The Big Foe fan
Hall of Fame
Please keep the argument civilized as long as possible.
Compared to other ATG's I am not sure if he is even top 5 on grass, as you have to take into consideration some of them had three GSs on grass, while he has only one. He has been training on hard court and clay most of his life.
So you can't really say he is bad on grass, but compared to Fed and Sampras his game is mainly focused on strong base line game, which is not the best way to play on grass.
But they are not from his generation, and there is hardly player with better peak (maybe Nadal, Murray not) and prime yeras (I don't think there is anyone better in this segment, as his prime years are going on for like 10+ years).
Compare this to clay, where Nadal denied him in so many GS and Masters SF and F(just take a look at number of their meetings in RG or Rome).
In my opinion his clay peak is soo much better, but for obvious reasons he underachieved there, in contrast to Wimbledon where he can make tie with Sampras next year :O
That's what I meant, he grew up on hard and clay, in Serbia there is literally no grass courts. So having big number of grass GSs is plus for him, as he has found the way to overcome that hindranceNovak is definitely in the top 5 on grass. He is a product of his own era, so you cannot judge him by saying that his game is not suitable on grass like the stalwarts of the 80s and 90s.
FYI he did beat Federer 3 times in Wimbledon finals, now we can spin it anyway by saying Federer was 33, 34 and 38 but then Federer in the finals means he still was at a very high level, if Novak can beat Federer of 2015 in 4 sets then yes peak vs peak he is in the same ballpark, even if he is considered a bit low than Fed yet it isn't that big a difference, definitely in the top 5.
Agree with rest of what you said regarding clay.
He is not top 5 on grass.Novak is definitely in the top 5 on grass. He is a product of his own era, so you cannot judge him by saying that his game is not suitable on grass like the stalwarts of the 80s and 90s.
FYI he did beat Federer 3 times in Wimbledon finals, now we can spin it anyway by saying Federer was 33, 34 and 38 but then Federer in the finals means he still was at a very high level, if Novak can beat Federer of 2015 in 4 sets then yes peak vs peak he is in the same ballpark, even if he is considered a bit low than Fed yet it isn't that big a difference, definitely in the top 5.
Agree with rest of what you said regarding clay.
He is not top 5 on grass.
Pancho, Rosewall, Laver, Sampras and Fed, are clearly better than him
You're not DjokovicI have reached a pretty high level on grass.
Clay did nothing for me.
Bjorg too.He is not top 5 on grass.
Pancho, Rosewall, Laver, Sampras and Fed, are clearly better than him
Hmm.For me it s very hard to say if we talk consistency it s grass but in peak it s really debatable.Of course we should include that in period 2011 - he have to face clay GOAT like Nadal on clay with peaking Stan and Thiem.In grass he only have Murray and Fed as big obstacles but they are more comparible to Stan and Thiem than Nadal.So no ATG in peak form on grass which wasn't the case on clay.
Don't know where to rate Borg, it's kind of 50-50 for me whether he is better than Novak or notBjorg too.
But modern grass makes Djokovic so good because of his return.
Where did he *reach.This sounds like 2013 RG vs 2015 Wimbledon, where did he reached a higher level ?![]()
If anything, nadal was out of extraordinary energy after 2 hours but that's been the case with him ever since 2019. Djokovic just happens to be the best at exploiting his legs which become heavy after 2 hours.Based on 2020 and 2021, clearly not.
In 2020, Nadal beat Djokovic 60 62 75 at RG.
And in 2021, Djokovic needed a 98 minute 3rd Set just to take the lead vs. foot-injury-Nadal, and since then Nadal has had to shutdown his season and seek career-saving treatment.
So Djokovic is destroyed by a healthy Nadal, and has to fight like crazy just to hit the lead vs. injured-Nadal..... and Djokovic talked like it was the greatest achievement of his career!
Whereas at Wimbledon, Djokovic was a notch above everyone else this year.
You are "going/talking" off topicYou are off topic![]()
![]()
You are wrong this timeYou are "going/talking" off topic
I think Nadal’s absolute peak on grass was possibly better in terms of an all time great ranking (given the Federer win)Well he did beat Nadal twice on clay (even though Nadal wasn't peaking of course) its still a great accomplishment. Nadal on clay is still better than Fed on grass. I dont think Nole's grass level is all that really. Hes great on it but I don't consider him among the all time Grass GOATs as far as level goes. Peak Sampras would take Nole to the cleaners at Wimbledon. Im not even sure Djokovic could beat 2007-2010 Nadal on grass
Novak on grass is an absolute beast . Out of the 6 Wimbledons he won 5 of those he had to beat a Wimbledon champion in order to win it ( 3 Fed , 2 Rafa ) .
He moves really well on grass , his serve is more potent there , his return of serve is second to none ( his biggest weapon on grass ) , the groundstrokes are more penetrating witch lets him be more aggressive than he sometimes is on other surfaces , and obviously there is his mental strength . He is 5-2 in Wimbledon vs FEDAL and 4 - 0 in finals .
People say that Novak was beating an old Fed but was Fed ever that godly on grass or did he never seem to have proper competition until Djokovic and Nadal came along .
People always say Fed was untouchable outside off clay in 2004-2007 but let's look his 2006 , 2007 and 2008 finals against Rafa .
In the 2006 final it really should have went five sets had Nadal not botched serving for the set and that was his first Wimbledon final , it wasn't as easy as the score might suggest .
In the 2007 final Nadal was outplaying him from the baseline pretty badly , it was Roger's clutch serve that won him that match . Nadal had 4 or 6 bp in the fifth set but after failing to convert Federer was able to take over , the set says 6-2 but people who watched that match know it was not easy by any means , after that fourth set Federer was in deep trouble but he managed to clutch it with his serve when it mattered .
In the 2008 final i am honestly even surprised that it even went to 5 , Nadal was outplaying Roger pretty badly , dominating him completely from the baseline . It was his clutch serving that prevented him losing in 3 or 4 sets , he started to play better later too but it was too late then , 1/13 bp for the grass goat ? Ouch .
Don't get me wrong Federer was great on grass but let's not pretend Nadal wasn't giving him hell , Nadal who was 20-22 i believe ( 2006-2008 ) , and imo Djokovic is better on grass than Nadal was even in 2008 , well the best Djokovic that is .
Roger's biggest ,, rival ,, if you could even call him that before Djokovic and Nadal on grass was Roddick who was Roger's whipping boy , and the only match where Roddick truly impressed me was in 2009 a match he should have won but beaned it , Roddick showed more all court prowess than i have ever seen him before especially on his backhand side but ultimately Roger proved too much in the fifth and Roddick gassed out in the end and Roger won with his experience and superior stamina .
People can tell me whatever they want but Djokovic > Nadal and Roddick on grass .
I see people say Federer would own Djokovic in 2004-2007 period if they were the same age and both in their peaks but then you look at his struggles against Nadal in 2006-2008 it suddenly doesn't seem that ,,easy,, anymore .
Eggjectly![]()
Peak/Primedal on clay is just tougher competition than Ol’ Rog on grass.
![]()
How long would you want?Please keep the argument civilized as long as possible.
Atleast 100 postsHow long would you want?
LOL. Gonzales and Rosewall never won Wimbledon, dude!!! Djokovic is 6-time Wimbledon champion and along with Borg belongs alongside Federer, Sampras, and Laver in TOP 5 at grass.He is not top 5 on grass.
Pancho, Rosewall, Laver, Sampras and Fed, are clearly better than him
They were pro, Rosewall from what I heard was one of the greatest natural grass court player.LOL. Gonzales and Rosewall never won Wimbledon, dude!!! Djokovic is 6-time Wimbledon champion and along with Borg belongs alongside Federer, Sampras, and Laver in TOP 5 at grass.
2011 Rome is such a pain in this comparison.It would be easier without that version of Novak in the mixI'd still say he peaked higher on grass even if prime/peak Nadal at RG is much better than aging Fed at Wimb.
Absolutely bruh. Beating prime nadal on one of his best clay courts after coming through a huge slugfest, while having way less time for recovery prior to the match, is an unbelievable achievement.2011 Rome is such a pain in this comparison.It would be easier without that version of Novak in the mix![]()
To be quite honest, he's face little resistance at Wimbledon than on clay.Djokovic's best at Wimbledon is a little better than his best at RG, but when you throw BO3 into the mix it becomes a tough comparison.
Nevertheless, he never won the Wimbledon title (he had the opportunity to do so as an amateur before the open era and then at the beginning of the open era as a professional), while Djokovic has 6. A tennis player who has never won Wimbledon cannot logically be considered a better grass court player than a player with 6 Wimbledon titles.They were pro, Rosewall from what I heard was one of the greatest natural grass court player.