That he can win more than 20 slams?What would he have left to prove, really?
To be the overall GOAT, Djokovic needs to win 12 Roland Garros and 9 Wimbledon titles. Otherwise, he is just the hard court GOAT.If he completes his second NCYGS beating Nadal in the final of Roland Garros wouldn't he be the GOAT in many people's eyes?
What would he have left to prove, really?
hardcourt is a more important surfaceLet me know when Djokovic wins 12 Roland Garros and 9 Wimbledon titles.
Too easy to win the Grand Slam race when 2 of 4 Grand Slams are on hard courts and you are a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard courts being your more succesful court).
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on grass, Federer could already have 23 Grand Slams or more.
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on clay, Nadal could have 30 Grand Slams.
The Grand Slam count is irrelevant. There will never be an overall GOAT. The Grand Slam count only indicates which player is greater on hard courts, not which player is greater overall.
For Djokovic fans, because Djokovic is a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard court being his best court).hardcourt is a more important surface
It's quite the opposite of what's bolded because everyone excels on hardcourts.To be the overall GOAT, Djokovic needs to win 12 Roland Garros and 9 Wimbledon titles. Otherwise, he is just the hard court GOAT.
Too easy to win the Grand Slam race when 2 of 4 Grand Slams are on hard courts and you are a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard courts being your more succesful court).
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on grass, Federer could already have 23 Grand Slams or more.
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on clay, Nadal could have 30 Grand Slams.
The Grand Slam count is irrelevant. There will never be an overall GOAT. The Grand Slam count only indicates which player is greater on hard courts, not which player is greater overall.
You are a Nadal fan I suppose?To be the overall GOAT, Djokovic needs to win 12 Roland Garros and 9 Wimbledon titles. Otherwise, he is just the hard court GOAT.
Too easy to win the Grand Slam race when 2 of 4 Grand Slams are on hard courts and you are a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard courts being your more succesful court).
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on grass, Federer could already have 23 Grand Slams or more.
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on clay, Nadal could have 30 Grand Slams.
The Grand Slam count is irrelevant. There will never be an overall GOAT. The Grand Slam count only indicates which player is greater on hard courts, not which player is greater overall.
Based on what? There is no argument to put Djokovic as the GOAT.Djokovic is already the GOAT in my eyes.
False. Some players play substantially better on grass or clay than hard courts.It's quite the opposite of what's bolded because everyone excels on hardcourts.
For the world, not for Djokovic fans.For Djokovic fans, because Djokovic is a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard court being his best court).
If there were 2 Grand Slams on clay, or 2 Grand Slams on grass, you would be the first to complain.
Nope. There will never be a tennis GOAT.You are a Nadal fan I suppose?
Djokovic will be tied overall GOAT when he wins 20 slams and overall GOAT when he wins 21
There is no such thing as a "neutral" surface. Hard court suits Djokovic's game more than Federer's or Nadal's one.For the world, not for Djokovic fans.
The majority of tournaments at all levels are on hardcourt, and hardcourt is the most neutral surface game wise.
Sure, of course, it doesn't. I bet if there was no such thing as Roger Federer and Nadal held the record of 17 slams, I wonder what that would indicate.The Grand Slam record doesn't indicate which player is greater overall, but which player is greater on hard courts.
It's not probably going to happen. But he's got a chance.Nah. A 2019 CYGS would make it debatable but that one is not happening.
I see you didn't quote the main point of my post.Nope. There will never be a tennis GOAT.
The Grand Slam count is irrelevant, since 2 of 4 Grand Slams are on hard courts. The Grand Slam record doesn't indicate which player is greater overall, but which player is greater on hard courts.
If there were 2 Grand Slams on clay. Nadal could have already 30 Grand Slams. If there were 2 Grand Slams on grass, he could have already 23 Grand Slams.
The Grand Slam count would only be relevant if 33% of Grand Slams were on clay, 33% were on hard courts, and 33% were on grass. Otherwise, it just indicates which player is greater on hard courts not overall.
What would you classify Becker as?For Djokovic fans, because Djokovic is a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard court being his best court).
If there were 2 Grand Slams on clay, or 2 Grand Slams on grass, you would be the first to complain.
Look, when Nadal was born clay already had only 1 slam tournament.There is no such thing as a "neutral" surface. Hard court suits Djokovic's game more than Federer's or Nadal's one.
Yeah doing something Rafa and roger couldn't, twice during their careers, no big dealIf he completes his second NCYGS beating Nadal in the final of Roland Garros wouldn't he be the GOAT in many people's eyes?
What would he have left to prove, really?
Otherwise, it just indicates which player is greater on hard courts not overall.
With his logic, if Federer didn't exist and Nadal held the record, it would indicate that Nadal is truly a hard court specialist, ah funny.With your logic otherwise we could say that if tennis was about who generates the most spin or picks his butt the most, Nadal would be the GOAT.
That's why Nadal can't be considered the GOAT. King of clay with amazing results elsewhere surely. The other 2 are better tennis players Outdoor indoors grass hard court etc etcThere is no such thing as a "neutral" surface. Hard court suits Djokovic's game more than Federer's or Nadal's one.
It is what it is. If there were more clay slams or grass slams the rest of the trour players would be better on those surfaces hence Nadal might not be as dominantFalse. Some players play substantially better on grass or clay than hard courts.
Why does Federer have "only" 5 US Open and 8 Wimbledon titles? If there were 2 Grand Slams on grass, he could have already 23 Grand Slams.
Why does Nadal have 1 Australian Open and 11 Roland Garros titles? If there were 2 Grand Slams on clay. Nadal could have already 30 Grand Slams.
The Grand Slam count is irrelevant, since 2 of 4 Grand Slams are on hard courts. The Grand Slam record doesn't indicate which player is greater overall, but which player is greater on hard courts.
If you 'd listen to Nadal and his fans, the tour would only be played outdoor in windy conditions on clay. That's why they don't want to take into account the world tour finals.There is no such thing as a "neutral" surface. Hard court suits Djokovic's game more than Federer's or Nadal's one.
If he completes his second NCYGS beating Nadal in the final of Roland Garros wouldn't he be the GOAT in many people's eyes?
What would he have left to prove, really?
Roddick is not Djokovic main rival. Federer, Nadal and Murray is.Based on what? There is no argument to put Djokovic as the GOAT.
H2H overall? Roddick leads overall Djokovic 5-4, so he would be the GOAT according to that criterion.
H2H in Grand Slams? Nadal leads Djokovic 9-6 in Grand Slams (inclduing 2-1 at the US Open), so he would be the GOAT according to that criterion.
NCYGS? Laver made the CYGS twice, not only once, so he would be the GOAT according to that criterion.
Love how AO Final has brought enlightenment to Nadal fans. Before the final they were already looking at 19 slams by FO, one short of Federer .. possible GOAT ....To be the overall GOAT, Djokovic needs to win 12 Roland Garros and 9 Wimbledon titles. Otherwise, he is just the hard court GOAT.
Too easy to win the Grand Slam race when 2 of 4 Grand Slams are on hard courts and you are a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard courts being your more succesful court).
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on grass, Federer could already have 23 Grand Slams or more.
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on clay, Nadal could have 30 Grand Slams.
The Grand Slam count is irrelevant. There will never be an overall GOAT. The Grand Slam count only indicates which player is greater on hard courts, not which player is greater overall.
So in your definition to be a GOAT you need to be GOAT of all the most important tournaments individually?To be the overall GOAT, Djokovic needs to win 12 Roland Garros and 9 Wimbledon titles. Otherwise, he is just the hard court GOAT.
Too easy to win the Grand Slam race when 2 of 4 Grand Slams are on hard courts and you are a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard courts being your more succesful court).
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on grass, Federer could already have 23 Grand Slams or more.
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on clay, Nadal could have 30 Grand Slams.
The Grand Slam count is irrelevant. There will never be an overall GOAT. The Grand Slam count only indicates which player is greater on hard courts, not which player is greater overall.
Undisputed GOAT for sure.It would be a monumental, historic achievement, and I’d love to see him attain it, but it wouldn’t catapult him all the way to being undisputed GOAT.
Slam court surfaces are what they are. Players know this and all need to adapt to those surfaces in order to win. Of the top three, Nadal's performance in slams is more lopsided as to surface, with 11 of his 17 on clay. Federer and Novak are similar in their slam court surface success. Overall, I would rate Novak over Roger on clay, Roger on grass and about even on hard, with Nadal probably the clay GOAT. As for the pre open era players post 1950 I would rate Rosewall, Laver, then Gonzalez as the all court surface great players.For Djokovic fans, because Djokovic is a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard court being his best court).
If there were 2 Grand Slams on clay, or 2 Grand Slams on grass, you would be the first to complain.
Every single tournaments should be played on clay world tour finals included. Like this Nadal would the undisputed GOAT.Slam surfaces are what they are is not a convincing argument
Surfaces have been changed at USO and AO not too long ago.
Nadal would have whipped everyone’s rear if there had been 2 clay slams and you all know it
Nadal is the GOAT for me objectively speaking taking into account how he was the big daddy of all in big matches
He would still have 4/5 more grand slams left to prove.If he completes his second NCYGS beating Nadal in the final of Roland Garros wouldn't he be the GOAT in many people's eyes?
What would he have left to prove, really?
No.If he completes his second NCYGS beating Nadal in the final of Roland Garros wouldn't he be the GOAT in many people's eyes?
What would he have left to prove, really?
I hope Novak remains motivated. Beating Nadal in RG, winning 4 GS in a row, neither are new for Novak. He is setting his goal higher than that.If he completes his second NCYGS beating Nadal in the final of Roland Garros wouldn't he be the GOAT in many people's eyes?
What would he have left to prove, really?
I usually like your posts. But this, this.......this is one huge phat L O L.To be the overall GOAT, Djokovic needs to win 12 Roland Garros and 9 Wimbledon titles. Otherwise, he is just the hard court GOAT.
Too easy to win the Grand Slam race when 2 of 4 Grand Slams are on hard courts and you are a hard court specialist (in the sense of hard courts being your more succesful court).
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on grass, Federer could already have 23 Grand Slams or more.
If 2 of 4 Grand Slams were on clay, Nadal could have 30 Grand Slams.
The Grand Slam count is irrelevant. There will never be an overall GOAT. The Grand Slam count only indicates which player is greater on hard courts, not which player is greater overall.
What if he wins 5 or maybe 6 in a row? What then?If he wins CYGS then I will declare him GOAT.
For all that’s worth
It would be interesting to see J. Owens run on mondoIt would be interesting to see these players play with wood or T 2000 racquets ...
The answer has to be that Djokovic even with 16 Slams is at least on par with Fed if he does that.If he completes his second NCYGS beating Nadal in the final of Roland Garros wouldn't he be the GOAT in many people's eyes?
What would he have left to prove, really?