Is Djokovic an all-time great?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by 5555, Nov 25, 2012.

  1. Mike Sams

    Mike Sams Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    5,270
    Nadal's level in 2011 was extremely high. It was actually incredibly high. *******s just don't want to admit that Djokovic had all the answers.
     
  2. DRII

    DRII Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    6,567

    Dream on!

    It may have been high but it was off vs 2010, just like Nole's level is a tad lower this year vs 2011.
     
  3. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    12,484
    Location:
    Australia
    If not for Federer, Hewitt would have at least four or five slams to his name and a long run at #1. (Ending 2001, 2002, 2004 and possibly 2005 as the top ranked player).
     
  4. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Depends what you consider as an all time great
    He is around number 30 in my book but has time left to improved
     
  5. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    The only level Nadals 2011 level was comparable (not better but somewhat similar) to his best years was outdoor hard courts, where to Djokovics credit he still beat Nadal numerous times, but if Djokovic in by far his best year of tennis ever, on by far his best surface couldnt beat Nadal, then that would really have looked back. Nadals level of play on clay was his worst since 2004, it just shows how far ahead of everyone on clay he managed to win Monte Carlo and Roland Garros, and still be the #1 clay courter that year with that level of play. His play on grass was light years below 2007 and 2008, and a bit lower than 2006 and 2011. His play indoors at the WTF was an all time joke even for his standards, on par with 09.
     
  6. Mike Sams

    Mike Sams Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    5,270
    Nadal's level in 2010 was nothing great. Everybody else was in horrid form including Federer, Djokovic and Murray. Del Potro was in the hospital and the path was clear for Nadal. Nadal had a great USO thanks much in part to an incredibly easy draw along with a serve which he couldn't ever duplicate again without fear of injury to his shoulder.
     
  7. DRII

    DRII Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    6,567
    PLEASE!

    Nadal's form in 2010 took everyone by surprise, not to mention he came back with those new RPM blast strings that brought another level of spin to his game (at the loss of some pace and penetration).
     
  8. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    14,351
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    Nadal's 2010 form was very high, but the field was pretty weak as well. The fact he took a set of Federer indoors should show that he was playing very well even by his standards. I'd take his summer 2008 form over it though atleast on grass and clay.
     
  9. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    12,484
    Location:
    Australia
    Nadal stepped it up when he needed to most and profited.
     
  10. The Moonballer

    The Moonballer New User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Messages:
    35
    Djokovic denied ****** of winning quite a few GS so he is a great in my books.

    Can't have the Cheater winning USO again, can't fluke it twice
     
  11. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,418
    Prime Federer > prime Djokovic.


    However, I don't think the margin is as huge as some make it out to be. Djokovic in 2011 woudn't be a cakewalk for anybody. Grass and indoors is Fed by a good deal, clay is Nole (IMO his performance against Nadal 2 clay masters put him over the top to me), and outdoor HC is close. Strictly peak level, of course (and my criteria is mainly against the field, not head-to-head, although it does play a small part in my evaluation).
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2012
  12. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,643
    Clay Nole - really?

    Can't understand why you would have Nole winning against Federer on clay. Nearly 30 year old (ie past his peak) Federer beat peak Nole at the French Open last year in a very important match. Federer has a much better record on clay that Djokovic...so could you elaborate on your reasoning?
     
  13. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Federer fans have Federer winning over prime Kuerten on clay despite that prime Federer was CRUSHED by a hip butchered Kuerten at the 2004 French in their only ever meeting there. Sorry you will have to do better than 29 year old Federer beating Djokovic just once to why Federer would automaticaly win on clay. Djokovic beating Nadal in straight sets in 2 back to back finals on clay is noteable, considering that is something even peak Federer could only dream of doing. As for record, Federer's is better now but Djokovic has a good chance to catch and surpass Federer's records at both the Australian Open and on clay in general. On all faster courts Federer will always have a superior record.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2012
  14. Netspirit

    Netspirit Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Messages:
    4,245
    Location:
    Snoqualmie, WA
    Old Federer and prime Djokovic actually played on clay in 2011.
     
  15. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    I agree with this assessment.
     
  16. mbm0912

    mbm0912 Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,098
    Djokovic THE Great
     
  17. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,418
    Again, I mean mainly performance against the field. Djokovic won 3 titles on clay, 2 masters. He straight-setted Nadal in both. H2H with Fed would be competitive, no doubt, but I'm talking big picture. In my opinion, with both of them at their peak I see Djokovic having a slight edge.

    Also, form differs from one match to another. It's not all black and white. While Federer was past his peak in 2011, in that match he was inspired and played his best match in a couple of years. One match isn't a massive sample size by any means. 2012 Djokovic was worse than 2011 Djokovic,and 2012 Federer was better than Fed of 2011, yet the result was reversed. Not saying Nole would win the majority of clay meetings by any means, but it would be close and against the field I think Djokovic would have the slight edge (since winning clay masters often means beating Nadal in the final, and Djokovic has a higher chance of doing that.)

    As a Fedkovic fan I'd find them playing each other in their respective primes mouth-watering, I'll say that :)
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2012
  18. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,418
    Again, I was mainly talking about performance against the entire field, not head-to-head.
     
  19. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,418
    Yeah I think some people are too narrow-minded in their assessment of the two. I mean I hear people say Federer would "easily win", "kick his ass", "destroy, eviscerate, disembowel him" . . . I mean come on, let's be real here. Djokovic of 2011 was 12-2 against Federer, Nadal and Murray. He was 2-0 against Nadal on clay, without losing a set. At the AO he straight-setted Fed and Murray. At Indian Wells and Miami he was barely losing games up til the semi's, then beat Federer and Nadal. He won 39% of his return games that year, the highest rate since they started keeping track of it. His defense, movement and return that year were stunning. He would be a tough cookie for anyone. When people talk as if Fed would have his way with him with his hands tied behind his back, it just makes them sound uninformed.
     
  20. Seventeen

    Seventeen Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    Messages:
    268
    I hadn't realised some of those stats - truly was an incredible year.
     
  21. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,686


    Yep,he's beating up on old man Fed, washed up Nadal, and head case Murray. Great stuff indeed.
     
  22. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    It is a FACT that Djoker does not have as many slams or weeks at #1, as the others on the Laver list, FACT, again it is a FACT.

    It's been nice trolling with you.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na675QXAtS4
     
  23. NGM

    NGM Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2008
    Messages:
    636
    Of course Djokovic is all time great, no one can deny it. But you can not compare him to Federer in his prime. In my opinion, no one in this generation can be considered as (nearly) great as Federer when he is in the zone. When I say no one, I mean Nadal and Murray.

    I said that not because Federer is better than them in every aspect of the game. In the opposite, Nadal and Djokovic are much better in mental strength. Their backhand is not easily broken down like Federer, and they are as quick as him. But when you see Federer playing in full flight, you see something different. Something you can not describe by words.

    When he plays well, you see variety. It seems he can change the way he plays after every stroke and you don't feel tired when you see him playing, because he is so creative on his shots, he does not play one type of game hours after hours, but always find another way to approach the balls. He does it so easily that you don't feel he is trying. Quite the opposite, you have a feeling that he did not think when he changes the game, like everything comes to him naturally and he just let them out. It is so sad that he seems lost his killer instinct because of his age but still once in a while, you can see his greatness in a beautiful day. Should I need to say: you can not see the same thing in Djokovic' games, or anyone in this generation for that matter.

    People always talk about the beauty of his game, like he is dancing on the floor. Today he is not dancing like that frequently, instead he is walking like an old man with broken legs. But in his heyday, he covered the court like a boss, let no ball out of his reach, give balls back with extra speed and win his opponent hearts. Back to 2003-2007, you can hear players praised him almost everyday, like he was from another planet, his game was so artistic, and they lost without regrets because they knew he was so much above them, something they will never achieve in their life time despite how much they try and work. And now when Djokovic plays well, we praise that he is so strong, he is so quick, mental incredible, his body so flexible, his backhand and forehand so consistent, so hard to attack. Yes he is incredible, but not something we dream about. Federer is something only happens in our dream, while Djokovic is something happens in this real world if we work hard and physically blessed. Same thing with Nadal (I should not mention Murray here).

    If you put prime Djokovic and prime Federer in the same court, they will produce hell of matches. I think Federer has much more chance to win. But the more important and funny thing is, he can also make Djokovic play better than his already high level of playing. His genius always excite his opponent and make them trying their best to beat him. It is always the case. Federer-Safin 2005, Federer-Nalbandian 2005, Federer-Nadal 2008, Federer-Djokovic US Open 2010 and 2011, just too many to mention. Great players need to beat Federer to be even greater, not the opposite. Beating Federer, especially in Grand Slam, is much needed certificate for their status in the history of the sport, a ultimate evident that they have a game to be remembered.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2012
  24. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    13,684
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    Call them what you will, the fact remains they are the other top players in the game today and Djokovic consistently beats them!
     
  25. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    Have you got proof that Laver was not honest or sober when he made that list?

    You said that you were a proffesional player. Can you prove it?

    When you take into account level of competition it's a matter of opinion whether Connors is greater player than Djokovic. It's not a fact.
     
  26. kragster

    kragster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,671
    I would agree with your assessment. I think going by accomplishments, I dont see how people could put prime Nole above prime Fed , Fed was so much more consistent and won so much more. I think its fair to say that prime GOAT > prime Tier 2/3 great

    At the same time, some people put prime Fed on this pedestal where they think prime Nole would be no match and I strongly disagree with that opinion given that even pre prime Nole was given prime Fed trouble.


    Most tennis players would give their arm to win a slam let alone 5, so by that token Nole is already a great. I expect him to surpass the likes of Becker/Edberg and join the Agassi/Lendl ranks. Of course if Rafa doesnt come back strong and Murray somehow doesnt keep his level high, Nole could easily pick up 5+ slams.
     
  27. The-Champ

    The-Champ Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,541
    Location:
    Sweden
    Those tennis experts regard Nadal and Borg and as the greatest ever on clay because of the number of titles they have on the surface. Now, those same experts would regard Agassi as greater on clay than Djokovice because his accomplishements on the surface are way ahead of Nole's. Nobody gives a crap about competition. It's not like Nadal had to face the muster, courier or the Kuertens on route to those 7 FOs. Fact, only titles count. Nobody regards Krajicek as greater than Boris on grass just because the former beat Sampras at wimbledon. Boris has more titles on grass therefore, he is greater than Krajicek on grass.

    - I brought up Federer just to show you how absurd your speculation is, that had it not been for Nadal, Nole would have won the FO by now. If Federer had been 25, you wouldn't know if Nole would have had 3 majors in 2011.






    So why did you bring up Medvedev and Nadal into this? Fact: Agassi has 1 FO and two finals.




    Yes you did! you've been spewing the same nonesense everywhere, that only experts' opinion are relevant.

    Here's one expert opinion (Macenroe): "Nadal is a greater volleyer than Federer".



    Why can't you do that yourself?



    Are their opinion facts?
     
  28. DRII

    DRII Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    6,567
    Guess all those dreams were wet ones for you...
     
  29. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    Yes I played satellites in the early 90's, I lost to Bill Scanlon, Sandon Stolle, Mike Wolf, TJ Middleton, two others who I can't recall. I was 0-6 over the two summers and that was it for my career, I continued to teach for a year, and then after 3 years of that, I was finished and have played probably 10 times in the last 20+ years, if you'd like I could send you a signed poster, unfortunately the gear I have I'm not getting rid of, unless you want an old pair of stretched out socks.

    And it's not a matter of opinion that Djoker has less slams and less weeks at #1 than the others on Laver's list, not sure what you can't comprehend, I never said anything about the level of competition between the two eras.
     
  30. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,565
    You, my friend, are now deep in self-pwnage territory thanks to this gem...

    So, following that logic, when you take into account the level of competition, it's only a matter of opinion whether Rod Laver is a better player than, say, John X, a veteran from the local Ponca City, Arkansas, tennis club. It is not a fact. Hence, if Laver can't be proved to be a better player than a guy who never entered any competition and whose game basically sucks, he can't be said to be a tennis expert, can he? Hence, his opinion isn't worth squat. So this whole thread is irrelevant.

    Also, your "level of competition" law says that my John X could be a better player than your Novak D, and John X, who never played a professional match in his life, sure isn't an all-time great. So how could Novak D, who you can't prove is a better player than him, be one?

    Well done!
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2012
  31. 6-1 6-3 6-0

    6-1 6-3 6-0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2012
    Messages:
    4,657
    I'd say yes, because Djokovic is a part of the greatest rivalry in world history, Nadal-Djokovic.
     
  32. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,551
    ever heard of El Clasico?
     
  33. vllaznia

    vllaznia Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Messages:
    406
    You are wasting your time my friend, 5555 is not gonna comprehend that.
     
  34. KevinB9986

    KevinB9986 New User

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2012
    Messages:
    14
    I think it would be interesting if they had different types of tournaments for different type of rackets. Have some all wood racket tournaments. Then have different tournaments with the modern rackets. Probably will never happen, but to me it would be interesting and make it easier to compare players of today with the players of the past.
     
  35. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,565
    Don't worry, I know that. :D
     
  36. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,980
    Location:
    U.S
    how does djokovic have an advantage against the field on clay ? he has a grand total of 1 F at RG, suffered upset losses to melzer/kohlscreiber there.... federer since 2003 hasn't had such losses @ RG ...he has 1 W and 4 finals @ RG ...

    djoker is also 1-3 vs ferrer on clay, federer hasn't lost to ferrer on clay or anywhere else for that matter ....

    djoker has a matchup edge vs nadal on clay when compared to federer, that's it , but against the field in general ? I don't think so ... I think fed has the edge in that one ...
     
  37. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    Have you got proof that Laver was not honest or sober when he made that list?

    [​IMG]

    You and merlinpinpin do not know what word "fact" means. Go back to school and educate yourself.

    That's not proof. I could get socks from an pro as well as a poster signed by him, and then send it to you as "proof" I'm that player.

    So, I ask you again: can you prove that you were a professional player?

    Yes, you did here http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=7034561&postcount=85

    Is it a fact?

    Is it a fact?

    "Djokovic, 24, broke that record this year by going 43 games unbeaten, ending with a semi-final loss to Roger Federer in the French Open in May. But McEnroe believes tennis is harder today than it was 27 years ago. He told the BBC in May : "There is more competition, more athleticism, deeper fields and more depth in the sport. "So his record is even more impressivethan mine."" http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/14896786

    It's a matter of opinion what counts. In 2006 many tennis experts said that Federer is greater player than Sampras even though Federer had 9 slams at that time.

    I did not say that Nole would have won the FO by now had it not been for Nadal.

    I explained why in my previous post.

    It's a matter of opinion whether Agassi is greater clay courter than Djokovic.

    Can you explain why "only expert's opinions are relevant" means "expert's opinions are facts"?

    Can tell me which tennis expert is always right?

    In my opening post I quoted 6 tennis experts.

    No.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2012
  38. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,565
    I won't post it here, obviously, as I wouldn't want to ruin his reputation (more than he did on giving this list, I mean--and than you did by copying it here). :D

    Do you really need to repost things that prove my points? You would do better by arguing against them (of course, you'd be hard-pressed to do so, considering you were the one who set yourself up for this pwnage in the first place, but hey, you can still try by saying that it was a mistake, that you wrote that bs about perception of level of competition negating all facts while you had been abducted by aliens, that the NSKzilla army of clones stole your account, etc. It's bound to be entertaining, at least...)
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  39. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,565
    You could also get socks from a troll and a poster signed by him and send it to this forum to proove that...

    No, wait. You don't need that! :D
     
  40. sansaephanh

    sansaephanh Professional

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,166
    Location:
    Oakland
    I think if they speed up the courts again and shorten the tennis season a little we can see the modern era really shine.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  41. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    12,484
    Location:
    Australia
    Djokovic is top 20 all time.
     
  42. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    That says nothing about the level of competition between the two eras, but then again, the first sentence of this thread quotes Agassi, yet he didn't say it, the author of that article did, obviously reading comprehension isn't available to 55555555555555555555555555555555555555.
     
  43. Huanita99

    Huanita99 Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    209
    I'd say it's too early to talk about this but his is on his way. I believe that Fed at Nole's age won 7 majors. Nole 5. so if stays serious and keep working not sure who is going to stop him in next 3/4 years. Fed is slowing down, Rafa (even if he is healthy, just not as good on HC, and his mileage is huge. Mandy is simply not as consistent as Nole, plus he can't play on clay.
     
  44. Gonzo_style

    Gonzo_style Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,897
    Clarky, this is pathetic.
     
  45. TheFifthSet

    TheFifthSet Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,418
    Oh, overall I completely agree, Federer is a far better claycourter and will most likely end up with better credentials on clay.

    However, at Djokovic's peak, I think his performance against the field on clay would be better than Fed at his peak, if they were both playing at their peaks at the same time. Remember that how they match up with Nadal is a huge, HUGE part of it, because if they wanna win titles on clay they'll have to go through Nadal so that's a massive piece of the pie.
     
  46. Huanita99

    Huanita99 Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    209
    of course he does, and I'm talking about Nole 2.0 (last two years). The only player who def. him on clay last 2year (except Nadal of course) was that clown Tipsarevic on that stupid blue clay, hey Tipsy lol. so check out the facts first. He did win 2 masters on clay beating Nadal. don't use some old data to twist facts.

    Nobody will be able to challenge him on clay, except Rafa who is the the best clay player ever.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
  47. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,748
    Location:
    London
    You failed to provide proof that Laver was not honest or sober when he made that list, so you lost yet another argument.

    1. Pwnage? You lost virtually all arguments against me

    2. I repost things that prove your points? A fact is something you can prove. Can you prove that when level of competition is taken into account Connors is greater player than Djokovic?

    You said that you were a professional player. Can you prove it?

    You said that Borg, McEnroe and Lendl were tougher to beat than Djokovic's rivals, so your comment is about the level of competition between the two eras.

    That's just one instance. I quoted sources many times since I became user on TW, I you found just one instance when I got it wrong. So, no, that's not enough to prove that my reading comprehension is poor.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2012
  48. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,686

    No it's the truth.
     
  49. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,598
    Or Rangers v Celtic?
     
  50. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    I said those three are all time greats, nowhere does it say they were tougher to beat. Less trolling, more reading, you can do it.
     

Share This Page