No he's notI think OP list needs an update.
Djokovic is top 3 in the first three slams now. And now less than 6 at the USO.
No he's notI think OP list needs an update.
Djokovic is top 3 in the first three slams now. And now less than 6 at the USO.
No he's not
Djokovic has never been tested in one of the toughest mental and physical challenges in the sport like Federer. He never had to stare down younger ATG's with comparable talent who were peaking just as he was leaving his prime.
In the Eye Test Era (ETE) he is not.In Open Era he is.
Nope. He's the last person to win 3 FO. Any player who has won 3 before him is ahead. The follower/chaser doesn't get the nod.In Open Era he is.
Nope. He's the last person to win 3 FO. Any player who has won 3 before him is ahead. The follower/chaser doesn't get the nod.
Wimbledon, it's tricky between Borg and Djokovic, but my opinion Borg 5 straight Wimbledon was more impressive with great matches against Mac, Connors, Tanner, Ashe, Nastase....
I reason why I have Federer at #1 at the USO is
Clowns everywhereThe shamelessness is hilarious.
Every time I think TTW can‘t come up with a more nonsensical argument I’m proven wrongNope. He's the last person to win 3 FO. Any player who has won 3 before him is ahead. The follower/chaser doesn't get the nod.
Yeah, shamelessness by you quoting only part of my context.The shamelessness is hilarious.
He's the last person to win 5 USOs. Any player who has won 5 USOs before him is ahead. The follower/chaser doesn't get the nod.Yeah, shamelessness by you quoting only part of my context.
"I reason why I have Federer at #1 at the USO is because of he won 5 consecutive times, and made 6 consecutive finals. Keep in mind in 2010 & 2011 he had match points in the semifinal, very easily he could have made 8 straight finals!"
Every time I think TTW can‘t come up with a more nonsensical argument I’m proven wrong
And context is important which you conveniently ignoreHe's the last person to win 5 USOs. Any player who has won 5 USOs before him is ahead. The follower/chaser doesn't get the nod.
Please don’t go down the same route as the autistic twinsYou're an Djokovic fanboy, I can understand you want to put more weighed on the player who tie the record over the prior player who set the benchmark.
Nope. He's the last person to win 3 FO. Any player who has won 3 before him is ahead. The follower/chaser doesn't get the nod.
Wimbledon, it's tricky between Borg and Djokovic, but my opinion Borg 5 straight Wimbledon was more impressive with great matches against Mac, Connors, Tanner, Ashe, Nastase....
I don't care what you think because in your eyes you can only see Djokovic.Please don’t go down the same route as the autistic twins
there is no benchmark at 3 slams
Uh oh, you got him. He didn't fully think that through.He's the last person to win 5 USOs. Any player who has won 5 USOs before him is ahead. The follower/chaser doesn't get the nod.
I don't care what you think because in your eyes you can only see Djokovic.
There are other players have stronger case for the 3rd spot
Nope. He's the last person to win 3 FO. Any player who has won 3 before him is ahead. The follower/chaser doesn't get the nod.
Wimbledon, it's tricky between Borg and Djokovic, but my opinion Borg 5 straight Wimbledon was more impressive with great matches against Mac, Connors, Tanner, Ashe, Nastase....
There's no context here, just contradiction. Calling me Herald isn't going to yoga you out of the pretzel you've twisted yourself into.And context is important which you conveniently ignore
The shamelessness is hilarious.
Well, you're responding to someone who drowns in his own tears over the fact Federer was never a GOAT player, failed to win the Grand Slam, and watched Djokovic surpass him where it mattered most for Federer fanatics who habitually used majors count as the GOAT distinction. Now that Djokovic left Federer in the dust, in comes the daily goal-post moving, revisionist history, contradictory statements and lies.Every time I think TTW can‘t come up with a more nonsensical argument I’m proven wrong
I've already explained thatThen why do you have Federer above Sampras and Connors at USO?
No you haven't. You said that the person chasing is automatically secondary to the first person with the record. Sampras and Connors had 5 USOs prior to Federer so by your standard there's no way he can be the best there.I've already explained that
Federer at FO- NO way. He never came close to beating Nadal there and never won there before Nadal appeared.Trinity is too much.
Grand Slam Holy Dyad
AO:
Djokovic
Federer
FO:
Nadal
Federer
Wimbledon:
Federer
Sampras
USO:
Federer
Connors
So, a 5-time winner tops a 7-time winner, especially since Novak beat Federer in their 3 finals there? In reality, at Wimbledon: Federer, Sampras, Djokovic, then Borg.top 3 at Wimbledon is: Fed, Sampras, Borg
at RG: Nadal, Borg, Lendl.
djokoflation doesn't change that
That's typical from someone desperate to force-fit Federer into some category he either did not earn (take your pick) or creates self-defeating "rules" to place the long-surpassed Federer at the top of a list. Astoundingly pathetic,No you haven't. You said that the person chasing is automatically secondary to the first person with the record. Sampras and Connors had 5 USOs prior to Federer so by your standard there's no way he can be the best there.
Agree, but the OP is really one of a kind, the king of Bozos...Clowns everywhere
And needless, for as long as tennis is discussed among true fans the name of Roger Federer will be up there with the Perrys, the Rosewalls, the Connors etc. Guys who were a key part of their eras.That's typical from someone desperate to force-fit Federer into some category he either did not earn (take your pick) or creates self-defeating "rules" to place the long-surpassed Federer at the top of a list. Astoundingly pathetic,
Only 3 (07 WB, 12 WB, 17 AO) of 20 slams were over tough opposition. That was 17/20 over weak opposition.top 3 at Wimbledon is: Fed, Sampras, Borg
at RG: Nadal, Borg, Lendl.
djokoflation doesn't change that
Read post #359There's no context here, just contradiction. Calling me Herald isn't going to yoga you out of the pretzel you've twisted yourself into.
top 3 at Wimbledon is: Fed, Sampras, Borg
at RG: Nadal, Borg, Lendl.
djokoflation doesn't change that
Keep telling yourself it isn't a contradiction. You might even get yourself to believe it someday. Not likely, but it's good to have goals in life.Read post #359
I'm not going to repeat it again Herald
No context? Haha.Keep telling yourself it isn't a contradiction. You might even get yourself to believe it someday. Not likely, but it's good to have goals in life.
Djokovic won 1 RG title and 3 Wimbledon titles in his 20s.2018: Sandgren, Zeballos, Edmund, Khachanov, Nishikori, Old-dal, Anderson.
2019: Kohlschreiber, Kudla, Hurkacz, Humbert, Goffin, Agut, Old-derer.
2021: Draper, Anderson, Kudla, Garin, Fucsovics, Shapovalov, Berrettini.
2022: Kwon, Kokkinakis, Kecmanovic, Van Rijthoven, Sinner, Norrie, Kyrgios.
So, a 5-time winner tops a 7-time winner, especially since Novak beat Federer in their 3 finals there? In reality, at Wimbledon: Federer, Sampras, Djokovic, then Borg.
2018: Sandgren, Zeballos, Edmund, Khachanov, Nishikori, Old-dal, Anderson.
2019: Kohlschreiber, Kudla, Hurkacz, Humbert, Goffin, Agut, Old-derer.
2021: Draper, Anderson, Kudla, Garin, Fucsovics, Shapovalov, Berrettini.
2022: Kwon, Kokkinakis, Kecmanovic, Van Rijthoven, Sinner, Norrie, Kyrgios.
I've already explained that
Indeed. Thankfully, recorded history does not recognize the self-deceiving rants of Federer fanatics.Keep telling yourself it isn't a contradiction. You might even get yourself to believe it someday. Not likely, but it's good to have goals in life.
Indeed. Thankfully, recorded history does not recognize the self-deceiving rants of Federer fanatics.
2021: Draper, Anderson, Kudla, Garin, Fucsovics, Shapovalov, Berrettini.
2022: Kwon, Kokkinakis, Kecmanovic, Van Rijthoven, Sinner, Norrie, Kyrgios.
History remembers Inflatovic as talentless workaholic who lucked his way to 7 Wimbledon titles, including 3 finals wins over Federer unlike Federer who greased his palms and wiped tears to defeat Roddick 3 times in finals and get an injured Cilic in his 8th win.Beating Federer at Wimbledon also doesn't mean much, even when he hit around 100 winners.
History remembers that Djokovic has 7 Wimbledon titles and could have the record tied before he retires.
He's trolling you. Not cleverly of course, but still amusing.
I miss his goat avatar since I'd sometimes confuse it for a donkey.Indeed. Thankfully, recorded history does not recognize the self-deceiving rants of Federer fanatics.
So they were anomalies and not the norm.
Facing Federer and Nadal in 3 out of 3 runs is more difficult than facing Roddick 3 out of 3 runs.Not really true. In winning 2011/2014/2015 WB, Nole faced his top contemporaries (Nadal/Murray/Wawrinka) a combined one time.
Who’s Herald?No context? Haha.
Ok Herald
This tells us that Novak has a fantastic body and mindDjokovic won 1 RG title and 3 Wimbledon titles in his 20s.
Djokovic won 2 RG titles and 4 Wimbledon titles in his 30s.
The Serbian player did not equal but improved his efficiency in GS events on natural surfaces in his late stage.
What does that tell you?