The Spaniard's feat will spur many commentators to compare Nadal's performance to current "Greatest Of All Time" Roger Federer at the same age.
Federer vs. Nadal at the Very Same Age
|Nadal on 9/13/10||Federer on 11/18/05|
|Davis Cup Titles||3||0|
|Olympic Gold Medals||1||0|
|Longest Win Streak||32||34|
|Weeks at No. 1||60||93|
|Record vs. No. 1||14-6||2-3|
To me (who is an unabashed Federer fan, although I also admire and respect Nadal's play and prowess) these comparisons just reflect impatience. Until someone else actually wins more Grand Slam titles than the current leader (Federer's 16), Roger Federer is the greatest of all time. It is very possible, that Nadal will be declared the Greatest of all Time at some poit in time in the future, but he will have to win at least 16 (and possibly more) in order for me to agree to bestow that title upon him.
That being said, he is clearly the World #1 player in the world right now, and probably for at least another year when he has to defend all those points. I think he has a pretty good chance (and should be considered the favorite) to win the 2011 Australian Open.
Additionally, Nadal becomes only the 7th player in history to win all four major tournaments (Rod Laver, Fred Perry, Don Budge, Roy Emerson, Andre Agassi, Roger Federer). Many, many great players, such as Pete Sampras, John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors, Ivan Lendl, Bjorn Borg never were able to win at every single Grand Slam venue. Nadal also becomes the first player since Rod Laver to win 3 Grand Slams in a row in a calendar year.