There really has never been any meaningful metric against Novak especially for the last year or so to be honest. Ofcourse there are some fanbases which will try make it look artistry matters more than owning every record there is.Is there any meaningful metric where Novak doesn't beat Federer and Nadal now? Slams, other tournies, match wins overall, head-to-head, consistency, clutch factor, injury record etc all seem to fall in Novak's favor. He even has 3 slams on his weakest surface now
Not as fun to watch or as likeable as Federer and Nadal, but you can't argue against these numbers.
Greatest mens tennis player of all time
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
Haven't contemplated that one before but my initial reaction is you are likely correct.
He's probably the freakiest out them though!
EDIT - I guess this is the same debate, aesthetics vs. ability to get the job done.
You can't blame that fanbase. They always held on to the Slams count matters paratmer until theh realized both Nadal and Djokovic are breathing down his neck. Then the goalposts started to shift.
I do feel like people in the federer camp relied more on his grand slam record in goat arguments until nadal and especially novak started to catch up.
Then this “federer will always remain the goat regardless of what happens on the court and grand slams because look at that beautiful ballet-like left arm balancing when he makes contact with the ball with that backhand” started to rear its ugly unfair head. Art!
Edit:
Exactly! It's reminiscent of children sticking their buttery fingers in their ears going "nananana, I don't care, he iz da best". "Here's some silly arguments to support my federer goat claim, none of it is measurable in concrete facts or stats, how are you going to argue with me about how I value art and the makes it look easy thing eh?".
I feel they have developed these psychological issues due to the fact that it almost looked like Federer's record would be unmatched at one point in time and he was already accepted as already the greatest of all time whose exploits in tennis would never be surpassed... this went on for quite a long period until Nadal and Novak started to seriously do damage and hack away at his achievements. Even I needed time to digest what was going to happen, let alone some more fanatic Federer fans who have simply not been able to cope with the reality that two players have surpassed their idol already.
Last edited:
Translation: some people won't acknowledge my nutty god as the greatest despite him grinding his way to the most success and I'm not happy about it.
So many stats in Djokovics favour, he really had the argument sewn up even before today.
to think, he’s been denied slams based on hitting balls accidentally at lineswomen and not having vaccines as well.
to think, he’s been denied slams based on hitting balls accidentally at lineswomen and not having vaccines as well.
I think for a while Djokovic’s target has been to get to 25 grand slam titles - while records and milestones in men’s and women’s tennis should be viewed separately, he clearly wants the accolade of winning more grand slam titles in singles than anyone else in history male or female.
If he does, he would have won more grand slam titles in his 30s than in his 20s which would be crazy stuff.
I remember thinking that his ‘inefficiency’ in terms of winning grand slam titles from 2012-2014, when he lost in 5 grand slam finals, his titanic 2013 RG SF which was pretty much the de-facto final, and his 2014 US Open SF against Nishikori which he was the overwhelming favourite to win, would ultimately prevent him from reaching the marks of Federer or Nadal. I think that his 2014 Wimbledon title win (after losing in 5 out of his last 6 grand slam finals) was crucial in terms of him going on to become one of the greatest players ever rather than merely great. And after his 2019 Wimbledon final win, snatching the title from Federer in those circumstances, I thought that he would finish as the outright leader in the slam race.
If he does, he would have won more grand slam titles in his 30s than in his 20s which would be crazy stuff.
I remember thinking that his ‘inefficiency’ in terms of winning grand slam titles from 2012-2014, when he lost in 5 grand slam finals, his titanic 2013 RG SF which was pretty much the de-facto final, and his 2014 US Open SF against Nishikori which he was the overwhelming favourite to win, would ultimately prevent him from reaching the marks of Federer or Nadal. I think that his 2014 Wimbledon title win (after losing in 5 out of his last 6 grand slam finals) was crucial in terms of him going on to become one of the greatest players ever rather than merely great. And after his 2019 Wimbledon final win, snatching the title from Federer in those circumstances, I thought that he would finish as the outright leader in the slam race.
Djokovic is the Tennis GOAT
If Manchester and London didn't exist then Liverpool would've won a lot more PL titles.
Good chance he wins those titles but those actions were in his control, so he can't have any complaints.
I've not really seen it said recently but it's a bit like the argument of what if Nadal didn't have certain injuries too. Great opportunities missed but nothing is a certainty and those experiences shape them into who they are (or were
) players today.I had good chuckle at that post, the irony of referring to people who prefer Federer as children, in the middle of a post complaining that some people don't agree that his favourite tennis player is the best, is incredible.
Indeed
I think you might be watching Grand Slams only if you think men tennis is declining. Don't take Djokovic's, or the Big 3, dominance as an indicator of "lowness". There are many, many exciting and capable players in men tennis that I lost count. Their average level is way higher than 10-15 years ago. Men tennis is flourishing.
I've been watching mens Tennis since the early 80s. Trust me, it isn't close to flourishing at the moment. You have one dominant player who is at the very tail end of his career, one emerging young star, and one or two levels below that, several decent, but nowhere near great top 10 players who will loiter with intent within the top 10 then fade away.
There's no big three (as there was a few years ago). There's no McEnroe v Borg v Connors or Lendl. There's no Agassi v Sampras v Edberg or Becker, nor a mid to late 2000s version Fed v Rafa. Until a new super star or two emerge to create a top rivalry (such as Alcaraz v someone who has yet to emerge), this will be viewed as a low period in men's Tennis. This is literally a rehash of the tail end of the Sampras/Agassi era where the likes of Safin, Kuerten, Hewitt, and Roddick were considered to be the best of what Tennis could offer until Federer emerged to win Wimbledon in 03 and Rafa emerged on clay a year or two later.
Pretty obvious who that's gonna be, isn't it? Rune has three Masters 1000 finals with one title and a 2-1 record vs Djokovic (GS and Masters only), and he turned 20 a month ago. There's a very good three-way rivalry emerging with Alcaraz, Rune and Sinner, who also all play very entertaining tennis.
I hope so. It will be interesting to see how Rune fares in slams over the next year or two. That will tell us a lot of in terms of his long term potential.
Putting Murray down when he had to contend with the 3 greatest mens players of all time at the same time is a vibe, he still won a fair amount of slams and other tournaments and had very creditable career.
Having said that if you ask who I would prefer to watch of the 3 it would be Federer but that doesn't necessarily make him the best, the one I wouldn't make an argument for is Nadal easily the weakest of the 3 imo.
Having said that if you ask who I would prefer to watch of the 3 it would be Federer but that doesn't necessarily make him the best, the one I wouldn't make an argument for is Nadal easily the weakest of the 3 imo.
How come you think Nadal is easily the weakest of the 3?
Because of the 'reliance of clay dominance'?
Djokovic has a really good shot to win the Grand Slam in a calendar year. Have to imagine he'll stroll through Wimbledon.
Is Nadal expected to return for the US open?
Is Nadal expected to return for the US open?
Nadal will only return next year for his farewell tour. Don't expect to see him play before Monte Carlo. Novak is a bit underwhelming at the USO but given the lack of any real competition, he should still win it. Unless another pandemic hits and he's banned.
I wouldn't read too much into players beating Novak (or even Rafa and Federer earlier) in Masters and other tournaments. These guy, especially in their 30s, aren't really arsed about the Masters and only really show up in the Slams where none of these kids can touch them. Rune beat Novak and Rome and yet he got smashed by a Ruud who was easily beaten by Novak today.
Huge admiration for Djokovic. I never thought anyone would get close to Federer or Nadal, and certainly not a scrawny-looking Serbian vegan!
His relentless pursuit of tennis perfection is wonderful to behold. Incredible all-round game and an outstanding champion.
Will be fascinating to see how his game evolves in his twilight years in the face of new competition. Given how meticulous he is in looking after his body, I suspect he’ll have a few more strong years in him yet.
His relentless pursuit of tennis perfection is wonderful to behold. Incredible all-round game and an outstanding champion.
Will be fascinating to see how his game evolves in his twilight years in the face of new competition. Given how meticulous he is in looking after his body, I suspect he’ll have a few more strong years in him yet.
Novax has displayed more of the twat factor than Roger and Rafa combined. He's also the best match competitor I've seen. Maybe these two aspects of his personality reinforce one another.
10 years ago I never thought Djokovic would one day hold the GS record. Incredible achievement.
Having said that, Federer will always be the greatest for me.
Having said that, Federer will always be the greatest for me.
The US Open is the grand slam that Djokovic has underachieved at during his career. With his hard court prowess, he should have won the title there more than 3 times, and shouldn’t have fewer titles there than Nadal.
If he can win one more title there before he retires, that would help to address that - it would also mean that he would have won each slam at least twice during his 30s which would be something. He has been bullet proof in finals and semi-finals in Melbourne (even when Nadal pushed him to a titanic 5 set battle in the 2012 final, he was clearly the better player by every metric and should have wrapped it up in 4 sets - a mirror image of their 2013 RG semi-final). However he has lost twice as many finals as he has won in New York, plus had the disqualification in 2020, and the SF defeat against Nishikori in 2014 when he was the overwhelming favourite.
If he can win one more title there before he retires, that would help to address that - it would also mean that he would have won each slam at least twice during his 30s which would be something. He has been bullet proof in finals and semi-finals in Melbourne (even when Nadal pushed him to a titanic 5 set battle in the 2012 final, he was clearly the better player by every metric and should have wrapped it up in 4 sets - a mirror image of their 2013 RG semi-final). However he has lost twice as many finals as he has won in New York, plus had the disqualification in 2020, and the SF defeat against Nishikori in 2014 when he was the overwhelming favourite.
Last edited:
This is extremely unlikely given he'd have been out for almost a year when he returns and his age. Besides, he's pretty much confirmed next year is likely to be his final one and he wants to be able to say goodbye at all the tournaments. I think he'll be done post the Olympics.
No chance. He had a couple of surgeries last week and said if all goes well, recovery should be 5 months. Him playing in Australia might be touch and go. Think if recovery is fine we'll see him from the clay court swing up until the Olympics or US Open and that will be him done (unless he feels 100% fit with more in the tank).
Yeah pretty much, the other 2 are more all rounders I feel, but that's just me
It's a valid argument. As many as 64% of Nadal's slams are Roland Garros alone. When it comes to Federer and Wimbledon the number is just 40%. The list of slams minus their favored tournament looks like this:
13 - Novak
12 - Federer
8 - Nadal
Last edited:
His dedication to his fitness is another level too. You hear about LeBron sleeping in hyperbaric chambers between playoff games or Ronaldo doing whatever he does to have kept himself at an athletic peak until a year ago and Novak doesn't nearly get the credit he deserves for being as fit and durable as he has been.
Personally I don't think it matters that much, maybe if he'd only won one of the others and the gap was huge.
You could spin it another way too and even argue his achievement of winning 14 RG titles (or 14 at any single slam) could be a record that stands for longer than the Grand Slam record.
Watching Novak win is like watching City win. I just feel like 'okay *shrugs shoulders*' in comparison to others where I actually feel a little something.
Looks at age of current “goats”. Yep, tennis is real strong place right now.
Djokovic also now has more seasons in which he has won multiple grand slam titles than Federer or Nadal.
Djokovic - 7 (2011, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2021 and 2023)
Federer - 6 (2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 and 2017)
Nadal - 6 (2008, 2010, 2013, 2017, 2019 and 2022)
He's had 2 seasons in which he won multiple grand slam titles (and multiple masters series events), but didn't finish as the year end no. 1, which was unlucky, although given that he also has that record it's not a big deal.
I did think at the time that his ban from entering the US and playing in Indian Wells and Miami in March / April, would benefit him and his grand slam title prospects. He clearly wanted to play at those events, and Indian Wells in-particular is a real favourite for many players on both the men's and women's side. But ultimately at this stage of his career when he's in his mid 30s and chasing slam titles, there was no real benefit for him to play at those tournaments which 'lead to nothing'. He had played a lot of matches near the end of 2022 before fighting incredibly hard to win the title at Adelaide at the start of this year, so the break clearly did him good.
As long as he gets a moderate amount of matches under his belt in-between slams, that's more than good enough.
Djokovic - 7 (2011, 2015, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2021 and 2023)
Federer - 6 (2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 and 2017)
Nadal - 6 (2008, 2010, 2013, 2017, 2019 and 2022)
He's had 2 seasons in which he won multiple grand slam titles (and multiple masters series events), but didn't finish as the year end no. 1, which was unlucky, although given that he also has that record it's not a big deal.
I did think at the time that his ban from entering the US and playing in Indian Wells and Miami in March / April, would benefit him and his grand slam title prospects. He clearly wanted to play at those events, and Indian Wells in-particular is a real favourite for many players on both the men's and women's side. But ultimately at this stage of his career when he's in his mid 30s and chasing slam titles, there was no real benefit for him to play at those tournaments which 'lead to nothing'. He had played a lot of matches near the end of 2022 before fighting incredibly hard to win the title at Adelaide at the start of this year, so the break clearly did him good.
As long as he gets a moderate amount of matches under his belt in-between slams, that's more than good enough.
Does not matter who you consider the goat, what Nadal and Djoko have done is pretty incredible. But the standard that was set by Federer was also incredible.
Pretty clear Djokovic is the goat. Most GS, most diverse distributions of GS (won all at least 3 times), better H2H against both Nadal and Federer, only player to win all 9 Masters 1000.
He's a nationalistic, antivax conspiracy nut who often is a bellend on the court but that doesn't matter when judging his achievements as an athlete.
He's a nationalistic, antivax conspiracy nut who often is a bellend on the court but that doesn't matter when judging his achievements as an athlete.
There's no way to make a case based on results and stats for anyone but Djokovic, but he leaves me cold somehow, in my heart I'll always prefer the beauty of Feds game. it just seemed more creative and all rounded.
I always say it like this:
- Novak is the best tennis player of all time.
- Federer is the greatest ever tennis player.
A distinct difference.
- Novak is the best tennis player of all time.
- Federer is the greatest ever tennis player.
A distinct difference.
That AO final was probably the best match I've ever seen tbh. The fact they couldn't stand at the end was just mental.