A beautiful moment has slipped away, for all of us...

R. Schweikart

Professional
Novak could have won the US Open 2021 final but he ruined his chances by going to play in that wretched Olympics because of his greed for some golden slam nonsense.

He should have taken rest and prepared for the USO.
Yes those 11 sets in 5 matches at the Olympics in late July were brutal.
No wonder he was not rested enough at the USO in early September.
 

R. Schweikart

Professional
Why is it greed to want to win probably the most prestigious thing in sports - a gold medal?
It was not the gold medal alone - Nole wanted the Golden Slam.
He knew that by winning that "holy grail" he would be the undisputed GOAT for the next 50 years (comparable to the great Steffi).
 

skaj

Legend
It was not the gold medal alone - Nole wanted the Golden Slam.
He knew that by winning that "holy grail" he would be the undisputed GOAT for the next 50 years (comparable to the great Steffi).
He wanted the gold medal, Golden Slam or not. He wanted it badly in 2016 too, cried like a baby after losing to Del Potro.

As for the Golden slam, he would have the most slams in the ATP history, plus the only big title he misses in his collection. That wouldn't make him "the undisputed GOAT for the next 50 years", nor would the calendar golden slam make him that (just like it didn't do that for Steffi Graf).
 

Sunny014

Legend
Why is it greed to want to win probably the most prestigious thing in sports - a gold medal?
Because a gold medal for tennis at the Olympics has no value, it is pursued by failures like Murray and Leander Paes, in reality nobody cares for the olympics in the tennis world as it has no points in the calender year plus it is a b grade BO3 event at best, there is no extra degree of difficulty at the OIympics for Tennis for that to actually have an significance.

So I am sorry to say that Novak should have skipped it citing fatigue and given his 100% for the USO, he would have pulled it off in the final if he had taken rest after wimbledon, a much needed rest after winning 3 slams at the age of 34.....
 

Sunny014

Legend
3 majors, 46 titles including world tour finals, two olympic gold medals, Davis Cup win, world number 1, 76.7 winning percentage and $62,000,000+ in prize money. 99.9% of tennis players would like to fail like that!
He has failed to become an ATG
So at that level if he is a failure.

Compared to guys who have never won slams, Murray is a great player.
 

R. Schweikart

Professional
He wanted the gold medal, Golden Slam or not. He wanted it badly in 2016 too, cried like a baby after losing to Del Potro.

As for the Golden slam, he would have the most slams in the ATP history, plus the only big title he misses in his collection. That wouldn't make him "the undisputed GOAT for the next 50 years", nor would the calendar golden slam make him that (just like it didn't do that for Steffi Graf).
:p Nice try.

Let us make a bet - in 2030 no one will consider Serena GOAT anymore even in the USA.
Currently she has many supporters for that claim, it is the "current stars are greatest syndrome" and the recurrent desire to have an American as GOAT. I even understand this somehow - the USA has had so many great players over the last 100 years that it seems to be unfair that a girl from Germany should be the greatest. This can't be!!

But when the dust settles Steffi will be on top again even in the USA (as she has always been everywhere else).
 

goldengate14

Professional
Laver won it on 2 measly surfaces. Im sure he would have a few guys win a Calendar Slam if all slams were played on grass/clay these days. Djokovic could have won 3-4 of those LOL. Since all the depth has mainly been on Hardcourts for the last 20-25 years.

Hell, I would take what Andre did in the 90s over anything Laver did in 1969.. Andre got 4 slams and an Olympic gold on completely different surfaces.
Cannot compare eras like that.
Agassi v Sampras though is interesting. Sampras the better player yet id take Agassis career as he won all 4 majors and the Olympics.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Could be true depending on how you define ATG but many tennis commentators still view Murray as one of the top 20 players of all time. For example:

20 Greatest Men’s Tennis Players Of All Time

20 Greatest is this and there is no murray in it

01. Federer
02. Djokovic
03. Claydal
04. Peter Sampras
05. Mcenroe
06. Borg
07. Lendl
08. Connors
09. Andre
10. Boom Boom Becker
11. Stefan E
12. Mats
13. Rod Laver
14. Emerson
15. Rosewall
16. Fred Perry
17. Newcombe
18. Vilas
19. Courier

20. Last, but not the least - The Legendary Arthur Ashe

Sorry, no place for Mooray....
 

Spencer Gore

Hall of Fame
20 Greatest is this and there is no murray in it

01. Federer
02. Djokovic
03. Claydal
04. Peter Sampras
05. Mcenroe
06. Borg
07. Lendl
08. Connors
09. Andre
10. Boom Boom Becker
11. Stefan E
12. Mats
13. Rod Laver
14. Emerson
15. Rosewall
16. Fred Perry
17. Newcombe
18. Vilas
19. Courier

20. Last, but not the least - The Legendary Arthur Ashe

Sorry, no place for Mooray....
Jim Courier in the Top 20 but no Gonzales, Tilden or Budge.

Complete and utter ignorance of the sport of tennis confirmed.

Best stick to discussing earnings from endorsements. That appears to be the only thing you understand.
 

pcft369

Rookie
I'll never understand the bitterness of people who can be glad that Djokovic failed.
Since you don't understand, I will explain it to you. It's not bitterness, just can't stand Djokovic. Ever since he insulted Roddick at the USO in 2008. Nothing has changed, I still root against him. If he had won the CYGS, then I would have to be reminded about it until I'm an old man like you. So, I'm happy he lost - not bitter. :)
 

rUDin 21

Professional
Since you don't understand, I will explain it to you. It's not bitterness, just can't stand Djokovic. Ever since he insulted Roddick at the USO in 2008. Nothing has changed, I still root against him. If he had won the CYGS, then I would have to be reminded about it until I'm an old man like you. So, I'm happy he lost - not bitter. :)
He won NCYGS 4 in a row on three different surfaces.Just here to remind you.
 

Spencer Gore

Hall of Fame
Since you don't understand, I will explain it to you. It's not bitterness, just can't stand Djokovic. Ever since he insulted Roddick at the USO in 2008. Nothing has changed, I still root against him. If he had won the CYGS, then I would have to be reminded about it until I'm an old man like you. So, I'm happy he lost - not bitter. :)
You've simply explained why you are so bitter.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
I can't stand Djokovic either as he has always reminded me of an American frat boy from the movies. And Nadal reminds me of all those faux polite careerists I've met in my professional career.

I'm sure I'd get along better with Federer if only at a very superficial level, but his game is clearly inferior to Djokovic's given the prevailing conditions.

Since you don't understand, I will explain it to you. It's not bitterness, just can't stand Djokovic. Ever since he insulted Roddick at the USO in 2008. Nothing has changed, I still root against him. If he had won the CYGS, then I would have to be reminded about it until I'm an old man like you. So, I'm happy he lost - not bitter. :)
 

Bubcay

Hall of Fame
I can't stand Djokovic either as he has always reminded me of an American frat boy from the movies. And Nadal reminds me of all those faux polite careerists I've met in my professional career.

I'm sure I'd get along better with Federer if only at a very superficial level, but his game is clearly inferior to Djokovic's given the prevailing conditions.
Djokovic's antics on the court drive me insane and I can't stand when he is behaving terribly. It is clearly not pointed at his opponent though. He is angry at himself and does not seem to have control over it. Then I see how respectful he is to the opponent at the net, win or (most importantly) lose. That to me defines him a lot more than his racket smashing or screaming. That to me shows the real man. That is why I was disappointed that he did not complete his CYGS. And, of course, that we missed a once in a generation opportunity.
 

Larry Duff

Hall of Fame
I can't stand Djokovic either as he has always reminded me of an American frat boy from the movies. And Nadal reminds me of all those faux polite careerists I've met in my professional career.

I'm sure I'd get along better with Federer if only at a very superficial level, but his game is clearly inferior to Djokovic's given the prevailing conditions.
And MurrayGOAT you go out for beers with.
 

skaj

Legend
Because a gold medal for tennis at the Olympics has no value, it is pursued by failures like Murray and Leander Paes, in reality nobody cares for the olympics in the tennis world as it has no points in the calender year plus it is a b grade BO3 event at best, there is no extra degree of difficulty at the OIympics for Tennis for that to actually have an significance.

So I am sorry to say that Novak should have skipped it citing fatigue and given his 100% for the USO, he would have pulled it off in the final if he had taken rest after wimbledon, a much needed rest after winning 3 slams at the age of 34.....
Yes, of course, that is why Djoko cried like a baby in 2016, when he lost to Del Potro, that's why Serena played her best tennis at the Olympics in 2012, and that is why Nadal celebrated the way he did in 2008.
All of them failures, of course. Or they just didn't care, I am not sure which one it is.
 

skaj

Legend
:p Nice try.

Let us make a bet - in 2030 no one will consider Serena GOAT anymore even in the USA.
Currently she has many supporters for that claim, it is the "current stars are greatest syndrome" and the recurrent desire to have an American as GOAT. I even understand this somehow - the USA has had so many great players over the last 100 years that it seems to be unfair that a girl from Germany should be the greatest. This can't be!!

But when the dust settles Steffi will be on top again even in the USA (as she has always been everywhere else).
Nice try in explaining the obvious to someone who is in denial?

I don't need to make bets for the future, because I have history to conclude from.
 

skaj

Legend
You've simply explained why you are so bitter.
Dude, the fact that you can't think of/admit that there are numerous reasons for someone not to want a certain player to win a calendar slam(prefers one of his favorites to win that slam instead, thinks that that certain player is a bad person and doesn't deserve it, would like to watch a more exciting field etc.), just tells about your own bitterness. My friendly suggestion is to stop saying such silly things, cause it reveals how you yourself feel.
 

Sunny014

Legend
I don't think there's need for insults, especially when it is only because a professional athlete wants to win the most prestigious award in sports and the only big title they miss in their collection.

As for the second part of your post, you should tell that to the people I've mentioned in my previous post. ;)
A Best of 3 more prestigious than a best of 5 ? hahahahahah

Ya sure, for Mooreys and Nadals maybe, not for legends like Roger or Pete who were/are GOATs.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Jim Courier in the Top 20 but no Gonzales, Tilden or Budge.

Complete and utter ignorance of the sport of tennis confirmed.

Best stick to discussing earnings from endorsements. That appears to be the only thing you understand.
You can include those names too and the list would increase even more, no big deal.
Unlike you I dont fantasize and romanticize history.

If you started watching Tennis from the 2008 french open then stick to it.
 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
Its way easier winning it during the country club era with far less players and a FRACTION of the physicality than it is now. Yes. And what was Laver, smaller than Ferrer? LOL. Dude was only a few inches taller than Shwarzmann for god sakes. Laver would be lucky to win a masters event much less a slam much less a calendar slam at his size now.

Not only does Novak have to deal with 3 surfaces (as opposed to 2 during Laver's day) he has to deal with monsters damn near a foot taller and more powerful than anyone in the 60s and also that are way more fit
Oh, how little . . .
 

Spencer Gore

Hall of Fame
You can include those names too and the list would increase even more, no big deal.
Unlike you I dont fantasize and romanticize history.

If you started watching Tennis from the 2008 french open then stick to it.
Anyone placing Jim Courier above Tilden, Budge and Gonzales is a moron who understands nothing about tennis in any period.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Anyone placing Jim Courier above Tilden, Budge and Gonzales is a moron who understands nothing about tennis in any period.
Courier will beat those old Panchos and Budges type amateurs ..... Just because some oldist moron who started watching since 08 wants to dream of these oldies being some supermen and thinks they should be placed very high doesn't mean those players are relevant today.

Guys like Pancho would lost to even Medvedev/Zverev types if they played their same, those fellows are no match to the modern day beasts.

That having said, the list I posted is just ordered in the top 10, below it is just a cluster of players and not necessarily their ranks.
 

Spencer Gore

Hall of Fame
Courier will beat those old Panchos and Budges type amateurs ..... Just because some oldist moron who started watching since 08 wants to dream of these oldies being some supermen and thinks they should be placed very high doesn't mean those players are relevant today.

Guys like Pancho would lost to even Medvedev/Zverev types if they played their same, those fellows are no match to the modern day beasts.

That having said, the list I posted is just ordered in the top 10, below it is just a cluster of players and not necessarily their ranks.
Then why have you got Perry in your list?

Come on, quick! Try and work out a lie to save face. You've backed yourself into a corner, you'll need to find a way to move the goalposts. Courier will beat Gonzales from the 50s and 60s but not Perry from the 30s! How do you get out of this one! Posting Federer's endorsement earnings isn't going to cut it this time!
 

skaj

Legend
A Best of 3 more prestigious than a best of 5 ? hahahahahah

Ya sure, for Mooreys and Nadals maybe, not for legends like Roger or Pete who were/are GOATs.
What do does a number of sets have to do with the prestige and meaningfulness of the gold medal? Since you are laughing so much, I guess you are not seriously when saying that.

And somehow Nadal and Serena are not legends. :unsure:
 

Sunny014

Legend
Then why have you got Perry in your list?

Come on, quick! Try and work out a lie to save face. You've backed yourself into a corner, you'll need to find a way to move the goalposts. Courier will beat Gonzales from the 50s and 60s but not Perry from the 30s! How do you get out of this one! Posting Federer's endorsement earnings isn't going to cut it this time!
I just used wikipedia and saw that Perry has a lot of slams, so put him there randomly. Is that a big deal ??? Like I told you dumbo, the guys outside the top 10 are not in order, just the top 10 is on order, for the remainder of the top 20 I just included names of players randomly
In reality I don't rate these guys like Perry or Gonzales or Emerson or Hoad or whatever, these are ancient outdated dinosaurs who wouldn't be able to even beat anyone in the top 100 today, thats how much the sports has evolved.
 

Sunny014

Legend
What do does a number of sets have to do with the prestige and meaningfulness of the gold medal? Since you are laughing so much, I guess you are not seriously when saying that.

And somehow Nadal and Serena are not legends. :unsure:
Sets has everything to do with prestige and meaningfulness.
The difficulty of the slams over 5 sets is what gives them so much importance

Don't compare the worthless olympics medals that even leander paes has in singles to something like a grand slam or even a tour finals win.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Djokovic cries all the time. And what fetish you are talking about is beyond me. The gold medal is the most well known and prestigious award in professional spots. Professional athlete wanting to win it is not "a fetish" it's a natural wish.

Also putting Srdjan and sensible/pragmatic in the same sentence is problematic itself. :laughing:

I don't see the connection between the number of sets and the importance on the medal.
Olympics is known for 100m sprints, swimming, gymnastics etc etc

Nobody cares whether someone like leander paes or mooray or zverev won medals there for tennis, players used to skip olympics at will and still do in the tennis world, so discuss with respect to the tennis world only, don't include the prestige of a medal in swimming/athletics in a parasitic way to provide credibility to a tennis medal, lol
 

FiddlerDog

Professional
Mac never got over his FO loss to Lendl after being up 2 sets.
Novak may never live this down, poor guy. CYGS and ATSC at the same match.
Even if he gets 21, it will not match the sheer dominance of the dual record in a single match.
 

skaj

Legend
Olympics is known for 100m sprints, swimming, gymnastics etc etc

Nobody cares whether someone like leander paes or mooray or zverev won medals there for tennis, players used to skip olympics at will and still do in the tennis world, so discuss with respect to the tennis world only, don't include the prestige of a medal in swimming/athletics in a parasitic way to provide credibility to a tennis medal, lol
Again Djokovic, Nadal, Serena care. So does Federer. You should go and make them face the reality then :laughing:
 

skaj

Legend
Sets has everything to do with prestige and meaningfulness.
The difficulty of the slams over 5 sets is what gives them so much importance

Don't compare the worthless olympics medals that even leander paes has in singles to something like a grand slam or even a tour finals win.
Yes, it's all about the number of sets... :-D

Sorry, I don't take orders from strangers, especially orders that are silly.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Again Djokovic, Nadal, Serena care. So does Federer. You should go and make them face the reality then :laughing:
They are all fools to do so.

Being the greatest players on the players on the planet does not mean that you are always right.

Novak was foolish to go to Tokyo against the advice of his father who is pragmatic.

Result proved Srdjan right and Novak wrong!
 

Quaichang

Rookie
I was 12 years old when Rod Laver won his second Grand Slam in 1969. I remember watching the grainy picture on TV and thinking that it was a huge deal and an amazing accomplishment. But I have a far stronger memory of sprinting through the hedges at Forest Hills two years later to see a 16 year old Chris Evert in 1971. I'm not sad that I didn't see another Grand Slam yesterday but I am a little sad that I will probably never again be as excited to see a tennis match as I was that day in 1971.
Sounds like you were more excited about Chrissie than tennis match.
 

skaj

Legend
They are all fools to do so.

Being the greatest players on the players on the planet does not mean that you are always right.

Novak was foolish to go to Tokyo against the advice of his father who is pragmatic.

Result proved Srdjan right and Novak wrong!
Okay, Nadal, Federer, Djokovic and Serena are fools. And Srdjan is not... :giggle:
 

Quaichang

Rookie
Djokovic clearly wanted the Golden Slam which has been achieved only once previously, in 1988.
The normal Grand Slam was won in 1938, 1953, 1962, 1969, 1970. Five times in 32 years.

I have to laud Nole for aiming for the stars, trying to be the second club member in the Golden Slam Club.
I think he was deflated when he lost at the Olympics and lost a bit the motivation which was need to win at least the normal Grand Slam.
I think he lost some confidence not motivation. After defeating Rafa and winning FO he must have felt invincible. Losing to Zverev in Tokyo knocked him back down a few levels from that high perch.
 
Top