Could Djokovic hypothetically become a Tier 1 great?

[5555]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

I can, because people only possibly consider him a Tier 1 great. Very few, if any, would consider him an Tier 1 great.

Can you provide a reliable source which says that most tennis historians do not consider Sampras a Tier 1 great?

[Gonzo_style]

Originally Posted by beast of mallorca

Hey POB, what's this obsession about the Greatest this, Greatest that ? It's is a fact that Federer is the most accomplished male tennis player of all time. Why is there a need on your part to make everybody believe that he is the greatest for this Slam and that Slam. Those things can NEVER be proven, because then you have to put everybody on the same period and play with one another. And not even Clarky can do that.....

He's obsessed with GOAT discussions and one player

[5555]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

I can, because people only possibly consider him a Tier 1 great. Very few, if any, would consider him an Tier 1 great.

Can you provide a reliable source which says that most tennis historians do not consider Sampras a Tier 1 great?

[Hawkeye7]

Originally Posted by 5555

Can you provide a reliable source which says that most tennis historians do not consider Sampras a Tier 1 great?

Are you a robot?

[Magnus]

Nadal belongs in a "special tier", the one that has Lance Armstrong in there too.

[5555]

Prisoner of Birth, I'm going to ask just one more time: can you provide a reliable source which says that most tennis historians do not consider Sampras a Tier 1 great?

If you do not reply, you will lose the argument.

[zagor]

Originally Posted by 5555

Prisoner of Birth, I'm going to ask just one more time: can you provide a reliable source which says that most tennis historians do not consider Sampras a Tier 1 great?

If you do not reply, you will lose the argument.

Not really fair since in that case he loses by default.

[Phoenix1983]

Originally Posted by 5555

Prisoner of Birth, I'm going to ask just one more time: can you provide a reliable source which says that most tennis historians do not consider Sampras a Tier 1 great?

If you do not reply, you will lose the argument.

Why are you so obsessed with winning online arguments?

Most people who post here have more important things to focus on in their lives.

[xan]

can you provide reliable source he is obsessed with winning online arguments?
if you don't provide a source you will lose the argument.

[Tennis_Hands]

Originally Posted by Phoenix1983

Why are you so obsessed with winning online arguments?

Most people who post here have more important things to focus on in their lives.

I will put it in simple words.

Because he NEEDS to be right, in order to be able to feel important.

Apparently, there is no other way for him.

[tennis_pro]

Originally Posted by djokovic2008

Yes but he will get more than 12 slams so what then.

then you wake up

[Nickzor]

I think he is already a tier one great, his 2011 season was one of the top 3 best calendar performances ever, his won 3 slams in a row, 13 consecutive semi-finals in grandslams, been world number One, been in top 3 for 4-5 consecutive years, won Aus open 3 consecutive times, beaten 2 Goat contenders (Fed,Nad) in multiple grandslam finals/semi-finals.

He may not have 8,9 or 12 Slams, but his only going to win more and has already accomplished what maybe only 0.1% of all professional tennis have ever accomplished.

[cork_screw]

Yes, Djokovic could be a "great." For a simple reason, he's beaten guys who are talked about as GOAT of Fed and a GOAT of clay. Yes, fed's window has been winding down, but he was pretty much challenging him and winning matches during fed's prime and Nadal is pretty much in his age prime, minus his physical ailments. But he's beaten nadal before nadal had all the knee issues. So anyone who can take down these top two tier GOAT's deserve to be a GOAT himself.

I have immense respect for Djokovic, but more so how he handled Nadal last year at Aussie open and beating him at Indian Wells and Sony Erricson as well as those clay court events. Djokovic is the real deal. He is more mentally strong than people give him. If he is down break point or even match point, he plays that same point as if he was up 40-0 and I would have to say with that courage you are mentally strong as any elite athlete can be.

[Hodgey20]

Absolutely CAN BE.. the real question is IS HE ALREADY

I agree with Nickzors argument saying that he already is

[borg number one]

For the rest of the majors, I would still go with Nadal as of now, but there's a lot of tennis left even before the French Open. As of now, I'd go with Nadal, with Djokovic having his best chance for his next major win at the U.S. Open. I also think that Federer will continue to challenge him at majors in 2013.

[Relinquis]

it's hard to see it happening... even hypothetically...

He's a good age. Still has quite a few years before his movement will slow down and flexibility reduces.

At 30+ years old he won't be winning anything, but that's nearly 5 years from now.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Phoenix1983

Why are you so obsessed with winning online arguments?

Most people who post here have more important things to focus on in their lives.

I notice many threads(not just his own) that he's involved with this same old win/lose arguments.