Djokovic was an ATG beating machine at 19-20 as well as at 36-37
- Thread starter junkieballer
- Start date
GoatNo1
Legend
?????
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
T1ts
GoatNo1
Legend
sorry but i do not understand
Just to show you how dominant Djokovic was when he picked up the injury between '16 WB and '18 RG, he won four straight slams before (the so-called Novak slam, beating Federer three times and Murray once), and won three of four slams after (beating Nadal twice and Federer once).
If he hadn't been injured, one Federer wouldn't make it to twenty slams, two Djokovic would be ahead of Nadal by four or five slams, he would be the one who has eight WB championships (not Federer), and four he would be the one who broke the 20-slam barrier. And five his slam record would be further out of sight for Alcaraz and Sinner.
Last edited:
Good-old hypothetical Fed. As unbeaten as healthy Nadal.
Sometimes the truth hurts, which is why you shed tears my friend.
Nole is not in his own tier. Tennis peak level, Nole is not as good as Federer.
It's absurd that Fedfans have this visceral hatred for Djokovic, they should be thankful for him.
GoatNo1
Legend
of course he is not as good, he is much better
and about tiers, he owns ALL main stats., and gap between him and fedal (they are in the same level) is bigger than between them and sampras! so he is clearly in tier above!
if you call at 3 T1 GOAT parameters, YE#1, weeks and slams and look at them, it looks as (sampras in bold, nole is best in every metric, fed is underlined):
YE#1: 8 > 6 > 5 = 5
weeks: 209+209+10 > 310 > 286 > 209
slams: 24 > 22 > 20 > 14
i think that YE#1 is at least as worth as slam (sampras, fed and nole think the same, actually more). so if we give 1p for each slam and YE#1 and 1 point for 50 weeks at no1 (apr 1 year) we will get:
nole: 8+8,6+24=40,6 T1 GOAT poins
fed: 5+6,2+20=31,2 T1 GOAT points
rafa: 5+4,2+22= 31,2 T1 GOAT points
ampras: 6+5,1+14=25,1 T1 GOAT points
so nole has clearly bigger gap to fedal than them to sampras! and as they are tier above sampras so is nole tier above them!
If he is not as good, it means he is not better. Is English your second language?
Stats are circumstantial. They depend on changing conditions and rules of the game. Eg. Best of 5 M1000 final, no one playing AO in the 70s/80s. If new slams are introduced tomorrow, they will have an easier time of getting slam records, and you ********* will be crying the loudest.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Federer had injuries of his own before that, in 2016. Nadal was also largely MIA in 2015-2016 at the very top.
GoatNo1
Legend
nole has better records in bo5 than 3. best of 5 would favore him more. if you think is a 4 slams per year and he has 24, while it is 9 maters and he has 40. it is 2,25 times more masters but nole has only 1,67 times more masters titles than slams. big deferens. + that it is not indoors slams and those conditions favor him the most.
Records are meaningless if the rules and conditions aren't constant over time,
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Certainly not in the 2012-2014 period.
GoatNo1
Legend
big3 calls big3 for reason. they are widely considering to be the greatest of all time. did they had same rules and conditions? did not them played each other 150 times?
records and titles is what the sports is about! not insta and X followers and fans awards!
GoatNo1
Legend
he was alpha even n that period. and is undisputed GOAT overall!
Djokovic's injury had some MAJOR implications. He was injured during ages 29-31, normally important phase of a player. There were 8 majors to be contested, let's assume he won 4 of those, that might be an understatement, because he actually won 7 out 8 before and after. One, he would beat Nadal by 6 majors and Federer by 10+ majors. Would Federer be included in Big 3?
Second, he would be the one to break the 20-slam milestone. Some anti-Djokovic fans believe he needed the woeful 90's generation to capture the slam record, so this would be an academic issue.
Third, he would be in position to avenge '13 WB loss to Murray, and show who's boss on grass. Fourth, he would be in position to avenge '13 US loss to Nadal, and show who's boss on HC. Fifth, Alcaraz & Sinner will find it much harder, virtually impossible, to reach 29 majors.
Last edited:
Mustard
Bionic Poster
He underachieved in best of 5 sets in the 2012-2014 period, compared to how he was doing in best of 3 sets tournaments. It's why Djokovic got Becker as his coach.
GoatNo1
Legend
lucky for fed and rafa, as he outclassed them anyway!
Mustard
Bionic Poster
4 straight wins for Nadal against Djokovic in majors in that period.
Shameless, all were on RG. We all knew Nadal was peerless there. In that period, Nadal was suffering a 9-match and 19-set losing streak to Djokovic on HC.
GoatNo1
Legend
yes, that and noles deportation helped him get to 22 slams. pity for him that nole got 24 despite those 0-4 and deportation and DQ and ban and W cancelation!
Mustard
Bionic Poster
The 2013 US Open final too, which completed a Canadian Open-Cincinnati-US Open clean sweep in 2013 for Nadal. Nadal had also beaten Djokovic at the 2013 Canadian Open, the match where Nadal hit Djokovic in the chops during a rally.
Eh?
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Djokovic had it within his power to play. Nadal even warned him in 2020 of what was coming.
2013 was long gone. We're talking about '16-18 seasons. Djokovic would have a shot at Nadal in '17 US, if he weren't injured. That would also bridge as the defending US champion in '18 US, if he were successful.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
I was talking about 2012-2014, and how Djokovic underachieved in best of 5 sets in that period relative to his best of 3 sets form. This was the reason why he got Becker as his coach.
No, they did not play under the same rules. Also, courts were slowed down progressively each year. Yes, Federer also benefitted from slowing of courts, but considering game styles, slowing of courts favoured Djokovic much more than Federer, so no things have not been constant. And even with slowing of courts, post-peak Federer defeated peakiest peak Djokovic on the slowest court of them all in 2011. So we can conclude that if courts were not slowed, it would favour Federer more than Djokovic. Ergo, and once again, Federer >>> Djokovic. QED.
_phantom
Hall of Fame
mike danny
Bionic Poster
And the extent of Becker’s contributions is debatable
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Is it? They had a slowish start, admittedly.
GoatNo1
Legend
yes, fed is, as always, the IF- and the hypothetical-GOAT and BOAT. much greater than nole who has only the real numbers, real BOAThood and GOAThood, just that!
GoatNo1
Legend
most important: by the end of his career he will have a 24-37 record in slam finals. at least! the law of big numbers, if you constantly get chances you will take some. while if you lose in first rounds to 100+ ranked players you will not get so many chances and even if you take them with great success (mostly thanks to the holy clay with miraculously healings power) at the end it would not be enough. 24 and 37 will always be more than 22 and 30.
by the end of W2014 rafa lost 3 consecutive times in early rounds at most prestigious slam to 100+ ranked opponents, making it 4 in a row in 2015!
at the end 10-7-10-10 gave 10-3-7-4 while 6-14-5-5 gave 2-14-2-4!
Last edited:
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Djokovic lost at the Australian Open to Istomin and Chung!most important: by the end of his career he will have a 24-37 record in slam finals. at least! the law of big numbers, if you constantly get chances you will take some. while if you lose in first rounds to 100+ ranked players you will not get so many chances and even if you take them with great success (mostly thanks to the holy clay with miraculously healings power) at the end it would not be enough. 24 and 37 will always be more than 22 and 30.
by the end of W2014 rafa lost 3 consecutive times in early rounds at most prestigious slam to 100+ ranked opponents, making it 4 in a row in 2015!
Even Nadal in 2015 didn't lose at the French Open to Sock, or a player inferior to Sock.
GoatNo1
Legend
still 10-7-10-10 gave 10-3-7-4 at the end while 6-14-5-5 gave 2-14-2-4!
RSJfan
Legend
Christmas Eve is tommorow. Will you be on duty or will someone be willing to cover your Eggbot duties for you? I hope you can get time off.
_phantom
Hall of Fame
We all know what happened at the end. The question is why Djo lost 7 out of 13 slam finals at one point. And 9 out of 21 slam finals by the end of 2016 despite having years like 2011, 2015 and 2016.
Did he reach that many more slam finals than Nadal and Federer in his 20s to excuse the ignominy of having a negative record on his 27th birthday or a B- record on his 31st birthday? I doubt that.
One contributing factor was that the gap between RG and WM was 2 weeks back then. With declined physicality and injuries, it was difficult for Nadal to "try" to play a full clay season and then recover so quickly for grass. The gap became 3 weeks in 2015. That year he was losing to everyone everywhere anyway. In 2016 he didn't play. From 2017 to 2022 he made full use of that extra 1 week and his results were respectable. Another thing is Borg, Fed and Nadal completed the channel slam when WM was only 2 weeks after RG. Djo could not achieve that
Oh common, he was injured. He showed what he was made of, coming straight out and beating Nadal at '18 WB!
Trying hard to find fault, aren't you!
_phantom
Hall of Fame
Not really. I remember that Djo very well.
The most lasting picture of Djo I have from that period is him crying on the podium after losing to Wawrinka in that RG15 final. Already 28 and a father, destined to be the goat but still could not complete the career slam. Every dog and their owner felt pity for him on that day. Everyone realized he was simply not as remarkable as Federer and Nadal and was probably a tier below them. That's why there was extended clapping for his losing effort and then the resulting tears.
As I said, the numbers are also IFs since they depend on the conditions and rules. If those change, numbers cannot be compared. How many slams would Djokovic have in the 90s polarized surface conditions? Very few. Fed would also have fewer, but most likely more than Djokovic. Ergo, numbers are relative and not very meaningful since they depend on the conditions and the current tour set up.
However, specific matches that you are supposed to win that you do not, say a lot more about your true tennis level. See FO11 for the best example.
GoatNo1
Legend
you see, slams are not all that matter. for example, up too OG24 it was OG that rafa fans most talked about in conversation with noles fans. now, rafa fans like to take slams as the only thing but it is not. fed, nole and sampras, 3 last GOATs, said that YE#1 is most important, for example. nole has 8 and he was stolen for another back in 2022. and even with slam finals and WTF and many masters can do the job. in period 12-14 (that rafa fans take up as noles weakness) nole won 3 WTF (something rafa never did!) made 2 YE#1s and was ITF champ for all 3 seasons. he also won 10 masters, 16 big titles overall. at the and rafas biggest holes are YE#1, weeks at no1 and WTFs, thats why his fans want to skip talk about those stats. if rafa and nole had each oters result in 12-14 period, rafas CV would be much better. vast majority still see fed as the greater player but if rafa had 6 YE#1 (istead for5), 250 instead f 209 weeks at no1, 3 instead of 0 WTFs, 7 sted of 5 ITF champ award and 38 instead of 36 masters (would have same as nole) and 94 instead of 92 overall titles but 21 instead of 22 slams his CV would see much better and would videly was seen as second greatest of all time. with noles result in 12-14 period rafa would even have 3 CGS and 2 GM!
if rafa had revers results with nole in 12-13 period it would make his CV much stronger! and he would surely be greater than fed!
| rafa as now | rafa if he and nole had reverse results in 12-14 period | fed | |
|---|---|---|---|
| YE#1 | 5 | 6 | 5 |
| ITF champ | 5 | 7 | 5 |
| weeks at no1 | 209 | 250 | 310 |
| slams (AO, RG, W, USO) | 22 (2, 14, 2, 4) | 21 (4, 11, 3, 3) | 20 (6, 1, 8, 5) |
| WTF | 0 | 3 | 6 |
| OG | G | G | S |
| masters | 36 | 38 | 28 |
| GM | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| all titles | 92 | 94 | 103 |
GoatNo1
Legend
so nole who is most versality and complete player ever and definitely between the big3 would win very few slams if they was more polarized and fed would have fed than now but stil many! ???? what the F. what logic. nole who have 11 titles and 20 finals on HC now, 3 titles and 7 finals on CC and 7 titles and 10 on GC would win just a few while fed would do almost the same. nole is most complet player with greatest versatility of the big3 by far! fed won only 1 RG and 8 W! rafa won 14 RG and 2 W. so they seem not to be the almost the same as you want to believe. rafa won 36 masters, 26 was on clay! thats 68,4%!!!! but CC are just 33,3% of masters! nole, on the other hand, won 11 out of 40 masters on clay. 27,5%!!!! not so far from 33,3% and he is peer with rafa who is by far the greatest CC player ever! rafa never won any of 2 biggest indoor HC tournaments (WTF and paris) or miami, fed never won 2 out of 3 clay masters. but all is the same? nole completed tennis and won ALL big titles in usual ATP cullender at least twice! but he would won just a few slams in 902. yea, sure, with fed fans logic!
mike danny
Bionic Poster
The competition changed significantly when he came on board which begs the question on whether Djokovic would have won the slams that he did anyway even without Becker.
Plus, Becker didn’t help Djokovic too much with Wawrinka, his biggest concern
Well, was Wawrinka the biggest concern of Djokovic? Post-'11, at the slams Djokovic met Federer 11 times (2 losses), Nadal 13 times (6 losses), Murray 9 times (2 losses), and Wawrinka 8 times (3 losses). Djokovic owed 5-3 lead. Djokovic actually had more wins, but when Wawrinka won, it was big news. And Wawrinka won more against Djokovic post-'11 than anyone except Nadal.
But Djokovic's wins against Federer and Murray were more important to his career than Wawrinka. Wawrinka was Djokovic's 4th most important opponent.
Last edited:
Nole is not the most versatile and complete player, that's just a pipe dream emanating from your buttocks.
Yes, under the polarized conditions of the 90s, Djokvoic would win a lot less. Nole only has so many records is because of the homogenized conditions. In no universe is Novak more versatile than Fed which is why he would not win as much in the 90s.
junkieballer
Legend
The most versatile player before 2000 was Agassi, and Djokovic has the most similar game to Agassi's among Big3s.
I don't understand in what universe Federer would win in the moonballing era at Roland Garros or Nadal would win in the serve and volley era of Wimbledon, while Djokovic who has better serve and return than Nadal and a better baseline game than Federer wouldn't succeed on all surfaces.
Another important role Djokovic played was that he almost invariably played another ATG more times than anyone else. Yeh, take that, Fedfans!
Post-'11, Federer at the slams played Murray 4 times and Wawrinka 7 times. Nadal played Murray 3 times and Wawrinka 3 times.
Djokovic served an informal facilitator of important matches.
Fedfans, Djokovic's schedule wasn't easy, was it! At least, it was much harder than Federer or Nadal.
Last edited:
GoatNo1
Legend
yes, as always, trust me bro prove and hypothetical slams and levels. if nole only was 10% as good hypothetical player as IRL as for fed if he only was a 10% IRL as hypothetical.
numbers talk their own language. and do not lie. rafa had no tactic vs nole. as he said. it was just to play as good as he can and hope that nole is not at his level that particular day. vs fed was always hitting to his BH. was fed so complete as you said he would not had negative h2h vs main rivals even in his own era! he would won more on clay. players would not exploited his weakness and he would not lose 24 or 25 matches having MPs! nole on all big tournaments at least twice (except for OG thats every 4 years and in different time, countrie, conditions and surface) hile fed newer MC or rome and won RG and paris only once each. nole is closer o 3 times all big tournaments (except for OG) than fed (or rafa) to his 1st (nole missing only 3rd MC)!
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Blue clay and struggles in windy conditions pretty much put that idea to rest
junkieballer
Legend
Don't trust predictions on hypotheticals by people that can't predict future matches
Here it is! Your two finalists!
A repeat of last years epic final that went the distance, with Novak clinching the win.
The pair have played 39 times, with Roger leading the H2H only slightly at 20-19.
Grass H2H at 1-1, with both players splitting their previous Wimbledon meetings.
May the best man win!
A repeat of last years epic final that went the distance, with Novak clinching the win.
The pair have played 39 times, with Roger leading the H2H only slightly at 20-19.
Grass H2H at 1-1, with both players splitting their previous Wimbledon meetings.
May the best man win!
One of the many threads for this final I think 
Last 5 matches
Federer to win in 4 sets
Last 5 matches
Federer to win in 4 sets
Similar threads
