Do you think Djokovic is legend?

Is Djokovic legend?

  • Yes of course

    Votes: 108 71.5%
  • Just No

    Votes: 35 23.2%
  • He will be for sure

    Votes: 8 5.3%

  • Total voters
    151

NGM

Hall of Fame
#1
I think he is a great player. But a legend? I am not sure. Do you think Wilander as a legend? I dont think so. Djokovic is very much alike to Wilander in term of legendary story.

Some legends to me: Laver, Connors, Bjon Borg, Federer, Nadal.

Mc Enroe is more like a clown. No one cares about Lend and who is Boris by the way?
 

haqq777

Hall of Fame
#8
Offcourse! Now opinions about him might be highly polarized for whatever reason (I myself am admittedly a Fedal fan), but we can not take away his massive achievements in sport of tennis. I do not particularly like his style of play and find his style rather mundane, but that is not mutually exclusive to what he has attained so far. Great sportsman and deserves every bit of what he has achieved.
 

gino

Hall of Fame
#17
I think he is a great player. But a legend? I am not sure. Do you think Wilander as a legend? I dont think so. Djokovic is very much alike to Wilander in term of legendary story.

Some legends to me: Laver, Connors, Bjon Borg, Federer, Nadal.

Mc Enroe is more like a clown. No one cares about Lend and who is Boris by the way?
...........................................?
 
#18
I think he is a great player. But a legend? I am not sure. Do you think Wilander as a legend? I dont think so. Djokovic is very much alike to Wilander in term of legendary story.

Some legends to me: Laver, Connors, Bjon Borg, Federer, Nadal.

Mc Enroe is more like a clown. No one cares about Lend and who is Boris by the way?
You, Sir, shall withdraw your calumnious statement against Mister Mc Enroe, or face a duel with pistols the coming day at morn. How dare you insult the honor of the legendary American who took on the Iceman from Sweden in the Greatest Sporting Contest of the Century, lost with great dignity and came back the following year to take on the mantle of the Best on the Planet. If that is not legendary, I do not know what is. Please watch the below video for your edification before you make any more posts on this forum:

 
#20
…or they just have a different idea of legend than you. I would put Dj as one of the greats but legend to me is a player like Fed or Laver.
But bottom line there has to be some kind of fixed criteria about being a legend. I mean I understand if someone is debating about Edberg or Becker being legends but Djokovic?! He is like the 4th-5th best tennis player of all time considering modern achievements and you simply can't skipp someone like that. No mather of his personality, he is a legendary TENNIS player and nobody cant take that away from him
 
#21
But bottom line there has to be some kind of fixed criteria about being a legend. I mean I understand if someone is debating about Edberg or Becker being legends but Djokovic?! He is like the 4th-5th best tennis player of all time considering modern achievements and you simply can't skipp someone like that. No mather of his personality, he is a legendary TENNIS player and nobody cant take that away from him
Indeed, as much as it sucks :p
 
#24
Go figure. If you have a brain ... or course he is. I don't care if you like him or not. Novak wrote his ow tennis history, like it or not. I'm not sure what this thread is all about. What is to discuss?

The OP should enlighten us what 'legend' is ... freaking stupid, sorry but this thread is ********.
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
#27
he's not on my tennis/open era mount rushmore but he's certainly a tier 1 ATG and legend.
IDK how he can't be with his name slashing through the record books! His '11 & '15 alone does the job, but add 6 AO''s, 3 Wimbledons, 5 YEC so far, a CGS, approaching top of list to hold #1 ranking, and he's not done yet! If Connors, McEnroe, & Becker are thought of as legends, Djokovic has already put himself near the top! :rolleyes: :p ;)
 
#29
People don't realize that 11-12 slams will become the minimum amount required to be an ATG from now on. The 70s and 80s basically only had 3 important slams, and if they cared about AO then players like Connors, McEnroe, Lendl would be on 11-12 slams. Agassi was also an anomaly because he skipped so many slams. If you look at all time greats such as Rosewall and Laver, they had 17-23 slams won, and if you convert so that pro slams only count as 2/3 of a regular slam, they come close to the 14-17 mark of Federer/Sampras/Nadal.
 
#41
Fed, Laver and Borg for me .

Pete and Rafa if we are stretching it further.

Other folks from Edberg/Becker to Djok/Lendl are ATG but not legends. If you include one, you got to go down the list and get up to Edberg and that is diluting the list. You have to draw the line some where.

Remember, legend means holy trinity and there is room for just a couple.

Djok has let Stan and Murray win 3 majors each in his time and that is a big stain from getting there
 

OhYes

Hall of Fame
#45
#46
I wouldn't try to claim Nadal or Fed weren't legends back when Fed had 12 majors (after US 07 win), or Nadal had 12, (after RG 13 win). Those who claim Djokovic isn't are truly letting personal prejudice get in the way. You can't not be a legend when you have 12 slams, the career slam, 4 slams in a row, all the YEC and YE1 and weeks at 1, and all the important matches (wins and losses) against both Federer and Nadal. It just doesn't work that way, regardless of what mitigating factor you think makes his achievements less impressive, that does not take away from his legend status at this time. To say so is absurd at this point.
 

Minion

Hall of Fame
#47
I'm gonna go with no - not yet anyway. He plays a fairly decent game of tennis, sure, but he is not in the same league as Federer, Sampras and Nadal. There can only be 3 legends. 4 legends just doesn't sound right.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
#48
I wouldn't try to claim Nadal or Fed weren't legends back when Fed had 12 majors (after US 07 win), or Nadal had 12, (after RG 13 win). Those who claim Djokovic isn't are truly letting personal prejudice get in the way. You can't not be a legend when you have 12 slams, the career slam, 4 slams in a row, all the YEC and YE1 and weeks at 1, and all the important matches (wins and losses) against both Federer and Nadal. It just doesn't work that way, regardless of what mitigating factor you think makes his achievements less impressive, that does not take away from his legend status at this time. To say so is absurd at this point.
Not sure if any of these guys really believe what they're writing half the time tbh.
 
Top