Where would you rank Djokovic now?

Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by Phoenix1983, Jan 27, 2013.

  1. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    In which conditions? I don't care for match-up. They are only match-up. Prime Djokovic couldn't deal with Grandpa Roddick.
     
    #51
  2. ramos77

    ramos77 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    605
    1. Lance Armstrong
    2. Ben Johnson
    3. Novak Djokovic
     
    #52
  3. Duncan Bell

    Duncan Bell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,229
    Location:
    Nottingham
    Clarky is really having an influence...
     
    #53
  4. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,960
    Location:
    the Great White North
    you have to admit, this is funny.:twisted:
     
    #54
  5. mariecon

    mariecon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,960
    Location:
    the Great White North
    sorry I meant this is funny!:twisted:
     
    #55
  6. Gonzo_style

    Gonzo_style Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,897
    Do not pay attention to that banned troll
     
    #56
  7. Boricua

    Boricua Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,084
    Good assesment but I would put him in the second group (Lendl and company) tied with Agassi and Lendl.
     
    #57
  8. Boricua

    Boricua Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,084
    Very hard to assess. All these guy had premier games and in any given day would lose or win one against the other. Its like asking, are the Miami Heat better or worse than the 90s Bulls or better or worse than the 80s Celtics and Lakers?
     
    #58
  9. Grgisme

    Grgisme Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    254
    Location:
    Belgrade, Serbia
    I'm so tired of people dismissing Djokovic. He proved that he's a true champion, and he'll prove even more.

    You fans of Fedal era really act like babies sometimes. Tenis evolves and changes, like everything else. Get over it.
     
    #59
  10. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    1. Federer
    2. Sampras
    3. Nadal
    4. Borg
    5. Connors
    6. Agassi
    7. Lendl
    8. McEnroe
    9. Djokovic
    10. Laver

    Would be my overall Open Era only rankings at this point. Djokovic could easily be number 5 by years end only though. Laver`s Grand Slam in 69 is overall worth more than the entire careers of Becker, Edberg, and Wilander btw.
     
    #60
  11. Grgisme

    Grgisme Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    254
    Location:
    Belgrade, Serbia
    That's a very very nice list. Well done.
     
    #61
  12. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York
    Yes, of course. Who else? (best of open era more precisely because some players have done better pre-open era).
     
    #62
  13. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    Well, I disagree. Connors is the USO GOAT.
     
    #63
  14. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York
    Why? More finals?
     
    #64
  15. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    oh come on, Becker with 6 slams, 3 tour finals, 1 WCT and all the other titles not as valuable as Laver's GS in 69?
     
    #65
  16. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York
    Connors has 7 finals at USO instead of 6 for Fed. It's arguable whether 7 total but non consecutive is a bigger feat than 6 in a row . Regardless, 5 consecutive titles is definitely better than 5 non consecutive ones and titles should supersede finals in terms of records imo. (In terms of finals played, Lendl holds the record at USO- or any slam for that matter- with eight consecutive but of course he won only 3 of them)
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
    #66
  17. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    10,869
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    Well in defense of Connors, who I also believe is the USO GOAT, (correct me if I'm wrong) but didn't he win the USO on clay and HC?
     
    #67
  18. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York

    I don't think that makes a difference. If anything, it makes Fed an even bigger favorite since Connors has only 3 titles in USO as we know it: a hard court slam. Winning it on clay gives Connors the edge over Fed in the clay slams won category. But it lowers his stats on hard court compared to Fed's (and Fed's overall hard court stats are much higher than Connors')
     
    #68
  19. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    10,869
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    Fair enough, but I think it shows Connors versatility in winning the USO no matter the conditions. He also has something like 98 wins there, which far surpasses anybody else's record at ANY GS never mind just the USO. It could also be argued that the space of time between wins for Connors shows more longevity than Fed at the USO (although I still think 5 straight is more impressive.)

    Anyway, this is all kind of off topic. I would rank Djokovic just below Agassi and McEnroe at this point, and ahead of Becker, Edberg, and Wilander in the open era.

    EDIT: Just checked the winning %'s at the USO for Connors and Fed. Turns out I was wrong. Fed has a higher % than Connors.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
    #69
  20. Fiji

    Fiji Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,189
    Ouch, LOL.
     
    #70
  21. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York

    It seems we're all wrong here because Sampras has 5 titles and 3 finals at USO, so if # of titles combined with # of finals determines superiority, then it should be Sampras, not Connors. :oops: Regardless, I think 5 consecutive titles is the most impressive feat. But I concede it's arguable.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
    #71
  22. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    Yes, and longevity.
     
    #72
  23. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    Sampras was fairly inconsistent. Too inconsistent to be the GOAT, I'd say. One additional final compared to Connors doesn't equal Connors's ridiculous consistency and longevity at the event, IMO.
     
    #73
  24. President

    President Legend

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,988
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    LOL

    10lols
     
    #74
  25. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,967
    Location:
    New York

    But Sampras had the longevity as well and he made 1 more final than Connors. With 2 finals (8 instead of 6) in the balance, I would start hesitating between giving precedence to more finals or consecutive titles. But with just 1 final difference , if you 're telling me Connors hung around twice as long as Fed and yet still won the same # of titles, I see it as an argument in favor of Fed, not in favor of Connors (ie Fed dominated his era more than Connors if he scored the same results in more compact time frame/fewer attempts).
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2013
    #75
  26. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Connors would for sure have 7 U.S Opens had it been on decoturf the 3 years it was on clay. He lost 75 and 77 finals to Orantes and Vilas who would have had no chance of beating him on a fast hard court. I hate calling Connors the U.S Open GOAT as I personaly find the guy a major jerk, and for that reason I ever prefer Federer to him, but I think he has to get the title, atleast in the Open Era. Actually all time it would have to be Tilden though, 7 titles, and I think almost all of those were in a row. Even Connors (or Federer, or Sampras) didnt do that.
     
    #76
  27. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    As for Connors vs Lendl in general (not speaking the U.S Open here, but overall) I notice alot having Lendl above Connors. While I can understand that, I dont really agree. Both are 1-2 one way or another in alot of the same type of records, slam finals, I think were in slam semis at one point (Federer probably surpassed that by now), tournament titles in the Open Era. So all the stats Lendl is most praised for, those are also Connors biggest strengths and he matches him. Lendl from 85-87 probably seemed more dominant for 3 a year stretch than Connors ever was. However Connors from 74-76 was really similarily dominant, it just doesnt seem that way since he only won 1 major in 75 and 76 combined, but around then only the U.S Open and Wimbledon were really considered big 4 events, unlike when Lendl was on top. Connors was clearly the #1 in 76, and a toss up with Ashe in 75. Connors in 74 was far more dominant than Lendl was any single year however.

    The main thing though is their matches vs each other make it hard for to think Lendl is the better player. Even at 30 and 31 Connors was still winning most of his matches with Lendl, especialy the big meetings. Lendl had to wait until almost 25 to start getting the upper hand on a now 32 year old Connors. Plus Lendl won almost all his majors after McEnroe and Connors declined in a huge way, and Borg was long gone. Connors won his majors in a much tougher era.
     
    #77
  28. Flash O'Groove

    Flash O'Groove Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,156
    Connors at the USO:
    5 titles, 2 finals, 7 SF, 3 QF. From 1973 to 1991 he missed only once the QF or better.

    Sampras:
    5 titles, 3 finals, 1SF, 1 QF.

    Federer:
    5 titles, 1 finals, 2 SF, 1QF. His titles were consecutive.

    Lendl:
    3 titles, 5 finals, 1 SF, 2 QF. He had the same consistency than Sampras, but struggled to win it.

    I would say that Connors is the USOPen Goat by a good margin. He was a factor here for a freakin 20 years! Behind him Sampras and Fed are tied. Fed as the consecutive titles while Sampras has more finals. Fed is not done though. Lendl is not in the discussion, as he couldn't win the last match.
     
    #78
  29. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    Yeah, agreed. I think Sampras and Federer have equally good claims but Federer will surpass him by the time he's done. He'll have to win another USO (or make 2 more finals) to surpass Connors, though.
     
    #79
  30. Agassifan

    Agassifan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,542
    Quite possible he can be in Nadal's tier by the time he is done. Can't catch Fed in total slams, but could encroach into Fed's tier with a calendar slam perhaps.
     
    #80

Share This Page