How many other ATG candidates have a 3-6 Finals record at a slam on a surface they are supposed to be GOAT of?

pretty sure you have Federer at #3-4 for Wimbledon GOAT despite his records there, so I'm not sure I'm gonna take anything you say seriously.
Not neccessarily, but overall grass, I guess you could argue people like Laver, Tilden, and 1 or 2 others over Federer and the ones behind Federer (Djokovic, Borg, Sampras) on grass based on total achievements BUT it isn't really fair or accurate to do that with people who had 3 majors and a ton more tournaments on grass. So there is an argument, only if you are then willing to put Djokovic down as low as about 8th on grass per the same logic. And somehow I am doubting said person has Djokovic at about 8th on grass, so they are obviously not using this logic that could legitimately put Federer 3-4. Personally I don't go by that logic for the exact reasoning I said and probably have Federer at #1 on grass, and Djokovic probably top 5 (with capacity to climb even more of course) despite benefiting heavily from rye grass.

It is like how most regard Navratilova the grass GOAT due to Wimbledon, even if in total grass achievements vs eras with more grass play, she wouldn't be.
 
AO has been fast since 2017 and Novak has won three in a row there.
Yes, he has. The question is: If we split HC into Fast and Slow (even with the caveat you point out), or maybe between USO and AO, then Djokovic is only AO GOAT, which becomes a problem. But if you don't, then you have to acknowledge the fact that a 3-6 record at a HC slam finals is really bad. So it is a catch-22 kind of thing, isn't it?

I am trying to bring this to the logical conclusion that if a 3-6 record at the most important HC event in the calendar is not detrimental for Djokovic, then having "only" 7 slam outside clay shouldn't be detrimental for Nadal either.

There are many sound logical arguments you can build, and you can also build many of them based on contradictions like this.
 
This is something Djokovic gets too much crap for because reaching 9 US Open finals is a pretty remarkable achievement regardless of the conversion rate. It demonstrates his superb consistency at that event.

The real mark against him is that his level at the US Open very rarely hit the heights of his AO triumphs. I mean, you can find classic Djokovic HC masterclasses in the 2008, 2011, 2013, 2016, and 2019 editions of the AO. I’m probably missing a few more hidden gems. You don’t see that kind of peak-level hard court display in many of his US Open runs, do you?

In 2011, he was great all around but he never reached unstoppable heights. A Fed who wasn’t at or even particularly close to his best held match points against him, and we all know his serve was quite off in the final. He was even suffering from an injury in the fourth set but Nadal couldn’t capitalize.

In 2015, outside of the Cilic match, he was never really at his best. Even in the final against Federer he played worse than in the 2011 semifinals.

He looked pretty good in 2018 but that was probably his weakest Slam win in terms of the draw so it’s difficult to gauge just how good he was (in a similar fashion to Fed’s Wimbledon 2017 run the previous year).

No, I think the absolute best Djokovic has played at the US Open was in the 2012 tournament before the final. Some really shocking stuff from him, particularly in the Del Potro beatdown. But that hot streak was in (perhaps not even) one tournament.

I think Djokovic’s consistency at the US Open deserves some high praise, but I haven’t been as impressed by his peak level there compared to the AO.
But Nadal has achieved 4 Finals at the AO (and has had some rotten luck there), and also has an additional 3 Wimbledon Finals. This at slams on surfaces which are not his best. So, why not take these things into account?
 
Only 2 titles at the most important event overall is really bad.
Nadal actually has beaten Prime Fed there, which Novak has never done. Call me biased, but Nadal's 2008 Wimbledon title is the best and most memorable one in at least 15 years, and due to its significance I am not the only person to think so. In other words, when they make a movie about any of the Wimbledon finals where Djokovic has beaten an old or mentally unsound Fed, wake me up.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
Yes, he has. The question is: If we split HC into Fast and Slow (even with the caveat you point out), or maybe between USO and AO, then Djokovic is only AO GOAT, which becomes a problem. But if you don't, then you have to acknowledge the fact that a 3-6 record at a HC slam finals is really bad. So it is a catch-22 kind of thing, isn't it?

I am trying to bring this to the logical conclusion that if a 3-6 record at the most important HC event in the calendar is not detrimental for Djokovic, then having "only" 7 slam outside clay shouldn't be detrimental for Nadal either.

There are many sound logical arguments you can build, and you can also build many of them based on contradictions like this.
GOAT of a surface is about owning the numbers on that surface. No one is saying Djokovic is the GOAT of USO, but for the surface you need to take the whole body of work....there is no other player on that surface who is the GOAT of any slam, the only one who is, is Djokovic and he is top 6 at USO. Federer and Sampras don't even own the record outright there and they both fall far too short behind Novak at AO.

He has 12 HC slams in his pocket, that is the real number. Show me one person who has more HC slams in their trophy cabinet than Djokovic and I will pick him, please go ahead.
 

Nole Slam

G.O.A.T.
Nadal actually has beaten Prime Fed there, which Novak has never done. Call me biased, but Nadal's 2008 Wimbledon title is the best and most memorable one in at least 15 years, and due to its significance I am not the only person to think so. In other words, when they make a movie about any of the Wimbledon finals where Djokovic has beaten an old or mentally unsound Fed, wake me up.
8>6>2

Wimbledon is the biggest event in tennis and Nadal couldn't win more than 2 titles there. Lost to journeymen left and right.
 

Fedeonic

Hall of Fame
On the thread theme, I don't know how good was Chris Evert on Wimbledon grass, but 3-7 is atrocious for someone of her stature. In her defence, several of those finals were to Martina, one with Goolagong, another with still peak Court.
 
Only 2 titles at the most important event overall is really bad.
Well Seles has 0 there, and would be lucky to have 1 there even without getting stabbed, and her fan(atics) still insist she is the real and hands down GOAT, LOL! And this in the far less competitive womens game where all the real GOATs basically have 3 or more majors at every slam.
 

Nole Slam

G.O.A.T.
Well Seles has 0 there, and would be lucky to have 1 there even without getting stabbed, and her fan(atics) still insist she is the real and hands down GOAT, LOL! And this in the far less competitive womens game where all the real GOATs basically have 3 or more majors at every slam.
I'm only responding to the most important HC event garbage.
 
On the thread theme, I don't know how good was Chris Evert on Wimbledon grass, but 3-7 is atrocious for someone of her stature. In her defence, several of those finals were to Martina, one with Goolagong, another with still peak Court.
No Chris never lost to Court at Wimbledon. She lost to arguably still peak King at Wimbledon 73 in the finals. And losing to a past her prime Goolagong in 80, while not terrible, is not a great loss either.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
Well Seles has 0 there, and would be lucky to have 1 there even without getting stabbed, and her fan(atics) still insist she is the real and hands down GOAT, LOL! And this in the far less competitive womens game where all the real GOATs basically have 3 or more majors at every slam.
If Martinez could win Wimbledon, then Seles could have pulled out a win there also.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
If Ovrebo and the referees in all Arsenal and Real Madrid matches weren't blatantly supporting Barcelona, United would have won the Champions League in 2009 and 2011.
Chelsea-Barcelona 2009 was comedy though never seen so many bad ref decisions.
 
If Martinez could win Wimbledon, then Seles could have pulled out a win there also.
I know, which is why I said 1 was possible. 2 Wimbledon titles and 5 Wimbledon finals in the mens game > Seles's likely Wimbledon record even without the stabbing, and that in the far less competitive womens game. I agree Nadal's Wimbledon record really isn't good enough to be GOAT, emphasizing my point ever more.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
I know, which is why I said 1 was possible. 2 Wimbledon titles and 5 Wimbledon finals in the mens game > Seles's likely Wimbledon record even without the stabbing, and that in the far less competitive womens game. I agree Nadal's Wimbledon record really isn't good enough to be GOAT, emphasizing my point ever more.
Nadal is still an ATG at Wimbledon though for winning it twice and making five finals overall IMO. Just a few tiers down from Fedovic.
 

Kralingen

Legend
Well Seles has 0 there, and would be lucky to have 1 there even without getting stabbed, and her fan(atics) still insist she is the real and hands down GOAT, LOL! And this in the far less competitive womens game where all the real GOATs basically have 3 or more majors at every slam.
I mean what’s so bad about admitting that the stabbing irreversibly derailed one of the greatest young careers in tennis history?

Forget what happened post stabbing she had 8 Slams at the age of 19. Is that not at least someone who possibly could have been GOAT?
 
I mean what’s so bad about admitting that the stabbing irreversibly derailed one of the greatest young careers in tennis history?

Forget what happened post stabbing she had 8 Slams at the age of 19. Is that not at least someone who possibly could have been GOAT?
Considering it is someone who as I said would have been lucky to win Wimbledon even once in far the far less competitive womens game, even without the stabbing, and the importance being designated to Wimbledon (which I fully agree with) in this very thread when discussing Nadal's almost non existing GOAT arguments based on a too weak Wimbledon record, that still would have been far superior to what Seles ever would have done there. No, virtually no chance of being the GOAT.
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
I mean what’s so bad about admitting that the stabbing irreversibly derailed one of the greatest young careers in tennis history?

Forget what happened post stabbing she had 8 Slams at the age of 19. Is that not at least someone who possibly could have been GOAT?
There is no guarantee that she would have continued to have the same success, had she not been stabbed though.As we have seen in tennis so many times, things can change quickly.
 

Rosstour

Legend
Not neccessarily, but overall grass, I guess you could argue people like Laver, Tilden, and 1 or 2 others over Federer and the ones behind Federer (Djokovic, Borg, Sampras) on grass based on total achievements BUT it isn't really fair or accurate to do that with people who had 3 majors and a ton more tournaments on grass.
i think guys like Spencer Gore and 90s Clay would put Djokovic, Borg and Sampras all comfortably above Federer on grass.

If you follow the herd here, Federer is at best the fifth-best grass-court/Wimbledon player in history.
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
Reaching 9 finals should be in Djoker's favor, not something to trash him about. That means that he was always going deep in tourneys and earning tons of cash and points instead of losing to scrubs early while earning much less cash. I'd treat a slam final loss as 1/2 slam title. Why? It pays half and it's also worth about half the points of a slam title(slightly more than half, actually). This all or nothing garbage makes no sense. I've played in several tourneys(racquetball). Making it to the final 4 was always a huge goal in a field of 64. It's far better than going home early.

Meet Bret "The Hitman" Hart. He went to 25 straight USO finals. Unfortunately, he only won 10 of them. So is Bret a scrub now for going 10-15 in finals? Absolutely not.

Djoker has been a stone-cold killer at the USO. He's had worse luck with draws there, unfortunately.
 

Rosstour

Legend
He has 12 HC slams in his pocket, that is the real number. Show me one person who has more HC slams in their trophy cabinet than Djokovic and I will pick him, please go ahead.
Fed has 11. Is that really such a huge difference?
 

Nole Slam

G.O.A.T.
Reaching 9 finals should be in Djoker's favor, not something to trash him about. That means that he was always going deep in tourneys and earning tons of cash and points instead of losing to scrubs early while earning much less cash. I'd treat a slam final loss as 1/2 slam title. Why? It pays half and it's also worth about half the points of a slam title(slightly more than half, actually). This all or nothing garbage makes no sense. I've played in several tourneys(racquetball). Making it to the final 4 was always a huge goal in a field of 64. It's far better than going home early.

Meet Bret "The Hitman" Hart. He went to 25 straight USO finals. Unfortunately, he only won 10 of them. So is Bret a scrub now for going 10-15 in finals? Absolutely not.

Djoker has been a stone-cold killer at the USO. He's had worse luck with draws there, unfortunately.
ATG poster.
 

Kralingen

Legend
Reaching 9 finals should be in Djoker's favor, not something to trash him about. That means that he was always going deep in tourneys and earning tons of cash and points instead of losing to scrubs early while earning much less cash. I'd treat a slam final loss as 1/2 slam title. Why? It pays half and it's also worth about half the points of a slam title(slightly more than half, actually). This all or nothing garbage makes no sense. I've played in several tourneys(racquetball). Making it to the final 4 was always a huge goal in a field of 64. It's far better than going home early.

Meet Bret "The Hitman" Hart. He went to 25 straight USO finals. Unfortunately, he only won 10 of them. So is Bret a scrub now for going 10-15 in finals? Absolutely not.

Djoker has been a stone-cold killer at the USO. He's had worse luck with draws there, unfortunately.
Why this logic doesn’t work with NBA or tennis fans I will never understand. Falls on deaf ears so much of the time.
 

Kralingen

Legend
Considering it is someone who as I said would have been lucky to win Wimbledon even once in far the far less competitive womens game, even without the stabbing, and the importance being designated to Wimbledon (which I fully agree with) in this very thread when discussing Nadal's almost non existing GOAT arguments based on a too weak Wimbledon record, that still would have been far superior to what Seles ever would have done there. No, virtually no chance of being the GOAT.
8 slams at age 19. No chance of being GOAT.

Roflmao. Not even a slight chance? No chance whatsoever?
 

ffw2

Professional
Every other post of his it is centered on diminishing Federer's greatness so you can't expect anything good.
I've examined this phenomenon in depth here!

More than once, in fact!

Threads long-since smoked, I believe.

Here's the thing tho: Is the user that you're referencing a dying breed? Or will the pattern continue ad infinitum? :unsure:
 
GOAT of a surface is about owning the numbers on that surface. No one is saying Djokovic is the GOAT of USO, but for the surface you need to take the whole body of work....there is no other player on that surface who is the GOAT of any slam, the only one who is, is Djokovic and he is top 6 at USO. Federer and Sampras don't even own the record outright there and they both fall far too short behind Novak at AO.

He has 12 HC slams in his pocket, that is the real number. Show me one person who has more HC slams in their trophy cabinet than Djokovic and I will pick him, please go ahead.
So GOAT of a surface is about not distinguishing between USO and AO. But tennis GOAT overall has to distinighish where each one achieved their slams? Why isn't Nadal's otherworldly superiority at the French Open, and his ATG career outside, including having a superior record (and H2H) to Djokovic at the USO considered as a GOAT effort then? I'm trying to look at all this from a logical point of view. If you discriminate between USO and AO it looks bad for Djokovic, and if you discriminate between clay and non-clay it looks bad for Nadal (kind of, I actually don't agree). Why not just look at a slam as a slam? I am not claiming Nadal is grass or HC GOAT, but that shouldn't affect his overal GOAT claims. To me this doesn't compute (and I have an eminently logical mind, despite having been submited to Sunny's drivel in the past few days).

Why count surfaces instead of slams? And if you count surfaces, why not distinguish betwen USO and AO? I mean, I get the surface argument for Sampras' case, but I don't see it working for Nadal, since he has an ATG career outside clay alone.
 
8>6>2

Wimbledon is the biggest event in tennis and Nadal couldn't win more than 2 titles there. Lost to journeymen left and right.
Yes, and that can very easily be explained because the guy wipes out the clay season just before. That being said, his 2008 title is the best of those 16 titles you claim. You can kill 6 of your adversary's pawns, but the guy who wins is the one who takes the king.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
So GOAT of a surface is about not distinguishing between USO and AO. But tennis GOAT overall has to distinighish where each one achieved their slams? Why isn't Nadal's otherworldly superiority at the French Open, and his ATG career outside, including having a superior record (and H2H) to Djokovic at the USO considered as a GOAT effort then? I'm trying to look at all this from a logical point of view. If you discriminate between USO and AO it looks bad for Djokovic, and if you discriminate between clay and non-clay it looks bad for Nadal (kind of, I actually don't agree). Why not just look at a slam as a slam? I am not claiming Nadal is grass or HC GOAT, but that shouldn't affect his overal GOAT claims. To me this doesn't compute (and I have an eminently logical mind, despite having been submited to Sunny's drivel in the past few days).

Why count surfaces instead of slams? And if you count surfaces, why not distinguish betwen USO and AO? I mean, I get the surface argument for Sampras' case, but I don't see it working for Nadal, since he has an ATG career outside clay alone.

Tell me this, if someone wins all their slams on one surface, and the other person wins all their slams across all surfaces, but they have the same amount of slams, who is the GOAT for you?
 
Tell me this, if someone wins all their slams on one surface, and the other person wins all their slams across all surfaces, but they have the same amount of slams, who is the GOAT for you?
This is not what has happened, though. Nadal is undisputed GOAT on clay, and has an ATG career outside clay. Djokovic has a GOAT-like career on HC and close to it in grass, and a good career on clay. Nadal's record at the USO vs Djokovic is better than Djokovic's record against Nadal in RG. Basically, Nadal leads in 2 slams, despite HC not being his best surface and competing against two GOAT candidates there. Context is everything.
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
This is not what has happened, though. Nadal is undisputed GOAT on clay, and has an ATG career outside clay. Djokovic has a GOAT-like career on HC and close to it in grass, and a good career on clay. Nadal's record at the USO vs Djokovic is better than Djokovic's record against Nadal in RG. Basically, Nadal leads in 2 slams, despite HC not being his best surface and competing against two GOAT candidates there. Context is everything.
I am asking you a question. Can you answer it please.

If one person won all his slam at a specific slam and the other won them at all four slams, but they have the same amount of slams, can you tell me who you see as greater? Or are they dead even because all slams are the same essentially?
 
I am asking you a question. Can you answer it please.

If one person won all his slam at a specific slam and the other won them at all four slams, but they have the same amount of slams, can you tell me who you see as greater? Or are they dead even because all slams are the same essentially?
No, the person with the more balanced count would be better, under the same conditions. The problem for Nadal is that he was competing against 2 HC GOATs, Wimbledon is right after the grueling and extended clay season, etc. That's why I say context is everything.
 
@Hitman but if you look at imbalance with a critical eye, then you must look at all imbalances equally critically. Djokovic's imbalance between AO and USO performance is really puzzling and concerning, and it falls outside normal statistical probabilities. What are your thoughts on the reason for that?
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
No, the person with the more balanced count would be better, under the same conditions. The problem for Nadal is that he was competing against 2 HC GOATs, Wimbledon is right after the grueling and extended clay season, etc. That's why I say context is everything.
So your statement that all slams are equal then breaks down here is what you are saying.

You see beyond you going against your own words in this scenario shows that the statement - All slams are equal - cannot hold up all the time.


So what happens here is, we have a sliding level of subjectivity, where our subjective views will decide where and when that statement begins to show validity again. For you it is at a different point to where it is for @Sunny014. You're both starting off at the same point, but for you the statement starts to look valid after a specific amount of things have happened, while for him it will start to look valid after different amount of things have happened.

I know all about context, believe me, if you have read my posts, you know how I deliver my arguments, but the point I am making is this, this statement of all slams being equal doesn't hold true all the time, as you yourself go against it after the question I posed to you, the difference is, as we shift away from that extreme, where exactly is your head once again above sea level....

Nadal of course has an argument to being GOAT, heck I can say so does Sampras, and Laver and even Borg, but as you can see, where we perceive to put weight on achievements depends on our personal subjective view points. Yours is clearly different from Sunny's. :)
 

Hitman

G.O.A.T.
@Hitman but if you look at imbalance with a critical eye, then you must look at all imbalances equally critically. Djokovic's imbalance between AO and USO performance is really puzzling and concerning, and it falls outside normal statistical probabilities. What are your thoughts on the reason for that?
Djokovic's insanely God like level at AO is what makes it look even more weighted than it actually is. Yes, Djokovic has 3 USO and 6 finals, but tell me this, do we hold Federer's inability to beat Djokovic in a Wimbledon final as a mark against him, or do we reward him by saying he is at least making the final, if he cannot win it....or do we say no, Pete is greater at Wimbledon because he never lost a final and win percentage is 100%?

Novak has lost a lot of USO finals, but would losing a couple of quarter finals make him look more of a HC GOAT? I personally don't think so, even with his underpeforming, he is still around 6th in the open era there, and outright dominant first place at AO.
 

PilotPete

Hall of Fame
Fed is the true HC GOAT. Djokovic only has more achievements there because of the weakest era in history, Thiem AO2020, Delpo even getting to the final at USO18, pathetic.
 

Spencer Gore

Hall of Fame
And somehow I am doubting said person has Djokovic at about 8th on grass, so they are obviously not using this logic that could legitimately put Federer 3-4. Personally I don't go by that logic for the exact reasoning I said and probably have Federer at #1 on grass, and Djokovic probably top 5 (with capacity to climb even more of course) despite benefiting heavily from rye grass.
Grass Slam Record

1=Tilden -10 slams
1= Emerson -10 slams
3 Laver -9 slams
4 Federer -8 slams
5 =Perry -7 slams
5 =Newcombe -7 slams
5 =Sampras -7 slams
7 Rosewall -6 slams
7=Djokovic -6 slams
9 Borg -5 slams
10 Connors -4 slams
 
Top