Mens Tennis Forums banner
41 - 60 of 90 Posts
Let me preface this by saying that Djokovic has been my least favorite of the Big Three, although not by much. However, when he turned into a whiney-ass (I’m a victim! It’s a witch-hunt! My heart was pure!) over criticism of the Adria fiasco, I can’t stand him.

That said, I believe that he will one day be the greatest of his generation, if not the GOAT. And that’s on two levels. The first is overall career accomplishments. Assuming both he and Nadal surpass Fed’s slam number, I have to give the nod to Novak due to Nadal’s top-heavy French record.

The second is GOAT for highest level of play. For a couple of stretches, he was virtually unbeatable and that’s when Murray was still healthy, so the competition was top-notch. I believe if there was a round robin among the Big There (and throw in Murray, Borg or Sampras as the fourth) and all were playing at their peak, and it was played on all three surfaces, Djokovic would be the clear winner.

Much as I hate to, I have to give credit where it’s due.
 
Well, it's "The Guardian"... In UK... So, let's not get too excited :)

But, let's summarize objectively -
1. Rafa and Novak DOMINATE Federer in H2H. Federer simply isn't a match for these 2. They all share the same era.
I stopped there.

For the zillionth time, just because Federer is still playing and part of the elite doesn't mean he is a member of the same era. It's 2020, Federer's era was many years ago. He is a veteran of the game (as are Nadal and Djokovic these days) and his longevity clearly leads to false comparisons and people forgetting his age and the year he became a pro.

In tennis and almost any other (physical) sport, it is the most normal thing younger players 'dominate' the older players. On MTF, you deserve more points for that.
 
The second is GOAT for highest level of play. For a couple of stretches, he was virtually unbeatable and that’s when Murray was still healthy, so the competition was top-notch. I believe if there was a round robin among the Big There (and throw in Murray, Borg or Sampras as the fourth) and all were playing at their peak, and it was played on all three surfaces, Djokovic would be the clear winner.
Nobody post-1988 has won a Slam, so yes, there was tough competition in Djokovic's generation, but quite poor subsequently. And these are the players who should be depriving post-30 Djokovic the Slams, like happened in previous Gens. 24yo Djokovic would give 33yo Djokovic a consistent beating, so he has got lucky.
 
Nobody post-1988 has won a Slam, so yes, there was tough competition in Djokovic's generation, but quite poor subsequently. And these are the players who should be depriving post-30 Djokovic the Slams, like happened in previous Gens. 24yo Djokovic would give 33yo Djokovic a consistent beating, so he has got lucky.
Is this even English?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chicot
I stopped there.

For the zillionth time, just because Federer is still playing and part of the elite doesn't mean he is a member of the same era. It's 2020, Federer's era was many years ago. He is a veteran of the game (as are Nadal and Djokovic these days) and his longevity clearly leads to false comparisons and people forgetting his age and the year he became a pro.

In tennis and almost any other (physical) sport, it is the most normal thing younger players 'dominate' the older players. On MTF, you deserve more points for that.
Well, Federer Cult followers will need to face and answer their ultimate dilemma:
Is Roger a member of the "Baghdatis and Phillipouslis era" - and that's who he should be compared to, OR he's a member of the "Big 2 era" (Rafa and Novak) and that's his measure?
Roger started winning in 2003.
Rafa started beating him in 2006, Novak in 2008...
Roger had some 4-5 years (2003-2007) to amass 12 GSs against Baghdattis and Phillipousis, and couple against pre-pubescent Rafa and Novak, but then - in 2008 (when Novak and Rafa became "legal" and non-PG-13) it was over for Roger.
At that time - he was 26. In his prime (Rafa and Novak barely out of highschool at 19-20). Still couldn't play against the two teenagers - Rafa and Novak.
Later on - Fed won few more titles, here and there, when Rafa and Novak were injured or not playing.
And that's the story.
Roger amassed 12 of his 20 GSs against Baghdatis and Phillipousis in the short 4-5 years period.
And then in the next 12 years (6+ years of his "prime"), just by being there and almost exclusively when lucky that Rafa and Novak were injured at times, got a few more.


So... is 4-5 years "Roger's era"?
Or... is 12 years "Roger's era"?
I don't care really - but Roger's fans need to decide. Either way - Roggie is 2nd league in comparison to Rafa and Novak.

P.S. - I'd argue that Roger played his best tennis during the 2015-2018 period. Just because of his specific/special talent and style of play. But even then, when he was the "best Roger ever" he needed to wait for oppty when Rafa and Novak were either injured or for some reason, absent.
 
I stopped there.

For the zillionth time, just because Federer is still playing and part of the elite doesn't mean he is a member of the same era. It's 2020, Federer's era was many years ago. He is a veteran of the game (as are Nadal and Djokovic these days) and his longevity clearly leads to false comparisons and people forgetting his age and the year he became a pro.

In tennis and almost any other (physical) sport, it is the most normal thing younger players 'dominate' the older players. On MTF, you deserve more points for that.
Wow, how many times does Federer need to play Nadal and Djokovic to be in the same era as them? Do their "eras" have to completely sync and overlap?

Of course they're in the same era - Federer and Sampras weren't in the same era, Sampras and Lendl weren't in the same era, but you are borderline delusional if you think Federer/Nadal/Djokovic aren't in the same era
 
Let's not forget that Fed is the grandpa since 2007, so his losses since then don't count.
jaja
My favourite tale [emoji23][emoji108]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zverevdadiii
A primer in some basic concepts of humanity for fans of Novak Djokovic

a) Aging is a real phenomenon
b) Age affects athletic performance
c) Disease is real
d) The properties of water cannot be changed by the power of thought alone
 
Federer dominated his era like no other player in tennis history, clocking up 237 consecutive weeks at number one.

None of his rivals achieved anything similar.

Of course one could argue that Nadal and Djokovic were too young and inexperienced to challenge that record. But to forward that argument, one would have to accept that age affects performance. And because so many people in this thread are denying the effects of age, such an argument is not valid.

Thus, Federer is the greatest, simple and plain.
 
Federer dominated his era like no other player in tennis history, clocking up 237 consecutive weeks at number one.

None of his rivals achieved anything similar.

Of course one could argue that Nadal and Djokovic were too young and inexperienced to challenge that record. But to forward that argument, one would have to accept that age affects performance. And because so many people in this thread are denying the effects of age, such an argument is not valid.

Thus, Federer is the greatest, simple and plain.
LoL
 
1/2- Federer/Djokovic, likely to be Novak in a short time
3- Nadal
4- Sampras
5- Borg
6- Connors
7- Lendl
8- Agassi
9- McEnroe
10- Becker
11- Edberg
12- Wilander
13- Murray
14- Vilas
15- Newcombe
16- Courier
 
41 - 60 of 90 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top