If Nadal wins a gold medal in his career along with the US and Australian Open is he better than Federer?

Question

if Federer never wins the French or an olympic gold medal. Or is there greater emphasis on the number of majors a tennis player has won.

Answer 1

It would be hard to argue against it.  I think if you are to be considered one of the best, you have to win all 4 grand slams.  Federer would be the best if he could only win the French.  Just like Ivan Lendl, he dominated every GS, but couldn't win Wimbledon.  If Nadal wins all the GS and Federer never wins the French, it will be a close call.  I think as long as Rafa can close the gap in number of titles, then you have to give it to Nadal.  right now Federer is better because he has a 12-5 GS championship lead.  It's like Sampras vs. Agassi, Sampras has 15 GS titles but never won the French.  I believe Agassi won all 4 GS but only has 8.  Had Agassi, won maybe 12 to Pete's 15, probably most would give Agassi, the better career because he won all 4.  Instead, most  think Pete had a better career because he won 7 more than Agassi.

Answer 2

Yes i would say so. Even if Rafa never won a Gold medal but wins the US Open and Aussie Open to me that is better than Federer because Rafa would have won all the grandslams. It doesnt matter how many more times Fed wins the US,Aussie,Wimby....he needs to win the French to be called the Greatest in my opinion, he is close but still not quite there. We all have our own opinions some people will call me crazy because i believe that but who cares its my opinion lol Im not sure whats going on with Roger Federer, im still not writting him off like some people i reckon he`ll put up a big fight to regain his #1 spot but i think Nadal is going to get better and better he is constantly improving and always looking to improve. Nadal for the Gold, US and Aussie ! Vamos Rafa x*x

Answer 3

It would be a close call, but when you look at the head-to-head between the two players thus far, I'd think you'd have to hand it to Nadal. He does need to win the Aussie and US Opens to get that kind of consideration though. If he ends up winning ten or more grand slams, there would be almost no question that Nadal would be better than Federer.

Answer 4

hmm, that is a tough one. I wouldn't say better but I would say he would definitely move up on the list of the greats, and I think that would give him a chance to eclipse Federer in the future. It wouldn't quite be a Golden Slam (Graf is the only person to achieve that), but he would be the closest anyone has ever gotten to a golden slam. It would be a great feat if he did that.