You said Borg is considered greater player than Lendl because he won more slams
. Sampras won more slams
Laver won not one but two CYGS. That is the holy grail of tennis and he did it twice.
Federer is considered greater player than Laver despite the fact that Federer never
Firstly, Federer's career is not
over yet. Secondly, can you find a tennis expert who is always
Novak is 5-4 in slam finals. If he was 7-2 in slam finals instead then he would definitely be on his way to double digits but a 5-4 in slams finals is not enough as I explained above. His career trajectory is different from that of Borg, Sampras, Federer and Nadal. At the peak of his career Novak is winning almost as many slam finals as he is losing. This year he lost more slam finals than he won. That's not how you end up hitting double digits at the slams. It wasn't until Borg, Sampras, Federer and Nadal had won 10+ slams that they started piling up slam final losses.
1. Your opinion is irrelevant because you are not
a tennis expert
2. Pete Sampras and Steve Flink said that Djokovic will probably reach double digits
3. Can you find tennis experts who said that Djokovic will not
reach double digits?