Of the most recent improvements in tennis punditry, the dispensing with the term and idea of the "Greatest of all Time" tag (GOAT for short) has been a most welcome change for and from fans, neutrals and players alike.
And of course, the introduction of the more correct and plausible "Greatest of their Generation" tag has brought some peace to the plenty stirred waters of online tennis forums the world over.
Some argue that Federer is from an earlier generation to Nadal, while others argue that both men are from the same generation. For the purpose of this debate, we'll assume the latter which then brings us to an interesting question.
Would Nadal be even greater in the absence of his injuries? Or put another way: is it possible that Nadal's injuries could make him the greatest of his generation?
Given the type of injury (the severity and frequency of occurrence), its physical and psychological burden (add in the percentage of the season played on hard courts) and the adversity he's potentially had to overcome every time he's won, is it possible that without having to equal Federer's 17 slams Nadal could be seen as the greatest of his generation because of these problems?
Leave your response below! Agree with someone's comment? Vote for it to make the Debate Highlights section. Disagree with a comment? Reply and voice your opinion.
JUMP INTO THE DEBATE AND HAVE YOUR SAY.
Agree with someone's comment? Vote for it to make the Debate Highlights section. Disagree with a comment? Reply and voice your opinion. Happy Debating!Add Comment