Djokovic officially top 3 now on all three surfaces in open era

Hitman

Bionic Poster
With his incredible win at RG, he leapfrogs Lendl, Wilander and Kuerten into the third spot.

Clay - Nadal, Borg, Djokovic,
Hard - Djokovic, Federer, Sampras
Grass - Federer, Sampras, Djokovic

Djokovic with 2 Monte Carlo, 3 Madrid, 6 Rome and 3 Roland Garros in the time that we saw the greatest single surface dominance of all time by Nadal carries immense weight.
 
With his incredible win at RG, he leapfrogs Lendl, Wilander and Kuerten into the third spot.

Clay - Nadal, Borg, Djokovic,
Hard - Djokovic, Federer, Sampras
Grass - Federer, Sampras, Djokovic

Djokovic with 2 Monte Carlo, 3 Madrid, 6 Rome and 3 Roland Garros in the time that we saw the greatest single surface dominance of all time by Nadal carries immense weight.
I still had Lendl at #3 after RG #2, but after this you have to kind of give it to Nole. I give it to him because he did it in the era of Rafa, and because of more deep runs at RG compared to Lendl.
 
With his incredible win at RG, he leapfrogs Lendl, Wilander and Kuerten into the third spot.

Clay - Nadal, Borg, Djokovic,
Hard - Djokovic, Federer, Sampras
Grass - Federer, Sampras, Djokovic

Djokovic with 2 Monte Carlo, 3 Madrid, 6 Rome and 3 Roland Garros in the time that we saw the greatest single surface dominance of all time by Nadal carries immense weight.
Also he is at 92 match wins at Roland Garros, second only behind Nadal. Incredible!
 
With his incredible win at RG, he leapfrogs Lendl, Wilander and Kuerten into the third spot.

Clay - Nadal, Borg, Djokovic,
Hard - Djokovic, Federer, Sampras
Grass - Federer, Sampras, Djokovic

Djokovic with 2 Monte Carlo, 3 Madrid, 6 Rome and 3 Roland Garros in the time that we saw the greatest single surface dominance of all time by Nadal carries immense weight.
If Djokovic wins one more Wimbledon do you see him as the best in 2/3 surfaces in the OE?
 
I still like Kuerten as 3rd best though.

There is a lot of class in Kuerten's game

Plus I think Kuerten could have had 4-5 french opens if not for injury, he schooled Federer in 2004 like Djokovic schooled Alcaraz in 2023.

So I will still keep Kuerten as 3rd maybe ?
 
He's got it now.

Second most wins at RG, 7 finals overall. Multiple titles are all the big events, can't put Lendl over him now.
Yea considering Lendl played RG 15 times and only made the SF or better 5 times, Djokovic pretty much takes it considering he did it like 12 out of 19 times. Djokovic needed #3 to be over Lendl considering Lendl's stats on clay but now he has it.
 
I still like Kuerten as 3rd best though.

There is a lot of class in Kuerten's game

Plus I think Kuerten could have had 4-5 french opens if not for injury, he schooled Federer in 2004 like Djokovic schooled Alcaraz in 2023.

So I will still keep Kuerten as 3rd maybe ?
Na unacceptable!! NOLE 3rd on clay now, 6 Rome titles that fat man.
 
I still like Kuerten as 3rd best though.

There is a lot of class in Kuerten's game

Plus I think Kuerten could have had 4-5 french opens if not for injury, he schooled Federer in 2004 like Djokovic schooled Alcaraz in 2023.

So I will still keep Kuerten as 3rd maybe ?

Umm...no? why? Have you seen how many tournaments Kuerten did win on clay my dude? How many of them were masters? How many RG finals did he make, RG matches he won? Have you tried then to compare those with Novak's stats and then look yourself in the mirror honestly telling yourself - Kuerten is greater clay courter thna Novak?? Like based on what exactly ,which criteria? Higher peak? Well that's purely hypothetical nonsense, that cannot be tested, it's just a personal impression, while stats are cold facts...so what exactly once again i ask politely does Kuerten have over Novak??...
 
I still like Kuerten as 3rd best though.

There is a lot of class in Kuerten's game

Plus I think Kuerten could have had 4-5 french opens if not for injury, he schooled Federer in 2004 like Djokovic schooled Alcaraz in 2023.

So I will still keep Kuerten as 3rd maybe ?
In peak level, Kuerten still has his argument as 3rd overall. I think in overall achievements though he has to be behind Djokovic and Lendl.
 
Na unacceptable!! NOLE 3rd on clay now, 6 Rome titles that fat man.
Comparing different eras is always complicated. Sampras has 14 slams, he could have won 22+ with great age shift and if all courts were homogeneously fast. So how do we compare ?

Goat is a privileged title for best of the era, but that cannot be extended other eras accurately.

I heard somewhere that Thomas Muster won some 15-20 clay titles in 24 months span ...not sure.....need to check....but can we say Federer is better than Muster ? ...of course not....Federe is inferior as he has not shown such peak level on clay

Sameway we never know if Novak is better than Kuerten or not, so better not to compare eras I think so
 
I've used a lot more than that, come on now.

Find me a better player on clay in the open era other than Nadal or Borg who has achieved as much on the big stage. I'll wait.

I’m actually sympathetic to the argument - see also the much longer post I just wrote on the thread claiming tennis isn’t clean. But there is nothing official about it. I am sure you’ve used more grandiose language! Don’t doubt you on that one.
 
I’m actually sympathetic to the argument - see also the much longer post I just wrote on the thread claiming tennis isn’t clean. But there is nothing official about it. I am sure you’ve used more grandiose language! Don’t doubt you on that one.

;)

There's nothing official about being GOAT either.... 8-B
 
Both Wilander and Kuerten have less clay titles than Novak. So they are out of the question. Lendl has more, but Novak have had much more RG success. He is 3rd best on clay, and if it wasnt for Rafa, he probably would have been above Borg.
If it wasn’t for Nadal is a hypothetical. Same we can say if Borg didn’t burn out and played 77 FO edition. Both hypotheticals together Borg would still be ahead.
 
Yea I agree.

If people want to say that there are players who played at higher level on clay, sure, no problem with that argument. I would say Guga has played at a higher level myself also...but ultimately it is about winning matches, winning titles. No way can I put the other three time slam winners over Djokovic now there when he has won the second most matches there, and made an insane amount of semis and finals. Only Borg and Nadal dwarf him in that metric.
 
If people want to say that there are players who played at higher level on clay, sure, no problem with that argument. I would say Guga has played at a higher level myself also...but ultimately it is about winning matches, winning titles. No way can I put the other three time slam winners over Djokovic now there when he has won the second most matches there, and made an insane amount of semis and finals. Only Borg and Nadal dwarf him in that metric.
Yea I probably would rate Kuerten still at #3 in peak level but in overall clay career, Djokovic has more accolades.
 
In all traditional clay tournaments? Muster but Federer performed better at RG.
How do we know Fed is better at RG ?

Federer got RG as a gift from Soderling

Thomas Muster dominated 1995 clay season like Superman and took his slam

So this if not for Nadal argument is not right ...Federer is not above muster on clay anywhere despite more RG final appearances which are useless
 
Back
Top