If Thiem ends up winning Roland Garros 2 or 3 times (after Rafa retires from tennis obviously) he'll be rated higher than Djokovic/Federer on clay

[Deleted member 763691]

Seems unfair, but titles are titles, and Thiem may end up with more Roland Garros titles and therefore will supersede Federer/Djokovic in the all-time clay rankings
I guess its like in basketball when people say Charles Barkley and Karl Malone never won championships, they automatically aren't in the class of Tim Duncan, just because they never beat Michael Jordan.

 

[hipolymer]

no one cares about clay bruh. just stop talking about it as if anyone does

 

[Lleytonstation]

Seems unfair, but titles are titles, and Thiem may end up with more Roland Garros titles and therefore will supersede Federer/Djokovic in the all-time clay rankings
I guess its like in basketball when people say Charles Barkley and Karl Malone never won championships, they automatically aren't in the class of Tim Duncan, just because they never beat Michael Jordan.

Tim Duncan is on another level then Malone and Barkley without a doubt.

 

[Deleted member 763691]

Tim Duncan is on another level then Malone and Barkley without a doubt.

Duncan is the better defensive player, but other than that I'd take Malone and Barkley
Duncan = 19.0 points, 10.8 rebounds, 3.0 assists
Malone = 25. 0 points, 10.1 rebounds, 3.6 assists
Barkley = 22.1 points, 11.7 rebounds, 3.9 assists

no one cares about clay bruh. just stop talking about it as if anyone does

Clay and Grass are the only real surfaces.
Hardly any sports are played on concrete, and eventually tennis won't be either, it causes injuries....
And the 5th slam will probably be on South American Clay.

 

[ibbi]

Well, it'd be easy to say "Not for anyone with a brain" because applying context is more important than simply counting titles for anybody with a lick of sense, but why be so dismissive? We don't know how good Thiem could be on the surface, who he would beat en route to those titles. He might grow into something really special.

 

[Deleted member 763691]

Well, it'd be easy to say "Not for anyone with a brain" because applying context is more important than simply counting titles for anybody with a lick of sense, but why be so dismissive? We don't know how good Thiem could be on the surface, who he would beat en route to those titles. He might grow into something really special.

Thiem is already better than post-2016 Djokovic, so I know he's special, but he'll never face what Djokovic/Federer faced - peak/prime Rafa - so we'll never know exactly where Thiem stands......but I know how the media and analysts work, and they'll put Thiem above Djokovic/Federer (on clay) if he wins more Roland Garros titles than they did

 

[Sephiroth]

Thiem is already better than post-2016 Djokovic

At French Open, definitely had the better results but not clay overall. Djokovic won a clay Master post 2016. Thiem's yet to win as big or bigger clay title.

 

[Phoenix1983]

Thiem is already better than post-2016 Djokovic, so I know he's special, but he'll never face what Djokovic/Federer faced - peak/prime Rafa - so we'll never know exactly where Thiem stands......but I know how the media and analysts work, and they'll put Thiem above Djokovic/Federer (on clay) if he wins more Roland Garros titles than they did

That's not definite if he wins, say, 2 titles. I don't think everyone puts the likes of Bruguera and Courier above Federer and Novak Djokovic on clay.

If he gets to 3 titles and joins Lendl/Wilander/Kuerten, then yes, probably the majority will.

 

[Bukmeikara]

Do you really believe that Nadal in 2018-2019 is somehow worse than the one in 2005-2006? The things he lost in his physical decline, he replaced with experience and evolution of his game. If Thiem enda up beating Nadal, he deserve his credit.

Not to mention that you hold against Thiem the fact that he was kid and couldnt meet younger Nadal. Both Djokovic and Federer did and they " failed " but somehow this in their plus ?
You know 100% that they cant bet Nadal.

 

[JasonZ]

Do you really believe that Nadal in 2018-2019 is somehow worse than the one in 2005-2006? The things he lost in his physical decline, he replaced with experience and evolution of his game. If Thiem enda up beating Nadal, he deserve his credit.

Not to mention that you hold against Thiem the fact that he was kid and couldnt meet younger Nadal. Both Djokovic and Federer did and they " failed " but somehow this in their plus ?
You know 100% that they cant bet Nadal.

You can’t replace physical abilities with experience. Nadal of 2006 would destroy todays Nadal, 2005 Nadal would also win.

I think Federer of 2005, 2006, 2007 would have won today against Nadal, too.

Nadal speed and movement is still good, but nowhere near his prime. This is not replaceble. It is just that there is no peak Fed or peak Davydenko to take advantage of it. Maybe Djokovic can if he wins against Thiem, but he is also not the player he was, though his decline is much lesser

 

[Sartorius]

Seems unfair, but titles are titles, and Thiem may end up with more Roland Garros titles and therefore will supersede Federer/Djokovic in the all-time clay rankings
I guess its like in basketball when people say Charles Barkley and Karl Malone never won championships, they automatically aren't in the class of Tim Duncan, just because they never beat Michael Jordan.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Tim should win 1 first before we crown him anything.