Benjamin Rio
Professional
Next FO he's going to be a big turning point. If Novak beats Nadal and wins a second FO that will definetly settle their positions. Still Nadal is the favorite at the FO.
Next FO he's going to be a big turning point. If Novak beats Nadal and wins a second FO that will definetly settle their positions. Still Nadal is the favorite at the FO.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
No, they both have 3 UO titles.
The Fedfather
Legend
He's won as many Slams as Federer and Djokovic in the last 2 years, and was ranked #1 just like them. Tennis isn't about dominating certain players.
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
Yes, you are right.
I think my point still stands though...
Outside of the French, Djok has 4 Wimbledons, 6 AO, 3 USOs in 8 Finals, 5 YECs.
Outside of the French, Rafa has 1 AO, 2 Wimbledons, 3 USOs in 4 Finals, 0 YECs.
Rafa hasn't won Wimbledon in 8+ years, hasn't won AO in 10 years.
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
Riiiiight...tell Rafa fans that when they chant "H2H" to Fed Fans.
I agree with you, but those aren't the rules.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
You're entitled to your opinion bro. We just have to disagree here
Stilljonesing
Rookie
I don't think losing to Wrawinka and Murray 4 times is anything to be ashamed of. They are also some of the greatest players to ever live IMO who were just unfortunate to have come along in this era. Murray literally has the same SF percentage as Sampras he just had the bad luck the other big 3 were usually in the semi finals as well and that's a tough ask to be 2 of the bst 3 players ever to win majors. Just doing it a few times or getting to 12 finals he's undervalued all time.
The Fedfather
Legend
I think it's been said plenty of times to them, some just refuse to listen. Doesn't mean you have to be like those fans
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Don't even try to compare Murray and Sampras. I say this as a fan of Murray. I always liked him and he was my 2nd fav player for years. I also hated Pete as an Agassi fan, but Pete is in an entirely different league than Murray. It's not close in any shape, form, or fashion.
TennisPinkBabe
Rookie
I would put Djokovic just about on par with Nadal. Yes slams are the most important, but they're not the only thing. With only a 2 slams differential, Nadal may still be ahead by a nose, but at this stage other things do come into play, such as weeks #1 and WTF.
Stilljonesing
Rookie
All I'm saying is he's unfortunate to have played in this era and that you have to judge him on a different scale IMO ( just like you do all the guys in this era IMO as they canablized each other). Facts are facts though, he played in the SF's 44% of the time and Sampras played 45% of the time and that includes on a bum hip the last few. It makes a difference when the 3 best players ever were almost always waiting for him in the SF's that he didn't win that often. 12 finals made despite it is something considering.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
I would *just* put Nadal ahead at the moment, but if Novak Djokovic gets to one slam behind him, then his overall resume would put him above the Bull, IMHO.
Federer and Laver would remain above him though, just as they are currently above Nadal.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
According to the ATP they are worth more
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
YEC are amazing. Borg Mcenroe Lendl Beck Edberg Sampras Djokovic Federer have won this tournament. This tournament is a must win for top players.
What play out?
Slams are the most important criteria - but not the only 1. I rate the WTF highly (not as high as the Slams but still highly). Djokovic has 5 of those, Nadal has none. Djokovic has 1 more year as YE#1, he also has a significant number more weeks as number 1. Stated again, Slams are not the only criteria. In my view Djokovic is already slightly ahead of Nadal.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Neither one of them have hung up their racket and there is still a FO to play. Djokovic is not the favorite there.
Last edited:
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Not favorite but he will have his chances if he faces Nadal in the final.
2012 He lost in 4 sets but got a set due to the rain.
2013 5 sets and really close of winning.
2014 Lost in 4 sets but was close of having a 2 sets to 0 lead.
2015 He won in 3 sets but Nadal was far from his peak.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Yes he will have a chance, but let's not forget Thiem obliterated Djokovic in their last two meetings on clay. He also lost his only match on clay with Zverev. Clay is when Djokovic is most vulnerable imo. He may not even reach Nadal.
Sure - but aren't we talking about how things stand right now. Isn't that the subject of this thread?
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Djokovic is amazing on clay. He lost to Thiem due to lack of form in 2017 and 2018.
Djokovic worse surface is grass.
https://www.**************.org/tenn...e-most-demanding-surface-says-novak-djokovic/
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
I'm not giving it to him. One slam behind I would consider it. Two is just too much for me and reaching imo.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
His winning % on grass is nearly 4% higher.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Without Nadal on clay he would have won several french open. The same applies to Nadal. They are both amazing players on clay but Nadal is too great on that surface.
Djokovic has won 1 FO 2 monte Carlo's 4 Roma 2 Madrid.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
At least as far as the ATP is concerned, Djokovic is already closer to Federer:
https://www.atptour.com/en/news/djokovic-federer-big-titles-update-january-2019
Spencer Gore
Legend
Djokovic is already the greatest player of the 21st Century.
If he wins the Grand Slam he enters the conversation of GOAT alongside Laver.
If he wins the Grand Slam he enters the conversation of GOAT alongside Laver.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Same could be said for Federer too with the FO. Don't get me wrong, Djokovic is one of the favs there or anywhere. It's the one place he can lose to a player outside of the Big 3 though. It can happen at Wimbledon too, but not as likely at this point I don't think. Clay is still a question mark until he plays it again.
Slightly D1
Professional
He’s closer to Nadal than Nadal is to Federer at the moment but it’ll come down to whether he keeps his game going. Hate to say it as a Nadal guy.
But he is not closer to Federer than Nadal is.
But he is not closer to Federer than Nadal is.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
IF Djokovic manages to get within one of Nadal the comparisons in favour of Djokovic will start to mount.
IF Djokovic equals Nadal, Nadal is out of contention, so, as hard as it is to bridge a two Majors gap, a major recognition is awaiting Djokovic just around the corner.
If that happens, Nadal becomes automatically number 3 from the big 3, no debate.
IF Djokovic equals Nadal, Nadal is out of contention, so, as hard as it is to bridge a two Majors gap, a major recognition is awaiting Djokovic just around the corner.
If that happens, Nadal becomes automatically number 3 from the big 3, no debate.
Last edited:
TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic is still behind Nadal. We can begin talking when he hits 16.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
More epic TTW logic.
So only "time will tell" if Rafa can win 4 more slams, but Nole will definitely get "6 more" slam titles.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
So YEC are worth nothing for example?
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Don’t break my heart!
titoelcolombiano
Legend
Better dominance? The difference between the YE # 1 is literally a good end to last season for Djoker and and injury which means Rafa could play out the rest of the season. That is the difference between the YE # 1 numbers being reversed. Ditto with the weeks, you give Nadal YE # 1 last year and he adds all the weeks from the offseason right through to the AO and the gap is much closer. So yes, whilst Djoker leads, it is hardly a gaping hole.
Distribution is a myth - a slam is a slam. A masters is a masters. Djoker has won 8 clay masters, Rafa 9 hard masters. Djoker has won 10 of his 15 majors on hard, Rafa has won 11 of 17 on clay. It doesn't matter though, a slam is a slam. Rafa has won at least twice on each slam surface, Djoker has not yet.
And finally, Djoker is behind in the slam count, so I'll have to respectfully disagree on the premise of the thread.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
Djokovic would have finished world number 1 even in the case Nadal would have played. He's a much better player on hard courts. He won Shanghai runner up in Bercy and World tour finals.
There's more Masters 1000 on hard court than on clay. Much more opportunity for Nadal to be ahead of djokovic in that count.
Distribution definetely has to be taken into account. Nadal is mainly the undisputed king of clay a specialist surface with less competition than the other slams. It's a fact. Nadal has never played all major finals the same year and hasn't held all 4 slams at the same time.
Benjamin Rio
Professional
That's the thing with the GOAT debat. It is tough to compare different eras.
But we can compare nadal and djokovic same generation.Djokovic is ahead because he's a better hard court grass court outdoor and indoor player . Nadal only on clay.
I love how people casually contradict themselves, Djokovic grass record is better by a margin compared to their differences in career achievement.
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Nadal peaked on grass before Djokovic did and had to face Peak Federer in 2/3 finals they played at Wimbledon. Same goes with Federer having to play Nadal at his peak in FO finals. Two things Djokovic didn't have to do that always gets lost in all this. According to many Djokovic fans, tennis didn't start until 2011 the same year Federer was a 13 year veteran and still pushing Djokovic around.
It is all opinion, but doing the grand slam or holding all four is worth a great deal as it really hasn’t been done very often. I think the 5>0 is massive in tour finals, as Djokovic is right at the top and Nadal is nowhere on that. I think that is a bigger difference than a couple of French opens, this is why Djokovic is better right now if they both retire. Also winning all the masters matters as nobody has done it, Nadal is so far the best clay courter there isn’t a number 2 or 3 but maybe number 10, but overall I don’t think he can be put above Djokovic, maybe with a 3 slam lead. For Fed I think it’s different career wise these two are closer
Sweeping generalizations do not an argument make. I watched a whole heap of tennis, believe it or not it existed before Fed too. Peak this or that is absolute rubbish talk. Beating Peak Fed is as good as losing to Darcis is bad, so this talk about these wins meaning more is crap 48-11 against 65-10 speaks volumes
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
Typical Djokovic guy that gives stats but can't back it up with actual tennis explanations and situations. Peak Djokovic was very fortunate that he didn't have to play Federer and Nadal at their best on their best surfaces. End of.
Last edited:
I love how Fed fans are talking Nadal up relative to Djokovic. So scared, if Novak gets to 20 they have no argument, whereas Nadal there will always be
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
I love how Djokovic fans proclaim spots ahead of someone every time they get within two slams. What a joke
Pretty funny how scared Fed fans are that their guy might not be universally accepted as the best. Take it easy 5 slams are a long way away. I even saw a thread saying regardless of how many slams Novak or nadal get fed will be the goat for aesthetic reasons. Tennis is about winning, and you can take peak talk and maybe call philippoussis goat coz he played lights out tennis at Wimbledon for almost a whole match against peak Sampras. Relax 5 slams is a quite a distance
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
I could tell a lot of you the same thing. Wait until it's official before claiming spots that haven't been earned.
Would you call Emerson better than say Lendl?
True Fanerer
G.O.A.T.
You're talking about two players that played more than twenty years apart in totally different eras. Before you make a Sampras remark, technology was much closer between his generation and now compared to 1965 (Emerson) and the mid-late 80's(Lendl)
Similar threads
- Poll
- Deleted member 748597
- General Pro Player Discussion
- Poll
- Deleted member 748597
- General Pro Player Discussion
