more celebrated in Western mainstream than Djoker is, and most “experts“ clearly prefer Fedal over Nole. The Serb will not just have to win the race, but he has to run away with it for the majority to view him as the greatest.

 

[Fighter]

I'm still mumbling about how Rafa was flawless in the final, geez what a performance. King of clay might be an understatement. But as for the GOAT argument, I'd still take Feds over him. When 21# will come for Rafa, this could change. As for Nole, age is going up for him as well and he isn't as dominant on hard than Rafa is on clay...

 

[Cruor]

The Olympics historically has never been seen as a big accolade or tournament in tennis, that's a much more recent development and I'd hesitate to put much stock in it when comparing resumes historically. The WTF/YEC on the other hand is unofficially known as the "fifth slam" for a reason, it's the top 8 players duking it out in a round robin tournament format.

And yes, it's a pretty glaring hole in Rafa's resume.

 

[MeowLeafs]

It’s hard to compare the two. One is played every 4 years so no one will be able to win it 5/6 times, while the other is an end of year event usually played every year.

With Rafa at the WTF, it’s a bit similar to Pete Sampras at RG. They never really prioritized it and a partial reason to that is they know the conditions don’t suit their games at all and they’d be better off trying to peak at other events.

I 100% agree with what you said. Sampras was relatively weak on clay, and the lack of a French Open title is a big hole on his resume. The WTF conditions are similarly bad for Rafa (fast conditions, hard court, indoors, end of year when he's injured) so it makes sense for him to not prioritize as it can be argued that his focus should be elsewhere. But that doesn't mean it's not a hole in his resume because it is. Just because he never prioritized it, doesn't suddenly mean it doesn't matter. At the end of career, if Nadal never wins it, and the Big 3 are close overall, the lack of WTF will absolutely be used against him (and deservingly so). And this is coming from a guy who's fav player is Nadal...

 

[MsMeow]

The Olympics historically has never been seen as a big accolade or tournament in tennis, that's a much more recent development and I'd hesitate to put much stock in it when comparing resumes historically. The WTF/YEC on the other hand is unofficially known as the "fifth slam" for a reason, it's the top 8 players duking it out in a round robin tournament format.

And yes, it's a pretty glaring hole in Rafa's resume.

The Olympics aren't anywhere near as important as the year end tourney. It's new and it's a fun kind of thing for the players.

 

[kihei]

The Olympics aren't anywhere near as important as the year end tourney. It's new and it's a fun kind of thing for the players.

So what would it take for those of us who see Roger as the GOAT to switch our vote to Rafa? Would another French Open win for Nadal do it, giving him 21 GSs? Each new French Open win only reinforces the argument that he is a transcendental player on clay, but not the greatest player overall. Still, that would be enough for me to consider grudgingly switching votes, but not happily and with a great big asterisk. What would work for me? An ATP finals win would help, but what would really clinch the case, what would really turn me into an unapologetic defender of Rafa as GOAT, would be if he won another Australian Open for his 21st slam, giving him at least two GSs in every GS tournament, a very rare feat. Then he would have my wholehearted support.

 

[MsMeow]

So what would it take for those of us who see Roger as the GOAT to switch our vote to Rafa? Would another French Open win for Nadal do it, giving him 21 GSs? Each new French Open win only reinforces the argument that he is a transcendental player on clay, but not the greatest player overall. Still, that would be enough for me to consider grudgingly switching votes, but not happily and with a great big asterisk. What would work for me? An ATP finals win would help, but what would really clinch the case, what would really turn me into an unapologetic defender of Rafa as GOAT, would be if he won another Australian Open for his 21st slam, giving him at least two GSs in every GS tournament, a very rare feat. Then he would have my wholehearted support.

A wimbledon win would do it for me but honestly, if he edges Roger 21-20 on any surface but clay, that would do it. Roger still has that wild record of quarters and semis in major tournaments and is an all surface player. There is so little to choose between them.