Aggassi says Fed, Djoke, Nadal 3 GOAT, agree?

M

Mick3391

Professional
I know these types of threads always devolve into jerks calling others names, but I think they are fun talk.

Aggassi would know, but three greatest?

I can play a little Tennis, but when I see for example Fed/Tsonga I'm like NO WAY, these guys would KILL ME. They are playing at such a high level it's incredible, I don't think many on this forum realize the high level of play they give.

I mean a MONSTER cross court forehand right on the line, then it's not only returned but returned with purpose, then down the line, to be returned by a monster backhand, just high level tennis, incredible.

If you look at players of the past, from Conners to Sampras, we don't see this IMO, oh they played incredible, but I can see for example Borg serve to Fed and Fed just killing it down the line, all night hitting hard where Borg isn't, basically a cakewalk.

So, on the one hand I'm not sure the new players themselves are better intrinsically, but think about it, from kids they trained on large racquets with improved strings, what if Borg, Conners, etc started their training as kids with the newer equipment? That would even things out and we could make a real comparison, perhaps they'd look even more impressive.

Take out a old 75 inch raquet and see how well you do.

Of course no one knows, but Aggassi's opinion should be respected, top 3 of all time?

My answer is that I don't know!!!!
 
A

Agassifan

Hall of Fame
whoever is playing the best tennis at the current moment is automatically a GOAT candidate. That is how these arguments go. It will be like this for ever because tennis evolves by the year.
 
M

Mick3391

Professional
This is going to devolve into a insult session real quick.

What I'm asking is AGGASSI right? The top three, are the the best of all time?
 
Phoenix1983

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Fed is GOAT, Nadal top 5 all-time and Djokovic maybe top 20.

At the moment. Let's wait until their careers are over to rank them correctly.
 
xan

xan

Hall of Fame
he isnt the only one who said that. truth is tennis quality has improved. only blind people who cling to past cant seem to realize that.
and tennis isnt the sole example. you can see it everywhere, in football, in basketball, etcetc.
now im not saying those people of old were any less talented, or that they wouldnt be able to compete with players of today if they had played under same terms from the get go (so comparing players from different eras is already a flawed attempt), but people claiming tennis was at its peak 15/10/5 years ago seriously need to wake up. like it you or not.
 
mad dog1

mad dog1

G.O.A.T.
xan said:
he isnt the only one who said that. truth is tennis quality has improved. only blind people who cling to past cant seem to realize that.
and tennis isnt the sole example. you can see it everywhere, in football, in basketball, etcetc.
now im not saying those people of old were any less talented, or that they wouldnt be able to compete with players of today if they had played under same terms from the get go (so comparing players from different eras is already a flawed attempt), but people claiming tennis was at its peak 15/10/5 years ago seriously need to wake up. like it you or not.
Click to expand...

the athletes have adapted and optimized their games to the current surface conditions and the current equipment. it's called evolution.
 
veroniquem

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
That's because he's talking "all time". Djoko would be higher than that in open era I'm sure (only 12 players have won more than 5 slams in open era and Djoko is about to break top 10 in # of weeks at #1).
 
M

Mick3391

Professional
xan said:
he isnt the only one who said that. truth is tennis quality has improved. only blind people who cling to past cant seem to realize that.
and tennis isnt the sole example. you can see it everywhere, in football, in basketball, etcetc.
now im not saying those people of old were any less talented, or that they wouldnt be able to compete with players of today if they had played under same terms from the get go (so comparing players from different eras is already a flawed attempt), but people claiming tennis was at its peak 15/10/5 years ago seriously need to wake up. like it you or not.
Click to expand...

That's partly true, Boxing has devolved. But yea these guys do seem insanely good, whether we personally like them or not.
 
F

fed_rulz

Hall of Fame
xan said:
he isnt the only one who said that. truth is tennis quality has improved. only blind people who cling to past cant seem to realize that.
and tennis isnt the sole example. you can see it everywhere, in football, in basketball, etcetc.
now im not saying those people of old were any less talented, or that they wouldnt be able to compete with players of today if they had played under same terms from the get go (so comparing players from different eras is already a flawed attempt), but people claiming tennis was at its peak 15/10/5 years ago seriously need to wake up. like it you or not.
Click to expand...

+1000. well put.
 
M

Mick3391

Professional
Phoenix1983 said:
Fed is GOAT, Nadal top 5 all-time and Djokovic maybe top 20.

At the moment. Let's wait until their careers are over to rank them correctly.
Click to expand...

I don't think so, because it's not a matter of GS's won, but quality of Tennis. Anyone can win GS's if the situation is right, for example if Fed retires and Nadal can't play anymore, if Djoke starts winning GS's does that mean he's better? That he has improved?

I mean if Fed wasn't around and Nadal played the same time instead, would he not have 17 GS's and there would be no doubt?

I think we've seen the best out of these guys with the possibility of Murray, so this is based on how they play. Of course winning matters when you have the top guys going against each other, but that's not the point.
 
M

mattennis

Hall of Fame
Yes, obviously, because the ATP nº1 (or even the nº5 ) player in 2017 would defeat 6-0 6-0 6-0 peak Federer, peak Nadal and peak Djokovic. Obvious is obvious. Because tennis level is always improving.

And people buy it.
 
M

Mick3391

Professional
mattennis said:
Yes, obviously, because the ATP nº1 (or even the nº5 ) player in 2017 would defeat 6-0 6-0 6-0 peak Federer, peak Nadal and peak Djokovic. Obvious is obvious. Because tennis level is always improving.

And people buy it.
Click to expand...

Good point. I do agree the game and players improve in Tennis. The reason is that we have a much larger pool of available players in the Amateurs, bigger prize money, more fame available when kids see Fed (Hero worship), but there is a point of diminishing returns.

I mean how much better of a fetcher will we have then say Murray, or creative shots and timing of Fed, or brutal baselining of Nadal.

There will be a player, there always is, that will combine the best of all three and be the latest greatest GOAT, but that will be a tall order. I think more likely someone, I know you will think I'm nuts, but perhaps someone who is super aggressive, can play the net consistantly without getting passed??

The best match I ever saw was Wawrinka/Djoke, because it wasn't that Djoke was playing bad, Wawa just kicked his butt, his backhand was just such a weapon, what about a Wawa times two?
 
zagor

zagor

Bionic Poster
mattennis said:
Yes, obviously, because the ATP nº1 (or even the nº5 ) player in 2017 would defeat 6-0 6-0 6-0 peak Federer, peak Nadal and peak Djokovic. Obvious is obvious. Because tennis level is always improving.

And people buy it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this hype the modern game nonsense is getting hilarious.

People seem to liken tennis to swimming and running when it's a far more nuanced sport, I mean we're talking about a sport in which Santoro can dominate Safin for Pete's sake.

Sure the game changes over time but not always for the better, some parts improve, others are neglected and stagnate, conditions and coaching also influence what is the current dominant playing style.
 
C

corners

Legend
Mick3391 said:
I know these types of threads always devolve into jerks calling others names, but I think they are fun talk.

Aggassi would know, but three greatest?

I can play a little Tennis, but when I see for example Fed/Tsonga I'm like NO WAY, these guys would KILL ME. They are playing at such a high level it's incredible, I don't think many on this forum realize the high level of play they give.

I mean a MONSTER cross court forehand right on the line, then it's not only returned but returned with purpose, then down the line, to be returned by a monster backhand, just high level tennis, incredible.

If you look at players of the past, from Conners to Sampras, we don't see this IMO, oh they played incredible, but I can see for example Borg serve to Fed and Fed just killing it down the line, all night hitting hard where Borg isn't, basically a cakewalk.

So, on the one hand I'm not sure the new players themselves are better intrinsically, but think about it, from kids they trained on large racquets with improved strings, what if Borg, Conners, etc started their training as kids with the newer equipment? That would even things out and we could make a real comparison, perhaps they'd look even more impressive.

Take out a old 75 inch raquet and see how well you do.

Of course no one knows, but Aggassi's opinion should be respected, top 3 of all time?

My answer is that I don't know!!!!
Click to expand...

What exactly did Agassi say, and to whom? Do you have a link?
 
M

Mick3391

Professional
corners said:
What exactly did Agassi say, and to whom? Do you have a link?
Click to expand...

I don't, sorry. It was before the final, they were talking to Agassi, he said point blank "We are talking about the three greatest players of all time in Fed, Nadal and Djokavich", that's all.
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
Agassi seems to be going out of his way to constantly give circle jerks to the top players of this era

... dont read tooooo much into it.

Its just a slight at Sampras.. Agassi is bitter as hell vs. Pete for taking perhaps GOAT status away from Andre
 
T

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
corners said:
What exactly did Agassi say, and to whom? Do you have a link?
Click to expand...

I don't recalled Agassi ever said Nada/Nole is the goat, the OP misrepresent Agassi. However, Agassi said Roger is the greatest player, a player that is equal to Jordan in basketball, and Nicloson in Golf.
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
powerangle said:
Agassi is pandering to the media and all the "golden age" talk.
Click to expand...

I agree.

Hell Nadal hasn't even played in almost a year and hasn't defended a title off clay in almost three years. .. Murray only has one slam, Fed is 31 and very beatable.

Nole is really the only one looking like one of the GOATs right now.

And everyone from rank 4-5 on down SUCKS.

Thats hardly a golden age if you look at it in that perspective. I consider a golden age consisting of multiple talented threats, and depth. 80s-mid 90s for instance. Multiple all time greats, and great depth and many contenders to the crown consisting on ALL surfaces.
 
Talker

Talker

Hall of Fame
TMF said:
I don't recalled Agassi ever said Nada/Nole is the goat, the OP misrepresent Agassi. However, Agassi said Roger is the greatest player, a player that is equal to Jordan in basketball, and Nicloson in Golf.
Click to expand...

Better to not mention Nadal and Djoker in the GOAT context for now.
 
M

Mick3391

Professional
TMF said:
I don't recalled Agassi ever said Nada/Nole is the goat, the OP misrepresent Agassi. However, Agassi said Roger is the greatest player, a player that is equal to Jordan in basketball, and Nicloson in Golf.
Click to expand...

It didn't misrepresent it if you actually read it. He said "Greatest three players of all time", do you agree!

And yes, he has said that Fed is the greatest of all time, but that is no contradiction.
 
The-Champ

The-Champ

Legend
90's Clay said:
Agassi seems to be going out of his way to constantly give circle jerks to the top players of this era

... dont read tooooo much into it.

Its just a slight at Sampras.. Agassi is bitter as hell vs. Pete for taking perhaps GOAT status away from Andre
Click to expand...

you know what...agassi actually agrees with what you have said a couple of times...."You can not be the greatest if there was someone in your generation that dominated you"

http://youtu.be/hSVWWCBgr78?t=2m51s
 
M

Mick3391

Professional
90's Clay said:
I agree.

Hell Nadal hasn't even played in almost a year and hasn't defended a title off clay in almost three years. .. Murray only has one slam, Fed is 31 and very beatable.

Nole is really the only one looking like one of the GOATs right now.

And everyone from rank 4-5 on down SUCKS.

Thats hardly a golden age if you look at it in that perspective. I consider a golden age consisting of multiple talented threats, and depth. 80s-mid 90s for instance. Multiple all time greats, and great depth and many contenders to the crown consisting on ALL surfaces.
Click to expand...

How can a guy be less talented because he's injured? Or Fed less great because at present he's on the decline?

I wish you guys would learn to read. I mean what, Djoke hurts himself, can't play for a year so all of a sudden he's not as talented? That's what we are talking about for crying out loud.
 
forzamilan90

forzamilan90

Legend
Here's the official GOAT list.
1. Roger Federer
2. Rod Laver
3. Ken Rosewall
4. Bjorn Borg
5. Pete Sampras
6. Pancho Gonzales
7. Rafael Nadal
8. Bill Tilden
9. John McEnroe
10. Ivan Lendl or Jimmy Connors (tie)
 
smoledman

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
90's Clay said:
Agassi seems to be going out of his way to constantly give circle jerks to the top players of this era

... dont read tooooo much into it.

Its just a slight at Sampras.. Agassi is bitter as hell vs. Pete for taking perhaps GOAT status away from Andre
Click to expand...

Not nearly as bitter as Sampras at Fed for taking his precious slam record away in less then 7 years! :shock::twisted::twisted:
 
T

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Mick3391 said:
TMF said:
I don't recalled Agassi ever said Nada/Nole is the goat, the OP misrepresent Agassi. However, Agassi said Roger is the greatest player, a player that is equal to Jordan in basketball, and Nicloson in Golf.
Click to expand...

It didn't misrepresent it if you actually read it. He said "Greatest three players of all time", do you agree!

And yes, he has said that Fed is the greatest of all time, but that is no contradiction.
Click to expand...

I can't find the quote where he said "Greatest three players of all time".

However, I found this...

"I think what Roger's done in tennis is as commendable as what we've seen with Nicklaus in golf, or what we've seen with Jordan in basketball."

Federer among sport's greatest ever - Agassi
 
smoledman

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
TMF said:
I can't find the quote where he said "Greatest three players of all time".

However, I found this...

"I think what Roger's done in tennis is as commendable as what we've seen with Nicklaus in golf, or what we've seen with Jordan in basketball."

Federer among sport's greatest ever - Agassi
Click to expand...

Commendable huh? Faint praise if you ask me. I wanted to hear something like - "What Roger has done is so ****ing badass I can't even comprehend".
 
forzamilan90

forzamilan90

Legend
90's Clay said:
Why do idiots compare Roger to Jordan and Nicklaus.

these guys actually disposed of their main rivals rivals on the big stage. Something Fed couldn't do.

Hell Jordan was UNDEFEATED on the big stage (NBA finals) Sport for sport.. Jordan has a much nicer claim to GOAT then Fed does in tennis.
Click to expand...

Federer's main rivals = the history book. He certainly disposed of them.

Jordan was undefeated in the Finals (6 for 6), but it's not like he was winning everything left and right non stop. He doesn't even have the most MVPs or championships (especially championships). I wish one day you'd give it a rest and just accept Fed's status as GOAT. Fed was 7 for 7 in his first 7 finals, probably should have chosen to retire right then and there to preserve his perfect finals percentage and have mystique as the unbeatable one.

And btw Fed has wins over Nadal, Djokovic and Murray in Grand Slam Finals, as well as Roddick, Safin, and Hewitt, don't give me that garbage that he hasn't disposed of his main rivals. Fed's dominance over the sport is legendary.
 
Last edited:
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
forzamilan90 said:
Federer's main rivals = the history book. He certainly disposed of them.

Jordan was undefeated in the Finals (6 for 6), but it's not like he was winning everything left and right non stop. He doesn't even have the most MVPs or championships (especially championships). I wish one day you'd give it a rest and just accept Fed's status as GOAT. Fed was 7 for 7 in his first 7 finals, probably should have chosen to retire right then and there to preserve his perfect finals percentage and have mystique as the unbeatable one.

And btw Fed has wins over Nadal, Djokovic and Murray in Grand Slam Finals, as well as Roddick, Safin, and Hewitt, don't give me that garbage that he hasn't disposed of his main rivals. Fed's dominance over the sport is legendary.
Click to expand...


ROFLMAO.. What is Fed 2-8 vs. Nadal on the big stage. A losing record OUTSIDE of clay as well on the big stage vs. Nadal.

A losing sad overall h2h vs. Nadal.. Hasn't been able to beat Nadal in 6 years at the slams.



Fed can't hold a candle to Jordan GOAT for GOAT. That would be like if Jordan was pathetic on the big stage vs. his main rivals as bad Fed was.

Russell had more championships but he doesn't have even CLOSE to the overall resume that Jordan has.. In fact, his numbers pale in comparison. Its not even close

10 scoring titles
5 regular season mvp
30 ppg regular season career scoring title
33 ppg, most dominant post season numbers ever
UNBEATABLE on the big stage
DPOY
6 FMVP
Complete dominance over his contemporary rivals (Something Fed failed to do)

.. No one is coming close to that in NBA history.. Forget it

Stop with the **** nonsense.. Jordan is "hands down basketball GOAT" and its not close.. Fed is just in the "discussion" for GOAT

Why dont we compare Fed to Gretzky and Phelps as well.. Fed gets destroyed.
 
Last edited:
forzamilan90

forzamilan90

Legend
90's Clay said:
ROFLMAO.. What is Fed 2-8 vs. Nadal on the big stage. A losing record OUTSIDE of clay as well on the big stage vs. Nadal.

Fed can't hold a candle to Jordan GOAT for GOAT.

Russell had more championships but he doesn't have even CLOSE to the overall resume that Jordan has.. In fact, his numbers pale in comparison. Its not even close
Click to expand...

compare their rebounds then, since I am sure your dumb *** is looking only at points scored/averaged. And btw if you want to look at great numbers, look at Wilt Chamberlain's stats (Jordan's pale in comparison). Numbers don't tell the whole story of course, and by acclamation Jordan is the greatest, just like by acclamation Federer is the greatest. Don't give me that Fed ain't on Jordan's level. One or two wise cracking loudmouths on a forum with a bad case of nostalgia since their former favorite players got their records beaten, and you think you can diminish Fed's status in the sport's history? Pathetic. Fed.
 
C

_craze

New User
the athletes have adapted and optimized their games to the current surface conditions and the current equipment. it's called evolution.


Calling it "evolution" is subjective. It is a form of progression though. I'd just call it "adaptation".
 
90's Clay

90's Clay

Banned
forzamilan90 said:
compare their rebounds then, since I am sure your dumb *** is looking only at points scored/averaged. And btw if you want to look at great numbers, look at Wilt Chamberlain's stats. Numbers don't tell the whole story of course, and by acclamation Jordan is the greatest, just like by acclamation Federer is the greatest. Don't give me that Fed ain't on Jordan's level. One or two wise cracking loudmouths on a forum with a bad case of nostalgia since their former favorite players got their records beaten, and you think you can diminish Fed's status in the sport's history? Pathetic. Fed.
Click to expand...



Wilt's overrall resume pales into comparison to Jordan's well.. Especially post season numbers which Jordan shats all over.

2 championships to Jordan's six. Declining post season numbers to Jordan's most dominant post season numbers in history bar none

Rebounds? Wilt was a Center.. Jordan was a SG. What kind of nonsense is that?
 
A

Al Czervik

Hall of Fame
Here is the quote. Nole gets to 10 or 12, and Andre may be right.
You know, Fed raised it; Nadal matched and raised it; Djokovic, for that intense little period of time, even raised it. I seemed like last year settled down a bit, and now all of a sudden Murray is in the equation of where is he going to go.
But when I see those top three guys, I see what history will say is the golden age of tennis. You're talking about arguably the three best guys. Djokovic will still need some distance to cover, but best of all time, if you're having that discussion in the same generation, it's remarkable.
Click to expand...
http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/news/interviews/2013-01-25/201301251359099161064.html
 
forzamilan90

forzamilan90

Legend
90's Clay said:
Wilt's overrall resume pales into comparison to Jordan's well.. Especially post season numbers which Jordan shats all over.

2 championships to Jordan's six. Declining post season numbers to Jordan's most dominant post season numbers in history bar none

Rebounds? Wilt was a Center.. Jordan was a SG. What kind of nonsense is that?
Click to expand...

Wilt's numbers>Jordan's numbers.
Bill Russel's titles>Jordan's titles.
Jordan is regarded as the best player though, but those two guys are the best in those respective categories.
 
M

Mick3391

Professional
90's Clay said:
Why do idiots compare Roger to Jordan and Nicklaus.

these guys actually disposed of their main rivals rivals on the big stage. Something Fed couldn't do.

Hell Jordan was UNDEFEATED on the big stage (NBA finals) Sport for sport.. Jordan has a much nicer claim to GOAT then Fed does in tennis.
Click to expand...

You can't do that, different sports have huge variance in win/loss records. For example in boxing if you lost as much as Tennis players you'd be a joke.

Look at boxing, Duran 69-1, or Marciano 49-0. Top boxers don't lose a few times a year, different sport, so different standards, same deal with Baseketball or other sports.

In Tennis, the "Greatest" can lose any day, in boxing the best will not lose, except in extreme cirucumstances.

All of the top guys in boxing have only lost a few bouts, and that typically at the end, it's comparing apples/oranges.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
How Fed will consistantly beat Nadal, Djoke and Murray
Replies
38
Views
4K
coloskier
C
D
  • Poll
Aggassi / Baghdatis
2 3
Replies
125
Views
7K
guygee
G
REKX
  • Poll
Peak Federer is the second greatest clay court player of all time? Agree?
2 3 4
Replies
151
Views
3K
DariaGT
D
kraggy
Nadal - best overhead smash in the game?
Replies
21
Views
4K
Knightmace
K
R
Nadal 2017 USO - Fed 2018 AO
Replies
10
Views
747
CentreCourt
C
Top