Djokovic is greater than every ATG on at least 2 surfaces out of 3

[Lew II]

Surfaces Djokovic is superior:

vs Connors - hard/grass/clay
vs Borg - hard/grass
vs McEnroe - hard/grass/clay
vs Lendl - hard/grass
vs Wilander - hard/grass
vs Becker - hard/grass/clay
vs Edberg- hard/grass/clay
vs Agassi - hard/grass/clay
vs Sampras - hard/clay
vs Federer - hard/clay
vs Nadal - hard/grass

 

[Sport]

Djokovic isn't even better than Federer on hard yet, both are tied with 11 Slams on hard.

But even if/when Djokovic wins another Slam on hard, he will only be the greatest in 1 surface out of 3: hard courts. Federer and Sampras will have a better resume than him on grass, unless he wins 4 extra Wimbledon titles.

And if Djokovic only adds AO titles from now on, he would be a "weak hard court GOAT", since many players like Connors, Sampras, Federer and Nadal have won more USO titles than him.

 

[SamprasisGOAT]

Surfaces Djokovic is superior:

vs Connors - hard/grass/clay
vs Borg - hard/grass
vs McEnroe - hard/grass/clay
vs Lendl - hard/grass
vs Wilander - hard/grass
vs Becker - hard/grass/clay
vs Edberg- hard/grass/clay
vs Agassi - hard/grass/clay
vs Sampras - hard/clay
vs Federer - hard/clay
vs Nadal - hard/grass

All depends on what kind of hard court and whether it’s old or modern grass doesn’t it lew? Be reasonable about things.

 

[FedeRadi]

Djokovic isn't even better than Federer on hard yet, both are tied with 11 Slams on hard.

But even if/when Djokovic wins another Slam on hard, he will only be the greatest in 1 surface out of 3: hard courts. Federer and Sampras will have a better resume than him on grass, unless he wins 4 extra Wimbledon titles.

And if Djokovic only adds AO titles from now on, he would be a "weak hard court GOAT", since many players like Connors, Sampras, Federer and Nadal have won more USO titles than him.

No one is claiming Djokovic is better than Federer and Sampras on grass. But that he is on clay. He has 1 RG, like Federer, but in every other metric(Masters, Win Rate, Career "Clay Slam") he's ahead or tied(H2H). The only stat that help Federer is an additional slam final.
I think he's alredy ahead on hard too(Masters, Slam Finals, H2H, Win Rate). Federer has one more WTF btw.

Think the most debatable is Borg on grass(Borg is clearly ahead on clay).

 

[Lew II]

Djokovic isn't even better than Federer on hard yet, both are tied with 11 Slams on hard.

But Djokovic has more slam finals, more big titles, higher win percentage and leads the h2h.

But even if/when Djokovic wins another Slam on hard, he will only be the greatest in 1 surface out of 3: hard courts. Federer and Sampras will have a better resume than him on grass, unless he wins 4 extra Wimbledon titles.

This is not what the thread is about. I didn't write he is the greatest on 2 surfaces, I wrote he is greater than each ATG on 2 surfaces.

And if Djokovic only adds AO titles from now on, he would be a "weak hard court GOAT", since many players like Connors, Sampras, Federer and Nadal have won more USO titles than him.

3 USO titles is not bad at all. Djokovic won at least 3 times every hardcourt big tournament plus the two best 500s Bejing and Dubai. There's no one more complete than him on all types of hardcourt. I don't get your point.

 

[MichaelNadal]

But Djokovic has more slam finals, more big titles, higher win percentage and leads the h2h.

This is not what the thread is about. I didn't write he is the greatest on 2 surfaces, I wrote he is greater than each ATG on 2 surfaces.


3 USO is a lot.

Imagine 4, beating Novak for half of em

 

[Lew II]

Imagine 4, beating Novak for half of em

Not what the thread is about. Bring your memes somewhere else.

 

[Djokodalerer31]

Djokovic isn't even better than Federer on hard yet, both are tied with 11 Slams on hard.

But even if/when Djokovic wins another Slam on hard, he will only be the greatest in 1 surface out of 3: hard courts. Federer and Sampras will have a better resume than him on grass, unless he wins 4 extra Wimbledon titles.

And if Djokovic only adds AO titles from now on, he would be a "weak hard court GOAT", since many players like Connors, Sampras, Federer and Nadal have won more USO titles than him.

Tell me one name in tennis history, who would be greatest on more than one surface! C'mmon lets take a laugh...
The point is since nobody is ever greatest on more than one surface - then Novak shouldn't be mocked for something nobody's ever achieved anyway...just sayin'
You could say Federer was the only one such for quite a long time...but now its clearly not the case anymore (yes even with 1 extra hardcourt grand slam title advantage over Novak...)

 

[UnforcedTerror]

That's why Djokovic is the tennis BOAT. He's better than everybody.

 

[Sport]

But Djokovic has more slam finals, more big titles, higher win percentage and leads the h2h.

This is not what the thread is about. I didn't write he is the greatest on 2 surfaces, I wrote he is greater than each ATG on 2 surfaces.


3 USO titles is not bad at all. Djokovic won at least 3 times every hardcourt big tournament plus the two best 500s Bejing and Dubai. There's no one more complete than him on all types of hardcourt. I don't get your point.

Federer has won more ATP finals/WTF than Djokovic. Djokovic needs an extra hard court Slam (and I think he will achieve it) to be the overall hard court GOAT. At the moment he is the hard court co-GOAT with Roger.

 

[Sport]

That's why Djokovic is the tennis BOAT. He's better than everybody.

No he is not. He has 17 Slams, while his biggest opponents have 19 and 20. You can't be the best if you have less Slams than the same opponents that played in your era.

He will be the best once he gets the Slam record. I would even consider him the best if he ties Federer with 20 Slams, considering his advantage in most categories outside Slams over Federer.

 

[Fiero425]

Djokovic isn't even better than Federer on hard yet, both are tied with 11 Slams on hard.

But even if/when Djokovic wins another Slam on hard, he will only be the greatest in 1 surface out of 3: hard courts. Federer and Sampras will have a better resume than him on grass, unless he wins 4 extra Wimbledon titles.

And if Djokovic only adds AO titles from now on, he would be a "weak hard court GOAT", since many players like Connors, Sampras, Federer and Nadal have won more USO titles than him.

I keep saying to people who can't seem to remember Nole's 5-6 years younger than Federer so he has plenty of time! It's ridiculous to hold him up to standards to someone that much older even though Nole has matched or surpassed Federer in so many other categories! Why is that so hard for people to keep in mind?

 

[UnforcedTerror]

No he is not. He has 17 Slams, while his biggest opponents have 19 and 20. You can't be the best if you have less Slams than the same opponents that played in your era.

He will be the best once he gets the Slam record. I would even consider him the best if he ties Federer with 20 Slams, considering his advantage in most categories outside Slams over Federer.

Nobody but Nadal fans thinks Nadal is a better player than Djokovic though

Nadal has a couple of (clay) slams more, but that's pretty much it. Djokovic has everything else going for him, Rankings, WTFs, Masters, H2H and better overall on 2/3 surfaces.

 

[junior74]

The age of the GOAT is over

The time of the BOAT - has come

 

[Fiero425]

Nobody but Nadal fans thinks Nadal is a better player than Djokovic though

Nadal has a couple of slams more, but that's pretty much it. Djokovic has everything else going for him, Rankings, WTFs, Masters, H2H and better overall on 2/3 surfaces.

Not that I'm a huge fan, but Djokovic has it all over Nadal in every other category outside of winning the FO! You just mentioned only a few stats he dominates, but there are plenty of others Fedal aren't even close to achieving! He's completed his Nole-Slam, won a Golden Masters (owning at least one each), and has been taking major titles in bunches like no one in the Open era even after turnng 30!

 

[MichaelNadal]

Not what the thread is about. Bring your memes somewhere else.

Lol do you want me to ACTUALLY shut you down then bc you know I will? Come for me Lew

 

[tennis_pro]

How is Djokovic greater than Federer on HC?

Oh, yeah, h2h. Roddick and Kyrgios say hi.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Nobody but Nadal fans thinks Nadal is a better player than Djokovic though

Nadal has a couple of slams more, but that's pretty much it. Djokovic has everything else going for him, Rankings, WTFs, Masters, H2H and better overall on 2/3 surfaces.

How fortunate that that's all he needs

 

[KINGROGER]

Federer is marginally ahead on HCs, Djokovic is marginally ahead on clay. Federer is far ahead on grass.

fail thread.

 

[tennis_pro]

Djokovic is greater than Federer on clay because of achievements.
Djokovic is greater than Federer on HC because of the h2h.

/thread

 

[Hitman]

The age of the GOAT is over

The time of the BOAT - has come

Lol. That is one savage T Rex

 

[Lew II]

Djokovic is greater than Federer on clay because of achievements.
Djokovic is greater than Federer on HC because of the h2h.

/thread

I think Djokovic is greater on hc in achievements too. 3 masters and 2 slam finals are better than 1 yec.

Djokovic is not even declining so he is likely to add more hc achievements.

 

[RF-18]

The only question mark is Fed. I wouldn't say Djokovic is ahead on 2 surfaces there yet. Too close to call.

 

[tennis_pro]

I think Djokovic is greater on hc in achievements too. 3 masters and 2 slam finals are better than 1 yec.

Djokovic is not even declining so he is likely to add more hc achievements.

+ no multiple Slam champion younger than him even though he is almost 33 years old helps a bit I think, not sure

No Slam champion under the age of 31,5 could help a little bit too, not sure

 

[KINGROGER]

I think Djokovic is greater on hc in achievements too. 3 masters and 2 slam finals are better than 1 yec.

Djokovic is not even declining so he is likely to add more hc achievements.

12 actual titles > 2 slam finals as well as dominated both HC slams during your peak with stronger competition.

 

[Lew II]

Top3 beaten in hardcourt slams:

Djokovic 13
Federer 3

 

[tennis_pro]

Top3 beaten in hardcourt slams:

Djokovic 13
Federer 3

Number of players younger than Federer who won at least 2 Slams - 4
Number of players younger than Djokovic who won at least 2 Slams - 0

 

[Lew II]

Number of players younger than Federer who won at least 2 Slams - 4
Number of players younger than Djokovic who won at least 2 Slams - 0

Proof that younger means better - 0

 

[tennis_pro]

Proof that younger means better - 0

Yes but only until Djokovic and with a specific age difference of at least 5 years.

 

[Lew II]

12 actual titles > 2 slam finals as well as dominated both HC slams during your peak with stronger competition.

?

 

[Mike Sams]

Can't compare eras. The surfaces were a lot different in the old days as was the racquet technology. Djokovic has thrived on homogenized surfaces. The fact that he only has 3 US Open titles even today on slowed down courts and heavier balls don't show him as having much of a shot in the old days when USO played fast as heck. Even AO was faster as was grass.

 

[Sport]

Nobody but Nadal fans thinks Nadal is a better player than Djokovic though

Nadal has a couple of (clay) slams more, but that's pretty much it. Djokovic has everything else going for him, Rankings, WTFs, Masters, H2H and better overall on 2/3 surfaces.

Nobody but Djokovic fans think Djokovic is a better player than Nadal though.

In a recent Youtube poll about who is the tennis GOAT with over 27.000 votes, 25% of people voted for Nadal while only 12% voted for Djokovic:

And stop with the excuses, if Djokovic isn't talented enough to win as many Slams as Nadal despite competing in the same era, he ain't no greater than Nadal. The number of Grand Slam is the most relelvant all-time great criterion. Other criteria are just tie-breakers in case two players are tied in Slams.

Nadal has 19 Slams, and not only he is better at RG. Nadal also has more USO titles than Novak. With the claim "Novak is better in 2/3 surfaces" you are strategically ignoring clay and only considering 67% of the surfaces. If we consider 100% of the surfaces (not only 2 of 3), Nadal is better since 19 > 17.

Nadal has

1. More Grand Slam titles than Novak (including more USO titles)
2. Olympics
3. More Masters 1000
4. H2H advantage in Slams
5. Higher winning percentage
6. 5 Davis Cup (including a 96% winning percentage in DC matches in singles)
7. Better in 2/4 Slams
8. If we consider 100% of the surfaces (including clay), he is better overall, as he has more Grand Slam titles

 

[Biotic]

7. Better overall in 2/4 Slams

 

[ibbi]

This is even less convincing than most of your arguments, Lew. Not had your coffee this morning?

 

[ADuck]

Because all great statisticians say: "Let's only consider 66% of the data!"

 

[Mike Sams]

Not that it matters much but a week back before the Tyson Fury vs Deontay Wilder boxing match at the Staples Center, they introduced 3 legends to the ring including Lennox Lewis, Evander Holyfield and Mike Tyson. The interesting thing was that even despite both Lewis and Holyfield having beaten Tyson when they fought and perhaps even being deemed as greater and more accomplished fighters overall on paper, it was Tyson who got by far the loudest ovation from the 18,000 fans in attendance. They all loved Tyson a lot more than the other 2 legends in the ring.
I can imagine that even if Djokovic and Nadal take the records, Federer will still be by far the more popular and more beloved tennis player among the 3 when they are all retired. It comes down to who the fans simply liked more. No doubt they all loved Federer a heck of a lot more than Djokovic. Some people claim it as being not that big of a deal. But it seems to eat away at Djokovic hence why he does everything he can to get that same level of adulation but continues to fall flat.

 

[Lew II]

Nobody but Djokovic fans think Djokovic is a better player than Nadal though.

In a recent Youtube poll about who is the tennis GOAT with over 27.000 votes, 25% of people voted for Nadal while only 12% voted for Djokovic:

All non-Big3 being at 3% proves the incompetence/bias of voters.

 

[Lew II]

Because all great statisticians say: "Let's only consider 66% of the data!"

It shows how complete Djokovic is.

 

[Breakpointerer]

Nobody but Djokovic fans think Djokovic is a better player than Nadal though.

In a recent Youtube poll about who is the tennis GOAT with over 27.000 votes, 25% of people voted for Nadal while only 12% voted for Djokovic:

And stop with the excuses, if Djokovic isn't talented enough to win as many Slams as Nadal despite competing in the same era, he ain't no greater than Nadal. The number of Grand Slam is the most relelvant all-time great criterion. Other criteria are just tie-breakers in case two players are tied in Slams.

Nadal has 19 Slams, and not only he is better at RG. Nadal also has more USO titles than Novak. With the claim "Novak is better in 2/3 surfaces" you are strategically ignoring clay and only considering 67% of the surfaces. If we consider 100% of the surfaces (not only 2 of 3), Nadal is better since 19 > 17.

Nadal has

1. More Grand Slam titles than Novak (including more USO titles)
2. Olympics
3. More Masters 1000
4. H2H advantage in Slams
5. Higher winning percentage
6. 5 Davis Cup (including a 96% winning percentage in DC matches in singles)
7. Better in 2/4 Slams
8. If we consider 100% of the surfaces (including clay), he is better overall, as he has more Grand Slam titles

Not disagreeing with you here but I wouldn't put any stock in YouTube polls.

 

[ADuck]

It shows how complete Djokovic is.

Complete could mean anything. When viewing 100% of the data without cherrypicking he is not the best. Sorry.

 

[zagor]

Very hard to compare eras due to a variety of factors.

 

[Lew II]

Complete could mean anything. When viewing 100% of the data without cherrypicking he is not the best. Sorry.

You perfectly know what complete means in tennis.

 

[Lew II]

Grand Slam win percentage (minimum 25 matches per surface):

1) Djokovic #1 hard, #4 grass, #4 clay --> average position #3
2) Borg #2 clay, #2 grass, #6 hard --> average position #3.3
3) Federer #2 hard, #3 grass, #8 clay --> average position #4.3
- gap -
4) Nadal #1 clay, #9 hard, #13 grass --> average position #7.7
5) Connors #5 hard, #10 grass, #10 clay --> average position #8
6) Murray #5 grass, #11 clay, #12 hard --> average position #9.3
7) Lendl #5 hard, #7 clay, #19 grass --> average position #10.3
8) Wilander #3 clay, #14 hard, #16 grass --> average position #11
9) Agassi #7 hard, #15 grass, #17 clay --> average position #13
10) Becker #7 grass, #11 hard, #23 clay --> average position #13.7

 

[aditya123]

Djokovic greater than Borg on grass???? No I dont think so!!!

 

[aditya123]

It is absurd to compare any player with the great Borg!!!! He won is last slam at 24 and left tennis by 26.

 

[UnforcedTerror]

Nobody but Djokovic fans think Djokovic is a better player than Nadal though.
In a recent Youtube poll about who is the tennis GOAT with over 27.000 votes, 25% of people voted for Nadal while only 12% voted for Djokovic:

An online poll, really? Do you really want to go there? Because it's easy to find one in which Djokovic is rated over Nadal. Moreover, everybody knows Rafa has more followers on social media so yeah.

And stop with the excuses, if Djokovic isn't talented enough to win as many Slams as Nadal despite competing in the same era, he ain't no greater than Nadal. The number of Grand Slam is the most relelvant all-time great criterion. Other criteria are just tie-breakers in case two players are tied in Slams.

I agree that Grand Slams are the most relevant achievements but it's never and will never be the end-all and be-all. Other achievements matter too, and your claim they are just tie-breakers is dumb to say the least.

Nadal has 19 Slams, and not only he is better at RG. Nadal also has more USO titles than Novak. With the claim "Novak is better in 2/3 surfaces" you are strategically ignoring clay and only considering 67% of the surfaces. If we consider 100% of the surfaces (not only 2 of 3), Nadal is better since 19 > 17.

How so? Me saying Novak is better in 2/3 surfaces doesn't mean the clay is ignored, quite the opposite, it means Nadal is better in 1 out of 3 surfaces which is clay.

Nadal has

1. More Grand Slam titles than Novak (including more USO titles)
2. Olympics
3. More Masters 1000
4. H2H advantage in Slams
5. Higher winning percentage
6. 5 Davis Cup (including a 96% winning percentage in DC matches in singles)
7. Better in 2/4 Slams
8. If we consider 100% of the surfaces (including clay), he is better overall, as he has more Grand Slam titles

1- Yes, Nadal has won 2 more slams.
2- Nadal has the olympics but Djokovic has multiple WTF titles. No comparison here. Djokovic > Nadal.
3- One more Masters title for Nadal doesn't make him the Masters king. Nadal needs to complete the Golden Masters first but for now, Djokovic Master's resume > Nadal's.
4. Djokovic leads Nadal in H2H l last time I checked, and if you want to talk about Slam H2H, Djokovic completed the Rafa-Slam beating him in every Major venue while Nadal's never beaten Nole at AO. Djokovic > Nadal.
5. Only on clay. Djokovic's has it higher on hard & grass. Djokovic > Nadal.
6. Team competitions now? Lol.
7. This is the difference between you and me, for you it's as simple as 2>1, for me, hell no. I do consider Djokovic a better USO player than Nadal. One title isn't much, Nadal was just fortunate enough to get cakewalk draws there.
8. Same point as #1.

 

[guitarra]

Roger is still undefeated and GOAT on blue clay. Beat that.

 

[Pheasant]

To me, Nadal’s dominance on clay earns bonus points. Unlike others, he is clearly the king pin by a massive margin on his favorite surface.

Djoker will pass Fed on hard courts eventually. But it will likely end up quite close.

Fed is the grass GOAT. But again, this is a very close call with Sampras.

Nadal owns clay by a massive margin. If Nadal wins the FO this year, that will be 3 separate 4 peats, which seems impossible. Nadal’s achievement on this surface will be remembered forever.

Let’s say Nadal ends up with a record 21 slam titles. If Nadal Jr came along and broke that record by winning 22 FO titles, then 22>21. I would give this to Nadal Jr. And Nadal Jr. would gain bonus points with 22 FO titles in 22 years. That’s true mastery of a surface, which would be completely unique. And uniqueness is a GOAT attribute.

 

[Phoenix1983]

The only question mark is Fed. I wouldn't say Djokovic is ahead on 2 surfaces there yet. Too close to call.

Borg is a question mark also.

Is Novak Djokovic really greater than him on grass?

 

[Pheasant]

As for hard courts, I go back and forth between Fed and Djoker. Right now, it’s Fed and here’s why;

1. Fed has the most hard courts titles
2. 6 WTF is a very big deal. During Fed’s prime, they paid as much as a slam title and about 5 times as much as a Masters. Masters events weren’t much of a focus during Fed’s prime.
3. 5+ slam titles at two different hard court slam events is impressive. Fed’s USO feat of 5 straight titles and 6 straight finals is absurd
4. Fed owns the two longest hard court winning streaks, which is absurd. Nobody is close in this metric. Fed had streaks of 56 and 36.

Of course, Djoker will sneak ahead with 1 more hard court slam title, which seems inevitable.