Greatest mens tennis player of all time

KirkDuyt said:
Yeah definitely. That's also what sets him, Nadal and Djokovic apart from the rest of the field. Some of these younger guys can match their shots on a good day, but simply lack the consistency and mentality to do it when it matters most. Unlike the kids, they almost never break down. Djokovic is most notable for this since his rise to the absolute top. He wasn't overly spectacular on Sunday, but his level simply doesn't drop when i matters most.

that's why it's so grating to watch a guy like Kyrgios. He's talented sure, but he's just such a weak willed fecking moron that it's a shame the gods saw fit to bless him with talent.
Click to expand...

Maybe against the current versions of them. But prime Fed, Nadal and Djokovic are a different ball game. Some of the shots/rallies they pulled off were insane - and that's what it took to beat the other guy.

Wimbledon 08, AO 09, US Open 2011 finals had some of the most insane shot making I've ever seen.
 
KirkDuyt said:
Yeah definitely. That's also what sets him, Nadal and Djokovic apart from the rest of the field. Some of these younger guys can match their shots on a good day, but simply lack the consistency and mentality to do it when it matters most. Unlike the kids, they almost never break down. Djokovic is most notable for this since his rise to the absolute top. He wasn't overly spectacular on Sunday, but his level simply doesn't drop when i matters most.

that's why it's so grating to watch a guy like Kyrgios. He's talented sure, but he's just such a weak willed fecking moron that it's a shame the gods saw fit to bless him with talent. And I don't know why I suddenly sound like dialogue from Spartacus in that last sentence.
Click to expand...

His mental strength is definitely the greatest of the 3. Nadal used to be really strong in that regard but he's been pretty vulnerable in recent years.

Career matches lost having matchpoints:

Federer 22 out of 1487: 1,48%
Nadal 5 out if 1152: 0,43%
Djokovic 3 out of 1053: 0,28%
Click to expand...
Crazy numbers here as well for Novak. The best closer there is.
 
Skills said:
Maybe against the current versions of them. But prime Fed, Nadal and Djokovic are a different ball game. Some of the shots/rallies they pulled off were insane - and that's what it took to beat the other guy.

Wimbledon 08, AO 09, US Open 2011 finals had some of the most insane shot making I've ever seen.
Click to expand...
Yeah, in their peaks for sure, but even now, when I'm sure the likes of Thiem, Zverev, Tsitsipas and some of the other youngsters can match them physically. They still cannot consistently beat any of them. Federer is fecking 38 and still beats most of the top 15 without breaking a sweat.

@wr8_utd

There was a time that Nadal would just relentlesly pummel everyone in to submission and then, when somehow being broken turning it up even further. He can really make you feel sorry for his opponent. So unrelenting. He's waned a bit, but I think that's also due to the physicality of his game. He puts so much in to his game.
 
KirkDuyt said:
Yeah, in their peaks for sure, but even now, when I'm sure the likes of Thiem, Zverev, Tsitsipas and some of the other youngsters can match them physically. They still cannot consistently beat any of them. Federer is fecking 38 and still beats most of the top 15 without breaking a sweat.

@wr8_utd

There was a time that Nadal would just relentlesly pummel everyone in to submission and then, when somehow being broken turning it up even further. He can really make you feel sorry for his opponent. So unrelenting. He's waned a bit, but I think that's also due to the physicality of his game. He puts so much in to his game.
Click to expand...
Nadal's physical decline is very obvious but I think a major decline in mental strength has also happened. He himself keeps talking about the stress and nerves he's felt in recent years and you kind of see this nowadays. He's started to get a lot more tight when serving out sets and matches, he's gotten tighter on crucial points as well irrespective of how well he's played all match. He's still remarkably strong but there is an obvious decline in how clutch he is now.
 
Depends on what you mean by "greatest". Need to define that term first.

Liking a particular style is just a matter of personal preference, does not really make someone the greatest.
 
DeGea said:
Depends on what you mean by "greatest". Need to define that term first.

Liking a particular style is just a matter of personal preference, does not really make someone the greatest.
Click to expand...
For me it's basically saying that based on peak ability, whoever you pick should be able to beat any other candidate based on their peak ability. Or at least have the highest probability of doing so.
 
Samid said:
Will Federer still be considered goat if he ends up behind the other two on slams? Think the order will be Djoko, Rafa and Federer.
Click to expand...
Rafa's distribution of grand slams is really bad. He can be the GOAT in clay, but the overall GOAT, hell no. He has what, 5 or 6 GS outside of clay, half of what Federer has outside of grass.

If Djoker reaches Fed's number of GS, it is close to impossible making an argument against him. Better h2h against both Federer and Nadal, more GS, more masters, more weeks as No. 1, more end-years as No. 1, superb distribution of slams, you name it. Federer will always have the aesthetics, but Djokovic will be considered better.

I wouldn't be surprised if some bizarre conclusion is reached, with Roger being considered the greatest and Djokovic as the best. A bit like in box where Ali is considered the greatest, but Sugar Ray Robinson is mentioned as the best. Like Ali, Federer has had a much higher influence in the sport, but if Djoker reaches him in GS, he would be universally mentioned as the best player. Heck, even now there is an argument that he is the best player ever.

Nadal is way of those two IMO. And that won't change unless he wins another 2-3 GS not called French Open.
 
Moby said:
For me it's basically saying that based on peak ability, whoever you pick should be able to beat any other candidate based on their peak ability. Or at least have the highest probability of doing so.
Click to expand...

Nadal at Roland Garros anywhere close to his peak - annihilates any tennis player in history.
 
Revan said:
Nadal is way of those two IMO. And that won't change unless he wins another 2-3 GS not called French Open.
Click to expand...
I largely agree but even one more Australian Open would be massive.

It's certainly not beyond the realms of possibility as he's been going deep in all of them in the past couple years.

Equally the same if Djokovic or Federer win the French again, as none of them have won each slams more than once.
 
Revan said:
Heck, even now there is an argument that he is the best player ever.
Click to expand...
If we are looking at the technical and mental ability, Djokovic is definitely the best tennis player out of the big 3, which likely makes him the best tennis player of all time.
 
Skills said:
Nadal at Roland Garros anywhere close to his peak - annihilates any tennis player in history.
Click to expand...
Aye, the different surfaces add a new complexity for us to make a call. Maybe we can say if there were 3 matches - 1 each on clay, grass and hard court, who would have the greatest probability of beating any opponent, both at their peaks, in that 3 match series?
 
Nadal is far more likely to beat the other 2 on grass or hardcourt than the other 2 are to beat him on clay if all 3 are at peak level. Novak will clearly end up as the GOAT for me especially if he ends up with the most slams.
 
If Nadal wins 1 more at AO, he will be first player in open era to win at least 2 titles at each slam. Same goes for Djokovic and Federer with RG. Nadal's slam count is skewed but if he can get one AO and probably one more at Wimbledon or USO, then even with still a skewed distribution, he will be right back in GOAT argument, having proved himself on all surfaces multiple times. His slam count on hard court is less than Federer and Nadal but still has 3-1 h2h on hard court slams vs Federer and 2-3 vs Djokovic.

What Nadal has done in h2h is, he has totally dominated both Federer and Djokovic on clay (6-0 and 6-1 respectively at RG) but on slams of other surfaces, he hasn't let them dominate him the same way. He will always have that 2008 win in Wimbledon final vs Grass GOAT, in his prime. Same with Djokovic on hard court. Whereas in his prime, Federer and Djokovic didn't stand a chance vs him at RG. Still just h2h won't matter, hence 2-3 non RG slams needed, then above h2h will become a plus point for him.
 
KirkDuyt said:
Most gutting thing is that Federer was playing better tennis for most of it, but somehow just over did it in the three breakers.

Bit of heartbreak makes the sport fun though I guess.
Click to expand...
Yeah agreed. I think he should be proud of his performance rather than distraught. Yes a little here and there it was his match and the greatest win of his career. But his level was absolutely superb for the most part. And like I said, he himself came back from the dead in that 5th set.
 
Moby said:
For me it's basically saying that based on peak ability, whoever you pick should be able to beat any other candidate based on their peak ability. Or at least have the highest probability of doing so.
Click to expand...

How do you measure peak ability? That is very subjective. When?
 
Nadal and Djoko are like machines (like CR7)but Federer is like Ronnie O Sullivan (like Zidane). Is CR7 as good as Zidane? Is he f. ck!!!!!
 
For me it’s a toss up between Federer or Djokovic. I think Djokovic will become the most successful tennis player of all time, but not sure that will be enough to be the undisputed GOAT.

Federer might not finish his career having the most grand slams or best head to heads (though he is still very successful), but I feel his legacy is far greater. Federer isn’t just a world class tennis player, he, like many of the other outstanding sportsmen across many fields can turn the game into a work of art with the beauty and skill of their game, the other two might be brilliant players but neither quite capture the imagination like Roger can. He is almost worshipped like a god at times in the sport and this can grate a little bit on other fans as it is almost quite radical fanaticism.

Nadal is awesome to and is the greatest clay court player of all time undisputedly. He isn’t just the most successful here but he has totally blown the other two out of the water.

Ultimately, I don’t think there will be a definitive GOAT as they all have their merits. But I will say is that where ‘successful’ could be considered factual, ‘great’ is merely opinion and there will probably be more opinions in Rogers favour due to is far greater following.
 
RedFish said:
Nadal and Djoko are like machines (like CR7)but Federer is like Ronnie O Sullivan (like Zidane). Is CR7 as good as Zidane? Is he f. ck!!!!!
Click to expand...
That's a rubbish opinion. While Nadal is not as aggressive as Fed and usually has a patient build up for a point, some of the winners he has hit are absolutely scintillating.



That's the most aesthetically pleasing shot in the sport for me.
 
Moby said:
That's a rubbish opinion. While Nadal is not as aggressive as Fed and usually has a patient build up for a point, some of the winners he has hit are absolutely scintillating.



That's the most aesthetically pleasing shot in the sport for me.
Click to expand...


Don't like.;)
 
siw2007 said:
For me it’s a toss up between Federer or Djokovic. I think Djokovic will become the most successful tennis player of all time, but not sure that will be enough to be the undisputed GOAT.

Federer might not finish his career having the most grand slams or best head to heads (though he is still very successful), but I feel his legacy is far greater. Federer isn’t just a world class tennis player, he, like many of the other outstanding sportsmen across many fields can turn the game into a work of art with the beauty and skill of their game, the other two might be brilliant players but neither quite capture the imagination like Roger can. He is almost worshipped like a god at times in the sport and this can grate a little bit on other fans as it is almost quite radical fanaticism.

Nadal is awesome to and is the greatest clay court player of all time undisputedly. He isn’t just the most successful here but he has totally blown the other two out of the water.

Ultimately, I don’t think there will be a definitive GOAT as they all have their merits. But I will say is that where ‘successful’ could be considered factual, ‘great’ is merely opinion and there will probably be more opinions in Rogers favour due to is far greater following.
Click to expand...


l'll remember them as equals most likely. They're just incredible sportsman and the fact Murray was standing toe to toe with them for as long as he did is truly magnificent.
 
RedFish said:
l'll remember them as equals most likely. They're just incredible sportsman and the fact Murray was standing toe to toe with them for as long as he did is truly magnificent.
Click to expand...

Such a shame that Murray has had such bad injuries. If instead of getting injured he continued to progress then he could have been a real force when it comes to grand slams.
 
siw2007 said:
Such a shame that Murray has had such bad injuries. If instead of getting injured he continued to progress then he could have been a real force when it comes to grand slams.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Just imagine if he'd managed to win a couple if those 4/5 finals he'd lost.

I'll always remember when an American intellectual/ reporter on newsnight saying Murray was an elite tennis player. 'hes git game she said. She was right. I think at the tine he'd won multiple ATP masters, beating THE three GOAT contenders plenty of times in the process. His standard at the time was absolutely the equal of the famous three, but alas he could not maintain it. Therein lies the greatness of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Each fading away at one point and then coming back as if they never went away. Remarkable is not even close to describing their ongoing achievements.

Wawrinka is the other one that comes to mind who arguable produced the most unplayable tennis of the lot during a remarkable period.

Lucky that we can bear witness to it all :)
 
RedFish said:
l'll remember them as equals most likely. They're just incredible sportsman and the fact Murray was standing toe to toe with them for as long as he did is truly magnificent.
Click to expand...

This. In another era Murray ends ups with 8-10 slams and is revered as an all time great, at the level of someone like Agassi. Wonderful player.

Having said that you can't discount how the presence of the big 3 pushed them all on to greater heights. Without Nadal and Djokovic to push him maybe Federer becomes bored and complacent and is already retired. Without Federer to set the standard perhaps Rafa and Nole plateau at a lower level.

I think this is why you can't make number of slams won the only element in this argument. Unfair on the previous greats who held that mark and set the target for the next era of players. Each increase changes the perception of what is possible, it is why when you talk about greatest sprinters ever it can't only be on times.
 
Bobski said:
This. In another era Murray ends ups with 8-10 slams and is revered as an all time great, at the level of someone like Agassi. Wonderful player.

Having said that you can't discount how the presence of the big 3 pushed them all on to greater heights. Without Nadal and Djokovic to push him maybe Federer becomes bored and complacent and is already retired. Without Federer to set the standard perhaps Rafa and Nole plateau at a lower level.
Click to expand...
.
Well said, and entirely accurate. They define each others greatness. Those epic finals and matches, pushing the limits of each other to unfathomable levels. Breathtaking and mindboggling at the same time.
 
siw2007 said:
For me it’s a toss up between Federer or Djokovic. I think Djokovic will become the most successful tennis player of all time, but not sure that will be enough to be the undisputed GOAT.

Federer might not finish his career having the most grand slams or best head to heads (though he is still very successful), but I feel his legacy is far greater. Federer isn’t just a world class tennis player, he, like many of the other outstanding sportsmen across many fields can turn the game into a work of art with the beauty and skill of their game, the other two might be brilliant players but neither quite capture the imagination like Roger can. He is almost worshipped like a god at times in the sport and this can grate a little bit on other fans as it is almost quite radical fanaticism.

Nadal is awesome to and is the greatest clay court player of all time undisputedly. He isn’t just the most successful here but he has totally blown the other two out of the water.

Ultimately, I don’t think there will be a definitive GOAT as they all have their merits. But I will say is that where ‘successful’ could be considered factual, ‘great’ is merely opinion and there will probably be more opinions in Rogers favour due to is far greater following.
Click to expand...

This. Spot on. "Successful" is objective i.e. number of grand slams. But "greatest" is just an opinion.
 
whichever of the big 3 that ends up with the most slams will be seen as the greatest by most I think

people use slams as the yard-stick already but to win the most in an era with two other all time greats around would be difficult to challenge
 
I said it after RG and Wimbledon that Rafa needs 2-3 more titles off clay to get to the GOAT tag. Today was one good step towards that tally.
He's now won more US Opens than arguably the greatest hard court player around in Djokovic.
He's won 4 US Open titles this decade.
Only the 5th man in the Open Era to win the USO 4 or more times.
First man in the Open Era to win 5 Slams after 30.
Rafael Nadal's 19 equal the combined total of Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe & Jim Courier.
Nadal, off clay, now has the same number of slam titles as McEnroe and Wilander won in their entire career.
 
wr8_utd said:
I said it after RG and Wimbledon that Rafa needs 2-3 more titles off clay to get to the GOAT tag. Today was one good step towards that tally.
He's now won more US Opens than arguably the greatest hard court player around in Djokovic.
He's won 4 US Open titles this decade.
Only the 5th man in the Open Era to win the USO 4 or more times.
First man in the Open Era to win 5 Slams after 30.
Rafael Nadal's 19 equal the combined total of Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe & Jim Courier.
Nadal, off clay, now has the same number of slam titles as McEnroe and Wilander won in their entire career.
Click to expand...

Does he have the most slams ?
 
wr8_utd said:
Like I said,

Even if he equals or overtakes Federer by the end of RG, he's still going to need a couple more hardcourt/grass Slams to be GOAT.
Click to expand...

If he equals Federer there will be a good case for him given the head to heads.
 
Raoul said:
If he equals Federer there will be a good case for him given the head to heads.
Click to expand...
I'd love to think so but I do think he needs just the 1-2 more non clay Slams to cement the spot. Otherwise the uneven distribution will continue to be held against him.
 
wr8_utd said:
I'd love to think so but I do think he needs just the 1-2 more non clay Slams to cement the spot. Otherwise the uneven distribution will continue to be held against him.
Click to expand...
Why? Since when did winning on clay count for less?

If he equals or surpasses Federer it doesn't matter on which ground he's won the most imo. He'll be regarded as the goat.

Altough I hope they both retire with the same amount of slams.
 
If Djokovic isn’t fit for Aussie then I don’t see anyone stopping Nadal at the moment. Remains to be seen what direction Medvedev is going to go. Will he step it up even more which he has to beat these guy or just fade away. Thiem on clay is always a threat for Rafa. He’s beaten Djokovic twice in Paris which is no mean feat but came up short vs Rafa. A tad unlucky with the scheduling this year.

On grass though there’s literally nobody outside the big three. I think Fed can serve his way into another final if he healthy.

There’s more slams to be won for these guys. Thiem/Medvedev need to step it up even further.
 
Vato said:
Why? Since when did winning on clay count for less?

If he equals or surpasses Federer it doesn't matter on which ground he's won the most imo. He'll be regarded as the goat.

Altough I hope they both retire with the same amount of slams.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The debate also works in his favour as Nadal has won multiple slams on different surfaces. Federer and Djokovic haven’t won the French multiple times. Djokovic got schooled by Wawrinka in a final.
 
Also after watching the final, I take my words back about Sampras struggling in this era. Serve and Volley is back.
 
Vato said:
Why? Since when did winning on clay count for less?

If he equals or surpasses Federer it doesn't matter on which ground he's won the most imo. He'll be regarded as the goat.

Altough I hope they both retire with the same amount of slams.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately it's the perception and narrative that will always be held Rafa that he's won all his Slams on one surface. I believe H2H, Masters titles, weeks at #1 all play a big role and I've never been follower of the idea that just the number of Slams makes you GOAT. He's got a very good case right now but if he did win another AO (becoming the first ever to hold all 4 Slams twice) and maybe one more, it would be very very hard to make a case against him.

Bojan11 said:
Exactly. The debate also works in his favour as Nadal has won multiple slams on different surfaces. Federer and Djokovic haven’t won the French multiple times. Djokovic got schooled by Wawrinka in a final.
Click to expand...

All 3 of them have the one Slam where they've won their maximum number of titles but it's always Rafa that it's held against because of just how good he has been there.
 
Bojan11 said:
If Djokovic isn’t fit for Aussie then I don’t see anyone stopping Nadal at the moment. Remains to be seen what direction Medvedev is going to go. Will he step it up even more which he has to beat these guy or just fade away. Thiem on clay is always a threat for Rafa. He’s beaten Djokovic twice in Paris which is no mean feat but came up short vs Rafa. A tad unlucky with the scheduling this year.

On grass though there’s literally nobody outside the big three. I think Fed can serve his way into another final if he healthy.

There’s more slams to be won for these guys. Thiem/Medvedev need to step it up even further.
Click to expand...
He's got absolutely rotten luck at the AO. Injuries, retirements, heartbreaking losses.
I expect Novak to be back and win AO yet again.
Bojan11 said:
Also after watching the final, I take my words back about Sampras struggling in this era. Serve and Volley is back.
Click to expand...
The pair of them had 101 points won at the net! Both of them just resorted to rushing to the net when they really needed to win big points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.