At this moment, would you put Djokovic ahead of Nadal?

?

  • Nadal still greater

    Votes: 93 49.5%
  • Djokovic is ahead now

    Votes: 95 50.5%

  • Total voters
    188

RF-18

G.O.A.T.
7-1-5-3-5-32 vs 1-12-2-3-0-33

Nadal with two slams more, but Djokovic has a much more balanced resume across all slams and has enjoyed dominance on multiple surfaces.

5 YE#1 vs 4
260 weeks as #1 vs 196
5 YECs vs 0.
NCYGS + Golden masters

33 masters for Nadal vs 32
More career titles for Nadal too
1 Olympic Gold Nadal vs 0 for djoko.

Djokovic has defended Wimbledon on two seperate occasions aswell. He has defended titles on all surfaces and conditions, Nadal Only on clay.

I think there are arguments for Djoko to be put ahead of Nadal. What do you guys think?
 
Last edited:

StrongRule

Hall of Fame
I would like Nadal to win some more titles outside of clay but I would never trade Nadal's career for Djokovic's. His records on clay are just too great, even though many Djokovic fans are trying to "prove" they are worth nothing. Nobody ever dominated on a surface like that, not even close. This is just my opinion.
 

RF-18

G.O.A.T.
I would like Nadal to win some more titles outside of clay but I would never trade Nadal's career for Djokovic's. His records on clay are just too great, even though many Djokovic fans are trying to "prove" they are worth nothing. Nobody ever dominated on a surface like that, not even close. This is just my opinion.
I think there are many that would take Djokos career, from the sheer fact that he has won 5 Wimbledon titles and defended them on two seperate occasions, along with all other stuff he has achieved with all surface dominance.
 

Goof

Semi-Pro
If they finish their careers with the same number slams I would prefer Djokovic´s career, but today Rafa is greater
This is the correct answer. The Slam count is what matters most. In the event of Slam count tie(s), all of that other stuff comes into play (and Djokovic is superior to Rafa and Fed in the other stuff). Djoko will own all the tiebreakers, but he has to tie the ones above him before those even matter.
 

StrongRule

Hall of Fame
I think they are tied. More YE1, more weeks at #1, 5 WTFs are enough to compensate for 2 slams.

And Nadal is ahead only in the FO. Nole is ahead in two of the other slams and in the third they are tied, maybe slight advantage to Nole.
By 11 titles though. This is a giant gap. No need to underrate how great Nadal is on clay. Nobody ever was so dominant on a surface before.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
This sounds incoherent but I could see good arguments for Nadal having the ‘greater’ career so far...nonetheless I’d personally prefer Djokovic’s by a country mile. Nadal has never been YE#1 for consecutive years and has a losing record in non-clay finals and a pretty ugly record against the top 10 in non-clay finals. It just doesn’t sit well with me that for 70% of the year Nadal is a distant third, and sometimes fourth.
 
Or as someone else wrote (and I can’t recall who) net out the differences and here is what you have:

Nole: 6 AOs, 3 Wimbledons, 5 WTFs, 1 YE1, 64 weeks at number 1.

Nadal: 11 FOs, 1 masters

which would you prefer?
One Olympic gold in Nadal's column, too. I personally think it is double counting to put both years and weeks as #1 and that it's better to decide on one of them and only count that. There are some who say that it's double counting to include ranking criteria at all.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Slams are what it's all about. The rest is just filler/tiebreakers.
Not necessarily when you have 5 Slams at one and 7 Slams at another, and the other guy just dominated one Slam. Also when you have a big lead in weeks at #1 and 5 WTFs. It's not just about Slams in that case. Not diminishing Nadal because he has his argument but so does Djokovic.
 
Last edited:

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
I think there are many that would take Djokos career, from the sheer fact that he has won 5 Wimbledon titles and defended them on two seperate occasions, along with all other stuff he has achieved with all surface dominance.
If someone offers you 18 million dollars or 16 million dollars, which offer do you accept?

Why are so many of these tiresome threads started, day after day after day?

Nadal is greater because he has 18 majors. If and when Djoker gets 19, he will be considered the greater player than Rafa by nearly all tennis historians.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
If someone offers you 18 million dollars or 16 million dollars, which offer do you accept?

Why are so many of these tiresome threads started, day after day after day?

Nadal is greater because he has 18 majors. If and when Djoker gets 19, he will be considered the greater player than Rafa by nearly all tennis historians.
And what if somebody offered you 16 million dollars with 2 million in stocks and bonds, and a beach house in the Bahamas or 18 million dollars? It's not as cut and dry as you are making it seem.
 

DjokoLand

Rookie
It’s closer than 2 slams I think they are nearly level. If Djokovic wins the USO I’ll put him ahead as that is another slam outside AO and all his other records that are better than Nadal.
While a slam is a slam.
Djokovic has 9 outside AO
Nadal has 6 outside RG.

Djokovic is the all round better player but I’d say they are equal enough at the moment.
 

JasonZ

Semi-Pro
Nadal has only two wimbledons. So at the most prestigious tournament he is clearly behind Djokovic.

He also never won the wtf, which is a huge hole in his resumee.

I dont know who is ahead right now, but i would rather have Djokovics career
 

GabeT

Legend
One Olympic gold in Nadal's column, too. I personally think it is double counting to put both years and weeks as #1 and that it's better to decide on one of them and only count that. There are some who say that it's double counting to include ranking criteria at all.
I include both measures of #1 because they measure somewhat different things. If forced to choose I’d pick YE1 because it’s what most closely reflects sports seasons.

I don’t think ranking and tournaments is double counting. Player A wins 4 CYGS in a row and has 4 YE1. Player B wins one slam a year for 16 years and never reaches #1. Very different outcomes despite the same # of slams
 

onyxrose81

Hall of Fame
Novak has gotten close enough in GS for me to consider him over Nadal. People also forget he has won all the Masters as well. Nadal not having won WTF and disappearing regularly after the USO puts a blemish on his record for me. But that’s just my opinion.
 

victorcruz

Professional
And what if somebody offered you 16 million dollars with 2 million in stocks and bonds, and a beach house in the Bahamas or 18 million dollars? It's not as cut and dry as you are making it seem.
When you're an ATG, it's all about slams. There are 3 goats.
 

Goret

Rookie
I'd consider them more or less equal. Nadal's higher slams count is offset by Djokovic's Non-Calendar Year Grand Slam, which I'd consider as a huge achievement (I think it's really underrated), and his #1 weeks count.
 

TheSixthSense

New User
It is very close. Can't forget Djokovic was untouchable at times, even now he won 4 out of the last 5 Slams, and he can potentially spend the most time as number 1.

I have always preferred him over Nadal so I am not the most objective guy out there regarding this...
 
I imagine more would lean towards him if he gets within one Major of Nadal. The two Majors margin was there three years ago, as well as after the most recent Australian Open, and people were quite evenly split on this.

The next two Slams should be a good opportunity for Djokovic to do that. And it would be great for him to use them, while he is still playing at a good level.
 

augustobt

Legend
I honestly can say they're almost even, but with Novak having the edge, for me. 5YEC vs 0 is impressive and sure could be a tie-breaker itself under this situation, but the fact that Novak has 7 titles in Melbourne, 5 in Wimbledon and 4 in New York shows his dominance in multiple events. That can surpass Nadal's gigantic dominance on Clay.
 
Top