tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Assuming Djokovic wins the Slam this year and reaches a total of 9 (2 behind Nadal), would he be considered higher on the GOAT list than Nadal despite being 2 majors behind?
Djokovic winning all 4 majors this year - ranked higher on the GOAT list than Nadal?
- Thread starter tennis_pro
- Start date
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Yes.
He would have 2 slams fewer than Nadal but would have won the CYGS, and would have had much longer at No 1/been a more dominant player.
He would have 2 slams fewer than Nadal but would have won the CYGS, and would have had much longer at No 1/been a more dominant player.
PS: I don't think Djokovic will win the four GS this year.
Even though currently it may be "easier" than ever before (because there aren't great young players, the surfaces are more similar than ever before (except for the movement that will always be different), everybody plays more or less one unique baseline game, Federer too old, players like Ferrer, Tsonga, Berdych, Del Potro....unable to defeat Djoker in a GS...), in spite of all this, if Djokovic is able to win the four majors this year it will be the "greatest" thing in tennis since 1969, and deservedly so.
Even though currently it may be "easier" than ever before (because there aren't great young players, the surfaces are more similar than ever before (except for the movement that will always be different), everybody plays more or less one unique baseline game, Federer too old, players like Ferrer, Tsonga, Berdych, Del Potro....unable to defeat Djoker in a GS...), in spite of all this, if Djokovic is able to win the four majors this year it will be the "greatest" thing in tennis since 1969, and deservedly so.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
yeah to offset the 2 less majors, he would have
The calendar grand slam
multiple majors at 3 of 4 majors compared to 2 of 4 for Nadal.
2 WTF titles
I would assume more weeks at number 1
Nadal would probably still have more masters, more years winning a slam, more masters, Olympic gold as well as the extra 2 majors
The calendar grand slam
multiple majors at 3 of 4 majors compared to 2 of 4 for Nadal.
2 WTF titles
I would assume more weeks at number 1
Nadal would probably still have more masters, more years winning a slam, more masters, Olympic gold as well as the extra 2 majors
kragster
Hall of Fame
Yeah very close.
Nadal would have 2 additional slams + OG + best RG player + better winning % ( vs field and H2H)+ more masters
Djoker would have more time at no 1 + WTF + co-best AO player + calendar slams
I would still give it to Nadal based on the 2 slam difference but the reality is that if Djoker got to 9 this year, he would have more 'upside' than Nadal and hence you could expect that in the future he be considered greater.
he would definitely be ahead of Nadal. Consider if he win all 4 slams this year means he's going to be #1 for the rest of the year.
vladap
Professional
we've got it....more masters
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
To Kragster: That's insane. There is no greater feat than calendar slam. If Djoko did that (and for the record, I highly doubt he will), 2 slam difference wouldn't matter one bit. You're talking about the most difficult achievement in tennis here. You can't sell it short!!!
hoodjem
G.O.A.T.
Yes, definitely.
The Grand Slam has been "the holy grail" or Mount Everest of tennis since 1933. Even Roger could not accomplish it. To win it all Djokovic will, presumably, have to go through Nadal on clay at the FO. Again, something that Roger could not do.
If Djokovic achieves a Grand Slam on three surfaces in this "greatest of all eras" with the evolutionary "best players in tennis history," then he will rank higher than Nadal.
Last edited:
kragster
Hall of Fame
My view on slams is that for the most part the total matters more than how closely spaced those wins were. You can argue that winning slams back to back shows a 'High peak' while winning slams over multiple years shows longevity/consistency etc. If both slam totals were equal I would give the edge to the guy with more consecutive slams.
Based on this scenario though, if it happened, as of October 2013, I would still rate Nadal the better player than djoker. Now if djoker won an additional slam in 2014 (assuming nadal were still at 11) THEN I would rate djoker higher.
Wouldn't you rank him higher than Nadal if he ends up with a higher slam count regardless?
Mainad
Bionic Poster
2011 is the only year he didn't win a Slam ever since he won his first at 2003 Wimbledon.
2003 (1): Wimbledon.
2004 (3): AO, Wimbledon & USO.
2005 (2): Wimbledon & USO.
2006 (3): AO, Wimbledon & USO.
2007 (3): AO, Wimbledon & USO.
2008 (1): USO.
2009 (2): FO & Wimbledon.
2010 (1): AO.
2011 (0): n/a.
2012 (1): Wimbledon.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
People would argue Fed's longevity of course and that would be understandable but to me personally, whoever could do something so seemingly impossible these days would be the man. No question.
cork_screw
Hall of Fame
Assuming? Assuming he wins 3 more consecutive slams? We're 1/4 there, how do you go from that to 4/4, especially with Nadal defending one of them? If nole won french and wimbledon, then we could talk about it. But as always there's always someone here who jumps to conclusions.
If there's anything that goes on here it's making rash arguments and jumping to conclusions. Even if he won the french, I would say that Fed is the one to beat for wimbledon, so I couldn't even write his name for winning the year slam.
You actually remind me of that forum member who wrote a thread saying that Nadal one 4 matches coming back from his 7 month break, then he jumped from that to how Nadal could break McEnroe's record for most consecutive match wins at start of season blah blah blah of 44 or something... You go from a pin needle to a sky scraper needle in 1 paragraph.
Last edited:
vladap
Professional
totaly agreed
Yeah he's going to win a slam where he just has one final and has to beat the best clay courter of all time if he even gets there (and also the surface he was so vulnerable on last year), one slam on his worst surface and one slam where he has a terrible final record. This is of course based on his current form where he got beaten in straights by a Haas on his best surface...sounds legit.
I love Novak and want him to do well but and I also believe in him as a player but he's not winning 4 majors this year. 2 is a lot more realistic.
I love Novak and want him to do well but and I also believe in him as a player but he's not winning 4 majors this year. 2 is a lot more realistic.
Clarky21
Banned
Feather
Legend
A guy who has won just one slam out of the last four slams is going to win the remaining three slams. Ridiculous Why an educated person believe in jinx is beyond me
He can beat Nadal at RG, maybe he will (but the odds are HIGHLY against him). But beating Nadal AND winning on grass AND winning USO? The 3 things happening together is near impossible. And the way he played at Miami just reduces the chances even more which are already next to zero
N
Nathaniel_Near
Guest
Hmm, Nole winning the Grand Slam this year... would it make him greater historically than Nadal? Actually, no.
People go on about the Grand Slam being the hardest feat in tennis. Well, maybe it is! But, I wonder what we'll see first; two people from 2005 onwards achieving the Grand Slam, or an additional player winning 7 RG titles. It's just something to think about. Oh, and those 7 RG titles that Rafa owns may be bumped up to 8 quite shortly, such is the greatness of his play on the surface. In fact it's not unreasonable to think that he is the strongest player in history on any particular single surface.
People go on about the Grand Slam being the hardest feat in tennis. Well, maybe it is! But, I wonder what we'll see first; two people from 2005 onwards achieving the Grand Slam, or an additional player winning 7 RG titles. It's just something to think about. Oh, and those 7 RG titles that Rafa owns may be bumped up to 8 quite shortly, such is the greatness of his play on the surface. In fact it's not unreasonable to think that he is the strongest player in history on any particular single surface.
Clarky21
Banned
I don't believe in the jinx. It's just what I think is likely to happen.
Clarky21
Banned
I don't put much stock in the way he played in Miami. He just played bad, but he obviously going to be in much better form for the clay season. He said his main goal is winning RG and I think he will do it, and with ease.
Feather
Legend
You also thought Djokovic is going to win RG 2012, Wimbledon 2012, US Open 2012, Indian Wells 2013 and Miami 2013 also right?
Didn't learn anything from those five experiences?
N
Nathaniel_Near
Guest
Bwahahahaha...
He "just" played bad? On his best surface? In round 4? You should put a LOT of stock into that. If he can just play bad on hard courts he can definitely just play bad on clay. He doesn't just choose days to be bad on purpose, it happens when the opponent makes you play badly.
His main goal last year also was RG and Olympics and look what happened there. All tennis players have a goal to win the next slam, the next title. Doesn't mean it's going to happen.
Feather
Legend
Last year he was no way as dominant as he was in 2011. He faced match points against Tsonga in RG, played five sets with Seppi.
From what has happened in 2013, he doesn't look as unbeatable as he was in 2012 also. Lost in two masters in his best surface, played five sets against Stan in AO and still people make absurd statements like Djokovic will win all four slams. Some people dont watch Tennis at all
90's Clay
Banned
Depends on who he beat to win them. Nadal has dominance over ALL his rivals of this era, Nole does not.
Nole had to wait for Nadal and Fed to age and past their primes to do anything. Where was Nole prior to 2011?
I look at Nadal as the greatest player of the modern era (even though he doesn't have slam record yet mainly due to injuries or else he would have gotten it before Roger IMO)
1. Far and away GOAT on clay surface - No one else is on their respective surfaces
3. Dominance over ALL his main rivals (something none of the other guys have)
4. Most difficult draws to win his respective slams (Something the other guy didn't or don't have. Nadal had to go through all the top 3 other players to win just about ALL his slam count)
5. Won 3 slams in one year on 3 difference surfaces. First time in history
6. Most masters count
Only thing going against him is Weeks at #1 and YEC. Though I dont look at that as a HUGE deal. His positives far outweight his negatives IMO.
While Fed has most weeks at #1 and most slams, he couldn't beat his main rivals (unlike Nadal who has) and once Nadal and Nole hit their primes, his results DRASTICALLY decreased.
Nole had to wait for Nadal and Fed to age and past their primes to do anything. Where was Nole prior to 2011?
I look at Nadal as the greatest player of the modern era (even though he doesn't have slam record yet mainly due to injuries or else he would have gotten it before Roger IMO)
1. Far and away GOAT on clay surface - No one else is on their respective surfaces
3. Dominance over ALL his main rivals (something none of the other guys have)
4. Most difficult draws to win his respective slams (Something the other guy didn't or don't have. Nadal had to go through all the top 3 other players to win just about ALL his slam count)
5. Won 3 slams in one year on 3 difference surfaces. First time in history
6. Most masters count
Only thing going against him is Weeks at #1 and YEC. Though I dont look at that as a HUGE deal. His positives far outweight his negatives IMO.
While Fed has most weeks at #1 and most slams, he couldn't beat his main rivals (unlike Nadal who has) and once Nadal and Nole hit their primes, his results DRASTICALLY decreased.
Last edited:
Exactly, so far his 2013 is looking worse than 2012 although of course there's a lot to play for yet. I do think the Haas loss has given him more of a push though, which is what may result in a relatively successful clay season. But expecting 3 more slam wins considering who he's up against is just silly.
Um, you being serious? 2011 Nadal was at his absolute peak. He came up against a guy who was also at his absolute peak to the point he was beating Nadal in straights onn clay, was unbeaten until the FO semi's where he should have beaten Federer, and managed to beat Nadal over and over again including the AO 2012.
You do realise 2009-2010 Djokovic actually had mechanical flaws in his serve and forehand, why on earth the guy changed his service motion after 2008 I have absolutely no idea, as well as having severe fitness problems. The guy could hardly hit a serve in throughout those years and his FH was breaking down due to fatigue.
When Djokovic refined his serve and improved his forehand to a more smooth motion, as well as getting fitter, he has clearly been the best player.
I expect Djokovic to end with more majors and a positive H2H against Nadal.
Feather
Legend
If I remember correctly, weren't you the one who said before the IW final this year that since Rafa and Roger both are past their prime, Roger fans should not speak about the prime excuse? So using your own logic, when Rafa beat Roger at Wimbledon 2008 and AO in 2009, Roger was also past his prime. Remember am using your logic. So according to your logic, Rafa also had to wait for Roger to be past his prime to beat Roger in Wimbledon 2008 and AO 2009 :wink:.
Now in this post you are contradicting yourself Monsier
Last edited:
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Reading fail much? We're not discussing whether Djokovic is capable of doing the Slam (which I'm 99,9% sure he won't) but where he would stand on the GOAT list if he did it.
Last edited:
Federer is far and away the hard court GOAT and he's right up there on grass. He's tied for the record at three of the four slams and definitely has opportunities to set his own record. Where's Nadal outside of the French? Not anywhere near the top of any of those lists.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
What if Nadal retired having won no more majors from now on? The best player of this era having a 6-major (as many as Becker/Edberg/Djokovic have won in their entire careers) deficit? That's not how it works, bro.
Lol, nice one. Nadal made it a joke
Clarky21
Banned
Didn't you just scoff at me for saying this was going to happen? I said that loss in Miami doesn't mean much and you'll see come clay season when he sweeps it.
And yes, he also has a huge chance to win the remaining 3 slams this year. Why are you underestimating a guy who has dominated the entire tour for the last 2+ years? He is practically unbeatable, and in best of 5 even more so. You have every reason to think he is going to mop up the rest of the season.
Clarky21
Banned
So you're saying Cvac is a joke since he won Rome in 2008, and was part of that clay field as well?
But seriously who was there? 90's clay comes out with 04-07 was a joke on hard and grass and this weak era bs, but seriously, other than Nadal and Federer, I don't see any great clay courters from 2005-2010. I mean even Soderling is the third most successful FO player of this era. ????
Well he wasn't amazing on the stuff, although in that period he was still very good. It was only until after 2008 where he really dropped off. He only stepped up his game in 2011.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
He'd be close, but I wouldn't give it to him just yet. The whole GOAT list thing is dumb anyway, they are both elite players. Not like he's about to win the calendar slam anyway, those hopes will be stomped out at the French, yet AGAIN.
I meant more as in push him to not have weird stumbles in earlier rounds like last year against Tsonga. Doesn't mean he's going to win everything, Nadal remains the man to beat for now.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Why is it obvious he'll play better in clay season?
Last year his main goal was to win RG and how did he do then? He had even more reason to want to win it last year as well.
And how close did he get to winning all 4 majors last year? Winning all 4 hasn't been done since 1969, even in Djokovic's best year he could not do it. Please, what do you get out of talking such rubbish all the time?
(ps you've said that Djokovic winning Wimby was a fluke, so how's he going to win it again?)
Similar threads
