M
monfed
Guest
Oh really who's better than Fed excluding the open era?
Are Djokovic, Fed, Nadal the 3 best players ever
- Thread starter gabybackhand
- Start date
- Status
Oh really who's better than Fed excluding the open era?
Why are people so confused b/w greatest with best? After all, Fed in 2004 was a better player than Lendl was. However, Federer in 2004 was not yet as "great" as Lendl in terms of achievements.
"Better" refers to level of play, "Greatness" is accomplishments. Djokovic is not as great as Rosewall but he would crush him in a match.
If you believe that Fed/Nadal are better than the likes of Borg/Mcenroe/Lendl etc than Djokovic, who plays at the same level as Fedal is also better than those players.
The argument can be made for Sampras or Agassi however, as its arguable that they are at comparable level of play to the top modern players. I can certainly imagine Sampras beating Djokovic on hard courts but no way is Borg beating Djokovic, the level of play in the men's game has evolved
"Better" refers to level of play, "Greatness" is accomplishments. Djokovic is not as great as Rosewall but he would crush him in a match.
If you believe that Fed/Nadal are better than the likes of Borg/Mcenroe/Lendl etc than Djokovic, who plays at the same level as Fedal is also better than those players.
The argument can be made for Sampras or Agassi however, as its arguable that they are at comparable level of play to the top modern players. I can certainly imagine Sampras beating Djokovic on hard courts but no way is Borg beating Djokovic, the level of play in the men's game has evolved
borg number one
Legend
Always equalize for equipment when making comparisons across eras. Djokovic is perhaps second or third tier at this point. People overestimate the current level of play big time. Chalk it up to marketing of the current game. If you want to look at peak level of play, then yes, Djokovic is up there with some other all time greats, but give peak Borg all modern equipment and some time to adjust to modern conditions and Djokovic or anyone else on the planet would be find it very tough going on most any surface. Same with Sampras and Laver as well. If you took all time greats and equalized for equipment, the matches played between them would hinge greatly on surface and matchup. You'd have all the greats lose some and win some. That's just the nature of tennis. Tennis has evolved slowly over time in some ways, but it hasn't been just this linear progression with tennis always continually getting better. If that were the case, then one would have to admit that Federer of 2006 would be eclipsed by the top players in 2013. Also, the players of 2015 would just dust Sampras and Federer at their peak right? No.
Murrayfan31
Hall of Fame
My answer would be different if we're talking about which players performed the best in their Era. Then Djokovic would be far off.
robertharris
Banned
Considering Nadal is a way greater player than Djokovic at this point, your answer would be impossible to equate to reality (not that anything you say relates to reality, just your sad little fantasy World).
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
Even if Djokovic was in another era, it's not a given that he would've won 20 slams. Every era had its own best players and we don't exactly know how well they would've matched with the current players. That's why we can only go by the stats that we have. If we arbitrarily interpret the the stats too much, it is bound to become biased.
By the same logic, what if Borg was competing in a weaker era? How many would he have won? What about McEnroe and Connors? And many others?
Also, because of Federer and Nadal, Djokovic has become the player he is, we may say. If he was playing in another supposedly 'weaker era', he could've been content to just compete and do well against his contemporaries. We just have to use the data we have in hand.
By the same logic, what if Borg was competing in a weaker era? How many would he have won? What about McEnroe and Connors? And many others?
Also, because of Federer and Nadal, Djokovic has become the player he is, we may say. If he was playing in another supposedly 'weaker era', he could've been content to just compete and do well against his contemporaries. We just have to use the data we have in hand.
Death Master
Banned
it looks like a GOAT thread to me.
Day Tripper
Semi-Pro
No way Tilden, Pancho or Rosewall are top 5 let alone 10 or 15 for that matter.
Here's a more realistic list..
1. Federer
2. Sampras
3. Laver
4. Nadal
5. Borg
helloworld
Hall of Fame
Agreed. If peak Djokovic couldn't beat Murray at Wimbledon and US Open, what makes people think he'll beat peak Laver, Sampras, Borg, etc. on their best surface? :?
mbm0912
Hall of Fame
This. By far, highest level.
jhick
Hall of Fame
I would theoretically answer no to the OP question.
But with that said, doing player comparisons from different eras is pretty much meaningless. There are so many variables, technology, training, depth, no head to head, no way to know how said players respond to stronger/tougher competition, court surface, etc, etc...
But with that said, doing player comparisons from different eras is pretty much meaningless. There are so many variables, technology, training, depth, no head to head, no way to know how said players respond to stronger/tougher competition, court surface, etc, etc...
Anti-Fedal
Professional
Do you work for the tennis channel or something? Because any rational sane person knows that Tilden, Big Pancho and Rosewall are definitely top 5 of all time.
Here is a better list than yours
1. Rosewall and Laver tied
3. Gonzales
4. Tilden
5. Borg
jhick
Hall of Fame
And who's to say how past champions would respond to a higher level of tennis? They can't help it if there was not as much competition in their era. Perhaps a higher level would have just pushed them to raise their own level, train harder. Pros today have more tools in their toolbox than pros of past decades.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Irony is Fed fans would have chosen fed and Nadal as top 2 but not Nole and now fed himself is out of top 2
Very cruel but it is what it is.
Very cruel but it is what it is.
TheGoldenEra1990’s
Hall of Fame
Yea probably. With laver and Sampras not far behind. Of course we will never objectively know since rackets and court conditions can’t be compared. Realistically you can only be compared to the players of the era you played in
Donkus_Reborn
Semi-Pro
Djokovic
Sampras
Federer
Agassi
Laver
Sinner
Nadal
Sampras
Federer
Agassi
Laver
Sinner
Nadal
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
I still vote no. But I will concede that I am going by what others said. Laver and Nole are top 2.
Fed and Nadal both are almost equal but if I have to choose I will have to choose Nadal.
TheGoldenEra1990’s
Hall of Fame
One can easily say the big 3 vultured because of strings and homogenized conditions. And they wouldn’t be wrong really. Mix up and mess around with the conditions to 1990s conditions and what do the Big 3 achieve as a whole? Look at how quick alcaraz begins to whine about indoor conditions being “ too fast”. Only Fed would have enjoyed it. Djoker and Nadal would be screaming bloody murder with conditions being so extreme opposite from one week to the next
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Laver is still top 4 but Federer and Nadal have argument to be above him.
I still choose Federer above Nadal. His all around career at all Slams and weeks #1 gives him the slight edge for me.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Yes but laver also has arguments above them. As much as stats show, laver may be the best ever with Djokovic number 2.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Depends on which stats you're talking about.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Peak domination. Only laver and Nole ever have 30+ wins over top 10 in a single season. Both are only guys to win 4 slams in a row.
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
And only peak is not sufficient but laver has longevity just like fedkovic. Maybe even better than nadal's
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Yes his numbers are impressive. Too bad about his era and they didn't have a combined tour back then, so we could see what his true Slam count would be.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Yeah
nolefam_2024
Bionic Poster
Yes and also too bad it was so far back that almost no one has seen it. From the people we have seen big 3 are above all for sure.
- Status
Similar threads
