Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Federer's losses to Nalbandian and Haas came BEFORE his first AO win, not after. And Djokovic's came AFTER. Safin is an AO champion and so is Nadal. Neither Roddick nor Tsonga are AO champions. Again, you fail.
How many more Slams do you think Djokovic will win?
- Thread starter Prisoner of Birth
- Start date
Federer's losses to Nalbandian and Haas came BEFORE his first AO win, not after. And Djokovic's came AFTER. Safin is an AO champion and so is Nadal. Neither Roddick nor Tsonga are AO champions. Again, you fail.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Forget about ****s, do YOU think Fed is a better US Open player because he won 5 in a row and Sampras only managed 2?
Cos I actually think Sampras probably has the edge - it's at least debateable, and the only reason it is is because 5 in a row and 6 finals in a row is significantly better than any run Sampras made, plus the match points Federer had to make a 7th and 8th final and how close he got to winning 6 in a row vs Delpo. But that's still not enough for me to say Federer is the better US Open player.
So I think at best Djokovic winning 3 in a row but having the same amount of titles and less finals, makes it debateable. But not clearcut in his favour.
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
And if you're gonna talk about them before their first wins, Djokovic lost twice in the 1st round. Federer never lost before the 3rd round. Federer's win % at the AO - 88%. Djokovic's - 86.5%
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
Ah, such vitriol, such butthurt
Talking to yourself in the mirror again. If you need to do that to preserve your sanity go ahead, but best not to type while you do it. We all know you are ********, no need to display for all to see.
I dislike both Federer and Djokovic so I have no reason to be biased between them. I like Agassi about five times more than both, so just the fact I am saying Djokovic would have the edge over Agassi for me if he wins the upcoming Australian Open is proof I am putting any personal bias aside.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
I think in playing level I favor Sampras but I realize that is completely subjective and opinion based. In greatness I think Federer has the slight edge over Sampras at the U.S Open since he was more dominant by winning 5 in a row, even if Sampras has a big edge in longevity at the event for now, and more finals, more semis, so it is close but probably still favoring Federer since Sampras only even defended his title there once. Similarily to how I think Sampras still has the edge in greatness on Federer at Wimbledon since he won 7 in 8 years, as opposed to Federer 7 in 10 years.
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
LIAR! You've said before that you liked Djokovic. Either way, you lose. Agassi isn't even in discussions, he was too inconsistent. Djokovic will likely take over with 2 or 3 more wins. If he wins just 1 more, though, forget it.
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Thanks, that is consistant. Personally I find it hard to choose between them, Wimby and the US Open could go either way in my opinion since they both have things in their favour.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
I agree it would still be debateable. I did not say he would be the undisputed Australian Open GOAT if he wins this coming year. I said he would be my pick as the best Australian Open player if he wins this coming year. I know there would still be some picking Agassi or Federer, but I imagine there would be alot picking Djokovic. Then if he wins his 5th it would be undisputable IMO. Not what Prisoner of Birth was saying which is that he would have to win a 5th just to make it debateable and a 6th to make it undisputable, LOL!
It pains me to say this too as right now Agassi and Federer are neck and neck, and while it is known I am not a Federer fan, I am a big Agassi fan, and for that reason alone I would hate to see Djokovic eclipse both and take Agassi out of his only possible GOAT claim, but I still think that is how most will perceive Djokovic if he wins the upcoming Australian Open, the Aussie Open GOAT.
So
So by that definition it is possible that Djokovic hasn't reached his peak yet?
So by that definition it is possible that Djokovic hasn't reached his peak yet?
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Possible but improbable, given the trajectory of his career and the incredible level of his currently-presumed peak.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
BTW a player can definitely have multiple peaks:
Agassi- 1990/early 1991, late 1994/1995, 1999/early 2000, 2001. Agassi is the poster boy for that.
Graf- 87-89, mid 92, late 93/early 94, 95/96
Navratilova- late 77/early 78, 79/early 1980, 1982-1986, 1989
McEnroe- 1980/1981, 1984
Connors- 1974-1976, 1982-1983
Agassi- 1990/early 1991, late 1994/1995, 1999/early 2000, 2001. Agassi is the poster boy for that.
Graf- 87-89, mid 92, late 93/early 94, 95/96
Navratilova- late 77/early 78, 79/early 1980, 1982-1986, 1989
McEnroe- 1980/1981, 1984
Connors- 1974-1976, 1982-1983
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
I agree with you here, and yes 5 titles beats 4, it's simple maths :lol:
This does confuse me though-
I will be happy if he doesnt too since I am also an Agassi fan. I am a Djokovic fan too, but an even bigger Agassi fan, and anyway the only small hope of Nadal passing Federer's total is if Djokovic surprisingly didnt even reach 8.
eh? Not suggesting that you are biased, because although I think sometimes you are a bit, everyone is biased a bit (myself included) and you at least are reasonable and put thought into things, unlike a lot of people. But that confused the hell out of me :lol:
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
I admit I like him a bit less now than I used to. I am a Nadal fan and I am becoming a Murray fan surprisingly and he is the one who keeps beating them both which I admit doesnt endear me to him, the same reason alot of Federer fans dislike Nadal whether they will admit ir or not. I also find he has gotten alot more cocky since becoming #1. Before I was a mild fan, now I am neutral at best, so I guess I do still like him more than Federer, but alot less than Agassi.
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Agassi's peak was 1995. Graf 1988. Connors 1974. McEnroe 1984. Peaks can't be multiple, come on.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
Graf was equally good in 95/96 as 1988/1989. I honestly cant pick which she was better in. Connors's best results were in 1974 but it isnt at all clear that was his best tennis, the field was alot weaker that year then others he played great tennis in. Some would say his best tennis was 76-78, some would even argue 82. Agassi's best results by far were 99/early 2000, but some argue his best tennis was 1995, probably tennis wise alone it is a toss up. He as more agressive and hit more winners in 1995, and more fit and tactically aware in 1999. McEnroe in 1984 was probably better than 1981, but in 1981 everyone would have said that was his peak tennis, especialy by the time 1983 came around, and he showed otherwise.
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Like I said, it's possible Djokovic's peak is still to come. But I have a hard time envisioning it. And everyone has to admit it's unlikely.
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
You could debate on when a player had his prime, that's sorta subjective, but a player has only one peak. Prime could be divided, though. Nadal is a great example for this, and so is Agassi.
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
I wouldn't be surprised if Djokovic wins 3 GS next year, Murray looks like the only real threat.
Clarky21
Banned
I agree,but 3 is the minimum he will win. He could even win them all considering there's no one to challenge him in the slightest.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
For a player who dominates various times at their career I consider them as having more than one peak. That is why I consider Graf at her peak in 88-89, 95-96, and even 93-early 94 all. Selestards take it even further as they argue her peak was 1991-1992 but Graf was better in 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996 than 91-92 so obviously according to them Graf had a 10 year peak, LOL! Her prime years go beyond even that as 87-96 could all be considered her prime, but obviously not all her peak.
She is just one example but I think of a player who totally dominates for various broken and sometimes widely spaced periods over a long time span as having more than one peak.
Agassi unlike Graf never truly dominated but the periods he was his mostly successful, at the very least 1995 and 1999/early 2000 would have to both be his peak IMO. However periods he was also contending and sometimes winning slams aside from those would have to be his prime years also.
President
Legend
What? Nadal will definitely beat him at RG, and there's others who could as well (i.e. Federer, Ferrer, even Murray considering their Rome match). IMO Djokovic was pretty fortunate to win Wimbledon in 2011, all of the rest of the top 4 are better grass court players than he is. US Open again Federer is very capable of beating him, and Murray as well obviously. Even Nadal has a great shot, and then there's always Soderling/Berdych/Tsonga. Australia is the only major where he is a clear favorite.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
Isnt Berydch 1-9 vs Djokovic now. Soderling is basically retired it seems. Tsonga hasnt beaten Djokovic in years.
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
Murray is better grass courter, but in AO and USO Djokovic is the favourite, and RG is ????? depends on Nadal...
Clarky21
Banned
Is Nadal even coming back? He has been MIA for 4 months now,and hasn't even been practicing. He's not beating ******* at RG,or anywhere for that matter.
I really don't see any of those guys you listed beating ******* anywhere. He is unbeatable,and with no competition,he is going to mop up slam after slam for years to come.
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
I agree, btwTsonga have a 6 consecutive losses against Djokovic.
Clarky21
Banned
Nadal is also a better grasscourter but that didn't stop ******* from beating him at Wimby. He is definitely the favorite to win all the slams next year regardless of the surface.
Clarky21
Banned
President
Legend
If he is unbeatable, then why did he only win 1 major this year (and came very close to losing twice in Australia to boot, "should have" lost both matches, in my opinion)
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Oops, I meant to say that you can debate on when a player had his peak, not prime. Anyway, both peak and prime are debatable. I just always believed a player only has 1 peak, even if it's better than the other high by just 0.0000000001%.
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
Clarky21
Banned
If he is unbeatable, then why did he only win 1 major this year (and came very close to losing twice in Australia to boot, "should have" lost both matches, in my opinion)
He's unbeatable because he's the best hardcourter playing right now on a tour dominated by hardcourts. He is also the best claycourter playing right now as well,so he's also got RG locked down too. The only slam he might not win is Wimby,but he is still the favorite there as well.
Last edited:
Clarky21
Banned
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
I hope you're right!
She's wrong. Don't get your hopes up. Djokovic is gonna be the most successful player of the top 4 from here on out but he has a snowball's chance in hell of winning all 4 Slams next year.
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Yeah, that's why he won 4 Slams this year! Oh, wait...
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
LOL Djokovic has a better chance next year for true GS than Federer in 2006 and 2007
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
That's not saying much considering Federer didn't win all 4 in either 2006 or 2007.
But I can say with a straight face that Djokovic only has a slightly better chance at getting to Federer's 17 Slam count than I do ;-)
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
He had as good a shot this year as he's going to have next year, and look what happened.
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
Djokovic has a much better chance vs Nadal on clay than Federer, and Nadal is also injured.
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Joseph L. Barrow
Professional
These are the time-spans in which players who have won over five Grand Slams in the Open Era have collected those titles:
Connors:1974-1983.
Borg: 1974-1981.
McEnroe: 1979-1984.
Lendl: 1984-1990
Vilander: 1982-1988
Edberg: 1985-1992
Becker: 1985-1996
Agassi: 1992-2003
Sampras: 1990-2002
This averages out to around an eight-or-nine-year span. Djokovic won his first Major title just under five years ago, and now holds five of them. Supposing, then, that he has four remaining years in which to win more, and continues to average about one per year, then he should wind up with four additional titles, or about nine total. Of course, things cannot be expected to perfectly follow this script, but I think anywhere from three to five more Major titles for Djokovic is a reasonable projection.
Connors:1974-1983.
Borg: 1974-1981.
McEnroe: 1979-1984.
Lendl: 1984-1990
Vilander: 1982-1988
Edberg: 1985-1992
Becker: 1985-1996
Agassi: 1992-2003
Sampras: 1990-2002
This averages out to around an eight-or-nine-year span. Djokovic won his first Major title just under five years ago, and now holds five of them. Supposing, then, that he has four remaining years in which to win more, and continues to average about one per year, then he should wind up with four additional titles, or about nine total. Of course, things cannot be expected to perfectly follow this script, but I think anywhere from three to five more Major titles for Djokovic is a reasonable projection.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
The problem here is that Djokovic had a tough enough time winning one slam last year. He was 4 MP's down against Tsonga at RG of all places. (I know the crowd may have helped, but still it's by far Tsonga's worst surface). He also went 5 sets with Seppi there, and that's without even mentioning Nadal. He could've lost both the SF and the Final at the AO, he's never been great on grass, and he lost to Murray at the USO, and generally seemed to have infinitely more trouble adapting to the wind than Ferrer or Murray did.
Last edited:
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
Keep telling yourself that. Maybe it'll help you sleep at night
I'm ok man, but many Fed loverboys would have a nightmares if some player won GS!
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
Would you have nightmares if Federer won all 4 Grand Slams next year?
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
No of course, i'm just a casual fan of many players, Fed is not one them, true, but i have a respect for him! I don't hate any player, i don't like Berdych for example but i'm ok if he wins all big 4! Many ****s will probably stop watching tennis when Federer retires!
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
It's the same with me. I don't mind Djokovic winning all 4 next year. I don't mind anyone winning all 4 next year. I like most players and dislike very few (probably none from the ATP). But just because I don't mind something doesn't mean I should believe it'll happen. Only the delusional will think it's likely. It's possible, yes, but extremely unlikely.
Gonzo_style
Hall of Fame
Then explain to me why you so vigorously saying that Djokovic has no chance for this, there is no chance for that? Why? And 95% your threads and posts are based on Federer, for example this thread and Nadal GS thread, you want to see do they have a chance to surpass Federer 17?
Clarky21
Banned
President
Legend
I would be, no player since 1969 has won the Grand Slam for a reason. Djokovic isn't even close to dominant enough to win it next season barring a return to 2011 form (which looks unlikely). The other top 3 are fully capable of beating him, and they proved it this year.
Prisoner of Birth
Banned
I would just as vigorously argue that Federer won't get to 21 Grand Slams. It's what I believe.
As to why I discuss Federer so much, that's because he's my favorite player. And I love statistics, comparisons and arguments. That's why I'm here
And there's nothing more interesting than projecting Grand Slam totals of players as far as statistics and discussions go.Nadal has a decent chance, even now, of going past Federer. Maybe 15-20%. Djokovic, maybe 3-4%.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
