The 'Master'?

Nadal now has the following all-time records on Masters 1000 events:

- Most titles: 26

- Most finals: 35

- Most semifinals: 49

- Best winning percentage: 84.36% (only player above 80%).

- Most consecutive years winning at least one title: 9 (2005–2013).

- Most titles in a single season: 5 (2013. Shared with Djokovic).

- Most finals in a single season: 6 (2013. Shared with Djokovic).

- Most clay court titles: 18

- Clay Slam (Monte Carlo, Rome, Madrid and Roland Garros, 2010.)

- Most consecutive years winning 3+ titles: 2008-2010.

- Most consecutive titles: 4 (Rome to Cincinnati, 2013).

- Most consecutive finals: 5 (Monte Carlo to Cincinnati, 2013).

- Most consecutive finals allowing for a skipped event: 6 (Indian Wells to Cincinnati, 2013).

- Most consecutive quarterfinals: 21 (Madrid 2008 to Cincinnati 2010).

- Most times defending tournament titles: 11

- The only player to have won 5 different tournaments at least 3 times each:
....Monte Carlo: 8
....Rome: 7
....Indian Wells: 3
....Madrid: 3
....Canada: 3

- The only player to have won 2 different tournaments at least 7 times each (Monte Carlo & Rome).

- The only player to have won a tournament 8 times (Monte Carlo 2005–2013).

- The only player to have won a tournament at least 4 consecutive times (Monte Carlo 2005–2013).

- The only player to have won a tournament 4,5 6, 7 and 8 consecutive times (Monte Carlo 2005–2013).

- The fastest player to win Masters 1000 titles:
....5 titles: in 1 year, (Monte Carlo 2005 - Monte Carlo 2006).
....10 titles: in 3 years, (Monte Carlo 2005 – Monte Carlo 2008).
....15 titles: in 4 years, (Monte Carlo 2005 – Rome 2009).
....20 titles: in 7 years, (Monte Carlo 2005 – Monte Carlo 2012).
....25 titles: in 8 years, (Monte Carlo 2005 – Canada 2013).


Add to this the phenomenal stat that Nadal has a winning H2H record against everyone in the top 30 and its clear this guy is some competitor on a tennis court.

I guess he's not too shabby.

Rafa also hold the record for the most 500s with 14

That's pretty decent. Not bad.

Not bad for a "one dimensional, clay court, grinder" eh? Oh right I forgot the hard court wins don't count as they are actually Blue clay wins aren't they? After all we all know just how good Rafa is on the blue dirt

Not too shoddy!

If he can get back to winning ways at non-clay slams he could quite probably get the record he most probably most craves.

A quite exceptional set of achievements compiled by lydian.

Truly impressive

You have to say that the guy is a winning machine!

At Wimbledon the guy was truly on his knees and everyone thought that was it. His comeback continues to go from strength to strength.

Statistics such as these add considerable weight to claims of being one of the very greatest - a bewildering array of achievements. In a few years, who knows where he'll be? It's superb to see him back, and playing well to boot.

CaledonianCraig wrote:If he can get back to winning ways at non-clay slams he could quite probably get the record he most probably most craves.

This is about Nadal's claim to be "The Master"  It has nothing to do with Nadal's slam count. Although if I were to make a guess at a record that would hold a special place in Nadal's heart it would be a 10th Barcelona title. He appears to love that place

It's a phenomenal set of numbers. The guy is a colossus.

I do feel that 'clay skew' will always be a mark against him though.

33% of Masters tournaments are on clay but 69% of Rafa's titles are on clay.

By contrast, clay titles account for 29% of the totals of both Federer and Djokovic.

Of course, titles are titles and clay doesn't count less than other surfaces. But the skew does add some flavour to overall message.

This is one of the many reasons that I thing Nadal by the time it is said and done will surpass Federer in the GOAT standings. He is better now in numerous technical areas than he was as a young player. He has added the ability now to step in and hit winners on the return for example something that he never used to do. His serve is light years better than when he first broke on the tour. And he is also an expert in the forecourt with volleys and with drop shots as well.

socal1976 wrote:This is one of the many reasons that I thing Nadal by the time it is said and done will surpass Federer in the GOAT standings.
...............................................................................................................................

All things are possible and of course only time will tell. None of us can predict the future and a final judgement can only be made when respective careers are complete. Even then, any such assessments will always have a highly subjective element to them and there will never be consensus - as we know only too well from recurring debate centred around the legacy and status of various 'legends' of the game who have already retired many moons ago ......  

Certainly I have revised my own thoughts as to how much longer Rafa might be playing at the very highest level. During his layoff (and in light of mixed messages re his general fitness), I was predicting perhaps another two 'full' years or at the top ; but after these last few months I can see him going on for somewhat longer, and adding to his records. Who knows what's around the corner....??    

HMM makes a very valid point wrt to the skewed figures for clay titles vs percentage of events actually played on the surface.

Lags, no question that Rafa has more success on his favorite surface and only (lol!) 4 slams off of clay. But in my opinion I give Nadal some bonus points for all the time he has missed to injury and for having superior h2hs against all the great players of his generation. Therefore if Nadal gets to within a couple of slams of Federer's 17, and also adds another couple of slams off of the clay to his resume I would displace Federer in my own personal GOAT rankings and move Nadal ahead of him. It is not a function merely of Nadal's h2h against Fed as some might contend, he has the winning h2h against virtually every great player of his period. And in my opinion Nadal accomplished the lion's share of his winning against significantly tougher competition than what fed faced in 04-07.

Some valid points socal, but paradoxically yet another illustration of why there is unlikely ever to be a consensus when it comes to the old chestnut of who is the Daddy.

For instance many folk would contend that for all the h2h superiority over other players, Nadal has thus far fallen short when it comes to successfully defending non-clay Slam titles, and also fighting off challenges to his number one rank (IIRC he is still only seventh in terms of total weeks spent at the top).

Not sure I would give him any 'bonus points' for being injured ! My thinking on that is simply that a) no earthly or heavenly being can ever know what would, or would not, have happened if he had been fortunate enough to avoid injury and b) injury will always be part & parcel of tennis as it is in any other sport. No trophies for speculation.

But I see little merit in the familiar old arguments as regards arriving at any definitive conclusion. It makes for lots of debate and conjecture but will always - as I said before - remain ultimately subjective. And perhaps in some ways I guess that's part of the attraction and ongoing interest.

His talent and ability has NEVER been in question to those of his fans who have followed his career over the years. The tennis forums were littered with extreme vitriol and unsubstantiated claims against his credibility and integrity both as a person and a player . Only now this year finally Rafa is receiving the accolades he deserves from the press, and the anti.Rafa brigade. Yes he is the MASTER Lydian the statistics prove what you and I already knew. There are those who will never like his style of play but they can never deny that he is one of the finest tennis players who has ever lived.

I agree it is subjective, just like the current GOAT crown that Federer wears is subjective. I do agree that Rafa's lack of a large weeks at #1 total is a knock on him but again I think it is a function of his injuries. I mean we can't know for certain how well nadal would have done with healthy knees but it is safe to assume that the man that goes on a rampage after every return from injury probably would have continued to play at his own elevated level. Injuries are part of the game but I do give Nadal some bonus points for the reason I stated above. I mean lets say a player comes up and wins everything imaginable for a few years. Accumulates slams, even wins not one but two calendar slams in a row and then cuts down in auto accident with no chance of recovery at a very young age. I think a lot of people would take the terrible injury into consideration and examine his level at peak fitness and think what if.

Please bear with me because what I am about to ask is a very genuine question.

Why should Nadal's achievements be considered "skewed" or have a mark against them because of his phenomenal dominance on the surface of clay? Seriously, why?

If there are only 33% of Masters played on clay, yet a player can boast a staggering 69% win rate on them, doesn't that prove that not only is he a very good player on this surface, he is streets ahead of his peers because he has less opportunity to play on his favourite surface and yet his win rate shows utter dominance. That in itself should be lauded, rather than considered a skew in his overall success, surely? It's not as if he can't back this up with titles on other surfaces. So what am I missing?

Just having a quick look at Federer's Masters success, 15 of his 21 titles have come on hardcourts (and off topic, I know, but 9 of his 17 Slams are won on hardcourts), however, there never seems to be a slant that his stats are skewed because of his great success on his best surface. Who ever says, yeah he's good, but he needs to have more clay titles?

I've enjoyed watching both Federer and Nadal's successes over the years and I think it's a testament to both their greatness that they have such a stash of Masters titles between them. And yet I just can't recall any player other Nadal facing this asterix because of a surface success, hence the question. So why is it?

Rafa is dominant on Clay, that's not ever disputed, many ex players hold him as the greatest Clay Courter of all time. However, dominance on one surface plus very good on the others vs excellent on all 3 is a hard choice to make and IMO the answer is utterly subjective

Cav wrote:Please bear with me because what I am about to ask is a very genuine question.

Why should Nadal's achievements be considered "skewed" or have a mark against them because of his phenomenal dominance on the surface of clay?  Seriously, why?

If there are only 33% of Masters played on clay, yet a player can boast a staggering 69% win rate on them, doesn't that prove that not only is he a very good player on this surface, he is streets ahead of his peers because he has less opportunity to play on his favourite surface and yet his win rate shows utter dominance.  That in itself should be lauded, rather than considered a skew in his overall success, surely?  It's not as if he can't back this up with titles on other surfaces.  So what am I missing?

Just having a quick look at Federer's Masters success, 15 of his 21 titles have come on hardcourts (and off topic, I know, but 9 of his 17 Slams are won on hardcourts), however, there never seems to be a slant that his stats are skewed because of his great success on his best surface.  Who ever says, yeah he's good, but he needs to have more clay titles?

I've enjoyed watching both Federer and Nadal's successes over the years and I think it's a testament to both their greatness that they have such a stash of Masters titles between them.  And yet I just can't recall any player other Nadal facing this asterix because of a surface success, hence the question.  So why is it?  

Excellent post there CAV, I agree I don't see so much as an asterik's on Nadal's clay wins, I mean do we asterisk Sampras' wins on grass. But I do agree somewhat in that a GOAT candidate has to show dominance on at least high level competence on all surfaces, it is clear that Nadal with 4 slams off of the clay can claim this, but I think if Nadal where to win a couple of more slams off of the clay it would cement his legacy even further. Not that I value he is clay titles or slams less, but that I think a GOAT should be a dominant figure year round.

Cav wrote:If there are only 33% of Masters played on clay, yet a player can boast a staggering 69% win rate on them, doesn't that prove that not only is he a very good player on this surface, he is streets ahead of his peers because he has less opportunity to play on his favourite surface and yet his win rate shows utter dominance.  That in itself should be lauded, rather than considered a skew in his overall success, surely?  It's not as if he can't back this up with titles on other surfaces.  So what am I missing? 

It's not a 69% win rate. It's 69% of his titles are on clay. (His clay win rate must be up in the 90s!).

Federer's stats are not actually skewed. The tournaments are 33% clay, 67% hard court. Federer titles are 29% clay and 71% hard court (as are Djokovic's).

Statistically you could say their wins are proportional. Rafa's wins are disproportionately clay.

It doesn't matter at all really. Wins are wins.

It's just if we want to take a measure of 'greatness', when numbers are similar, proportionate results are often taken as being ahead of skewed results.

Discussions of greatness are very subjective though, so it's far from an exact science.

Haddie-nuff wrote:His talent and ability has NEVER been in question to those of his fans who have followed his career over the years. The tennis forums were littered with extreme vitriol and unsubstantiated claims against his credibility and integrity both as a person and a player . Only now this year finally Rafa is receiving the accolades he deserves from the press, and the anti.Rafa brigade. Yes he is the MASTER Lydian the statistics prove what you and I already knew. There are those who will never like his style of play but they can never deny that he is one of the finest tennis players who has  ever lived.

Haddie-nuff   Nice to see you! Hasn't it been fun watching "the Master" add the rare Canada, Cinci double to his CV. Something that has proved too tricky for other great hard court players.

  nice to see you too. HE  Im not around much these days though I never miss the tennis... I probably (to the relief of many) will only pop in from time to time.  On the move HE.. im in the process of emigrating to Canada ...
But its always fun seeing the boy do what he does best  Biting trophies

Rafa's success this year has been phenomenal. Some might disagree, but I think it was important that, at the very least, he returned and competed at the top level.
What's actually happened is that he's not just competed but has triumphed and is, probably, heading for number one. I've never been a great fan of his, but I do recognise his amazing competitiveness and I also think he brings something completely different to the mix at the top of the game.

Agree with that sirfred.

If Rafa hadn't returned so successfully, the immediate future would have been mostly Novak v Andy for the big prizes. What Rafa adds to that is not only his incredible intensity and competitiveness, but also a very unique game style which is completely different to the other two.

I'm delighted he's back and playing so well. It makes tennis more interesting. Lets face it, love him or hate him... Rafa is box office!

@Lydian... you may also want to update WiKipedia with the statistics. Very nice collection of them.

Thanks LF, if only I had the time..,these days my evenings and weekends consist of driving my son to practice and tennis tournaments...all part of amassing those 10,000 hours

lydian I'm sure (or at least I hope ...) that your son will be eternally grateful for all those hours you're putting in for his benefit !

And just think of the huge sense of pride that will envelop you when he plays in his first ATP Challenger. Not to mention his first match on the main tour .......

Great thread Lyd   , and list is breath taking, why I like Nadal is for one simple reason un compromising character when it comes to achieving a goal and like Federer a great role model off court too.

If Nadal gets anywhere Near 16 slams [let alone over haul 17] I will hand the title as the GOAT, till then I might say Fed will hold the title, coz however impressive Nadal's cv is so is Fed's cv, if Nadal steps it up we can easily say two of the greatest Tennis players of all time came from our era and I am so proud to have seen them play.

But to say He would have won more slams than Fed by now is utter stupidity, everybody deserve what they achieve, Nadal deserves his success as well as failures, who know if Nadal might have won on all surface at his earlyhood he might not be this determinate to achieve it now.

Fed's goal and hard work started to die down a bit when he neared Pete's slam tally, Pete's interest started to vanish once he set the record and more or less same would be for Nadal, Nadal's hunger to overhaul Fed's tally is making him work harder and harder, had he set the record now his interests might have vanished like Borg too who knows.

Cheers lags, I certainly hope he makes it - if he wants to make it - that far. Lots of hurdles between now and that 1st Futures, never mind Challenger, event of course, including having the will to continue to press on over the years ahead, but he loves the game presently, wants to be a pro and will be a great adult player come what may. His fall back option is to get a tennis scholarship in the US as a means of going to university.
So lots of options... it's a passion for both of us, not that he's living my dreams by any means but I'm fully supportive of his ambitions. It's also a very interesting journey including being involved in the inner workings of the LTA at times. On here we talk about guys ranked 200 as if they're useless yet any pro of decent ranking seems light years away compared to even very good 1.2 to 3.2 ranked players you meet in the UK.

Anyway...for now its also about drills, strength and conditioning, competition and squad practices....no short cuts!

lydian wrote:His fall back option is to get a tennis scholarship in the US as a means of going to university.

Wonderful option, if he so chooses. Training in Spain a la Murray is another to consider, and a bit closer to home, if you will.

lydian wrote:On here we talk about guys ranked 200 as if they're useless yet any pro of decent ranking seems light years away compared to even very good 1.2 to 3.2 ranked players you meet in the UK.

Anyway...for now its also about drills, strength and conditioning, competition and squad practices....no short cuts!

This is why the longevity of a Tennis player at the top is so impressive, doing it for 15, 20 and 30 years. I admire the players who constantly give to the Sport of Tennis and it's history. Even the journeymen and journeywomen of Tennis have their stories to tell.

If you have not seen this already, the players got together in NY to show case their Sport - http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2013/08/34/Heritage-Celebration.aspx

lags72 wrote:And just think of the huge sense of pride that will envelop you when he plays in his first ATP Challenger. Not to mention his first match on the main tour .......

...then the first tournament title, first slam win, eight slams in total, and an autobiography in which he writes about how he hated his dad...

lydian wrote:Cheers lags, I certainly hope he makes it - if he wants to make it - that far. Lots of hurdles between now and that 1st Futures, never mind Challenger, event of course, including having the will to continue to press on over the years ahead, but he loves the game presently, wants to be a pro and will be a great adult player come what may. His fall back option is to get a tennis scholarship in the US as a means of going to university.
So lots of options... it's a passion for both of us, not that he's living my dreams by any means but I'm fully supportive of his ambitions. It's also a very interesting journey including being involved in the inner workings of the LTA at times. On here we talk about guys ranked 200 as if they're useless yet any pro of decent ranking seems light years away compared to even very good 1.2 to 3.2 ranked players you meet in the UK.

Anyway...for now its also about drills, strength and conditioning, competition and squad practices....no short cuts!

Well done to both of you for getting this far  What is often overlooked is that it takes dedication and hard work from parents too to give young players the best chances. I presume a tennis scholarship in the US would also provide a good academic education? If so your son is in a win,win situation.

Thanks LF and HE, it's certainly a commitment, one you don't quite realise until you're fully immersed. Yes, scholarships are a good option because let's face it not many can make it to full pro status so if they can play seriously at the same time as gaining a degree then it can't be such a bad option, plus the wonderful experience of learning in and touring around the US.

Lol SB...one step at a time!

Every time I see this thread I have visions of Rafa appearing in Doctor Who.