Counterpoint (when sorted by road pct):

I don’t completely agree - let’s not forget that Rafa made the finals at the AO, Acapulco, and Miami last year so he has quite a bit to defend as well. He’s already dropped points at AO while the GOAT has made a net positive so far if we trade off his second-round defeat in Dubai last year and his run in Rotterdam…

I know what you’re up to Giri. You don’t want to jinx the GOAT. I agree - Birdman has a fighting chance. But long live the GOAT!

I used to be like many of you guys who absolutely hated this guy. But if you change your viewpoint to realize he’s a father who really (and I mean really) supports his kids...I’m all for it. It’s great that he cares and is actively involved in his kids’ lives. Who amongst us had dads who touted us as the best thing as…

Can’t tell if this is sarcasm or not. I’ll take the latter. If it’s the former, please ignore the rest. If you think kneeling is disrespecting America’s troops, do tell your opinion on how America generally treats it’s veterans like shit. For example, the VA being continuously underfunded. You would think people who…

Koeman is a poor man’s Mourinho. Literally. He does what Mourinho does with a team half the price. Great at parking the bus and scoring goals with big bad bruisers. But you give them some money to spend on more attractive football and they’re fish out of water. He couldn’t play 10 men behind the ball with all that…

Stare away at the sun guys. Any scientist who says otherwise is peddling fake news. MAGA hahahahaaaa

The person that has played him the most in Wimbledon finals...that’s playing with words a lot considering it’s a grand total of 3. What about all the other grass court tournaments? I can also say that Roger’s won 67% of the time they’ve played on grass totally out of context too. And if we extrapolate that to 10…

They play on grass once a year. So a one win advantage matters if you’ve only played 3 times ever. Just saying.

Your first sentence says ignore statistics. Then you site a h2h. So what you really mean is to ignore all the other statistics and focus on one statistic. Great argument.

Roger could have tied it up with Djoker if Djoker’s elbow didn’t start hurting while scoreboard watching.

Just watch, Plank’s tunnel vision counterargument will be that Roger wasn’t there to lose to Rafa at the French Open this year. (While ignoring all the times Rafa wasn’t around to lose to Roger). That is the internets.

Ah yes - it’s come full circle. One stat is not the be-all end-all. I’m glad you agree Federer is the GOAT.

“Does this make Cilic a better player than Nadal?”

“The GOAT discussion is not zero-sum.”

Non h2h stat - which matters for what reason? Roger won today without beating Nadal because...wait for it...Nadal wasn’t good enough to meet him in the final. You’re basically saying it’s better to lose in the QF than in the finals? I think rankings points have a bone to pick with you if that’s your argument. By the…

“Had Federer been as dominant against Nadal on non-clay courts as Nadal was on clay against Fed, this would have been a lot easier. But he wasn’t. It’s pretty close.”

They spend 6 weeks on clay and 3 weeks on grass. Roger was good enough to meet Rafa in the finals on clay, but what about the reverse? Nobody’s discounting clay - just stating facts, such as 19 Grand Slams and 92 overall singles titles. But hey, 23-14 amirite?

Where were Nadal or Djokovic in the Wimbledon final? Oh wait...they were not there. That’s how math works though - you can’t improve your record against somebody if they’re not good enough to meet you in the next round. By your logic, 1.6 billion people are just as good as Roger because we’re all 0-0 against him.…

Roger rocket ruthless