Djoker owns the highest level of tennis in open era

Zhilady

Professional
But surely one of the true and undeniable marks of greatness, forget about having the HIGHEST LEVEL OF TENNIS IN OPEN ERA, just a mark of genuine undeniable greatness is to rise to the occasion when it matters most?
I thought Djokovic did that from 2015-2016, when he won 4 Slams in a row.

Djokovic (like Federer before him) was OBSESSED with winning Roland Garros, with completing the collection, he'd set it as his major priority every year from 2012 on, and in spite of that it literally took till conditions were laid down on a plate for him in 2016 to get the job done. Anyone can have a bad day, of course, but if you've set winning this title as your specific goal for 4 years, and only one guy has stopped you over and over again, then surely when you get to that final against some other guy you become doubly focused and determined to achieve that white whale of a task? It wasn't like it was against some unknown quantity either, those two had been meeting again and again in majors, and had to know each other pretty much inside out, and he still got blitzed.
Both Federer and Djokovic have won the French Open the same number of times. Once. In other words, Djokovic rose to the occasion as many times as Federer has.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
This is a bit knee jerk reaction to the semi final match today, IMO.
How about the 1984 USO semis, the greatest set of semifinals in the history of the Open era:

Lendl-Cash 5 sets
Chris-Martina 3 sets drama
Mac-Connors 5 set drama

Semis often exceed the quality of the final. This will probably be the case when we look back on the final tomorrow night.
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
You underrate yourself Mr. Gore.

You played in the strongest era in tennis history. One of my ancestors wrote letters detailing the entire era and said future generations would be weak in comparison. The word “mug” was used frequently to describe what future players may be like.

Then @Meles was created by the tennis gods so the masses could be fooled into believing that tennis was advancing and the players were getting better.
I sometimes wonder about these threads. Move Laver to the current day and just throw him on the court wood racket and all and it wouldn't be a pretty picture.:confused:

The game does advance and so do the players. Technology wise the last big change was a more subtle one with a young Kuerten winning RG for the first time with Poly strings. Throw say Nadal 2006 back there at the same time with basically the same technology and he would unmercifully pound the field. Yet some like to entertain that peak Kuerten (2000-2001) might have beaten Rafa quite a bit.:rolleyes: The game does move on with time even if the technology changes are minor.
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
How about the 1984 USO semis, the greatest set of semifinals in the history of the Open era:

Lendl-Cash 5 sets
Chris-Martina 3 sets drama
Mac-Connors 5 set drama

Semis often exceed the quality of the final. This will probably be the case when we look back on the final tomorrow night.
he meant it was knee jerk to say Djoker has the highest level of tennis in Open Era after the match today, not anything about the quality of the semi final...
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
Since 1, Federer has 20 Slams and 6 WTF titles compared to Djokovic's 12 Slams and 5 WTF titles.
Federer has been playing a lot longer though.
Federer is the most consistent but in slams he loses to Djokovic/Nadal most times.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
I'm not sure if he does but I think it's nice to see someone making an argument for him. A guy who held all 4 slams at one point and tamed Fedal certainly deserves to be in the conversation when talking about peak level of play.
 
D

Deleted member 733170

Guest
I'm not sure if he does but I think it's nice to see someone making an argument for him. A guy who held all 4 slams at one point and tamed Fedal certainly deserves to be in the conversation when talking about peak level of play.
This, he at least deserves his place at the table.
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
Tennis is, always has been, and likely always will be about depth. At his best, Novak consistently hits a deep ball more than any other living player.
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
Um....(massive sigh)...he will be EIGHT MAJORS behind Roger at at the age of 31 if he wins tomorrow. To surpass him, not tie.
Who cares what number he's behind to the second man behind Roger? The front runner is the salient point here.
I never suggested he’d pass Roger but Rafa is still a possibility, albeit a small one, as Nadal will probably win 2 more himself.
 

Hyde

Rookie
There is no doubt that Djokovic had the potential to be the best and most successful player of all time.
There were two things in his career who likely denied him the goat term:

1) Stan Wawrinka
2) His loss of motivation after completing his career slam at French Open 2016

Without these two aspects, he could easily stand at 18-20 slams now.
 

Terry Tibbs

Hall of Fame
I agree with the OP and I was thinking about this yesterday. I'm also a Fed fan. I think what we have here is 2 different entities. In my opinion, in terms of accomplishments, stats, amount of titles and also and possibly more significantly what he has achieved at his age, Federer is the GOAT. I really cannot see either Nadal or Djokovic winning slams at age 36. However as much as I hate to say it, when it comes to actual level of play and not just over 1 match but over a sustained period of time, I really do think that Djokovic at his peak is the best player I've ever seen. Just an impossible level of play I have witnessed from him several times. I fully expect now to see all the imbeciles on this forum call me a troll again pretending to be a Federer fan. Understand this guy's, I am a huge Federer fan and I'm crushed every time he loses. However, get this, I can also have an objective, unbiased, honest opinion and that is that for me, Djokovic has demonstrated the highest level of tennis I've ever seen in the 40 years I've been watching tennis.
 

Hyde

Rookie
This is impossible to conclude, since Fed's and Novak's peaks didn't collide.

Heck, even 2011 well past prime Fed beat the best djokovic ever on his worst surface, in 4 sets.
Söderling beat Nadal at French Open too, but that doesn’t make him the better clay court player than Nadal.

It‘s not very useful to pick single duells to tell who was the better tennis player overall. Of course, when players play against each other 20, 30, 40 times, you‘ll always find matches who put one player or the other in a good light.

Of course even Djokovic of 2011 didn‘t win EVERYTHING, like Federer of 2006 also didn’t win everything. It’s normal.
 

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
I mean Federer did, right? 4 years in a row losing at a single major to a single man (I'm not sure that has ever happened anywhere ever before, surely?) and he finally got a sliver of opportunity, a 1 year window in 10, and bam, he dug himself out of a 2 sets to 0 hole, withstood the onslaught of Del Potro, and completed the career grand slam
Yes, and look what happened in 2017 as soon as it was clear Djoko was heading for a poor spell. Federer pounced.

People go on about "weak era" but it's kind of missing the point. He took the opportunity to rack up the slams, just like he took the opportunity in FO 09 and in 2017. There's a mental strength in being able to do that, just as there's a strength in winning tight matches.
 

Hyde

Rookie
Overall, it's 27-25.

Coming to Grand Slams, it's:

2-1 to Djokovic at Wimbledon.
2-1 to Nadal at the US Open.

6-1 to Nadal at the French Open.
1-0 to Djokovic at the Australian Open.

Nadal leads, but how would things look if they'd played 7 times at the Australian Open and 1 time at the French Open?
One of the reasons Nadal has a very good slam record against Djokovic is that Nadal is not consistent enough outside of FO so he barely played Djokovic in the later stages of other slams.

If Djokovic would be a bad clay court player, he and Nadal may never had met at FO (because Djokovic would have lost in early rounds). In this case Djokovics h2h with Nadal would improve drastically. But would those better stats make Djokovic the better player than he is now?
 

Midaso240

Hall of Fame
What does it matter though,and what does it prove? How can it even be determined? Surely a player can only play as well as their opponent lets them...
 

mistik

Hall of Fame
Djokovic peak isnt highest. He was never been in the same league of Fed and Nadal until 2011 and he caught Rafa off guard in 2011.That is still the one only dominant period ı respect from Djoko.What ever happened in 2015 and 2016 holds zero importance.Rafa washed up that years and Fed is also no spring chicken anymore age 34.
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
Nadal is the most naturally gifted tennis player of all time. I mean look at his physique, handed to him by god.
 

mistik

Hall of Fame
I'm not sure if he does but I think it's nice to see someone making an argument for him. A guy who held all 4 slams at one point and tamed Fedal certainly deserves to be in the conversation when talking about peak level of play.
He held all 4 slams when Fed and Nadal no longer the players as they used to be against joke field.Rafa was done and dusted in 2015.His 2011 dominance still more impressive than 2015.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic at his best beats Federer and Nadal at their best. Any honest, knowledgeable tennis watcher knows that.
Except at Wimbledon, USO, Cincinnati, Hamburg/Madrid, YEC Shanghai, Shanghai, Madrid Indoors. RG likely 60/40 to Fed, AO RA to Fed, Plexi to Djokovic.
 

Alien

Hall of Fame
Obviously, Nole showed the highest level. He even has a winning H2H with Rafa who is of course the father of Roger. He beat Rafa on clay and at RG. He beat Federer at W.

Only fanboys see it differently
 

top10

Rookie
When you guys talk about the number of Grand slams won: the only one of the big three who actually won a Grand Slam (a non calendar year one) is Djokovic, all Fed and Nadal won were individual Grand Slam tournaments...
 

Raining hopes

Hall of Fame
Um....(massive sigh)...he will be EIGHT MAJORS behind Roger at at the age of 31 if he wins tomorrow. To surpass him, not tie.
Who cares what number he's behind to the second man behind Roger? The front runner is the salient point here.

You really love Novak,don't you?
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
No. Nadal has the highest level on any single surface, including Federer on grass or Djokovic on slower HCs.
 

BringBackWood

Professional
I sometimes wonder about these threads. Move Laver to the current day and just throw him on the court wood racket and all and it wouldn't be a pretty picture.:confused:

The game does advance and so do the players. Technology wise the last big change was a more subtle one with a young Kuerten winning RG for the first time with Poly strings. Throw say Nadal 2006 back there at the same time with basically the same technology and he would unmercifully pound the field. Yet some like to entertain that peak Kuerten (2000-2001) might have beaten Rafa quite a bit.:rolleyes: The game does move on with time even if the technology changes are minor.
so moving Nadal back to 90's grass or hard court against Sampras? Why would anyone think moving Laver with a wooden racket to today is at all meaningful?
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Hilarious nonsense bullcrap myth of "peak Fed" from Fed fans to justify Nadal, Nole, and a whole host of other people WRECKING Fed starting in 08. Still managed to vulture a few slams from 08-10 since Nole was still a baby, but Federer from 11-12 was basically at his peak level and could barely scrap out one major against slam virgin Murray who was whupping him before the roof closed. Would go on, but why upset Fed fans? Already bad enough that Fed grew up with 2 DADDYS Nadal and Nole with no calming feminine influence in his life, not that he needs one ROFLMAO
 

OddJack

G.O.A.T.
That was 3 years ago.

And Now even more so.

Too bad Fedal fans.

Djoker is now the GOAT, accept it, be in peace with it. get used to it. Cuz he deserves it.

Have a good day.
 
Top