Greatest mens tennis player of all time

altodevil

Odds winner of 'Odds or Evens 2023/2024'
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
17,350
Why isn't Borg in these discussions? Career length?
 

Skills

Snitch
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
42,010
Why isn't Borg in these discussions? Career length?
Borg I think was recognised as the greatest till about 2007 when Federer usurped him. I think Federer has just added to his legacy since and both Rafa and Novak have overtaken him too.
 

wr8_utd

:'(
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
38,160
Well first off you need to decide which peak level of Djokovic are you considering.

From 2014 Wimbey till 2016 he won 6 out of 10 slams he competed in. Was #1 and won 6 masters in one season as well as posting his best season to date results.

During that time Nadal missed 2 slams, made it 2 times past the 4th round(2 QF's), was bagelled by Berdych in one of them and won zero sets in those QF's.

Federer on the other hand missed 2 slams. Finished 2016 at #16 - his career low so far and was miles off his best.

Federer is 5-1 against Murray in grand slams. Hardly Murray will cause him more trouble when he was actually at his peak at slams is it?

If you mean 2011 Djokovic - Federer (who again was off his peak) was 2 MP away from beating him in the 2 slams they've met.

In any case I'm not sure how you can consider Djokovic field to be better, especially 2014-2016.
See in this way you're going to explain away every time Novak has dominated by Federer being off peak. Federer's absolute peak came at a time when Rafa and Novak were still kids and yet in that 05-08 period they were both giving Federer a run for their money in their H2H matches and in Rafa's case, even beating him at Roger's favorite surfaces.
The "off peak" Roger Federer is still probably Top 3 GOAT contender and he was really making Novak work for the wins even in the 2011-12 phase and even beat him a decent amount of times including Wimbledon and RG if I'm not wrong. If not for Novak, there's a good chance Federer would be on something like 23 Slams right now.

As for peak Novak, I find his 2011-12 version the biggest because he's had to get past Federer multiple times and he's beaten Rafa at all the Slam finals. Beating Rafa 7 FINALS in a row is a staggering achievement given how good Rafa is at finals.
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,596
See in this way you're going to explain away every time Novak has dominated by Federer being off peak. Federer's absolute peak came at a time when Rafa and Novak were still kids and yet in that 05-08 period they were both giving Federer a run for their money in their H2H matches and in Rafa's case, even beating him at Roger's favorite surfaces.
The "off peak" Roger Federer is still probably Top 3 GOAT contender and he was really making Novak work for the wins even in the 2011-12 phase and even beat him a decent amount of times including Wimbledon and RG if I'm not wrong. If not for Novak, there's a good chance Federer would be on something like 23 Slams right now.

As for peak Novak, I find his 2011-12 version the biggest because he's had to get past Federer multiple times and he's beaten Rafa at all the Slam finals. Beating Rafa 7 FINALS in a row is a staggering achievement given how good Rafa is at finals.
I'm not sure your argument there. Djokovic peak came later in 2015 and 2016. He won most of his slams then and broke most of his records then. Having great results doesn't particularly mean his best years came in 2011 don't you agree?

Federer in 2016 played 28 matches in total, that was his worst year since 15-20 years ago. Nadal was close to non existent after 2014 FO up until 2017 AO at slams.

If you come with this bullshit weak era argument, then Novak's era was even worse from 2014 on. He won 9 of his 15 slams from 2014 on.
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,596
Why isn't Borg in these discussions? Career length?
Unfortunately yes. Fantastic credentials and also game especially being able to dominate 2 surfaces, but his career length doesn't do him much favor.
 

SteveJ

all-round nice guy, aka Uncle Joe Kardashian
Scout
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
62,851
I've no clue about tennis but wanted to ask: why is McEnroe rarely mentioned in GOAT discussions? See, I've always read that he was a 'maverick genius' (even very recently he's the subject of a documentary about his search for tennis perfection).

Thanks.
 

wr8_utd

:'(
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
38,160
I'm not sure your argument there. Djokovic peak came later in 2015 and 2016. He won most of his slams then and broke most of his records then. Having great results doesn't particularly mean his best years came in 2011 don't you agree?

Federer in 2016 played 28 matches in total, that was his worst year since 15-20 years ago. Nadal was close to non existent after 2014 FO up until 2017 AO at slams.

If you come with this bullshit weak era argument, then Novak's era was even worse from 2014 on. He won 9 of his 15 slams from 2014 on.
Novak has had to beat a Rafa in imperious form in 2 of his last 3 Slam wins. If that's a weak field, I'm not sure what to call pulverizing the likes of Roddick, Hewitt, Gonzalez and Bagdatis in finals of Slams..

There was an interesting article around 2 years ago about difficultly of Slams for the Top 3 :

Most Grand Slams Won Without Facing a Top-10 Opponent in Final:
Sampras 7
Federer 4
Nadal 2
Djokovic 1

Most Grand Slams Won By Facing Only One Top-10 Player in Whole Tournament:

Sampras 7
Federer 3
Nadal 3
Djokovic 2

Most Grand Slams Won Without Having To Beat a Single Top-5 Player:

Federer 5
Sampras 4
Nadal 1
Djokovic 0

Most Grand Slams Won With Having to Beat ‘At least’ Three Top-5 Players:

Djokovic 5
Federer 5
Nadal 3
Sampras 1

Record of Top-10 players beaten in a same Grand Slam:
Federer 4
Nadal 3
Djokovic 3
Sampras 3

Record of Top-five players beaten in a same Grand Slam:

Federer 3
Nadal 3
Djokovic 3
Sampras 2

Most Grand Slams won without beating at least one of the other three Big Four members:


Federer 12
Nadal 2
Djokovic 0

Percentage of matches from the quarter-finals against a non-Top-10 player:

Sampras 57.1%
Nadal 33.3% (15/45)
Federer 31.6% (18/57)
Djokovic 25.6% (9/36)
This is something I've always said. Out of the Top 3, Novak has had it toughest in terms of the field he's been up against.
 

wr8_utd

:'(
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
38,160
Also, I agree that maybe in 2015, the lack of Federer and Nadal helped but Murray was still in very good form at that point. Anyway, that's just one of his 3 big runs where he's had a comparatively easy run.
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,596
Novak has had to beat a Rafa in imperious form in 2 of his last 3 Slam wins. If that's a weak field, I'm not sure what to call pulverizing the likes of Roddick, Hewitt, Gonzalez and Bagdatis in finals of Slams..
I'm not sure if you read what I've wrote above. Your first quote was this:

I find Djokovic's dominance far more impressive than Federer's.
Federer 04-07, well, we know what the field was like.
Djokovic's dominance was from 14-16 where he won most of his slams. I wouldn't call one year 11' a dominance, especially since after that he didn't win more than 1 slam per year up until his actual dominance.

How Federer's field in 04-07 was weak compared to Djokovic 14-16?

There was an interesting article around 2 years ago about difficultly of Slams for the Top 3 :



This is something I've always said. Out of the Top 3, Novak has had it toughest in terms of the field he's been up against.
15 years ago surfaces were more diverse than now. Wimbledon got slower and slower.

This quote also means absolutely nothing to back up your original claim that Djokovic's peak came against a tougher field.

During his peak years(14-16) he met Nadal twice at slams - won once and lost once.
Federer - 4 times in majors and Federer was undoubtedly a lot worse than his usual(peak) self at the time.
 

saivet

Full Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
25,111
I think Djokovic in 2011 was the best version we've seen of him. This discussion will always be premature because they are all still playing at a high level but if they all finish with the same number of slams I'd consider Novak the GOAT (should other factors outside of the slams not change much)
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,596
I think Djokovic in 2011 was the best version we've seen of him. This discussion will always be premature because they are all still playing at a high level but if they all finish with the same number of slams I'd consider Novak the GOAT (should other factors outside of the slams not change much)
Nah, I think the 2015/2016 he was more complete and IMO better at both clay and grass. He improved on those surfaces whilst kept his level on hard.
 

wr8_utd

:'(
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
38,160
Nah, I think the 2015/2016 he was more complete and IMO better at both clay and grass. He improved on those surfaces whilst kept his level on hard.
2015 was probably the more complete version of Djokovic but I think 2011 was just more impressive with the players he was beating.
 

Bole Top

Full Member
Joined
May 2, 2014
Messages
3,508
so far it's Fed, but obviously it won't end like this. let's say all three of them end their careers with 20 grand slams total, this his how I'd look at them:

Djokovic - for me, he would be the GOAT in that case. but the thing is, I'd consider him as the greatest even if he's on 19 grand slams and Fed is on 20. for me, total number of slams is deciding factor when we compare 15 vs 20, but if it comes down to only one GS between them, I'd have to take everything else into account. Djokovic's path to those grand slams and the rivals he had, the fact he's the only one who has won every ATP masters tournament and there's good chance he'll end career as the one who has won the most of them in the history of tennis. he's also one ATP tour finals title away from having the most of them (will be tied with Fed), not to mention better head to head with Nadal and Fed. he would have almost everything on his side in that case so for me, he would be the greatest.

Nadal - imo, he needs to win one more than Djoko and Fed to be considered as the greatest. otherwise he'll "only" be equal to them. it's a popular thing to say that he wins mostly on one surface, but there's another way to look at that; he proved he can beat both Djoko and Fed on grass and other hard courts, but they never did the same. that's why I consider his peak level to be higher than both Roger's and Novak's. he could beat peak Fed in Wimbledon - Fed was never good enough to do the same in RG. he was just untouchable there. he will always have that against both of them and currently have the most ATP masters titles. but like I've said, while I could consider Novak as GOAT even with 19 grand slams, among three of them Rafa is the only one I think that needs to have the most grand slams at the end of his career to be considered as undisputedly the greatest of all time.
 

Skills

Snitch
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
42,010
so far it's Fed, but obviously it won't end like this. let's say all three of them end their careers with 20 grand slams total, this his how I'd look at them:

Djokovic - for me, he would be the GOAT in that case. but the thing is, I'd consider him as the greatest even if he's on 19 grand slams and Fed is on 20. for me, total number of slams is deciding factor when we compare 15 vs 20, but if it comes down to only one GS between them, I'd have to take everything else into account. Djokovic's path to those grand slams and the rivals he had, the fact he's the only one who has won every ATP masters tournament and there's good chance he'll end career as the one who has won the most of them in the history of tennis. he's also one ATP tour finals title away from having the most of them (will be tied with Fed), not to mention better head to head with Nadal and Fed. he would have almost everything on his side in that case so for me, he would be the greatest.

Nadal - imo, he needs to win one more than Djoko and Fed to be considered as the greatest. otherwise he'll "only" be equal to them. it's a popular thing to say that he wins mostly on one surface, but there's another way to look at that; he proved he can beat both Djoko and Fed on grass and other hard courts, but they never did the same. that's why I consider his peak level to be higher than both Roger's and Novak's. he could beat peak Fed in Wimbledon - Fed was never good enough to do the same in RG. he was just untouchable there. he will always have that against both of them and currently have the most ATP masters titles. but like I've said, while I could consider Novak as GOAT even with 19 grand slams, among three of them Rafa is the only one I think that needs to have the most grand slams at the end of his career to be considered as undisputedly the greatest of all time.
That statement is contradictory :D
 

Bole Top

Full Member
Joined
May 2, 2014
Messages
3,508
That statement is contradictory :D
yeah, a bit. what I wanted to say is that if he had the most grand slams, at least that's something you couldn't take away from him. but if they're all on 20, plenty would still point on Djokovic's better head to head record, much better record on other courts, much better record at ATP finals etc. there would still be plenty to dispute in that case, not to mention that other than that "freak" US open win in 2017, he hasn't won GS other than RG for about 7 or 8 years. he has also never won the ATP finals. the way it's going, Novak has most of the stats going in his favour and there would be less to dispute in his case if they're both on 20 for example.
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,596
2015 was probably the more complete version of Djokovic but I think 2011 was just more impressive with the players he was beating.
See, the issue I have with this supposedly weak/strong field is that players peak at different times and can beat whoever is in front of them. You can always pluck holes in each of those greats resumes as hardly their career overlapped(especially in Federer's case as he's much younger than them).

Djokovic was certainly a better player after 2011 as he developed and improved his game.
 

Samid

He's no Bilal Ilyas Jhandir
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
49,157
Location
Oslo, Norway
Will Federer still be considered goat if he ends up behind the other two on slams? Think the order will be Djoko, Rafa and Federer.
 

Strachans Cigar

New Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2015
Messages
1,137
I’ll always have a soft spot for Borg; Dominant on clay and grass unlike any of the current ‘big three’; didn’t bother with the Australian Open which didn’t help his Grand Slam count & retired at only 26.

Of the current trio, I’d say Djokovic is arguably the best. He has beaten Federer in all three finals the two men have played at Wimbledon, which is Federer’s best tournament. Djokovic is also one of two men to have beaten Rafa at the French Open where he is nigh on invincible.

...and he ain’t done yet. Federer almost is.
 

Massive Spanner

Give Mason Mount a chance!
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
27,893
Location
Tool shed
I'm not sure who's the best of the three, but Federer is comfortably the best to watch. Novak is just boringly brilliant sometimes in comparison.

Also peak Federer would've won that yesterday. He probably deserved it anyway, but Novak's got nerves of absolute steel.
 

KirkDuyt

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
24,444
Location
Dutchland
Supports
Feyenoord
Federer was a strong first serve away from sealing it yesterday. Well not sealing it, but it would've made his case that much stronger.

Fine fecking margins.
 

saivet

Full Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2013
Messages
25,111
Federer was a strong first serve away from sealing it yesterday. Well not sealing it, but it would've made his case that much stronger.

Fine fecking margins.
He had a strong first serve on that second match point to be fair. But as you say the margins are just incredible.
 

Acheron

Full Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2016
Messages
2,843
Supports
Real Madrid
Will Federer still be considered goat if he ends up behind the other two on slams? Think the order will be Djoko, Rafa and Federer.
Well, it would be a strong case specially for Djokovic if he overtakes Federer in Grand Slams.
 

Carolina Red

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
36,296
Location
South Carolina
Agassi would get butchered.
Nah. He’d be quite alright at the Aussie and the USO. Probably the only service returner better than him is Djokovic. His peak didn’t last nearly as long because of his personal life, but when he was at his peak, he could play with anybody.
 
Last edited:

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
33,113
Agassi would get butchered.
What?

I swear people underrate some of the past players.

Agassi more than Sampras would give them a match because the courts suit his style of play unlike back then. Also people go on about Federer being old man doing well. Agassi in 2005 at 35 pushed Federer who was like 23 at the time to four sets in the US open final. He would far from get butchered in his prime.
 

Dirty Schwein

Has a 'Best of Britney Spears' album
Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Messages
31,676
Location
Miracle World
Supports
Luton Town
I don't follow closely enough to have an opinion on this but I'm pretty sure Henman was the greatest tennis player ever.
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
129,966
Location
Hollywood CA
Will Federer still be considered goat if he ends up behind the other two on slams? Think the order will be Djoko, Rafa and Federer.
Definitely not. The person who leads in slams will almost certainly be viewed as the greatest tennis player ever (with the other two viewed as very close behind).
 

Samid

He's no Bilal Ilyas Jhandir
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
49,157
Location
Oslo, Norway
Definitely not. The person who leads in slams will almost certainly be viewed as the greatest tennis player ever (with the other two viewed as very close behind).
I don't disagree but don't underestimate Federer's massive cult following.
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,413
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
What?

I swear people underrate some of the past players.

Agassi more than Sampras would give them a match because the courts suit his style of play unlike back then. Also people go on about Federer being old man doing well. Agassi in 2005 at 35 pushed Federer who was like 23 at the time to four sets in the US open final. He would far from get butchered in his prime.
IMO a 35 year old Federer wouldn’t push a 23 year old Agassi to 4 sets. He’d beat him in 4.
 

Carolina Red

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
36,296
Location
South Carolina
IMO a 35 year old Federer wouldn’t push a 23 year old Agassi to 4 sets. He’d beat him in 4.
Probably not the best age to pick for Federer there. He was on a 4 year Slam drought and recovering from knee surgery and a back injury at 35.

And I say that as a Federer fan.
 

Bojan11

Full Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
33,113
IMO a 35 year old Federer wouldn’t push a 23 year old Agassi to 4 sets. He’d beat him in 4.
Well that’s just stupid logic. I’m going by the games they actually played not by your fairy tale logic. Agassi at 35 gave Federer a game in a season where Federer only suffered four losses.

So to say he’d get butchered is silly because the courts nowadays suit his game more and he pushed Federer in his prime when he was well past his prime. Sampras is more likely to struggle in the current era as most of the courts aren’t really for serve and volley.