fhdowntheline
Semi-Pro
But Sampras's serve, on the other hand...
Djokovic will finish with the most men's Grand Slam singles
- Thread starter REKX
- Start date
droliver
Professional
Certainly one of the best ever (behind only Isner, Ivo, and maybe 1 or 2 others of the serve-bot variety), and clearly the best ever by a top player. This idea that had had an all time great forehand though is just bizarre.
marc45
G.O.A.T.
the press has to now....they jumped the gun after AO 17
Karma Tennis
Legend
I meant to say Serve regarding Sampras not Forehand. Lendl had the best FH the game has seen. He could literally crush players with his FH.
Laver and Borg will largely be forgotten? REALLY?
Laver won two GRAND SLAMs. Still waiting for the next player to win ONE! Lave Retired from Pro Tennis FORTY YEARS AGO ... and he is still revered and spoken of as one of the Greatest ever.
Borg actually saved the sport from oblivion. Borg was the FIRST player to transcend the sport. Borg bought the sport kicking and screaming into the modern world. Borg was the first player to really use topspin and baseline play as an effective weapon on all surfaces. He was literally "The Beatles" of tennis. Borg was the reason why modern Pro. Tennis players make as much money as they do.
And like Laver, Borg was able to achieve something that the Big 3 struggle to do ... be very successful at the extreme ends of the sport ... Grass and Clay. (5 Wimbledon Singles Titles, 6 Roland Garros Singles Titles ... no modern player in the Men's game has come anywhere near that.)
Anyway, I presume you are either very young, or very ignorant about tennis, or both. Some of us have been here for the long haul. We can certainly appreciate the stunning achievements of the Big 3.
But we can also put those achievements into perspective of 50+ years of following this great sport.
We are not blinded by the idea that the latest and the greatest is always the best.
heninfan99
Talk Tennis Guru
He's getting the Lendl treatment. Facts.
Tshooter
G.O.A.T.
droliver
Professional
Yes. That's not a value judgement on those guys, but we're nearly 40 years from Borg's heyday and 50 years from Laver. They existed before modern media and sports coverage, and their footprint or influence today is little or none. The players who idolized those guys have been retired a quarter century and players today wouldn't be familiar with either of those guys matches, career, styles, etc.... The enduring influence of Agassi, Sampras, Feder/Nadal/Novak, etc... is going to be much longer just because they've come of age with ESPN/Tennis Channel coverage, ubiquitous on demand video, and player marketing that really didn't exist in the 1960's-1980's
hipolymer
Hall of Fame
It has nothing to do with marketing nor player popularity but simply with the passage of time. Tennis was more popular proportionally from the early 20th century to 1970 than it is today. Tennis players were seen as the highest of celebrities back then. And yet they are barely known today. Nothing is immune to the passage of time.
What are you talking about? Borg's footprint is on every forehand hit by a 4.5 or above player ever from here to the end of time (not to mention two-handed backhands). He is the father of modern tennis.
BlueB
Legend
[emoji3516][emoji1787][emoji23][emoji28][emoji3516]
Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Greatest at taking advantage of a weak era maybe.
droliver
Professional
This is kind of semantics, but Jimmy Arias is actually the model of the modern forehand stroke actually, and Andre Agassi is arguably the genesis of the modern pro game style that evolved in the early 1990's. In the meta sense, Nick Bollettieri was the "father of modern tennis" and has a MUCH more obvious influence then Borg in 2019.
Borg's development and career preceded the modern racket era that was starting in the early 1980's, and it's kind of limited his technical relevance to modern high level play. The same thing is generally applicable to tennis in general, the introduction of larger racquets and graphite composites was such a profound change that the norms and techniques that preceded were made obsolete rapidly. (Polyester strings have had a disruptive, but less dramatic effect along the same line over the last 20 years). It's this consideration plus the change in media (and the distance in time since they played) that have made Borg, Laver, Rosewall, Kramer, Stan Smith, Tony Roache, etc..... marginalized to a degree.
titoelcolombiano
Legend
Djoker will almost certainly move ahead of Federer for YE # 1 this year and tie Pete's record
Djoker is looking likely to be number 1 for at least another year which will see him break the weeks at # 1 record
Djoker needs to win one more WTF in his career to equal Pete & Fed. He is certainly capable of this
He is one behind Rafa in terms of M1000 titles and has a good chance of holding that record by the end of his career
Winning H2H against the two other greatest of all time players
The one question mark with Djoker has always been his slam count. He seems hell-bent on rectifying that at the moment. It is almost certain that he will end with the most convincing resume of all three guys.
As the records begin to tumble you can guarantee that this place will melt down with. 'Playing ''beautiful'' tennis means that Fed will always be GOAT' threads.
Djoker is looking likely to be number 1 for at least another year which will see him break the weeks at # 1 record
Djoker needs to win one more WTF in his career to equal Pete & Fed. He is certainly capable of this
He is one behind Rafa in terms of M1000 titles and has a good chance of holding that record by the end of his career
Winning H2H against the two other greatest of all time players
The one question mark with Djoker has always been his slam count. He seems hell-bent on rectifying that at the moment. It is almost certain that he will end with the most convincing resume of all three guys.
As the records begin to tumble you can guarantee that this place will melt down with. 'Playing ''beautiful'' tennis means that Fed will always be GOAT' threads.
Tshooter
G.O.A.T.
droliver
Professional
I get that point about the passage of time, but the media presence and availability of matches of recent decades in HD video is going to make contemporary stars like Federer, et al have a much longer and more vivid impression on sports and pop culture then their predecessors.
Tshooter
G.O.A.T.
Pete did it six years in a row.
True. Aesthetics matter. It may explain why Fed has to some extent transcended tennis but Butt Picker and Ball Bouncer have not. Even people that do not like tennis can appreciate Federer’s game.
Last edited:
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Every player in tennis has had a god mode at one time or another including Lucas Rosol. Who cares?
beard
Legend
Why should he be in his 20s peak whole carrier? And how you imagine that baby Novak is in his peak same time at 20s Federer peak? We can just imagine who would win between peak Novak and peak Federer on grass, or we can look at real matches that occurred... Me personally think that peak Novak is at same level as peak Fed on grass. Watching epics from 07 and 08, its objectively not so different in quality with some later epic matches Novak won against Fedal... And don't forget that peak grass Fed hardly defeated Claydal in 07 and lost in 08, and Novak is better grass player than Nadal... Fairytales everywhere....
beard
Legend
I would prefer to win 6 in 15 years span than 6 in 6... It show longevity in being great... Iam fir longevity over shorter time dominance...
beard
Legend
Whole their carriers big 3 are trying to prevale among them, and Federer in first part of carrier to prevale Sampras record... Its their goal whole carriers to have most slams, so the one that prevail on the end is winner in that task and the best among them.
Imagine this slam race as a basketball game, if someone win 23-22 its a win. They are playing for that one more, its so obviously their top carrier goal. Off course differences are small, but there can be only one best...
At the end of their carriers we will list players by slams, and list will always start with 1. xxxxxx, 2. xxxxxxx, 3. xxxxxxxx, no matter what the numbers are.
FreeBird
Legend
Imagine Federer at his best vs Sampras at this best on grass?
No contest in my book. Sampras would obliterate him. There goes Federer's 8 W.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Could Sampras hang on today's grass aka green clay?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
..
Last edited:
CYGS
Legend
Millman GOAT.
Federer now not GOAT but one of the greatest according to experts. The 3 of them will be remembered probably on a par with each other. Nadal and Djokovic will be fine with that, Federer wont be.
BobFL
Hall of Fame
I do. And I am talking about long-lasting godmode not about abberation, 1off or fluke.
Karma Tennis
Legend
Nick Bollettieri is a slick salesman. He lucked in with Seles and Agassi and then Sharapova. They have all made their mark in the sport. But if he was so great, he would have produced a lot more elite players than he did. Tens of thousands of players have passed through his Academy over the decades. But he has only produced four or five notable players. And I would argue that they would have all been successful regardless.
Your points regarding equipment are interesting ... but hardly pertinent.
Equipment doesn't make Great Tennis Players. Tennis Players make Great Tennis Players. The things that stand out about the Great Male players of the last 60 years, Kramer, Rosewall, Laver, Borg, Lendl, Becker, Sampras, and the current Big 3 are their MENTAL prowess.
People say it is difficult to compare players from different eras because playing conditions, competition and equipment was different. I don't buy that. Every player is a Human Being. They all have Human Brains and are subject to Human Emotions. It is the Brains and the Emotions, the Human Mind and the Human Heart that can be used to compare players from ALL eras.
At their peaks, Laver and Borg had Mental Prowess that is unparalleled to this day. Djokovic probably comes close to those two. The rest are a long way behind. You would think in the modern world of Sports Science and Sports Psychology, modern tennis players would be mental giants. But for the most part, they are mental midgets.
Who would you want to play for you to defend the future of the Planet? Laver? Borg? Sampras? Federer? Nadal? Djokovic? The answer is easy for me. Either Laver or Borg by a country mile.
Born Again
Rookie
Mistook him for federer?
BlueB
Legend
As much as I like Borg (my first tennis idol), he lost the status of a mental giant when he ran away from Mac. I think the most of his mental greatness is assigned to him due to the cool demeanor he had around thr court. We don't really know what was going on inside...
Another interesting point about Borg: He couldn't get anywhere with graphite frame, during his unfortunate return attempt. It's something to think about, regarding the equipment...
Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
droliver
Professional
You’re kidding, right? The Bollettieri/IMG facility has the best track record of any academy in the world for tennis. He’s a slick salesman to be sure, but you can’t dismiss the influence and success they have had and continue to have for almost 40 years. He’s been involved to varying degree in coaching and training over 15 #1 ranked players at this point and numerous other top players have spent time with him. Like I said, in the macro view, NB is the father of “modern tennis”
Eren
Professional
What about Nadal though? Is he destined to be viewed as the number two forever?
herronpaul
Rookie
Istomin no?
If Milman can go 3-0 against Djokovic and Fed in slam finals like Wawrinka did to Djok and also beat Djokovic in straight sets at a Wimbledon final then he isn't GOAT it's Djokovic being a mug
The Blond Blur
G.O.A.T.
Slam record = GOAT, whoever ends up with the most in the end will be king of tennis most likely forever.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
LOL at god mode. He needs some god-mode to try to make the French Open final since he can't seem to figure out how to beat Thiem there and thus robbing Nadal the chance to even the H2H against Djokovic.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Nadal has 12 titles in a single Slam. Quite possibly a number that will never be broken.
hipolymer
Hall of Fame
Never say never. With the rise of fitness and dietary regimes, players will extend their prime to twenty+ years.
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
You mean the rise of performance enhancing drugs. LOL
Federer was the only other guy who had a chance to win 12 Slams, having made 12 Wimbledon finals and losing 4 of them. Nadal's never lost in the French Open final and never been taken to 5 sets there either. The only guy who has a shot against him is Djokovic if he's playing god-mode for 5 sets but even he's not able to make the final these days.
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
32-year-old Djokovic loses in 2019: at peak
32-year-old Federer loses in 2013: retiree
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
What do you mean he can't make the final so Nadal can even the head to head? He's played Nadal 7 times at RG. They've only played 8 times at the other 3 Slams combined. If Djokovic never makes it to another RG final again to play Nadal, he's more than held up his end of the bargain at RG. I'm sure Djokovic would love to play him more at AO and Wimbledon to balance some things out.
R
Robert Baratheon
Guest
I wish he finishes with the most female grand slam titles too
dellealpi10
Rookie
I think Djoker can finish in 23, Nadal in 21, Fed in 20. Djoker is GOAT.
Eren
Professional
Djoke isn't at his peak either I agree. Still the highest level at 32 among the big 3.
Peak Djoke would have straight setted Fraud in the wimby final
Similar threads
