Is anyone else tired of the Federer and Nadal GOAT debate? I have reserved a permanent spot at the head of line so please, take a number! Granted, I am an unapologetically steadfast Roger Federer acolyte but this does not preclude rational objectivity. I firmly believe that when one makes a commitment to enthusiastically support a tennis player, one is obliged to formulate assertions – whether steeped in praise or criticism – through the prism of statistical, fact-based analysis devoid of emotion. Deprived of this ability, one invariably risks barbed attacks at the hands of those firmly entrenched in the Nadal camp and even tennis aficionados in general.
The criteria chosen to support the contention that either Federer or Nadal is the GOAT is arbitrary; one can pick and choose the variables to highlight and omit. That being said, I have devised my own list of variables to assess not only Federer and Nadal but other highly accomplished players from previous eras whose legacy – perceived and actual – has been or may be debated. I don’t place much weight on head to head stats or even total number of tournaments/grand slams won. The numbers are invariably deceiving.
I diverge to illustrate this point. Ivan Lendl – 8 time grand slam singles winner – is considered in most circles a less accomplished player than Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe despite the fact that he maintains a winning edge head to head versus both players ( 22-12 vs Connors and 21-15 vs McEnroe). I place greater emphasis and value on technique, economy of movement and mental stamina.
Indisputably, Nadal maintains a winning edge over Federer at 22-10 but even those numbers are deceiving. A majority of Nadal’s wins came on clay – undeniably his best surface but had he been as good a hard court player as Roger is a clay court player, I contend Roger would have the edge in the head to head. Roger was not only the second greatest clay court player during Nadal’s reign at the French Open, but also excelled at the US Open and Wimbledon during the same time frame which cannot be said of Nadal. He did not even make the final at the US Open until 2010. Had he not lost so early most previous years, Roger would have had the opportunity to turn the tables in their head to head.
Nadal did not keep up his end of the bargain at the US Open whereas Roger was in 4 consecutive French Open finals in addition to making the finals at the US Open and Wimbledon every one of those years (2006-2009). This not only speaks to Federer’s incredible consistency and physical resilience but more importantly to his exquisite technique and footwork which enabled him to dominate on all surfaces. Roger was never compelled to alter or tweak his game in order to excel on all three surfaces; Nadal has.
One of Nadal’s greatest weapons is his lefty forehand despite the fact that he was right-hand dominate until uncle Toni instructed him to play lefty. Would Nadal have dominated Federer on clay in those 3 French Open finals had he not chosen to play left-handed? Only one player has beaten the current world number one and Wimbledon champion twice this year and it isn’t Nadal – it is Roger Federer.
I rest my case.
Thank you for reading. Please take a moment to follow LWOS Tennis department on Twitter – @tennisfollows. Support LWOS by following us on Twitter – @LastWordOnSport and @LWOSworld – and “liking” our Facebook page.
For the latest in sports injury news, check out our friends at Sports Injury Alert.
Main Photo:
