[Andrej]

Both with 5 titles and one final.
Djokovic record 72-10, 88% winning percentage.
Borg record 51-4, 93% winning percentage.
Both had redutable rivals, but Djokovic even more so.
Who has the greater legacy at Wimbledon.
Discuss.

 

[Djokerer]

To slim a difference ATM but Novak will end on top. IMO Novak will end with 7 Wimbledon titles

 

[swissmaestro92]

to me Borgs greatness is defined by how he won at the French AND Wimbledon in the same era 5+ times when both had even more divergent surfaces. If you define it simply to wimbledon I reckon they are equal, 5 in a row for Borg after all.

 

[sheep85]

93 percent is actually insane, tho i wonder if would've kept at it if he played longer.

 

[Unbiased]

Borg played in a mug era, so his achievements objectively shouldn't be counted.

 

[Andrej]

It's pretty insane that Borg won 5/9 Wimbledons he played in.
But going 3-0 in finals against Wimbledon's most succesful player is also insane. Plus another win against RAFA in the final.

It's really difficult to call imo.

 

[guitarra]

Borg would have probably get 1 or 2 extra Wimbledons had he continued to play. But maybe Djokovic will get some too who knows. Too close to call atm.

 

[doubletrollt]

They are close, as it was hard to win the channel slam three times, so it was hard to win Wimb five times after usually playing finals at AO/IW/Miami and then atrocious clay masters/RG vs Nadal & co. whereas e.g. Sampras would've almost skipped the whole clay season and Borg AO/IW/Miami i.e. AO/Philadelph/LasVegas in his time.

 

[Guest82]

Thought they had announced the draw for this year already and Djokovic had drawn Leo Borg in the first round before I opened this.

 

[Johnny Groove]

Borg, easily

Borg played in a mug era, so his achievements objectively shouldn't be counted.

On the contrary, Borg played in a very strong grass era while Nole has benefited from homogenization

Djoker had to deal only with Clay Dominant Nadal and 500 years old Federer. Nole even in these days struggled with big servers like Querrey, how will he do vs Roscoe Tanner or Vitas Gerulaitis all other things being equal?

 

[Unbiased]

Borg, easily



On the contrary, Borg played in a very strong grass era while Nole has benefited from homogenization

Djoker had to deal only with Clay Dominant Nadal and 500 years old Federer. Nole even in these days struggled with big servers like Querrey, how will he do vs Roscoe Tanner or Vitas Gerulaitis all other things being equal?

Based on what? On many different GS "champions" and amateur "grass specialists"? That era was maybe competitive, but competitive =/= strong. And the story about "homogenization" is overrated, and even if it isn't it still doesn't deny the fact that Djokovic had way better opponents than Borg, because he simply played in the modern, better, professional era. Peak Federer (despite his age), peak Nadal in 2011 who was better than "strong era" Federer, Murray who denied Djokovic 1 title, all those players are way better than anybody Borg ever faced. And the rest of the field is deeper, because it's simply pros vs 1-dimensional amateurs.

 

[ballbasher101]

Borg, easily



On the contrary, Borg played in a very strong grass era while Nole has benefited from homogenization

Djoker had to deal only with Clay Dominant Nadal and 500 years old Federer. Nole even in these days struggled with big servers like Querrey, how will he do vs Roscoe Tanner or Vitas Gerulaitis all other things being equal?

I think great players would almost always be great players in any era. Agassi won Wimbledon when it was still considered a servers paradise, and we know Djoker is a better player than Agassi. What Federer, Nadal and Djoker do is not normal. I think these guys would be fine in any era. They are talented yes, but the way they see and think about the game is even more impressive.

 

[hammett]

Based on what? On many different GS "champions" and amateur "grass specialists"? That era was maybe competitive, but competitive =/= strong. And the story about "homogenization" is overrated, and even if it isn't it still doesn't deny the fact that Djokovic had way better opponents than Borg, because he simply played in the modern, better, professional era. Peak Federer (despite his age), peak Nadal in 2011 who was better than "strong era" Federer, Murray who denied Djokovic 1 title, all those players are way better than anybody Borg ever faced. And the rest of the field is deeper, because it's simply pros vs 1-dimensional amateurs.

Djokovic would struggle as much as agassi in the 90's but no , it is overrated ....

 

[Unbiased]

Djokovic would struggle as much as agassi in the 90's but no , it is overrated ....

Are you seriously comparing Djokovic, the grass GOAT and the naturally most talented grass player ever with Mugassi, who was being dominated by Mugpras?

 

[hammett]

Are you seriously comparing Djokovic, the grass GOAT and the naturally most talented grass player ever with Mugassi, who was being dominated by Mugpras?

Would like to see Novak get 3 S&V bots in a row , to see what happens . In a grass that fast . Prime Agassi would thrive in this era , dont underestimate him , perhaps not as good as Novak but still

 

[masterclass]

Based on Novak's existing playing style and abilities, Borg and McEnroe alone would make mincemeat of Djokovic on the much faster low and erratic bouncing like 70's-80's grass, not to mention some others. Djokovic would struggle probably even worse than Lendl did from the back of the court. By the same token, McEnroe would have difficulty on the Wimbledon green clay of today. Borg on the other hand, would find it much easier to go from RG to Wimbledon than he did at the time.

What Borg did to successfully adapt his game to win 3 channel slams with only 2 weeks between the RG final and the start of Wimbledon, a 1/3rd shorter period than these modern miracles of medical science have to do today, and earn 5 consecutive Wimbledon championships was unbelievable. It is one of the greatest records of all time (GRAT).

I was there. There is no comparison.

Adamantly,
masterclass

 

[bilentsob]

The winning percentage favors Borg and he did seem almost unbeatable for a stretch on both grass and clay; but the thing about Borg is that people tend to use the fact that he played for a relatively short time to extrapolate that he would have won many more slams. If he continued playing and his mind wasn't committed, I don't know how he would have fared.

 

[ballbasher101]

Based on Novak's existing playing style and abilities, Borg and McEnroe alone would make mincemeat of Djokovic on the much faster low and erratic bouncing like 70's-80's grass, not to mention some others. Djokovic would struggle probably even worse than Lendl did from the back of the court. By the same token, McEnroe would have difficulty on the Wimbledon green clay of today. Borg on the other hand, would find it much easier to go from RG to Wimbledon than he did at the time.

What Borg did to successfully adapt his game to win 3 channel slams with only 2 weeks between the RG final and the start of Wimbledon, a 1/3rd shorter period than these modern miracles of medical science have to do today, and earn 5 consecutive Wimbledon championships was unbelievable. It is one of the greatest records of all time (GRAT).

I was there. There is no comparison.

Adamantly,
masterclass

Would Djoker, Federer and Nadal play the way they do 30 or 40 years ago? Of course not. They would play the way those guys did, and they would do it well. The big 3 have continually added to their games. Their desire to improve is scary. Many players want to add to their games, but they just don't have the talent to do so. The big 3 have talent that would have served them well in any era. The likes of Johnny Mac, Ivan, Borg etc would have found a way to play in this era, and they would have done well because they were also very talented.

 

[décentré]

We might be able to see this one day actually.

 

[AskTheQuestion]

Are you seriously comparing Djokovic, the grass GOAT and the naturally most talented grass player ever with Mugassi, who was being dominated by Mugpras?

If the whole world of stupidity could be summarized in one sentence, this would be it.