Will Rafael Nadal ever win Wimbledon again?

Considering his recent Wimbledon record, no

Two questions, And can you vote please.

Voted. (Please double-check your spelling)
And I don't think he can match Federer's slam record. Injuries have blighted his career

He's got a French Open in him. Don't see him winning any other slams.

Doesn't really matter if he beats Federer's record btw, Roger's still the all time greatest.

What so if he comes back from this lull and injuries, regains form,and surpasses Fed's slam count, plus their one-on one record, he isn't greater?

I always thought he would, but 2014 let him down and now has 2015 so i don't think he can. Just to look at it logically, Federer had won 15 of his 17 grand slams by the end of 2009 at which he was aged 28 by the end of the season. Nadal had 14 to the end of last year (same age) which puts him behind. While the chance for odd slams still exists, Nadal's game is declining far more rapidly than Federer's as it appears he can no longer keep his physicality up (Federer's has never really required it).

So i'll go for a no and no. He'll probably win the French again though.

Regarding a 1 on 1 count, it's worth noting that around half their meetings have occurred on clay.

Ok good points, but a few things..Federer had Nadal and Djok and Murry there the whole time. Now Fed is out the way of Nadal, and whilst Djok is a constant threat, i still think his intesnity will wane at some point, while him and Raf ase still up there and he is top, I don't see Murray maintaining that level of intensity-also Murray is a favourable match up even for a less on form Nadal. Since there is very little underneath them that looks like being up to their level for a good few years(I mean Dmitrov, Raonic? no way) He only needs to get himself back on form and steal a few of the gaps. Murray will be going for OZ and the French and Djok the French to complete the career slam. If he is wise about this, then he can prioritise, as I said earlier -probably Australia would be the one to focus on. That said I don't think he has been very shrewd in his career about his body and what to prioritise. But if he does that, i can easily see him snatching a few, Djok won't win it all, and Murray is not looking like he'll repeat the intesity or form he had under Lendl.

Ok, I take that point. But it doesn't alter my main argument. to just say Fed is the best regardless of how the slam count ends up, just is not a legitimate argument.
I think if Nadal comes back from this mediocre form to surpass the slam count, then he is GOAT indisputably. If he doesn't, he isn't.

Largely agree with that however your assuming that Nadal will recoup as Federer declines, it's possible but current evidence would suggest that Nadal is collapsing at a much faster rate than Federer. Nadal has never before really had to adapt, he's always made others adapt to him and so i'm not sure how great his efforts to change his game will be.

Yes, we're already seeing a power vacuum developing as the big 4 as a whole have lost their slam grip and Raonic/Dimitrov/Nikishori are not good enough to dominate (Del Potro is but he's injured). This means that the 2016-2020 period is probably going to be like the pre-2003 period where a number of players scrapped amongst themselves for title before the next brilliant guys dominate (probably people not even on the tour yet).



I'd agree with that. Slam counts are probably the best way to judge GOAT albeit there's an argument to weight the 3 surfaces.