Is Djokovic an all-time great?

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

  1. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    You said that you were a professional player. Can you prove it?

    My queston:

    Your answer:

    Why did you say "Yeah I can prove it"?
     
  2. cknobman

    cknobman Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,087
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    After 2011 and 2012 I would also think that he has moved himself into top 20 (maybe only 25) all time.
     
  3. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    Wow you are a special person indeed. Let's review, Djoker lacks the weeks at #1 and slams to be ahead of the players on the Laver list, FACT. Connors level of competition included, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl, all time greats, FACT. There is no way to factually prove that one level of competition is greater than another, which is why I never set out to do this, yet you seem to think that unless I can prove this, all my statements aren't FACTS, and not surprisingly, you are wrong.
     
  4. merlinpinpin

    merlinpinpin Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,553
    Can you prove that when level of competition is taken into account Djokovic is a greater player than my 3-year old son? It's either yes or no to both, so better make up your mind.
     
  5. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    Yes that sounds about right, I haven't done the precise ranking but he would probably be around 20-25.

    Let's see, Fed, Laver, Sampras, Borg, Nadal, Rosewall, Gonzales, Budge, Tilden, Lendl, Connors, Agassi, McEnroe, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, Kramer, Perry, Cochet, Lacoste, Hoad, Vines, Emerson......that's 23 guys I would rank ahead of him right now. There may be a few more.
     
  6. djokovic2008

    djokovic2008 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,697
    Erm fed vs djoker is 3-3 on clay and one of those wins for fed was a RETIREMENT. Are you kidding me djoker is the only one can even come close to challenge Nadal on clay.
     
  7. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    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?

    In 2006 many tennis experts said that Federer is greater player than Sampras even though at that time Federer was far behind Sampras in weeks at No. 1 and slams.

    It's matter of opinion what is an "all-time great" so it's not a fact.
    You said that you can prove that Connors is greater player than Djokovic if level of competition is taken into account.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2012
  8. Hodgey20

    Hodgey20 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    137
    YES djoko is an all time great

    And if you dont think so you have to agree that he will be. The Djoker is an all time great because he has beaten all time greats consistently (fed,nadal)... AND his career is far from over hes the best in the world right now fed will fade away in a few yrs who knows about nadal. Besides that there is no one much younger than him that looks to be a threat so it will be him murray and delpo at the top for a while it looks like
     
  9. cknobman

    cknobman Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,087
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    ???

    Nadal has a 12-2 record vs Djoker on clay.
    Nadal has a 12-2 record vs Federer on clay.

    Federers career clay resume is far far far far greater than what Novak has done so far.

    I dont get where on earth would you even be able to assume that Novak is a better clay courter than Federer.
     
  10. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    Perhaps this will help you.

    fact
    [fakt]

    noun
    1.
    something that actually exists; reality; truth:
    2.
    something known to exist or to have happened:

    3.
    a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true:
     
  11. axel89

    axel89 Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,161
    federer might have a better clay resume NOW but we'll see when djokovic is at 31
     
  12. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    A 5 slams holder is an all timer
    How big?
    Between 30 and 40
     
  13. Huanita99

    Huanita99 Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    209
    nope, it's more like 20-25 and his career is far from over so that will improve by the time he is done.
     
  14. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    You said that you were a professional player? Can you prove it?

    What is definition of "all-time great"?

    It's not a fact. It's matter of opinion what makes one player greater than another.

    It's not a fact. It's matter of opinion what is definition of "all-time great".

    You said that you can prove what I asked you to prove and I asked you to prove that Connors is greater player than Djokovic when level of competition is taken into account. Right after you said (in the same sentence) that you can prove it, you mentioned Borg, McEnroe and Lendl to back up your claim. So, I was right when I stated that you said Borg, McEnroe and Lendl were tougher to beat than Djokovic's rivals.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2012
  15. kOaMaster

    kOaMaster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,025
    Location:
    Basel/Switzerland
    yes. let's wait.
     
  16. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    It may not be a fact in the same way that 1 + 1 = 2 is a fact. However if 99.9% of people maintain that Lendl, Borg and McEnroe are all-time greats, the conclusion must be that it is the truth.
     
  17. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    What is the definition of "all-time great"?
     
  18. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    It can be defined in different ways by different people but, however they define it, a very large percentage will place Lendl, Borg and McEnroe into that category.

    Presumably you're not trying to claim that, just because "all-time great" is a concept, and not a tangible item, it can't exist? :confused:
     
  19. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    I forgot to say that you commited logical fallacy called argumentum ad populum. It's an fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because most people believe it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
     
  20. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    I'm not bothering to read that but I think you are defining truth as scientific fact.

    For instance it can't be scientifically proven that you created this thread just to spout off philosophy, make yourself look smart and amuse yourself. However most readers will agree it to be true. :)
     
  21. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    Ship or play? ;)
     
  22. qindarka

    qindarka Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    267
    I'm not saying these rules of argumentation are wrong, they do serve as a very useful guideline. I do think, however, that its simplistic to use all these as proof of 'winning the argument'. And is 'winning' really the objective here?
     
  23. Cup8489

    Cup8489 Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    9,238
    Location:
    Silvis, IL
    Well, by that token, no one has ever been an all-time great, because if we assume that the opinions of professionals are only to be taken with a grain of salt, none of the top players in history has a claim to being an all time great.

    Especially not Djokovic. I'm really not sure what your argument here is.. are you trying to say there are no all-time greats? Because that's pretty much what you've just done, if you're thinking in such black and white terms as logical fallacies and only having a sound argument if it is backed up by facts (something you're not actually doing yourself, mind you, seeing as you said this in your OP):
    So, if you believe that the majority of expert opinions are not valid evidence to support the claim that Lendl, Borg, and McEnroe are all-time greats, something you just hinted at by calling another poster out for using a 'logical fallacy' to disprove his point, then your whole thread is for nothing, as you also have no grounds to argue Djokovic is An all time great.

    So, in conclusion, by taking your own words and applying them to the topic at hand, no, Djokovic is not an all time great.
     
  24. FlamEnemY

    FlamEnemY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,554
    AO can't come soon enough.
     
  25. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    In my opinion it's fun to debate is Djokovic an all-time great, so I do not think this thread is for nothing.

    It's matter of opinion.
     
  26. jokinla

    jokinla Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,705
    Fact = truth, reality, something known to be true!!!!!!!!!
    Examples of this would be:
    1. Djoker has less slams and weeks at #1 than the others on the Laver list, an indisputable FACT!
    2. Borg, McEnroe Lendl, Connors, all legends of the games, hall of famers, all with more weeks at #1 and slams than Djoker, an indisputable FACT!

    As I said before, you should read what I wrote and stop trolling, I never said the above bold, you have adjusted it to fit your silly debate, and once again you are wrong, an indisputable FACT!
     
  27. BauerAlmeida

    BauerAlmeida Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Argentina
    Djokovic has a lot more years ahead in his career, while the others are retired.

    He will end up being with more slams than Agassi, Connors, Mac and Lendl probably.
     
  28. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,817
    Location:
    Poland, eating bigos and ┼╝eberka
    Put together?
     
  29. Cup8489

    Cup8489 Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    9,238
    Location:
    Silvis, IL
    Wow, he reported one of my posts as well. I hate when that stuff gets reported just because I call someone out on their hypocrisy. Feels like censorship at times.
     
  30. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Djokovic can be argued as an all time great. Many rate Edberg, Becker, and Wilander as all time greats, and one could easily argue Djokovic is equal or slightly ahead of all of them, despite that they have 1 more major (well 2 more for Wilander). Yeah you could argue he isnt too, but it is far from a crazy assertion by 5555 to say he is, and most experts do call him an all time great at this point, a lower tier one probably, but still an all time great.
     
  31. beast of mallorca

    beast of mallorca Legend

    Joined:
    May 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,752
    He has time on his side, so he can change the above for sure. MIGHT even be in the category of Fed, Sampras, Laver at some point......POSSIBLY.
     
  32. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    I doubt he will ever be in that tier, as he started dominating too late (consider that Borg, Sampras, Fed and Nadal have all won at least one slam for 8 consecutive years - that's something I don't think Djoker can achieve).

    Mind you he might win the CYGS... :shock:
     
  33. LuckyR

    LuckyR Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    6,404
    Location:
    The Great NW
    Well considering that the level of tennis he sustained during his Streak was the best that the game has ever seen, yup he's an all time great. Not the GOAT, but by definition an ATG.
     
  34. TennisCJC

    TennisCJC Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    5,360
    Djoko is not quite an all time great in my view. He is just simply a great player. To me, you must have at least 6+ slams and maybe some other distinctive record such as a career grand slam - winning all 4 slams to be in the all time great group. Djoko is obviously behind Fed, Nadal and Sampras; and I put him behind Agassi, McEnroe, Borg, Lendld and Connors who all had more slams and Agassi has a career grand slam.
     
  35. LuckyR

    LuckyR Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2006
    Messages:
    6,404
    Location:
    The Great NW
    Just wondering if in the Talk Track 100 Yard Dash Warehouse Forum, if a runner who owns the current World Record in the event (that occurred at a second tier meet), but never dominated in many important meets, like the Olympics would be considered not an All Time Great in the sport. I would call that guy the Fastest Human of All Time.
     
  36. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    You said that you were a professional player. Can you prove it?

    PS This is the last time I asked you the above question. If you do not answer I will conclude that you do not have proof you are a tennis expert.

    In one of your earlier posts you said it's a fact that Djokovic is not greater player than Connors, Agassi, Lendl etc. First you said "no way he is above any those guys" here http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=7032841&postcount=58 then I asked you "Is it a fact?" here http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=7032971&postcount=65 and your answer was "Yep" here http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=7033436&postcount=71

    In one of your earlier posts you wrote it's a fact that Borg, McEnroe and Lendl are all-time greats. Is that correct?

    You said that you can prove that Connors is greater player than Djokovic when level of competition is taken into account. Is that correct?
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2012
  37. Paul Murphy

    Paul Murphy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,925
    He's on the way, no doubt about it.
     
  38. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    According to your criteria, Djokovic is greater player than Pancho Gonzales. Novak has superior accomplishments at Grand Slams (numbers).
     
  39. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    In 2006 many tennis experts stated that Federer is greater player than Sampras even though in 2006 Federer had 9 slams (5 less than Sampras). It's matter of opinion what is criteria for greatness.
     
  40. reaper

    reaper Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,102
    I think Djokovic will end his career with about 9 grand slam titles which would put him 5th on the open era men's list. That would make him an all time great.
     
  41. Sabratha

    Sabratha G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    12,088
    Location:
    Australia
    Djokovic (at age 25) - 5 slams.
    Federer (at age 25) - 9 slams.

    Do the math.
     
  42. FlamEnemY

    FlamEnemY Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,554
    Is that a fact????????
     
  43. Love_No1e

    Love_No1e New User

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Messages:
    77
    Not yet but he definitely has the potential to be. 2 fantastic years including one record breaking year means he'll always be remembered as a great but to be an all time great he has to rack up more slams and win Roland garros. 2013 will be a better indication of where he'll stand. I think 2013 will actually be the most important year in terms of defining his career.
     
  44. rafafan20

    rafafan20 Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    964
    Location:
    USA
    I think he is, he is one of the biggest TALENTS to ever play the game. The mental aspect is coming round as well. Plus he offers something different than the run of the mill boring athlete in today's sport.
     
  45. nikdom

    nikdom Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,725
    Location:
    Tennisville
    Can't say just yet. In an era of two double-digit slam winners who are still active (at least one is), Djokovic's performance however solid, is not looking impressive enough yet.

    Perhaps when he gets in the Agassi range or around 8 slams, or if he completes his career grand slam.
     
  46. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    In 2006 many tennis experts stated that Federer is greater player than Sampras even though Federer had 9 slams in 2006 (5 less than Sampras). It's matter of opinion what is criteria for greatness.

    Yes.
     
  47. Cup8489

    Cup8489 Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    9,238
    Location:
    Silvis, IL
    Yes, and consequently his opinion on the matter is no less valid than yours, because it's opinion-based.
     
  48. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    The-Champ stated it's a fact that only titles count. According to him it is not matter of opinion but matter of fact what is criteria for greatness.
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012
  49. Hawkeye7

    Hawkeye7 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,003
    Location:
    Cologne
    Considering that titles/achievements are the only objective criteria (fact) we have to judge greatness, his argument is better than yours (opinion).
     
  50. 5555

    5555 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,701
    Location:
    London
    Is criteria for greatness a matter of opinion? Yes or no?
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2012

Share This Page