For me Djokovic is a Tier 1 great - what do you all think?

[pds999]

From a Rafa fan this may seem a strange thing to say, especially as he lost relatively early in the AO this year and hasn't had the best of the recent match-ups with Rafa in the slams.

But he is the one player who can not only beat Rafa when he is on it, but can beat absolutely anyone in history in my opinion, at least on today's courts. He *only* has 6 slams to his name I know, which would put him alongside the Edbergs and Wilanders arguably as a Tier 3 player.

But for me in terms of actual ability, he is a Tier 1 great. I think he will end up with 10+ slams. He won't get close to 17 or 18 and ultimately that will be what he is judged on. But purely as a tennis player on today's courts, I would say he almost has no equal bar Rafa, and that is always a 50:50 match.

 

[Manus Domini]

Fabrice Santoro was a problem for Safin, who would be a low-tier great. IS Santoro a great, now, too?

 

[pds999]

Fabrice Santoro was a problem for Safin, who would be a low-tier great. IS Santoro a great, now, too?

That wasn't a serious question was it?

I am not saying this because Djokovic gives Rafa a problem, he gives everyone a problem and would give any player in history a problem on today's courts.

In Rafa's book (which was written before Novak started beating him), Rafa singled him out as the biggest talent in tennis and that he would start to shine. He was right.

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

For me Djokovic is a Tier 1 great - what do you all think?


He is not. Not yet.
But big credit to him for facing the toughest era, having to beat Federer and/or Nadal to win grand slams.

 

[90's Clay]

Tier 3 tops

 

[Kenshin]

From a Rafa fan this may seem a strange thing to say, especially as he lost relatively early in the AO this year and hasn't had the best of the recent match-ups with Rafa in the slams.

But he is the one player who can not only beat Rafa when he is on it, but can beat absolutely anyone in history in my opinion, at least on today's courts. He *only* has 6 slams to his name I know, which would put him alongside the Edbergs and Wilanders arguably as a Tier 3 player.

But for me in terms of actual ability, he is a Tier 1 great. I think he will end up with 10+ slams. He won't get close to 17 or 18 and ultimately that will be what he is judged on. But purely as a tennis player on today's courts, I would say he almost has no equal bar Rafa, and that is always a 50:50 match.

I agree with your evaluation. Djokovic is a great player. But the truth is that you have to actually "earn it" and win about 10 grandslams to become a tier 1 great. So he has a lot of work to do.

 

[Manus Domini]

That wasn't a serious question was it?

Yes, yes it was.

I am not saying this because Djokovic gives Rafa a problem, he gives everyone a problem and would give any player in history a problem on today's courts.

Ability to trouble any other player does not imply one is a Tier 1 Great.

In Rafa's book (which was written before Novak started beating him), Rafa singled him out as the biggest talent in tennis and that he would start to shine. He was right.

Oh, no, Rafa's book! That infernal contraption!

Look, Djoker may eventually become an all-time great. But he's still behind JMac, Conners, and Wilander at the moment.

 

[Bud]

Not even close

Tier 3 currently

When he achieves a career slam and a double digit slam count, perhaps

 

[Swissinator]

But for me in terms of actual ability, he is a Tier 1 great. I think he will end up with 10+ slams.

That seemed likely after AO12, but no so much anymore. Novak's lost some of the mental edge and reliability he used to have in his "iron man" days, as a result of which he now loses matches he would have won 2 years ago.

It would be great for tennis if he could get back to his best self in the slams and start really challenging Nadal again. Then he could hope to end up with an Agassi-like career record.

He is a Tier 1 great in terms of friendliness and graciousness in defeat. Sadly that doesn't count as much as the trophies.

 

[Matthew Bance]

tier 2
tier 1: Federer, nadal, Sampras, borg, laver
tier 2: lendl, Agassi, necombe etc, Edberg, djokovic, emerson, rosewall, mcenroe
tier 3: becker, vilas, murray, kueten, courier etc
tier 4: stan smith, Roddick, del potro
tier 5: krajeck (winners who were complete outsiders
tier 5: players like ferrer

 

[Backspin1183]

 

[poofytail]

He is something like a tier 4 great. Looking only at World War 11 players:

Tier 1: Laver, Gonzales, Nadal, Rosewall, Federer, Sampras, Borg

Tier 2: Lendl, Connors

Tier 3: McEnroe, Newcombe, Hoad, Agassi

Tier 4: Wilander, Becker, Djokovic, Edberg

 

[monfed]

He's tier 2 atm as is Nadal.

 

[poofytail]

He's tier 2 atm as is Nadal.

Cute. Enjoying your fantasy World I see.

 

[monfed]

Cute. Enjoying your fantasy World I see.

8/13 slams on clay. Even if he wins tomorrow, it will still be 8/14 on clay which is a massive clay skew since only 1 slam on clay. Enjoy living in your fantasy world, and if you like it so much no need to step out to strain yourself for a debate. :lol:

 

[Cesc Fabregas]

He's tier 2 atm as is Nadal.

How are Djokovic in the same tier as Nadal?

 

[Phoenix1983]

He is something like a tier 4 great. Looking only at World War 11 players:

Tier 1: Laver, Gonzales, Nadal, Rosewall, Federer, Sampras, Borg

Tier 2: Lendl, Connors

Tier 3: McEnroe, Newcombe, Hoad, Agassi

Tier 4: Wilander, Becker, Djokovic, Edberg

Tier 1 is correct, but McEnroe and Agassi should be in Tier 2, and everyone you've put as Tier 4 should move up to Tier 3. No way is Hoad a tier above Djokovic.

 

[monfed]

How are Djokovic in the same tier as Nadal?

Because tier 1 greats like Federer,Laver,Borg,Tilden are head n shoulders above Nadal. They didn't become tier 1 greats by padding up their records with a bazillion slams on a minority surface and they aren't 1D. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but tennis isn't played only on clay. If that was the case, the Nadal would be the GOAT(although that's also a bit doubtful but I'll give it to him)

 

[tennisaddict]

How are Djokovic in the same tier as Nadal?

Because he beat him 7 times in a row and that too in finals ?

 

[Phoenix1983]

Cute. Enjoying your fantasy World I see.

stop f*cking capitalising the "w" on "world" !

 

[poofytail]

Because he beat him 7 times in a row and that too in finals ?

By that logic Nadal must be in two tiers higher than Federer, his dog. Nadal atleast still leads Djokovic in head to head in slams and overall, and always has.

 

[Xemi666]

I think you should lay off the crack. He may be in the future, but right now? Not even close.

 

[Phoenix1983]

8/13 slams on clay. Even if he wins tomorrow, it will still be 8/14 on clay which is a massive clay skew since only 1 slam on clay. Enjoy living in your fantasy world, and if you like it so much no need to step out to strain yourself for a debate. :lol:

poofytail is NadalAgassi, btw.

 

[tennisaddict]

By that logic Nadal must be in two tiers higher than Federer, his dog. Nadal atleast still leads Djokovic in head to head in slams and overall, and always has.

But he didnt lose 7 straight times (yet).

 

[JRAJ1988]

Djokovic will be tier 1 when he's got to 10 slams (which imo he will)...he'll join Federer, Nadal, Sampras and Borg as the greats of the Open Era.

Que Federer fans to besmirch this fact

 

[poofytail]

Tier 1 is correct, but McEnroe and Agassi should be in Tier 2, and everyone you've put as Tier 4 should move up to Tier 3. No way is Hoad a tier above Djokovic.

McEnroe and Agassi do not belong in the same tier as Connors and Lendl. Their slam wins are similar but in terms of tournament wins, consistency, dominance (this part of Agassi only), longevity (for McEnroe), the former two arent even close to the latter two.

Hoad played at the highest level of any player in history at his best according to the likes of Laver and Gonzales.

 

[poofytail]

But he didnt lose 7 straight times (yet).

Lets, see 2-9 slam record vs your biggest rival and a fellow GOAT, or 7 losses in a row in one fluke stretch (only 3 in slams) and still an overall winning head to head and slam head to head years later. I will take the latter easily thank you.

 

[Backspin1183]

By that logic Nadal must be in two tiers higher than Federer, his lapdog. Nadal atleast still leads Djokovic in head to head in slams and overall, and always has.

Fixed it for you.

 

[timnz]

Tier 2 and a half

I think players should be rated by their career achivements. On that count Djokovic is a great player...but he is somewhere between tier 2 and tier 3. It won't be too long however until he reaches tier.2

He is to be ranked, in the open era, by my reckoning, at ninth in the open era. Ahead of him are (in no particular order) are Federer, Nadal, Lendl, Sampras, McEnroe, Borg, Connors, Agassi

Open era:

Tier 1: Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Borg

Tier 2: Lendl, McEnroe, Connors, Agassi

Tier 3: Djokovic, Becker, Edberg, Wilander (this tier is in order starting at Djokovic)

As i say, Djokovic will ascend to tier 2 with another great year or 2 solid years.

 

[kiki]

He is not even third tier right now.Can be third tier soon, but I doubt he´ll ever get past it.

 

[Start da Game]

Because tier 1 greats like Federer,Laver,Borg,Tilden are head n shoulders above Nadal. They didn't become tier 1 greats by padding up their records with a bazillion slams on a minority surface and they aren't 1D. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but tennis isn't played only on clay. If that was the case, the Nadal would be the GOAT(although that's also a bit doubtful but I'll give it to him)

what a stupid argument......federer and sampras bulldozed home seven slams each on a minority surface too......that too a surface on which players play only one tournament apart from the slam......

 

[Manus Domini]

8/13 slams on clay. Even if he wins tomorrow, it will still be 8/14 on clay which is a massive clay skew since only 1 slam on clay. Enjoy living in your fantasy world, and if you like it so much no need to step out to strain yourself for a debate. :lol:

Actually, he's 10/14 on clay (Wimbledon counts at this point :lol

 

[Start da Game]

Actually, he's 10/14 on clay (Wimbledon counts at this point :lol

make it 14/14......whatever he wins must be clay......

 

[kiki]

I think players should be rated by their career achivements. On that count Djokovic is a great player...but he is somewhere between tier 2 and tier 3. It won't be too long however until he reaches tier.2

He is to be ranked, in the open era, by my reckoning, at ninth in the open era. Ahead of him are (in no particular order) are Federer, Nadal, Lendl, Sampras, McEnroe, Borg, Connors, Agassi

Open era:

Tier 1: Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Borg

Tier 2: Lendl, McEnroe, Connors, Agassi

Tier 3: Djokovic, Becker, Edberg, Wilander (this tier is in order starting at Djokovic)

As i say, Djokovic will ascend to tier 2 with another great year or 2 solid years.

have you ever heard of a guy named John David Newcombe? Ken Robert Rosewall?Ilie Nastase?

of course, I left aside Rodney George Laver on purpose

 

[monfed]

what a stupid argument......federer and sampras bulldozed home seven slams each on a minority surface too......that too a surface on which players play only one tournament apart from the slam......

First of all, a player who wins Wimbledon will always be held in higher regard to a player who wins RG. That much is clear. Secondly, both Fed and Pete have 9 and 7 HC slams respectively which forms the majority of the tour,Nadal only 3, 4 if he wins tomorrow. That's still a skew. Though Pete has a missing RG which is detrimental to his case for GOAT.

For me, Laver and Fed both make a great case for GOAT. Also running close on their heels is Borg. Jack Kramer,whose opinion I hold in very high regard as he's seen almost every generation of past and present greats said that Federer is the greatest. I'd have to go with his opinion.

 

[papertank]

To get into tier 1 you need to achieve something that no one else has. Any tier 1 player has to have some kind of GOAT credentials. Djokovic isn't even in tier 2 yet, the competition there is much higher than him right now. Eventually I think he will be in tier 2.

Tier 1: Fed, Nadal, Sampras, Borg
Tier 2: Lendl, McEnroe, Connors, Agassi
Tier 3: Djokovic, Becker, Wilander, Edberg

Not including Laver, Rosewell, etc because it's impossible to compare pre open era.

 

[Manus Domini]

make it 14/14......whatever he wins must be clay......

Nah, the HCs aren't clay yet. They're close, though!

 

[monfed]

poofytail is NadalAgassi, btw.

It's always nice to have Professor RalphAgassi supply his pearls of wisdom, I must admit that I missed him and hope he sticks around longer this time. :lol:

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

tier 2
tier 1: Federer, nadal, Sampras, borg, laver
tier 2: lendl, Agassi, necombe etc, Edberg, djokovic, emerson, rosewall, mcenroe
tier 3: becker, vilas, murray, kueten, courier etc
tier 4: stan smith, Roddick, del potro
tier 5: krajeck (winners who were complete outsiders
tier 5: players like ferrer

LOL

Murray Tier 3. LMFAO.

Del Potro Tier 4. HAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Forehand Of Doom]

what a stupid argument......federer and sampras bulldozed home seven slams each on a minority surface too......that too a surface on which players play only one tournament apart from the slam......

Stupid arguments and gas is all you'll get from that one.

 

[a10best]

For me Djokovic is a Tier 1 great - what do you all think?


He is not. Not yet.
But big credit to him for facing the toughest era, having to beat Federer and/or Nadal to win grand slams.

I am not going to debate the toughest era, to each his own.


Novak is still tier 3. He lost to Nadal in 3 straight slam finals!! Is McEnroe tier 1 or Lendl? NO.

 

[kiki]

To get into tier 1 you need to achieve something that no one else has. Any tier 1 player has to have some kind of GOAT credentials. Djokovic isn't even in tier 2 yet, the competition there is much higher than him right now. Eventually I think he will be in tier 2.

Tier 1: Fed, Nadal, Sampras, Borg
Tier 2: Lendl, McEnroe, Connors, Agassi
Tier 3: Djokovic, Becker, Wilander, Edberg

Not including Laver, Rosewell, etc because it's impossible to compare pre open era.

If you don´t count till 75 I agree with this list.Otherwise, Rosewall and Newcombe, at least, have the record to be part of this third tier.

 

[timnz]

have you ever heard of a guy named John David Newcombe? Ken Robert Rosewall?Ilie Nastase?

of course, I left aside Rodney George Laver on purpose

I said open era kiki...

Of course Laver and Rosewall are tier 1 in the all time list

My all time tier 1 (in no particular order) is:

laver, federer, tilden, gonzales, sampras, rosewall, nadal, borg

Newcombe is around tier 3 all time

 

[Start da Game]

First of all, a player who wins Wimbledon will always be held in higher regard to a player who wins RG. That much is clear. Secondly, both Fed and Pete have 9 and 7 HC slams respectively which forms the majority of the tour,Nadal only 3, 4 if he wins tomorrow. That's still a skew. Though Pete has a missing RG which is detrimental to his case for GOAT.

For me, Laver and Fed both make a great case for GOAT. Also running close on their heels is Borg. Jack Kramer,whose opinion I hold in very high regard as he's seen almost every generation of past and present greats said that Federer is the greatest. I'd have to go with his opinion.

minority surface --> value of each slam --> jack kramer's opinion......my suggestion would be to stick to one type of argument......

nadal would have 6 non clay slams along with the 8 clay slams......sampras 7 and 7......federer 7 and 10......if nadal wins one more wimbledon, nobody else in history would have 3 slams each on clay, grass and hardcourts......

clay and grass are the original surfaces of tennis......wimbledon is only slightly greater than roland garros but roland garros is ten times greater than the hardcourt slams......

 

[Manus Domini]

If you don´t count till 75 I agree with this list.Otherwise, Rosewall and Newcombe, at least, have the record to be part of this third tier.

Try first tier for Muscles, how 'bout it?

Don't forget Tilden, Pancho Gonzalez, Laver.

 

[Manus Domini]

I said open era kiki...

Of course Laver and Rosewall are tier 1 in the all time list

My all time tier 1 (in no particular order) is:

laver, federer, tilden, gonzales, sampras, rosewall, nadal, borg

Newcombe is around tier 3 all time

Laver got the Grand Slam in the Open Era

 

[Tenez101]

Djokovic will end up with 10+ slams, though it could be only 10 now that he's dropped AO. It all depends on whether he can bounce back convincingly this season.

 

[kiki]

Try first tier for Muscles, how 'bout it?

Don't forget Tilden, Pancho Gonzalez, Laver.

Just Open era , not whole history.

 

[Fiji]

I think players should be rated by their career achivements. On that count Djokovic is a great player...but he is somewhere between tier 2 and tier 3. It won't be too long however until he reaches tier.2

He is to be ranked, in the open era, by my reckoning, at ninth in the open era. Ahead of him are (in no particular order) are Federer, Nadal, Lendl, Sampras, McEnroe, Borg, Connors, Agassi

Open era:

Tier 1: Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Borg

Tier 2: Lendl, McEnroe, Connors, Agassi

Tier 3: Djokovic, Becker, Edberg, Wilander (this tier is in order starting at Djokovic)

As i say, Djokovic will ascend to tier 2 with another great year or 2 solid years.

I concur. Nole is Tier 3.

He will join Tier 1 if he wins 11 slams at least like Borg.

 

[Tenez101]

Also, it adds a lot to Nole's resume that he's been by far the most successful player against prime Nadal.