BlueB
Legend
The GOAT sends his regards.As far as I see it at the highest level Safin can play like a GOAT but Djokovic just plays like a lendl at his best. Djokovic and GOAT do not belong in the same sentence
The GOAT sends his regards.As far as I see it at the highest level Safin can play like a GOAT but Djokovic just plays like a lendl at his best. Djokovic and GOAT do not belong in the same sentence
As far as I see it at the highest level Safin can play like a GOAT but Djokovic just plays like a lendl at his best. Djokovic and GOAT do not belong in the same sentence
Peak | vs Top5 | T5 Weight | vs Top10 | T10 Weight | vs T11+ | T11+ Weight | vs All | Opp Rank | Opp Elo |
Nole 11-16 | 91 (66-25) 72.53% | 19.08% | 174 (140-34) 80.46% | 36.48% | 303 (287-16) 94.72% | 63.52% | 477 (427-50) 89.52% | 18 | 2086 |
Fed 04-09 | 67 (44-23) 65.67% | 13.59% | 121 (91-30) 75.21% | 24.54% | 372 (351-21) 94.35% | 75.46% | 493 (442-51) 89.66% | 26 | 2017 |
Rafa 08-13 | 73 (47-26) 64.38% | 15.60% | 133 (93-40) 69.92% | 28.42% | 335 (313-22) 93.43% | 71.58% | 468 (406-62) 86.75% | 23 | 2045 |
Lendl 84-89 | 74 (52-22) 70.27% | 15.81% | 116 (83-33) 71.55% | 24.79% | 352 (333-19) 94.60% | 75.21% | 468 (416-52) 88.89% | 27 | 2014 |
let the circlejerk commence
Safin
I do agree on that. Putting it into context of the era (meaning that only three slams were played), considering competition (strong versions of Connors, Lendl, Wilander around), and winning % as well as dominance in individual matches it is actually the best in the OE. The contender for me would be Djokovic 2011, but he disappeared after USO which makes it a little less impressive.And if I come out and say that McEnroe had the most dominant season ever(I honestly believe it; at least for a seasons that I’ve watched since the late-1970s), then why would people be upset about that? Can’t Mac have one tiny little victory here, when your guy wins the most important metrics ?
Yeah, not only was Mac beating Hall of Fame legends, but he was absolutely murdering them.I do agree on that. Putting it into context of the era (meaning that only three slams were played), considering competition (strong versions of Connors, Lendl, Wilander around), and winning % as well as dominance in individual matches it is actually the best in the OE. The contender for me would be Djokovic 2011, but he disappeared after USO which makes it a little less impressive.
Had he won the FO final there would absolutely not be any discussion left. Even with that, it is still No.1 for me. Djoko going 10-1 against Fedal is absurd too, had he won YEC (even with the other losses), I would be inclined to give it to him.Yeah, not only was Mac beating Hall of Fame legends, but he was absolutely murdering them.
One stat guru posted % of points won. I need to find it. But it was something yo the effect that 1984 Mac win about the same percentage of points vs the top-20 as 2006 Fed won against players ranked outside the top-20. That is absolutely unthinkable. I will dig it up, since I am probably using some hyperbole there. But it was unreal
His season is top 4 of all time along with 2015, 1969 and 2006.Yeah, not only was Mac beating Hall of Fame legends, but he was absolutely murdering them.
One stat guru posted % of points won. I need to find it. But it was something yo the effect that 1984 Mac win about the same percentage of points vs the top-20 as 2006 Fed won against players ranked outside the top-20. That is absolutely unthinkable. I will dig it up, since I am probably using some hyperbole there. But it was unreal
The guy who beat Sampras and Federer at the USO and AO? OkayThe typical Safin overrating at TTW never fails to deliver.
Yeah, not only was Mac beating Hall of Fame legends, but he was absolutely murdering them.
One stat guru posted % of points won. I need to find it. But it was something yo the effect that 1984 Mac win about the same percentage of points vs the top-20 as 2006 Fed won against players ranked outside the top-20. That is absolutely unthinkable. I will dig it up, since I am probably using some hyperbole there. But it was unreal
Best Season | vs Top5 | T5 Weight | vs Top10 | T10 Weight | vs T11+ | T11+ Weight | vs All | Opp Rank | Opp Elo |
Nole 2015 | 20 (16-4) 80.00% | 22.73% | 36 (31-5) 86.11% | 40.91% | 52 (51-1) 98.08% | 59.09% | 88 (82-6) 93.18% | 18 | 2091 |
Nole 2011 | 16 (13-3) 81.25% | 21.05% | 25 (21-4) 84.00% | 32.89% | 51 (49-2) 96.08% | 67.11% | 76 (70-6) 92.11% | 17 | 2078 |
Fed 2006 | 12 (8-4) 66.67% | 12.37% | 23 (19-4) 82.61% | 23.71% | 74 (73-1) 98.65% | 76.29% | 97 (92-5) 94.85% | 28 | 2004 |
Mac 1984 | 16 (15-1) 93.75% | 18.82% | 28 (26-2) 92.86% | 32.94% | 57 (56-1) 98.25% | 67.06% | 85 (82-3) 96.47% | 22 | 2044 |
15-1
Best Season vs Top5 T5 Weight vs Top10 T10 Weight vs T11+ T11+ Weight vs All Opp Rank Opp Elo Nole 2015 20 (16-4) 80.00% 22.73% 36 (31-5) 86.11% 40.91% 52 (51-1) 98.08% 59.09% 88 (82-6) 93.18% 18 2091 Nole 2011 16 (13-3) 81.25% 21.05% 25 (21-4) 84.00% 32.89% 51 (49-2) 96.08% 67.11% 76 (70-6) 92.11% 17 2078 Fed 2006 12 (8-4) 66.67% 12.37% 23 (19-4) 82.61% 23.71% 74 (73-1) 98.65% 76.29% 97 (92-5) 94.85% 28 2004 Mac 1984 16 (15-1) 93.75% 18.82% 28 (26-2) 92.86% 32.94% 57 (56-1) 98.25% 67.06% 85 (82-3) 96.47% 22 2044
Did not include the 1969 because ranking is off.
If you knew the meaning of the word overrated you would know that even if he won 10 slams he could still be overrated.The guy who beat Sampras and Federer at the USO and AO? Okay![]()
I personally value 2011 more than 2015 and 2006. Having to beat a fellow GOAT candidate at prime level in six finals is way more impressive than everything 2006 or 2015 has to offer competition wise. Give Fed 2006 or Djoko 2015 THAT Nadal and their seasons likely don’t look so good anymore.His season is top 4 of all time along with 2015, 1969 and 2006.
Federer probably still wins 3 slams, probably doesn't win Miami though. Djokovic probably still wins 3 slams as well, maybe loses out in Rome?I personally value 2011 more than 2015 and 2006. Having to beat a fellow GOAT candidate at prime level in six finals is way more impressive than everything 2006 or 2015 has to offer competition wise. Give Fed 2006 or Djoko 2015 THAT Nadal and their seasons likely don’t look so good anymore.
We must not forget, that Fed in 2011 was also still very strong, stronger than in 2015 (apart from few tournaments). Djoko in 2015 USO could well lose to Fed 2011 and lose Rome to Nadal. AO and Wimbledon he wins regardless of course, but I don’t think he could go 10-1 against 2011 Fedal. 2006 Fed would likely still win three slams against 2011 Nadal and his future self, but would lose a couple more matches in Bo3.Federer probably still wins 3 slams, probably doesn't win Miami though. Djokovic probably still wins 3 slams as well, maybe loses out in Rome?
I don’t see either of 2006 Fed or 2015 Djokovic winning less than 3 Slams even if they squared up against 2011 Nadal. They were simply too good in the Slams they won (or in the case of AO, 2011 Nadal wasn’t in a position to threaten them).I personally value 2011 more than 2015 and 2006. Having to beat a fellow GOAT candidate at prime level in six finals is way more impressive than everything 2006 or 2015 has to offer competition wise. Give Fed 2006 or Djoko 2015 THAT Nadal and their seasons likely don’t look so good anymore.
The margins between 2011, 2015, 2006 are thin as is. They can likely still win three slams but lose more at other tourneys which would push the edge in favour to 2011. I can’t see either 2006 Fed or 2015 Djoko going 6-0 against 2011 Nadal. An upset is also always possible at one of USO, Wimbledon.I don’t see either of 2006 Fed or 2015 Djokovic winning less than 3 Slams even if they squared up against 2011 Nadal. They were simply too good in the Slams they won (or in the case of AO, 2011 Nadal wasn’t in a position to threaten them).
They’d probably lose out on smaller tournaments like Miami and Djokovic would suffer a few losses in the clay court season. But otherwise, their losses wouldn’t be too terrible.
I was just putting 2011 Nadal in for 2006'dal and 2011'dal in those respective years. Of course 2011 was a stronger year than either 2011 or 2015, significantly so.We must not forget, that Fed in 2011 was also still very strong, stronger than in 2015 (apart from few tournaments). Djoko in 2015 USO could well lose to Fed 2011 and lose Rome to Nadal. AO and Wimbledon he wins regardless of course, but I don’t think he could go 10-1 against 2011 Fedal. 2006 Fed would likely still win three slams against 2011 Nadal and his future self, but would lose a couple more matches in Bo3.
Yeah switching only Nadal will maybe not make much difference slam-wise. He could upset both of them at USO though. What is your take on 2011vs2006vs2015 in terms of greatest season?I was just putting 2011 Nadal in for 2006'dal and 2011'dal in those respective years. Of course 2011 was a stronger year than either 2011 or 2015, significantly so.
IMO Nadal is an underdog versus 2006 Fed at the USO, whichever year you pick for Nadal - particularly in 2006 conditions. By that point Federer had played Nadal a lot, so he wouldn't be surprised by Nadal's physicality and the shape he puts on the ball, and he was also very stable on the backhand wing, I just think he has too much game at the USO to lose. Versus Djokovic I also think Nadal is the underdog, compared to in 2011 Novak 2015 had less physicality for those long bruising rallies but his serve was waaay better and I think over five sets he'd be a little too strong for Nadal.Yeah switching only Nadal will maybe not make much difference slam-wise. He could upset both of them at USO though. What is your take on 2011vs2006vs2015 in terms of greatest season?
I think 2006 and 2015 can definitely lose to Nadal in Miami, and I think they’d also have some losses in the clay season (though I think Fed would actually improve on his original clay results because I believe he’d actually win Rome this time). But I don’t think they lose any of the Slams.The marti
The margins between 2011, 2015, 2006 are thin as is. They can likely still win three slams but lose more at other tourneys which would push the edge in favour to 2011. I can’t see either 2006 Fed or 2015 Djoko going 6-0 against 2011 Nadal. An upset is also always possible at one of USO, Wimbledon.
Oh don’t get me wrong. 2011 Nadal would of course be the underdog against both Fed and Djoker at both Wimbledon and USO, but he would I think be stronger than the opponents they faced in reality. Nadal played a **** USO final in 2011, but this was mostly due to his mental block against Djokovic at that time (never in any other match I have seen him so nervous, rattled, complaining to the umpire all the time, asking for the towel every second point etc.). The rest of the tournament he played quite well actually (only losing one set; in the semi to Murray) and against Fed, where he was always the underdog at the beginning, the mental aspects would be way different. I don’t give him more of a 30-40% winning chance though, but an upset is not impossible.I think 2006 and 2015 can definitely lose to Nadal in Miami, and I think they’d also have some losses in the clay season (though I think Fed would actually improve on his original clay results because I believe he’d actually win Rome this time). But I don’t think they lose any of the Slams.
Nadal wasn’t super great in the 2011 W and US Open finals, especially the latter. I actually think 2011 Fed would pose a greater threat, especially to 2015 Djokovic.
I'm not convinced 2011 Nadal was better than 2006 Nadal in the Wimbledon final. Better first set by a big margin, but a worse second set by a big margin and a worse third set as well IMO, mediocre fourth set in both matches as well.Oh don’t get me wrong. 2011 Nadal would of course be the underdog against both Fed and Djoker at both Wimbledon and USO, but he would I think be stronger than the opponents they faced in reality. Nadal played a **** USO final in 2011, but this was mostly due to his mental block against Djokovic at that time (never in any other match I have seen him so nervous, rattled, complaining to the umpire all the time, asking for the towel every second point etc.). The rest of the tournament he played quite well actually (only losing one set; in the semi to Murray) and against Fed, where he was always the underdog at the beginning, the mental aspects would be way different. I don’t give him more of a 30-40% winning chance though, but an upset is not impossible.
I agree in general, with the caveat that I actually think Nadal played a better Wimbledon final in 2006, even taking the dud opening set into consideration.Oh don’t get me wrong. 2011 Nadal would of course be the underdog against both Fed and Djoker at both Wimbledon and USO, but he would I think be stronger than the opponents they faced in reality. Nadal played a **** USO final in 2011, but this was mostly due to his mental block against Djokovic at that time (never in any other match I have seen him so nervous, rattled, complaining to the umpire all the time, asking for the towel every second point etc.). The rest of the tournament he played quite well actually (only losing one set; in the semi to Murray) and against Fed, where he was always the underdog at the beginning, the mental aspects would be way different. I don’t give him more of a 30-40% winning chance though, but an upset is not impossible.
2011 Djoker’s level of play across the whole tourney was clearly better than 2005 Safin’s run.
Let’s be real here. Safin needed 4 sets to beat Rochus. And he won all 3 tiebreaks in that match.
He needed 4 to beat Ancic.
The reason Safin’s 2005 AO run is talked about is because of 1 match; that semi vs Fed. That was arguably the best match that he played in his career.
And it’s miles ahead of his 3rd best match(2000 USO final and 2005 AO semi are easily his two best matches).
Had he won 20 slams he could still be underrated.If you knew the meaning of the word overrated you would know that even if he won 10 slams he could still be overrated.
What defines better then?Had he won 20 slams he could still be underrated.
Anyway thread is about who's better, NOT who's more achieved
We must not forget, that Fed in 2011 was also still very strong, stronger than in 2015 (apart from few tournaments). Djoko in 2015 USO could well lose to Fed 2011 and lose Rome to Nadal. AO and Wimbledon he wins regardless of course, but I don’t think he could go 10-1 against 2011 Fedal. 2006 Fed would likely still win three slams against 2011 Nadal and his future self, but would lose a couple more matches in Bo3.
What defines better then?
Simple. By actually watching the match to have great discernment about their level of play and quality of the game.
Looking at stats/box score alone doesn't say anything
So who is the authority then to decide who was better? You? Eye-test is completely subjective and when it is against different players at different times it is completely useless anyways.Simple. By actually watching the match to have great discernment about their level of play and quality of the game.
Looking at stats/box score alone doesn't say anything
Paris 2000 F versus Scud was another classic.It was more consistent yeah, but peaks are perfectly comparable.
No shame in that, Rochus was a very talented player who was hampered by his height. He almost beats Federer in 2006 having a few match points when Federer lost only one match to non-Nadal players that year and it was a half-tank. That would have ended Federer's unbeaten run on grass that was alive since 2003.
No shame in that either, Ancic was a great player and it was a 4-setter, not a 5-setter and all sets were won somewhat comfortably.
No. He was brilliant vs Hrbaty and Hewitt too. He was probably better vs Hewitt than he was vs Federer, so it wasn't the best match he played that run, let alone his career. I think as a match, that Safin-Federer is the best match ever, but as an individual performance vs Hewitt it was better. You are obviously going to find it easier to play your best against an inferior/non-peaking opponent than against an ATG playing his best.
Not true at all. He has many matches comparable to the matches vs Sampras and Federer. The aforementioned against Hewitt at AO 2005, vs Ferrero USO 2000, vs Agassi AO 2004, vs Nalbandian Madrid 2005, vs Hewitt Paris 2002, etc
Compare 8-4 vs 16-4!!! And I didn't know there were other good players beside Federer in 2006!!!
Best Season vs Top5 T5 Weight vs Top10 T10 Weight vs T11+ T11+ Weight vs All Opp Rank Opp Elo Nole 2015 20 (16-4) 80.00% 22.73% 36 (31-5) 86.11% 40.91% 52 (51-1) 98.08% 59.09% 88 (82-6) 93.18% 18 2091 Nole 2011 16 (13-3) 81.25% 21.05% 25 (21-4) 84.00% 32.89% 51 (49-2) 96.08% 67.11% 76 (70-6) 92.11% 17 2078 Fed 2006 12 (8-4) 66.67% 12.37% 23 (19-4) 82.61% 23.71% 74 (73-1) 98.65% 76.29% 97 (92-5) 94.85% 28 2004 Mac 1984 16 (15-1) 93.75% 18.82% 28 (26-2) 92.86% 32.94% 57 (56-1) 98.25% 67.06% 85 (82-3) 96.47% 22 2044
Did not include the 1969 because ranking is off.
10 match series 9-1 Djokovic?Oh really, let's see about that.
1st Serve percentage
Djokovic 2011 - 68%
Safin 2005 - 58%
Service games won
Djokovic 2011 - 83/93 (broken 10 times)
Safin 2005 - 113/127 (broken 14 times)
Return points won
Djokovic 2011- 46%
Safin 2005 - 40.7%
Return games won
Djokovic 2011 - 44.3%
Safin 2005 - 26.6%
Points dominance
Djokovic 2011 - 1.49
Safn 2005 - 1.34
Games dominance
Djokovic 2011 - 4.12
Safin 2005 - 2.41
This is just more reinvention and failed eye tests in here as usual from some Federer fans, where the voice of reason once again is Pheasant since you and others don't have that ability. The same people that think Safin was at the highest level in this match, who won it by the skin of his teeth from match point down, are the same people who say Djokovic only won the 2011 USO match because of luck and Federer being old. Safin is being overrated in here. The only player more dominant at a Slam than Djokovic at AO is Nadal at RG, bar none. In my opinion, Agassi was the next dominant player at AO who won 4/9 he played and 3 in a row. Safin had a great run but it wouldn't even be in my top 5 of greatest AO runs.
Oh really, let's see about that.
1st Serve percentage
Djokovic 2011 - 68%
Safin 2005 - 58%
Service games won
Djokovic 2011 - 83/93 (broken 10 times)
Safin 2005 - 113/127 (broken 14 times)
Return points won
Djokovic 2011- 46%
Safin 2005 - 40.7%
Return games won
Djokovic 2011 - 44.3%
Safin 2005 - 26.6%
Points dominance
Djokovic 2011 - 1.49
Safn 2005 - 1.34
Games dominance
Djokovic 2011 - 4.12
Safin 2005 - 2.41
This is just more reinvention and failed eye tests in here as usual from some Federer fans, where the voice of reason once again is Pheasant since you and others don't have that ability. The same people that think Safin was at the highest level in this match, who won it by the skin of his teeth from match point down, are the same people who say Djokovic only won the 2011 USO match because of luck and Federer being old. Safin is being overrated in here. The only player more dominant at a Slam than Djokovic at AO is Nadal at RG, bar none. In my opinion, Agassi was the next dominant player at AO who won 4/9 he played and 3 in a row. Safin had a great run but it wouldn't even be in my top 5 of greatest AO runs.
So who is the authority then to decide who was better? You? Eye-test is completely subjective and when it is against different players at different times it is completely useless anyways.
I watched Sampras and Agassi play in their primes. The question is, did you? Once again, you have nothing substantial to add to a discussion. Just more blanket statements like because I'm a Djokovic fan, I didn't start watching tennis until 2011 (which is a huge laugh and bogus); or that he never won on RA and imply he couldn't, which is actually false since he won Vienna in 2007, which is played on what hardcourt surface Mr. "tennis scholar"? Like RA would have been a thorn in his side when he's won on every surface and condition available.LOL
Djoker fans only start watching tennis in 2011 are vastly inferior in knowledge and have no clue about tennis in 2005. I bet you guys still don't know AO was played on Rebound Ace, not Plexicushion today. And Djokovic never won on Rebound Ace! You guys have no discernment.
Let say a player A watch a full tennis match but doesn't have a stats in his hand. A player B didn't watch the match but has all the stats in his hand. Who has greater depth of knowledge and understanding of the game? Of course its the player A, he has more insight in his pinky than the entire group of fans that never watched the match !
Without watching tennis, you have no idea how good Sampras's running forehand, Fed inside-out forehand, McEnroe's volley, Karlovic 1st serve, Agassi hitting on the rise, etc..
Please...refrain your nonsense about stats is all that matter when in reality, it's has NOTHING over actually seeing the match.