Certainly Nadovic were obsessed with winning but you only have to look at the styles to know who was playing for the good of the game.

 

Certainly Nadovic were obsessed with winning

You're saying Fed is Loserer?

 

Peter Colt

 

Murray.

 

Most likely Federer and probably will still play the most tennis post-retirement (we don't know about Djokovic yet). Rafole cared much more about winning. It's a war for them. Djokovic also cared more about putting his country on the map. A lot of things made it much more than just tennis for Djokovic. Maybe that's why he pushed himself so hard. Still all 3 were deeply motivated by different things. However, in terms of pure tennis passion it's Federer given how much history he knows about the game and how much he put emphasis being artistic while playing.

 

Not so sure… Federer hasn’t even thought of playing an exhibition in 3 years now. He seems pretty fed up with tennis on court. I don’t see him as a coach either

 

Big 3 as Bill Gates, Adam Sandler or Ben Stiller, those guys have the passion, just not the talent or the physical condition.

 

Actually the true Big 3 really is Minoxidil,Finasteride & Nizoral.

 

Rogie 100%!!

 

Djoker. He was the far least talented of the 3 guys. So he had to put in way more work. Nadal was a prodigy and the best young kid player ever, Fed could do it all on the court. Djoker didnt have these gifts. Not to mention hes 38 and a top 3 player still

 

I don't know why people always underestimate the massive amount of work Federer put in to make tennis look easy on court. It's not that his amazing footwork, smooth strokes, magnificent shot selection and great anticipation were just given to him in the cradle. He won his first small title at 19.5 years, at an age where Nadal and Alcaraz already had won a slam and some masters. An his coaches repeatedly mentioned that Federer was truly exceptional inasmuch as he always arrived fully motivated and with a positive attitude to the training.

 

Djokovic.
Nole hasn’t forgotten his roots, and the humble beginnings of where he came from.
He was also actively involved with the players union and trying to get better pay for lower ranked, fringe tour level players.
Federer and Nadal both love the sport and competing as well, not disputing that, even as a Djokovic supporter.
Federer put tennis 🎾 back on the map after Sampras and then Agassi retired.
Nadal winning his final RG in 2022 and then on crutches afterwards showed what he was willing to go through, as well as establishing his tennis academy for developing young players.

 

Federer has the most passion for playing tennis itself, not just winning. He somewhat enjoys play his own game, play all the shots he wants to, rather than play the shots to wreck his opponents' weaknesses. Sometimes in his career it became a weakness - he was too stubborn to adjust his game plan when he needed.

Nadal has the most passion for playing tennis to win, we can just look at how he sacrificed his body. Consider that he said he didn't miss tennis after retirement, I guess he never really enjoy tennis without winning.

For Djokovic, it's complicated to say, he is truly dedicated as well but the fact is he refused vaccinated to enter tournaments, and he seems to have other priorities than just tennis, such as political involvement and promotion of Serbian identity.

 

I believe this is Federer.
I think he played tennis with a deep, genuine enjoyment.

Nadal, I believe, loved competition more than tennis itself, and above all else, he prioritized overcoming himself.

Djokovic is similar to Nadal in that regard, but I think he prioritized defeating his opponents.

Incidentally, if the question were about the Big Four, I would have chosen Murray.
I believe he embodies all the characteristics I mentioned about Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic combined.

 

On the give-a-shit scale where Kyrgios is on one end and a player like Grosjean (who is known among tennis circles for collecting memorabilia and creating a small tennis museum) is on the other, I'm not sure where the Big 3 sit. We aren't talking about contribution to the sport - we are talking about love of the game. I always felt all of them played more for the shine of it, the crowd’s roar, for the gold in their pockets, for the weight of history written on their names.

And then there’s Stan. Still out there, dust on his shoes, ranked beyond the top 100. He doesn’t need the glory, he doesn’t need the shine. He plays because the game is still alive in him, because he feels it in his bones, because somewhere along the way, he learned what the rest forgot: the game is its own reward.

 

I mean, most people on this forum don’t earn a cent from tennis, but they still go to great lengths, spending days, weeks, and years on the GOAT debate. You see what I mean?

 

What's next? Are we going to sit and ponder whose parents' loved him the most?

This forum, I swear...

 

Impossible to tell unless you can read their minds. All kept playing until their bodies gave up.