So now that Nadal has 5 major titles of his own, does anyone else think that he could actually challenge for most major titles overall regardless of what # that Federer finishes at?

Let's examine this a bit. Nadal has 4 FO and it doesn't look like he's going to lose there anytime soon when the #1 player in the world can't even take him to 5 let alone 4 sets anymore. Now, he has a Wimbledon title of his own and that on top of reaching the finals the previous two years. He's like Sampras in reverse. Instead of winning Wimbledon and the US every year it will be the French and Wimbledon.

So to recap, Nadal has 5 majors and he's just 22, maybe just turned 23. If he just played five more years and won 3 FO title's then that's 8 and a couple more Wimbledon's trading with Federer then that's 10 and throw in a Australian and maybe a US Open and that's 12. Not quite passing Federer but I think Nadal could seriously be one of the greatest players ever after today's win.

I think he'll get up there, but because he relys so much on being ridiculously fit, I could see him wearing down by 25-26.

uh....wow

Becker vs. McEnroe during the Davis Cup in Hartford. Best. Match. Ever!
The Jimmy Connors matches where he reached the semis in Paris at age 150 or something like that were fantastic as well

Well this will probably be the last post in this thread until a few days before the US Open

I finally watched the match, although i hadn't managed to avoid finding out the result

Great, great final, i think everything's already been said. I don't think i can think of a better men's match in my viewing time (since approx '87) it was just sensational entertainment. I really look forward to the next chapter of Federer vs Nadal.

Can you beat Andy Roddick if he plays with a frying pan?

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... d=tab3pos1

how do you guys think the US Open will go? I think Federer is still the favorite.

I agree. Fed has owned this for many years so I don't see why it can't continue since Roddick will flame out and Nadal, as good as he is, just hasn't translated his vast improvement on grass to hardcourts yet.

i also think that the U.S. Open surface is arguably faster than Wimbledon now which will help Roger a lot. As much as i liked the rallies in the final about two weeks ago, a lot of them should of been over earlier on grass. Wimby's lost the quickness the past few years.

Don't forget Djokovic, last year he had a similar result at the French and Wimbledons and then went Finals - Championship at the US Open and Australian hard courts.

I think Djokovic is still the second favorite though until Roger is proven otherwise at the U.S Open and hard courts overall. Nadal is still best on clay, and it's a toss up on grass between him and Federer imo.

Nadal is into the final of the Toronto Masters HC event where he will face Nicolas Kiefer. Nadal will also most likely take over #1 by the end of the August - perhaps earlier, and it is very much deserved.

Is he playing in the Olympics, and do the Olympics count towards the overall rankings?

Regardless, correct me if I'm wrong, would he still take over #1 if he just makes the semis or something at the US Open? Considering Federer can't really gain anything considering he's defending his champion points, and Rafa lost in the 4th round last year, the jump should be enough I assume. I expect Nadal to at least make it to the finals and I'd probably pick him to win at this point, though.

If he wins this, he'll cement his place among the greatest of all time. Winning the final 3 majors of the year hasn't been done since Laver's two grand slams in the 60s, and then Tony Trabbert in the 50s before him. Then you can consider his current 29 game winning streak and the length it could go to if he wins a couple more tournaments until then, and the fact that he'll already have 6 majors and will most likely go over 10, if you consider he'll get at least 2 more French Opens and probably at least 2 more of the other ones. The Australian would be HUGE from him then, to do the unheard of and hold all the majors at once but not the chronological grand slam, like Serena and Tiger did recently. It'd also be big if you consider it'll take a miracle or injury for him to lose the French next year, so that Australian could be the door to do the insane by winning 5 in a row. But that's looking a little too far ahead. But even if he wins this and then only wins the French the next couple years, he'll be at least on the level of Agassi, McEnroe, Lendl, Connors, Wilander where the mass achievements aren't quite on the level of Laver, Sampras, Borg, or now Federer, but they still rank among the best without a doubt. If he does the 5 in a row... we can start talking about best ever like Federer.

Both are playing in the Beijing games, and yes they do count towards the rankings. Just not sure of how many points are available. But I don't believe that will matter. The next tournament, the masters series event in Cincinnati, have both playing, with Federer defending a title and Nadal defending all of 5 points. So If Nadal makes it to the semifinal he's number one. If Federer makes it to the final and loses, Nadal just needs to win one match. If Federer loses before the final, Nadal is number one. But because of the Olympics there's some scheduling matters that confuse me and may delay an official #1 ranking, but Nadal would be number 1 when it's all up to date.

So by the US Open, barring some unrealistic collapse, Nadal should be seeded number one, and Federer number 2. It looks like Nadal will be number 1 for the rest of the year, and Federer...just hope he stays at 2.

^^i'm not sure if what you say is totally accurate. i think the only way Nadal becomes number one in cincy is if Federer doesn't make it to the semifinals and nadal wins the tournament. but i think if lets say they both play in the final and federer wins or loses, he'll still be number one, but barely though. the olympics will award around 400 ranking points so it will be important for Roger to gain points from beijing and win gold or silver and have nadal lose early or at least before him. and then fed will also have to win the U.S. open to defend his points, and do very well in the tournaments after that to maintain number one. incredibly hard but doable. i'm not gonna lie, nadal has the upper hand on this because he is on a roll, but let's see how roger bounces back. first match against ginepri tomorrow!

Could be, with the Olympics messing up the schedule I may have gotten things wrong. But I'm reasonably certain that all last week during the AMS Toronto tournament, they were saying that all Nadal needs is a SF appearance in AMS Cincinnati. We'll see how it plays out this week.

Say it ain't so, Canadian TV wrong?: Ranking breakdown That calendar thing messed me up.

^^ yea we'll see. federer just basically needs to outdo nadal the rest of the year and believe it or not he can stay number one, but one slip up, and nadal will probably catch him depending on the circumstances. it's possible for fed to achieve the results since some of his favorite tournaments are coming up but not his best chances. this is where the olympics comes into play because gold= 400 points, silver= 280, bronze= 205, 4th=155, quarters=100, RD16=50, RD32= 25, 1st round= 5.

I think Federer may be able to regain the top spot in May-July of next year, he wouldn't have a lot to defend during the spring, and Nadal wouldn't be able to gain that many points after the summer he had.

wow roger almost lost today. i'm glad he was able to pull off that second set though, and do a 6-0 game in the third. ginepri was already mentally and physically tired by that time.

^^ pretty decent chance that that'll happen now. federer lost to karlovic today. even though i hate how karlovic plays he did what he could to win it. i'm pissed.

GO MURRAY!!

I'd still take Federer's 2006.

3 Grand Slams, 1 Final
17 total tournaments. 12 Titles. 16 finals.
92-5. Only lost to two players (Nadal and Murray)

Nadal right now is 65-8, 8 titles. 10 Finals. 2 GS 1 GS SF and Olympic Gold. Even if he wins the US Open, it would depend on his performance in the indoor season in the fall to get an accurate picture of how his year stacks up with Federer's 06.

ETA: Edited Nadal's stats, I don't think the ATP Profile has updated todays match.

He receives 400 points. Grand Slam winners receive 1000. So the ATP thinks it's about 2/5ths a Grandslam. I think it should be higher than a masters series tournament at least.