Alfred Chicken
Rookie
Federer in 2005, 2006, 2007 was ranked number one every week of the year(s), something no one else achieved in the open era
Could Djokovic nudge Nadal into 3rd place in the GOAT debate?
Federer in 2005, 2006, 2007 was ranked number one every week of the year(s), something no one else achieved in the open era
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Would you not consider him one of the top ten greatest players of the Open era?
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
No, but he does have more WTFs, Masters 1000s, YE#1, weeks at #1 and much better consistency. SLAMS AREN'T EVERYTHING!
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
Well people put lendl/connors below Borg in terms of GOAT-ness
Yet those players have vastly more weeks at 1, YEC (only Lendl), YE1, m1000/masters and titles ...lendl has 30 titles more and connors has 45 titles more.. HEck in the case on lendl he even played more slam finals...
Now tell me how djokovic will manage to surpass rafa in the same way than connors/lendl surpass Borg in every static, when he is already in quite disadvantage in most of the stats that really matter? (bar the YEC).
willhunting
Banned
Probably, but I think the law of diminishing returns applies. The gap between the players at the very top is much smaller than the gap between 9 and 10. Djokovic still has a long way to go.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
There's a lot to be said for having a more balanced resume. You know fine well that Nole would likely be ranked above Nadal if he had all those crazy stats in his favour.
willhunting
Banned
No, but he does have more WTFs, Masters 1000s, YE#1, weeks at #1 and much better consistency. SLAMS AREN'T EVERYTHING!
Slams are the most important tournaments, bar none.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Who would you put above him? For me it's only Federer, Sampras, Nadal, Borg, Lendl, Connors and McEnroe in the Open era.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
Agassi has 60 titles, tons of m1000 , Golden Slam, more slam finals, etc...
He is ahead in Slams too, didnt you know? Nobody with sane mind would put Djokovic above the likes of Agassi or Mac
Mac has 77 atp titles, 4 YE1.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Most important, but not everything otherwise there'd be no other tournaments that get played throughout the year. How do you explain many people putting Nole ahead of Wilander when he was still on 6 Slams compared to Wilander's 7? It's because he was also ahead in most other metrics such as the ones I've already outlined as to why I believe Djokovic > Agassi.
willhunting
Banned
I think that a case could be made for Agassi and Wilander to be above him, and perhaps even Becker and Edberg. Again, he's pretty low on the list. Did you even consider the aforementioned diminishing returns notion?
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Djokovic is still behind Mac but he's ahead of Agassi. Slams aren't everything(if only I had a pound for every time I've had to say this). Btw Nole has more Masters than Andre.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
What do you mean by "aforementioned diminishing returns"? Why am I getting the distinct feeling that you're just a Djokovic hater and quite possibly a troll? Nole is ahead of Becker, Edberg and Wilander and has been for some time now.
Alfred Chicken
Rookie
...if only you had to pay a pound for every time you say this (phrase)...
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
why behind Mac, but ahead of Agassi? (I think he's behind both)
and why the need to place him so specifically at this stage in his career, where he's still very must in his prime and playing some of the best tennis, he's ever played?
He'll get there eventually - 9 slams, 150+ weeks, 25-30 Masters as a bare minimum imo
willhunting
Banned
A career slam, one more major and 17 masters counts more than no career slam, one less slam and 20 masters, no?
Agassi also had prime Pete to contend with at No. 1. Who does Djokovic have? Past prime Federer and injury ridden Nadal.
willhunting
Banned
That the gap between the players at the top becomes smaller and smaller. Djokovic has a long way to go.
And no, I don't really like Djokovic. I don't care for his style or personality. Just my opinion - don't fault me for it.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Erm, you seem to be totally forgetting about WTFs, YE#1, weeks at #1 where Djokovic is ahead of Agassi, not to mention much greater overall consistency. And lol@ Nole having no competition. Talk about clueless.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
While Agassi's career slam + extra major, gives him the slight edge , one would have to consider the opponents faced by them in the finals.
Novak beat a 25 year old peak Nadal in 2011/2012 in 3 majors. He has beat Federer enroute in 3 other. That speaks a lot.
Agassi won lot of majors during a vacuum. (Medvedev, Todd Martin,Clement, Schuttler)
Last edited:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Doesn't matter if the gap becomes smaller, he's still ahead of those other players you mentioned and will likely be ahead of a few more by the time his career is over.
willhunting
Banned
No, I left them out purposefully because they don't matter until Djokovic matches Agassi in slam count. Wait until he gets to 8, and then you can bring those factors into the discussion.
I'm the clueless one? Weren't you the one in an older thread who was not only too ignorant to ever hear of the Roddick - Aynaoui match at the 03 Australian, but also too ignorant to even watch the highlights?
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
So you're saying that player A has to win the same amount of Slams to be considered as great as player B? Seriously? So it's only the majors that matter in your opinion, everything else can just be thrown out?
And I never said I'd never heard of that Roddick match, just that I never wanted to watch highlights of it which is my privilege. You obviously never read my post properly which quite frankly doesn't surprise me.
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
Open Era is:
Federer
------------Basically Impassable Barrier of 17-6-302-------------
Nadal
Borg
Sampras
McEnroe
Connors
Lendl
Agassi
Djokovic
I see Djoker getting in between Pete and Mac for 5th All-time.
Federer
------------Basically Impassable Barrier of 17-6-302-------------
Nadal
Borg
Sampras
McEnroe
Connors
Lendl
Agassi
Djokovic
I see Djoker getting in between Pete and Mac for 5th All-time.
willhunting
Banned
Nope, never said that. I said that those factors will be taken into account when he levels the slam count, even more so if he achieves the career grand slam.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Agree to disagree on that one then. That would only make sense to me if the Slams were the only tournaments on the ATP calendar.
willhunting
Banned
My apologies, fam, I forgot you were British. I just read your posts in a British accent and there is no way that I can compete with that level of sophistication. It's like bringing a knife to a gun fight. You win.
eldanger25
Hall of Fame
Slams are most important, and Agassi has an extra one. But once guys are within a slam of one another, it's reasonable to look at other factors - and that's where Djokovic, to me, passes Agassi.
eldanger25
Hall of Fame
All that said, if the ATP disbanded tomorrow, I'd rather have Andre's record at 3 of the 4 slams.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Which is what I've been trying to say all along. Thank god there are still some reasonable posters on this forum.
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
The thing is, Agassi has a career GS. That alone trumps the extra achievements that Djoker has done......for now. One more GS for Djoker will correct that. So for now, Agassi is ahead
willhunting
Banned
So reasonable means agreeing with you? Would you like to participate in a psychology experiment? I need one more credit and I think you would be good in validating the confirmation bias phenomenon.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Not always but most of the time, yes.
eldanger25
Hall of Fame
Very reasonable perspective. I'm just more impressed with what Djokovic has done, career-wise - he really did something impressive each year since 2007:
2007: Loses only to Federer or Nadal at the majors; epic 1-2-3 win in Canada
2008: Ends Fed's stranglehold in Melbourne; only guy to semi-push Nadal at RG; wins the YEC
2009: Great toe-to-toe clay season against Nadal; their Madrid SF put the final nail in the coffin on Nadal the raw, breathtaking athlete.
2010: Big win over Fed at the Open; great DC title run.
2011: No explanation needed. Apart from everything else, Federer-Nadal was like a brick wall on the tour for half a decade, and he demolished it.
2012: Semi-underrated here; fended off all three rivals at various times, and emerged as top dog at the end.
2013: One of the strongest PoY runner-up seasons in the Open Era (similar to Connors 1978 )
2014: Just very solid across the board (though some disappointments) - big titles on all surfaces.
Agassi checked out in the middle of his prime, and didn't have his signature season until Pete faded (just a little) in 1999 (and he still lost to Sampras in their two biggest matches that year). However much Nadal was exhaling/burning out in 2011, he was still just 25 and making final after final on all surfaces. And Djokovic just nailed him to the wall.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
YE1 and weeks are consequence of winning titles and not the other way around, what matter are the titles afterall, and Agassi achieved 60 atp titles and 8 slams, including golden slam.
YE1 says nothing, 2/3 YE1 of djokovic have been single slam years...
Compared to fedal where all their YE1 are multiple slam years...
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Why would you bring up Fedal when the discussion's about Djokovic and Agassi? Obsessed much?
Btw Novak's won more tier 1 tournaments than Agassi did, many of those 60 titles were 250 events. Oh and weeks at #1 is also a result of consistency, not just winning titles.
There is no way you can convince GOAT whiners and insecure fanboys like Chico and D2011. You'll always find yourself getting extremely trolled or irritated with their regular insecure bias. They simply infest in every Djokovic related threads, replaying defensively to every poster not giving opinion in favour of Djokovic. I don't know why they believes that their repetitive defensive posts can change opinions of those not rating Djokovic as high as they do. Frankly speaking I found very hard to support great player like Djokovic after reading those comments. These two guys can make any neutral tennis fan cheer against Djokovic.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Just because I defend my favourite player doesn't make me a fanboy.
And you know where the ignore button is sweetie.
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
I wouldn't lump DJ2011 in with Chico.
There are some quite reasonable Novak fans on here. One of them returned today.
The_Mental_Giant
Hall of Fame
Me neither, chico is on a whole other level of delusion :twisted:
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
Tiger8
Semi-Pro
I think people, including myself, rank Djokovic above Agassi mainly because he's only 27 and not closed to finished yet, so people basically assume he'll end up better, which he probably will be.
They're basically equals right now, Agassi has one more GS, and each have finished runner-ups 7 times. Other than a gold medal, Djokovic basically eclipses all of Agassi's other accomplishments. People say Agassi has 60 titles, but that's not really impressive compared to Djokovic's 47 (maybe 48 tomorrow), and who has many more years left on tour. Also, 33 of Agassi's titles were ATP 500 or 250 level tournaments.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
dominikk1985
Legend
of course. right now nadal is ahead. nole could stay at 8 or 9 and then nadal would be ahead even if he is done right now. nadal could also win 18 and become the GOAT.
however if we ASUME that nadal stays at 14 and novak gets to 14 too it is likely that novak has a pretty diverse slam win pattern and probably the double career slam (I know two FO is not a small order but 7 more slams aren't either).
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
That's a very good summation. Prepare to be ignored. Reasonable does not get answered very often.
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
Well, I just made it to the end of this thread and saw no one responded.
I think the biggest problem in this forum is that most people do not have a large enough picture of tennis history to move from era to ear and compare. And also that most people are such rabid fans that asking for any kind of objectivity seems unreasonable.
When assessing Novak's place in history it is rather silly to get really serious about it before the history is completed.
Novak could fade. This could be his last really good year. Or he might have another good year, then fade. Or he might dominate for a long time, if he does not lose a step, stays otherwise healthy and keeps his will to win.
Meanwhile, he's still fairly young for a modern player. We just don't know where he is going to be in another 5 or 6 years.
eldanger25
Hall of Fame
Agreed on all fronts. Who'd have thought Mac was done winning majors at the end of 1984? Djokovic could be winning one or more slams a year for another 4-5 years, or he (and Nadal and Federer) might be swept away in a season or two. All that's clear to me at this point is that the generation between Nadal/Djokovic/Murray and Kyrgios/Coric/Thiem etc. has been unusually docile, historically speaking.
BGod
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic looks promising to have more weeks at #1.
Past that, I've already covered how a more spread out record across the Slams might edge him over Nadal.
Sure, over half of his Slams are at one event but the Slam Finals and Semifinals should also be taken into account, another rundown:
AUS: 4-0
FRA: 0-2 (4 SM)
WMB: 2-1 (3 SM)
USO: 1-4 (3 SM)
In a hypothetical where he wins 2 French, 1 Australian, 2 U.S. Opens and 1 Wimbledon giving him 13 total Slams with 4+ Finals at every event and multiple titles. It gives him argument.
Nadal's breakdown for comparison:
AUS: 1-2 (1 SM)
FRA: 9-0
WMB: 2-3
USO: 2-1 (2 SM)
Depends how you look at it but some could say Djokovic has been at least equal to Nadal at Wimbledon & Flushing Meadows with a lead at Australian and Nadal of course ruling the French.
Nadal's record might stay relatively the same outside of the French though.
Past that, I've already covered how a more spread out record across the Slams might edge him over Nadal.
Sure, over half of his Slams are at one event but the Slam Finals and Semifinals should also be taken into account, another rundown:
AUS: 4-0
FRA: 0-2 (4 SM)
WMB: 2-1 (3 SM)
USO: 1-4 (3 SM)
In a hypothetical where he wins 2 French, 1 Australian, 2 U.S. Opens and 1 Wimbledon giving him 13 total Slams with 4+ Finals at every event and multiple titles. It gives him argument.
Nadal's breakdown for comparison:
AUS: 1-2 (1 SM)
FRA: 9-0
WMB: 2-3
USO: 2-1 (2 SM)
Depends how you look at it but some could say Djokovic has been at least equal to Nadal at Wimbledon & Flushing Meadows with a lead at Australian and Nadal of course ruling the French.
Nadal's record might stay relatively the same outside of the French though.
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
As do I. But you have to admit that Agassi, coming from the brink of anonimity, came back from the ashes and made a stellar performance at the end of his career. I'm sure if not for his back injury, he would have done much better at even older age.
He was distracted by so many things. Many personal stuff going on. That was his fault. As i said from above, he did redeem himself and made one of the greatest comebacks in the game. That is a legendary comeback, i might add. And as i said, his lone lead in the GS count made him slightly on a higher pedestal compared to Djoker, albeit the lead being a FO. He also won an Olympic gold which trumps Djoker's bronze. MADE OTHER notable wins for tennis....the intangibles if you may. And I reiterate, it's only a matter of time before Djoker completely dislodges Agassi from this place. Agassi also Made tennis very popular. Not that Nole didn't. But Agassi had his flare.
In all fairness to Nadal, he was able to turn things around against him. Beat him consecutive times after that, FO and USO. That's one of the Warrior's great assets. dON'T COUNT OUT the Nadal just yet
Similar threads
