Is Djokovic an all-time great?

[TMF]

This thread can only die when Nole loses, otherwise the nonsense will persist.

[above bored]

Originally Posted by sonicare

Can someone name me one thing that agassi does clearly better than djokovic apart from maybe hitting half volleys from the baseline?

I want something that is clear as night and day. So don't come back with return or backhand cos those are debatable.

I can point to djokovic's movement which is on a different planet to agassi.

So, please bring forth your opinions.

To answer the original question. Djokovic is definitely an all time great. Not a GOAT candidate though. You dont pawn Nadal across 3 surfaces and 7 finals consecutively at his peak without being an all time great. Add to that, his game play when down is stuff of legends.

What the Djoker has shown is that his peak is as good as anyone. he lacks longevity but hopefully that will come.

Agassi was a more aggressive and better ball striker than Djokovic, off both wings.

What separates Djokovic as a player is his consistency, movement and defensive ability. His ball striking is not as good as Agassi's.

[above bored]

Originally Posted by Apun94

Results wise, yes Nole is not one of the all time great, bt thats only becuz his career path is not finished yet. He is considered one of the all time greats simply becz of the level he has been able to play at consistently over the past two years. If he plays his best this man does not have a real weakness. And he has shown that he can play his best consistently. We all know the he is a better version of agassi. Anyone who can thrash prime nadal and does get the better of murray and fed on most occasions is definitely one of the best of all time. No one from the previous eras has come even close to this guy

You cannot really judge level of play objectively across eras because different eras restrict the level achievable. No player today would be playing as they do if they were playing 10 or 20 years ago. Each era always benefits from the ground work laid down prior to their own time.

You can only really compare level based on the degree to which each player has been able to separate themselves from their peers within their own time.

[The-Champ]

5555 needs to explain why Dolgopolov is as great as Federer.

If 5555 cannot explain this, then he has lost this debate.

[merlinpinpin]

Originally Posted by TheNatural

No, because he hasn't won enough slams yet and because he has only been great for a few years. He has to be great for more than a couple of years to be an all time great. In a few years time we will be in a better position to re-asses.

Is this a factual opinion, or an opinionated fact?

[ruariatp]

Not yet...once he has the french. but im not convinced his stamina is totally natural..

[5555]

1. BeHappy lost the argument.

2. The-Champ will lose the argument too if he does not explain why tennis experts disagree who is greater between Ivan Lendl and Pancho Gonzales if the criteria for greatness is not a matter of opinion.

Originally Posted by tennis_pro

Wow, 5555, 5 years since you registered on TW and you still can't tell the difference between a fact and opinion.

You agree with The-Champ that criteria for greatness is not a matter of opinion?

[Phoenix1983]

Djokovic is not an all-time great. This is a fact.

[librarysteg]

My answer would be not yet, but he might still become one. We'll have to wait another 5-10 years to know for sure. At this point, I think it could go either way.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by TMF

This thread can only die when Nole loses, otherwise the nonsense will persist.

It isnt nonsense. What is your definition of an all time great. Since Becker, Edberg, and Wilander are all time greats (and most think they are) then Djokovic should be called one too.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

It isnt nonsense. What is your definition of an all time great. Since Becker, Edberg, and Wilander are all time greats (and most think they are) then Djokovic should be called one too.

I'm not talking about Nole is either one of all time great or not, but this thread turns out to be an ego contest. Every opinions must provide facts/proven to have any credibility. Rofl

[The-Champ]

Originally Posted by 5555

1. BeHappy lost the argument.

2. The-Champ will lose the argument too if he does not explain why tennis experts disagree who is greater between Ivan Lendl and Pancho Gonzales if the criteria for greatness is not a matter of opinion.



You agree with The-Champ that criteria for greatness is not a matter of opinion?

if it's a matter of opinion then answer this; where are the experts that claim Donald Young is just as great as Federer? If you can't answer this, you have lost the argument.

[jokinla]

55555555555555555555 has lost the argument.

[beast of mallorca]

5555 can not lose a factual opinion of a fact. He is that opinionated, esp for factual opinions for certain tennis facts.And thjat's my humble opinion for this fact.

[5555]

Originally Posted by tennis_pro

Wow, 5555, 5 years since you registered on TW and you still can't tell the difference between a fact and opinion.

You agree with The-Champ that criteria for greatness is not a matter of opinion?

Originally Posted by Phoenix1983

Djokovic is not an all-time great. This is a fact.

Can you prove it's a fact?

Originally Posted by The-Champ

if it's a matter of opinion then answer this; where are the experts that claim Donald Young is just as great as Federer? If you can't answer this, you have lost the argument.

You failed to answer why tennis experts disagree who is greater player between Ivan Lendl and Pancho Gonzales. Tennis experts disagree who is greater between Lendl and Gonzales because they can not agree what should be criteria for greatness. It's logic.

You lost the argument.

Originally Posted by jokinla

55555555555555555555 has lost the argument.

No, I have not.

[Phoenix1983]

Originally Posted by 5555

Can you prove it's a fact?

Can you prove it's not?

[jokinla]

Originally Posted by 5555

You agree with The-Champ that criteria for greatness is not a matter of opinion?



Can you prove it's a fact?



You failed to answer why tennis experts disagree who is greater player between Ivan Lendl and Pancho Gonzales. Tennis experts disagree who is greater between Lendl and Gonzales because they can not agree what should be criteria for greatness. It's logic.

You lost the argument.



No, I have not.

Is that a fact or your opinion.

[Povl Carstensen]

Originally Posted by 5555

You agree with The-Champ that criteria for greatness is not a matter of opinion?

Originally Posted by 5555

Opinion can be false

You outargued yourself long ago.

[Sid_Vicious]

Can we sticky this thread? It is a great source of lulz.

[volleygirl]

Originally Posted by helloworld

Top 10 based on what? His 5 slams? I doubt it. His career is not over, but now he's definitely not top 10 all-time yet.

Some people just have to believe that the greatest ever has to be playing right now. Looks like some even think the best 3 or 4 ever just happen to be playing right now as well. Its laughable to insist the best ever at every sport just has to be someone playing right now.