Who is the true goat in Tennis ?

[boncer34]

What part of "there are no guarantees in sport" don't you seem to understand?

If you think Novak will surpass him then go on, it shouldn't be hard to list where Djokovic will win these five slams.

There's only 4 places in the world to win them Thrawny.

Melbourne, Paris, London and New York. That's where at some stage he'll win the 5 more.

 

[mcgarnacle]

What part of "there are no guarantees in sport" don't you seem to understand?

If you think Novak will surpass him then go on, it shouldn't be hard to list where Djokovic will win these five slams.

i'm not getting involved in what you and boncer have got going on (sounds like a bit of history), but this AO and Wimbo are within his grasp. that's two at least.

but you maybe right, and perhaps guys like medvedev, thiem, tsitsipas, etc, may begin getting a taste for it. in a best of 3, they're more than capable to compete with and win titles against the big 3. in a best 5, djokovic and nadal in particular still have the mental and physical stamina to outlast the younger brigade and it's where the new gen need to up their game.

 

[Thrawn]

There's only 4 places in the world to win them Thrawny.

Melbourne, Paris, London and New York. That's where at some stage he'll win the 5 more.

Have you ever considered a career in politics?

 

[boncer34]

Have you ever considered a career in politics?

Coz I wasn't dumb enough to give you your "gotcha" moment down the track?

If only politicians were as simple as you.

 

[Thrawn]

Coz I wasn't dumb enough to give you your "gotcha" moment down the track?

That's already come and pass. You're a laugh mate.

It was nice having a tete-a-tete with you, but let's bring this back on topic. I don't think Djokovic will win five more grand slam titles due to the reasons I provided. You've yet to provide any other than "hurr look I'm trolling Thrawn and making him upset lulz".

If only politicians were as simple as you.

Stay classy.

 

[Pistol Night]

 

[RAPPA]

Fed stays at 20, Nadal to take 2 more French opens to equal 20, and then the next 6 slams in 2020 and 2021 are up for Djok’s grabs (including this AO).

 

[Thrawn]

i'm not getting involved in what you and boncer have got going on (sounds like a bit of history), but this AO and Wimbo are within his grasp. that's two at least.

but you maybe right, and perhaps guys like medvedev, thiem, tsitsipas, etc, may begin getting a taste for it. in a best of 3, they're more than capable to compete with and win titles against the big 3. in a best 5, djokovic and nadal in particular still have the mental and physical stamina to outlast the younger brigade and it's where the new gen need to up their game.

Nevermind him, he has a history of trying to rile people up with nonsensical posts (and failing). Targets me because I hung a lot of shit on his club, heh.

Djokovic's main weapon - his return of serve, is starting to diminish slightly (he couldn't get much of a read on Federer's serve in last year's Wimby final, and the WTF match). That hand-eye coordination is going to decline ever so more, so he'll need to rely more on an attacking game - he's already serving faster, but at a risk of double-faulting more. His mental strength and stamina is certainly the difference, but at the same time, they'll either have to be committed to a Wawrinka-style raw power game to defeat him, or mixing up the trajectory and pace of the ball as he prefers balls with pace. See Federer in Wimb/WTF games vs Djokovic. While he did win the former (it all came down to mental clutchness in the tiebreaks and taking opportunities when they came), he certainly had trouble with Federer's game. The younger generation will need to emulate his tactics if they want to even have a chance.

 

[boncer34]

That's already come and pass. You're a laugh mate.

It was nice having a tete-a-tete with you, but let's bring this back on topic. I don't think Djokovic will win five more grand slam titles due to the reasons I provided. You've yet to provide any other than "hurr look I'm trolling Thrawn and making him upset lulz".


Stay classy.

No it hasn't.

Remember you made up the story about me commenting on the US open. If anything the reverse happened.

 

[Thrawn]

No it hasn't.

Remember you made up the story about me commenting on the US open.

Here's a novel thought: maybe try talking tennis instead of trying to "one-up" me or whatever silly thing it is you're trying to do here. Or perhaps the idea of analysing players' respective strengths and weaknesses is too much for you?

 

[boncer34]

Here's a novel thought: maybe try talking tennis instead of trying to "one-up" me or whatever silly thing it is you're trying to do here. Or perhaps the idea of analysing players' respective strengths and weaknesses is too much for you?

I have spoken tennis.

Do you forget that you tried to go off topic and bring football into this?

Oh dear Thrawny. Everything you're trying to claim moral high ground on.... you did first. Hey there's my GOTCHA moment. Wasn't as hard to do as you made out.

 

[boncer34]

Novak is a lot more than a defensive unit. 2017 when he was dealing with injuries, he was finished apparently. Yet here we are 3 years later talking about him chasing down Fed, you wanna bet against him ccoming good again over the next 3 year's? You're a braver man than me.

Look at how he's improved his serve over just one off-season.

 

[Blue1980]

Jury is still out on the absolute best, chances are Novak and Rafa will overtake Federer.

I haven’t seen any better than the current top 3 and that’s going back till about 1990

 

[Thrawn]

I have spoken tennis.

Do you forget that you tried to go off topic and bring football into this?

Oh dear Thrawny. Everything you're trying to claim moral high ground on.... you did first. Hey there's my GOTCHA moment. Wasn't as hard to do as you made out.

That's not going off-topic: that's demonstrating there are no guarantees in sport, much like there's no guarantees in Djokovic winning five more grand slam titles. It's a good example to use to drive home that point to you. The amount of laugh emojis you'd like to use doesn't change that fundamental fact.

Novak is a lot more than a defensive unit. 2017 when he was dealing with injuries, he was finished apparently. Yet here we are 3 years later talking about him chasing down Fed, you wanna bet against him ccoming good again over the next 3 year's? You're a braver man than me.

Look at how he's improved his serve over just one off-season.

Not saying that's all he is, but it is his strongest part of his game. He has the best return of serve in history. With age that'll naturally decline faster than some of his other offensive weapons... why do you think Federer plays all-out attack tennis against the best on the circuit? He can't hustle and bustle with authority anymore and grind as much; the same is going to happen with Djokovic. If you take that attribute away from him, then he's a lot easier to beat. That's why I don't think he's going to dominate for the next three years, that steady decline in his defence is going to hurt him more than Federer because he relies on it a lot more than Federer did.

His serve has been a work in progress for some time now, ever since his elbow surgery that forced him to change it. It wasn't just one off-season. Right now his serves are faster, but more double faults. We'll see how it holds up at the business end of slams.

 

[pepsi]

5 more grand slams nearing on 33 years old is a huge ask. Nadal surely finishes with the most slams considering his French open dominance and already having 19.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

Reasons why Federer is the third best of his generation.

1). Federer has an inferior head to head record against both Nadal and Djokovic. How can you be the GOAT when you're not even beating your biggest rivals more than 50% of the time.

• In Slams, Federer only has a better H2H against Nadal at Wimbledon.
• Federer does not have a better H2H against Djokovic in any of the Slams, but is equal to him at the French and US Open with Djokovic having a superior record at the Australian Open and Wimbledon which are regarded as Federer's best two slam tournaments.

2). Federer won the majority of his slams (12) between 2003-2007, which was considered a "weak era" of tennis and the peak of his career. Federer's biggest rivals at the time were:

• Rafael Nadal - Freak on Clay, but he was only 19-21 years of age at this stage.
• Andy Roddick - great serve, but all round game was average.
• Lleyton Hewitt - great trier but he already started declining from about 2006 onwards.
• Marat Safin - the most talented of the lot and arguably as talented as Federer but injuries and the lack of determination to win more slams was his biggest undoing.
• David Nalbandian - a natural talent who could turn it on when he wanted to, but too inconsistent at slams.
• Nikolay Davydenko - solid player, but always fell short deep into the competitions.

3). Federer has beaten Nadal and Djokovic in GS finals on 4 occasions. Rafa has beaten Federer and Djokovic on 10 occasions in GS finals. Djokovic has beaten Federer and Nadal on 8 occasions in GS finals.

4). Masters 1000 Tally:

• Nadal = 35
• Djokovic = 34
• Federer = 28

Djokovic is the only player to have won al tournaments in the Masters 1000 over his career. Federer and Nadal have not achieved this.

5). Federer hasn't been ranked #1 at the end of a calendar year since 2009/2010 when he was 28 years old. Nadal was 23 and Djokovic was 22.

6). Djokovic is the only player to hold all four slams at once since Rod Laver, though not in a calendar year (2015/2016).

• Wimbledon 2015
• US Open 2015
• Australian Open 2016
• French Open 2016

 

[Thrawn]

Reasons why Federer is the third best of his generation.

1). Federer has an inferior head to head record against both Nadal and Djokovic. How can you be the GOAT when you're not even beating your biggest rivals more than 50% of the time.

Because he's won more GS titles and has been at the top for longer than them. Dr Ivo has a superior H2H vs Djokovic, ooh no! At the end of the day, grand slams are the ultimate metric. Additionally, Nadal and Djokovic aren't the only players on the tour - you still need to beat everyone else. If you want a football analogy, team A could beat team B 70% of time time in a period of five years, but if team B actually has more flags than them during that time period, then that H2H record is irrelevant.

Not to mention that a lot of these matches have been very close and could have gone either way. There are a few prime examples, like '11 FO SF, '12 USO SF, '17 AO F, '19 Wimb F, etc.

2). Federer won the majority of his slams (12) between 2003-2007, which was considered a "weak era" of tennis and the peak of his career. Federer's biggest rivals at the time were

Considered by whom? We'll never know how many GS titles those other players would've won if Federer was out of the picture. Have you actually considered that they didn't win as much as they did because Federer stopped them?

Look at the men's competition in the last several years minus the big three. How do they stack up? Can't be claiming "weak era" when you've got players like Med, Theim, etc rounding out the top 5.

4). Masters 1000 Tally:

• Nadal = 35
• Djokovic = 34
• Federer = 28

How many Masters 1000 are on clay, as opposed to grass, Federer's favourite surface? You equal that, Federer would've won a buttload more. Easily.

5). Federer hasn't been ranked #1 at the end of a calendar year since 2009/2010 when he was 28 years old. Nadal was 23 and Djokovic was 22.

So what? He's still #1 weeks spent there. Nadal and Djokovic would rather be winning slams than chasing the end of year #1 rank. Ask Andy Murray what that did to him.

6). Djokovic is the only player to hold all four slams at once since Rod Laver, though not in a calendar year (2015/2016).

• Wimbledon 2015
• US Open 2015
• Australian Open 2016
• French Open 2016

That's pretty much the only one of your points that actually matter and adds to the discussion. But if you're going to use Master 1000 (which are not even equal), H2H, etc... then what about GS finals and SF made?

 

[PhatBoy]

I’m not going to go to in depth as there’s a lot of arguments you can make.

but the knock on Nadal that he has too many French opens is stupid.

firstly, he has 7 titles at the other slams.
Edberg won 6 majors for his career - all at Wimbledon, US, Aus. Becker has 6 for his career, all at the Aus or Wimbledon.
Agassi won 8 slams, 7 of them at Aus, US, Wimbledon.

These guys are undoubted legends and champions of the sport. If Nadal can match, and in some cases BEAT their tallies of slams AWAY from his preferred surface, pretty sure he’s done enough to say that he didn’t fluke them. He’s an amazing player on all surfaces. He just happens to be exceptionally amazing on one of them.

The point that sort of joins into that is this:
Nadal has 1 slam a year that suits his game down to the ground.
The other two, Federer in particular as his game is probably more fast-court specific than Djokovic, have 3 that suit their game naturally.

so maybe stop for a second and imagine that one of the other slams was also on clay or, I dunno, carpet or something else that’s slow, and have a think about how many slams Nadal would have won.

 

[PhatBoy]

You could say this about several close matches between any two of the trio, but that AO final a few years ago is really the only reason Federer still has any traction.

twice Rafa was up a break in the fifth set, if he stays on serve he’s already on 20 and Federer is 19, and a footnote to how many Nadal beats him by.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Grand Slam wins are the metric so Federer is the GOAT but by the time they're all done, Djokovic will probably have a better case.

The only asterisk will be that his main competition remained older guys rather than younger guys deep into his 30s.

We're accustomed to this cycle of a player emerging, breaking through, winning and maybe dominating for a period, holding the line and then being overtaken by a younger challenger before being pushed out. That's how it has worked until quite recently.

Even Federer, from reasonably early in his peak, had to contend with young turks coming up and challenging him. Nadal was nigh on invincible at the French Open from 19 onwards and converted that into a Wimbledon title aged 22. Djokovic, at 23/24, won 3 majors in 2011. Can anyone imagine that happening this year or next? The crop of under-25s just aren't of that calibre.

Where's the young Djokovic or the young Nadal challenging the old guard?

It means Djokovic, even at 32, must know he probably has Nadal covered except on clay and an edge on Federer physically. And anyone else, even guys 8 or 9 years younger, don't appear to be in his league. He could have another 7 or 8 majors by the time he's 35 unless one of the younger guys finds another gear fast.

So if Nadal and Federer end up with 20 majors and Djokovic has 25, there's no argument.

I say that as an ardent Federer fan, and I'd still say he's done the most to elevate the game and in doing so probably forced guys like Djokovic and Nadal to be more than just counterpunchers. But there's no substitute for winning majors.

 

[bullish23]

If Novak could win another FO then this debate would finally come to a close.

 

[Go Woods]

If Novak could win another FO then this debate would finally come to a close.

Fn hope not! Cmon RF!

 

[Redline]

Jury is still out on the absolute best, chances are Novak and Rafa will overtake Federer.

I haven’t seen any better than the current top 3 and that’s going back till about 1990

I'd agree with that, in the end I think the Grand Slam count probably decides and Novak will likely lead that.

I don't think Roger has another one in him. As he gets older the less he plays the more he will slide and struggle physically as we have seen this week.

I know many disagree but I think the Sampras era is dismissed to easily in these discussions.

 

[boncer34]

Said this time last year that Fed couldn't win another one unless Novak and Rafa weren't there.

I haven't seen anything to change that.

Fun fact, unless I'm mistaking, Fed has won 3 titles post 31, Novak is gunning for his 5th on Sunday. Those praying for his decline may be sorely disappointed.

 

[Tig017]

Djokovic is clearly a better player than Federer. Had to win all his slams against far better competition than Federer through the mid-2000s, and he'll still probably overtake him in the totals.