Elephant(s) in the room
- Thread starter demrle
- Start date
Tennis_Hands
Banned
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
the biggest elephant in the room is 20 sloms 13 of which are peasant slams and a couple berrettini opens
davced1
Hall of Fame
Yeah I know right only as many as Murray and Wawrinka won all career and then some more to pass them. If he pulls it off though then he deserves to be the GOAT no questions asked.Oh, come on, 3 Majors, should be easy peasy.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
I don't know about GOAT, be he surely would have deserved 20 (i.e. the number he has won).
demrle
Professional
Thanks for your reply!
While I tended to agree with you about the importance, i.e. lack there of, of the Olympics, I changed my mind a bit since Roger, Rafa and Novak all seem to give it a special treatment. In any case, it was no coincidence, that I've put it at the bottom of the list of Rafa's advantages.
It is, however, hardly the only arbitrary category. Year-end no. 1 and Weeks at no. 1 are too. And yet, they seem to be universally recognized as relevant categories. Year-end no. 1 is arbitrary per definition and I wouldn't use it as a criterion. Neither would I use Weeks at no. 1. I would argue, that a player is already compensated for being first in the rankings by obtaining the 1st seed in a tournament, which in turn makes for an easier draw and increases his chances of winning the given tournament. And that potential win is already accounted for, when comparing players. But I went with the flow, as it relates to which criteria to use.
If I understand correctly, you are basically advocating that points are the be-all and end-all, when comparing players. But I see two problems with that approach. Firstly, in this case we would definitely have to eliminate the Weeks at no.1, Year end no.1 and even H2H as criteria, as they are all unquantifiable. And secondly, we would then be able to settle the GOAT debate simply by multiplying the number of tournaments won by a given player by the number of points awarded for the given tournament, adding and consequently comparing those sums. And while I personally wouldn't even have a big problem with such an approach, there seems to exist a consensus on a more nuanced, i.e. not purely quantitative approach.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
He nailed the TIGER Debate. It's over now. Time to shut down the threads...
demrle
Professional
Thanks for your contribution!
I do think that Novak will highly likely break/tie Weeks at no.1 and YEC and say as much in the OP. But I consider Rafa a co-GOAT even if it doesn't happen. In other words, if Novak breaks those records while Rafa and Roger are still tied at 20 GS, then I think that Rafa gets ahead of Roger in the GOAT talk.
I don't really consider it to be that big of a deal who's won which GS how often, especially considering the fact that, as of now, all three have their own pet slam. That being said, I think there's a completely realistic chance of Novak winning another three titles in, say, next five years. If for no other reason, then because the competition is horrendous.
While they do make for nice headlines and probably generate clicks, I don't really understand the significance of streak records, when it comes to player comparison. And consecutive weeks at #1 is actually just another streak. If anything, I would argue that it's more valuable to have achieved the same number of weeks in multiple stints, as it somewhat accounts for anomalies, e.g. injuries (slumps) to the strongest opponents.
demrle
Professional
"The expression "elephant in the room" (usually "the elephant in the room") or "the elephant in the living room" is a metaphorical idiom in English for an important or enormous topic, question, or controversial issue that is obvious or that everyone knows about but no one mentions or wants to discuss because it makes at least some of them uncomfortable or is personally, socially, or politically embarrassing, controversial, inflammatory, or dangerous."
Your statement here hardly qualifies as something that no one mentions or wants to discuss. Quite the opposite, actually, that is one of the last straws Federer fans are grasping at in their desperate effort to fend off the dreadful reality.
But you can only hold on to a straw for so long.
demrle
Professional
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Fixed.
zagor
Bionic Poster
I barely had a moment's sleep ever since the Nadal won #20. My worst nightmares have come true.
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
And the 2010-2020 era, when Fedr was too old to compete?
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
Where's the elephant? Where's the room?
Breakpointerer
Legend
TTW is the room, sureshs is the elephant
demrle
Professional
I tend to see it completely reversed from you, but regardless of that fact, what I'm certain of, is that those are subjective assessments, whereas I would like to keep the thread sans such and stick to somewhat objectifiable criteria .
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Of course you do, which naturally renders your input to the topic useless.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
In the midst of a global pandemic, a thread beginning with "Roger lost the last glimmer of hope of ever being considered GOAT, by virtue of Nadal winning RG, his 20th GS title" is of earth shattering importance.If you are convinced you don't need an approval, and this and all other similar threads are a call for approval.
The telling thing is that Fed fans mostly don't care. Life goes on whether Roger has 20 slams or 2. For those who live vicariously through their sporting idols, it's quite obviously a different story.
demrle
Professional
Since your poll is not there anymore, what, i.e. who were the options?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
In the midst of a global pandemic, a thread beginning with "Roger lost the last glimmer of hope of ever being considered GOAT, by virtue of Nadal winning RG, his 20th GS title" is of earth shattering importance.
I live vicariously through the beauty in life, be it family, art, sport (tennis) or something else. There are few things that are more important than beauty (at lest to me), so I guess watching beautiful tennis is a kind of desirable. However, that sort of mindless bragging is ridiculous over the top stuff, and those people that are trying to use it as a tool for self-esteem are confused and worthy of pity.
demrle
Professional
I couldn't agree more. Of even greater importance, in terms of its potential for relieving the effects of said pandemic, is a contribution of a butthurt fan of a British rock and roll band to that very thread.
demrle
Professional
Why would you even make such an assumption? Let alone be so sure of its validity.You can take it whichever way you like, as long as you tell us.
I'm genuinely intrigued now.
demrle
Professional
No. Federer is clearly Justin Bieber here. Works on so many levels.Not a realistic comparison. If anything I would say Federer is Pink Floyd and Djokovic is the spice girls. Haven’t you seen the boob throws?
PS: and Nadal is Bon Jovi
All the 8+ slam winners. The fact is, Federer has the most fans, followed by Nadal, then Djokovic. A couple of votes for Laver and Sampras, but the vast majority support one of the big 3. I have seen other polls here and elsewhere, and the results are consistent.
No that would be Shapovalov.
demrle
Professional
Goddamn, you're so right! There goes my whole argument
demrle
Professional
It was no coincidence that I didn't bold it. I'm not running from that one, I completely agree with Roger being extremely and maybe even the most talented. But two things. Power, speed, quickness, height are all talents appreciated in tennis, but I somehow suspect that those are not necessarily your first associations. So you should specify what you mean by talent, otherwise it's too vague. More importantly, that has no merit in the GOAT talk, as it is subjective. And achievements in tennis are objectifiable.I noticed you didn't bold the most talented part. Everyone runs from that one. I wonder why
demrle
Professional
See?
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
demrle
Professional
No, it doesn't. My input consisted of some stats gathering and analysis, so I could remove some noise from the debate, i.e. somewhat simplify the issue for myself and whoever happens to give a s**t.
Yours, however, consists of spewing arbitrary bollocks, which definitely no one gives a s**t about, hence enhancing the said noise.
demrle
Professional
What about Kyrgios? He seems to have made his way into hearts of many a pandemic fan in recent months.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
All this has been regurgitated on these boards for years. All patterns of reasoning have been exhausted, only the stats themselves change but not the logic used in analysing them, whatever it is. If you should fail to recognise anything other than basic bean counting, instead dismissing it all as noise, then of course there's no point.
Meles
Bionic Poster
Roger is currently the GOAT. Your future hopes to displace him rest on two horses half a step from the glue factory.
davced1
Hall of Fame
Really? I believe I checked all the boxes. The controversial issue is that Djokovic is still far behind in the slam race and everyone knows it but no one mentions or want to discuss it because it makes some people uncomfortable like yourself. Djokovic fans are notorious for counting in slam titles he has not won yet. This year he won one, still at least four to go.
Very funny
demrle
Professional
In a discussion about a sport, whose scoring system is per excellence numerical, so much so that even the duration of a match is not predetermined, you are nonchalantly dismissing the relevance of stats. So I guess you should take the issue you have with bean counting up with the ATP structures, as I am really not in a position to decide on potentially reducing its role in tennis.
And yet the futility of introducing highly subjective and, what is worse, inflammatory arguments in such a discussion is still lost on you.
demrle
Professional
Well, for me Rafa is currently the co-GOAT, but will break the tie very soon.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Now we got a cat in the room too...
terribleIVAN
Hall of Fame
Neither Rafa or Novak ever lost a slam match after holding match points: Roger did it six times.
Count them.
Some GOAT.
demrle
Professional
I like your analogy. Those two horses, they could still turn around, run away, no? That GOAT horse, though... He already entered the facility...
demrle
Professional
Conclusion: Roger should have 26. He's the undisputed GOAT.
that can be looked as a positive too.. fed is so good even when he loses he almost wins
terribleIVAN
Hall of Fame
If Fed was truly GOAT, he should then also be able to win slam matches against Novak after being down match points.
Last edited:
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
What I'm dismissing is the singular interpretation of these stats, naturally one that supports your points, how coincidental.
Greatness is naturally a partially subjective notion so there you have it.
demrle
Professional
You hit that nail square on the head! It is a widely known fact that tennis pundits strictly refrain from criticizing Djokovic out of fear of a public backlash such an unprecedented incident could ignite.
So much so that it has been reported that Roger Federer and Christiano Ronaldo have booked a 7-day course in public relations management, held by Srdjan Djokovic under the title "Why the F**K can't I be that popular too?". The course, previously attended by such prominent public figures as Mel Gibson, Bill Belichik, Charlie Sheen and O.J.Simpson, will be held in Serbian mountain resort Kopaonik, February 30-31, 2022.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
