If/when Federer is overtaken in slams, will he still be the GOAT?

Will he or not?

  • yes

    Votes: 35 27.6%
  • no

    Votes: 53 41.7%
  • it depends

    Votes: 39 30.7%

  • Total voters
    127
It depends on what you mean by target. if novak gets more ye # 1 and weeks like no1 with all the other records that indicate domination and versatility he will not need 20 slams to be GOAT.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Lol at @lucky13 saying Nole peak dominance is greater than Federer.:-D:laughing:

Hard court winning streak
Federer - 56,36
Djokovic - 35

Grass winning streak
Federer - 65, 20
Djokovic - 16

Consecutive weeks at #1
Federer - 237
Djokovic - 122

Consecutive slam finals
Federer - 10, 8
Djokovic - 6

Consecutive slam semifinals
Federer - 23
Djokovic - 14

Winning streak vs. top ten
Federer - 24
Djokovic - 17
 
Lol at @lucky13 saying Nole peak dominance is greater than Federer.:-D:laughing:
Hard court winning streak
Federer - 56,36
Djokovic - 35

who cares about such streaks. about players who cannot dominate the whole tour and all surfaces. the biggest winings streak of the two has nole, 43! and GS matches streak, nole 30, 27 vs fed 27, 27!

Grass winning streak
Federer - 65, 20
Djokovic - 16

Look up!

Consecutive weeks at #1
Federer - 237
Djokovic - 122

without big4. nole still has the best year and season as well as points record.

Consecutive slam finals
Federer - 10, 8
Djokovic - 6

who cares about finals. you are not very dominant if you lose finals! only wins are counted!
nole 4, 3, 3? vs fed 3, 3, 2



Consecutive slam semifinals
Federer - 23
Djokovic - 14

look up +little bonus:
tournaments streaks
nole 7 + dc finals, 7 vs fed 7



Winning streak vs. top ten
Federer - 24
Djokovic - 17

feds streak was before big4 but:
W-L % vs top10:
nole 68,8% vs fed 65,2%, quite a big difference!!
 
Last edited:

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Hard court winning streak
Federer - 56,36
Djokovic - 35

who cares about such streaks. about players who cannot dominate the whole tour and all surfaces. the biggest winings streak of the two has nole, 43! and GS matches streak, nole 30, 27 vs fed 27, 27!

Grass winning streak
Federer - 65, 20
Djokovic - 16

Look up!

Consecutive weeks at #1
Federer - 237
Djokovic - 122

without big4. nole still has the best year and season as well as points record.

Consecutive slam finals
Federer - 10, 8
Djokovic - 6

who cares about finals. only wins are counted!
nole 4, 3, 3? vs fed 3, 3, 2



Consecutive slam semifinals
Federer - 23
Djokovic - 14

look up +little bonus:
tournaments streaks
nole 7 + dc finals, 7 vs fed 7



Winning streak vs. top ten
Federer - 24
Djokovic - 17

it was before big4 but:
W-L % vs top10:
nole 68,8% vs fed 65,2%, quite a big difference!!
Nonsense.
Your post is full of excuses and weak to say the least.

Fact is Federer is greater than Nole at peak dominant.
 
I don't think there is though. For one there's different eras so could never really say if Laver played today or Fed played in the 60s who would have done what. Then it depends on who you play, due to matchups the draw makes a big difference. Then there's changing surfaces, Laver played on mainly grass, courts have sped up and slowed down.

So maybe one player would be best in certain conditions and another in other conditions. Maybe no one else could have done the calendar slam when Laver did but he wouldn't be able to win 4 in a row on current conditions like Djokovic did
Well, I'm talking about a hypothetical fantasy world where all the greats had grown up in the same era and played on the same surfaces, with the access to the same training/nutrition etc, and all played against each other regularly, year after year.

One man is bound to come out as GOAT in this scenario.
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
he can just dream about 4 in a row
And he can just dream MANY records that Federer held.:giggle:

and 16,950 points! such dominance!
Ranking has changed. The points distribution of all tournaments was different in 2015 than in the past when Federer was at his peak. You need to adjust and use the same system for comparison.

And even if Nole is ahead in point, that's dwarf in comparison to Federer streaks like 10 consecutive slam finals.
 
And he can just dream MANY records that Federer held.:giggle:


Ranking has changed. The points distribution of all tournaments was different in 2015 than in the past when Federer was at his peak. You need to adjust and use the same system for comparison.

And even if Nole is ahead in point, that's dwarf in comparison to Federer streaks like 10 consecutive slam finals.
Even if you would convert back and forth fed would be far behind 16,950 points. and 10 consecutive finals are **** compared to 4 slams in a row!
 
Well, I'm talking about a hypothetical fantasy world where all the greats had grown up in the same era and played on the same surfaces, with the access to the same training/nutrition etc, and all played against each other regularly, year after year.

One man is bound to come out as GOAT in this scenario.
Youd have to have a really even spread of surfaces though
 
"At peak dominant"?! 25,000+ posts later and still can't write a sentence in proper English :X3:

PS: "Fräulein" is considered offensive.
Worttrennung: Fräu|lein
Als Anrede für eine erwachsene weibliche Person sollte, unabhängig von Alter, Familienstand und Beruf, immer Frau statt Fräulein gewählt werden. Die Anrede Fräulein ist nur noch üblich, wenn die angesprochene Frau diese Bezeichnung selbst wünscht.
  1. (veraltet) kinderlose, ledige [junge] Frau. Abkürzung: Frl.
    1. (veraltet) titelähnliche, auch als Anrede verwendete Bezeichnung für eine unverheiratete weibliche Person. Abkürzung: Frl.
    2. (gehoben veraltend) als Zusatz bei Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen
    3. (umgangssprachlich) kleines Mädchen (oft [scherzhaft] drohend)
  2. (umgangssprachlich veraltet) weibliche Angestellte in einem Dienstleistungsberuf oder im Lehramt (meist als Anrede)
Know your statements.

:cool:
 
Djokovic is the most charismatic guy, most complete player.
Forehand 10/10
Backhand 11/10
Movement 10/10
Speed 9/10
Flexibility 11/10
Defense 11/10
Offense 10/10
Mentality 11/10
Fitness 10/10
Serve 9/10
Return 11/10

And that little extra that he basically invented sliding whilst hitting winners on any court out there..

What did Federer invent? a good looking forehand (Subjective)

Get a grip guys.

Besides one can argue that the best tennis ever played is Nadal in RG.
Where are volleys, slices, and overheads?
 
Don't tell me you side with that idiotic, brainwash-happy rhetoric. The day the French catch on this and declare 'mademoiselle' offensive is the way we are doomed. There are always schitheads looking to be offended at whatever, when this breeds into nationwide culture though, urgh.
From what I have read, the French (aside from the baby boomer generation) have largely abandoned the use of mademoiselle to address adult women. The French government has also banned it from official forms:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...moiselle-banned-on-official-French-forms.html

Worttrennung: Fräu|lein
Als Anrede für eine erwachsene weibliche Person sollte, unabhängig von Alter, Familienstand und Beruf, immer Frau statt Fräulein gewählt werden. Die Anrede Fräulein ist nur noch üblich, wenn die angesprochene Frau diese Bezeichnung selbst wünscht.
  1. (veraltet) kinderlose, ledige [junge] Frau. Abkürzung: Frl.
    1. (veraltet) titelähnliche, auch als Anrede verwendete Bezeichnung für eine unverheiratete weibliche Person. Abkürzung: Frl.
    2. (gehoben veraltend) als Zusatz bei Verwandtschaftsbezeichnungen
    3. (umgangssprachlich) kleines Mädchen (oft [scherzhaft] drohend)
  2. (umgangssprachlich veraltet) weibliche Angestellte in einem Dienstleistungsberuf oder im Lehramt (meist als Anrede)
Know your statements.

:cool:
It says right there to address women as Frau instead of Fräulein unless the woman herself wants it. The nickname was given to Graf by Bud Collins, a distinctively non-German (but more importantly, non-Graf) broadcaster.

Anyway, I was told by a German woman that the term has fallen out of use in Germany due to a push in the '70s and '80s declaring it discriminatory. Perhaps one of the German members here can shed some light on this? I think either @tennis_pro or @tennisaddict is German.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic is the most charismatic guy, most complete player.
Forehand 10/10
Backhand 11/10
Movement 10/10
Speed 9/10
Flexibility 11/10
Defense 11/10
Offense 10/10
Mentality 11/10
Fitness 10/10
Serve 9/10
Return 11/10

And that little extra that he basically invented sliding whilst hitting winners on any court out there..

What did Federer invent? a good looking forehand (Subjective)

Get a grip guys.

Besides one can argue that the best tennis ever played is Nadal in RG.
Chico would be disappointed that you underrated Djokovic. He'd say something like "Unbelievable underrating of Djokovic :mad:."

Sorry to tell you that mate.
 
From what I have read, the French (aside from the baby boomer generation) have largely abandoned the use of mademoiselle to address adult women. The French government has also banned it from official forms:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...moiselle-banned-on-official-French-forms.html


It says right there to address women as Frau instead of Fräulein unless the woman herself wants it. The nickname was given to Graf by Bud Collins, a distinctively non-German broadcaster.

Anyway, I was told by a German woman that the term has fallen out of use in Germany due to a push in the '70s and '80s declaring it discriminatory. Perhaps one of the German members here can shed some light on this? I think either @tennis_pro or @tennisaddict is German.
Fallen out of use is different from being offensive. It is moving to a word that says less about the person, but the word itself hasn't lost its meaning, obviously hasn't lost its application as a "decent" word (as exemplified by the possibility of someone to allow for its usage) as hasn't lost its usage in its other applications (like using it in a playful manner to address little girls in particular situations).

Your contention was that it is offensive, which it isn't, unless you are siding with a particular views aligned with different feminists movements. It is less neutral than "Frau", but that has nothing to do with your contention.

At least that is what the practice shows, and Duden, which is an institution on everything concerning the German language, says.

:cool:
 
Distinguishing by marriage status officially isn't necessary, but erasing the words from generic discourse is language manipulation, how enraging.
Languages evolve, don't they? There are many words in the English language that are considered offensive now, but weren't always this way.

There's also been a similar movement to use Ms. instead of Mrs./Miss in English
Fallen out of use is different from being offensive. It is moving to a word that says less about the person, but the word itself hasn't lost its meaning, obviously hasn't lost its application as a "decent" word (as exemplified by the possibility of someone to allow for its usage) as hasn't lost its usage in its other applications (like using it in a playful manner to address little girls in particular situations).

Your contention was that it is offensive, which it isn't, unless you are siding with a particular views aligned with different feminists movements. It is less neutral than "Frau", but that has nothing to do with your contention.

At least that is what the practice shows, and Duden, which is an institution on everything concerning the German language, says.

:cool:
It's fallen out of use because it was considered discriminatory; to me that is nearly synonymous with it being considered offensive.

Duden's recommendation to steer clear from the word unless explicitly told otherwise also tells me it can be considered offensive
 
Languages evolve, don't they? There are many words in the English language that are considered offensive now, but weren't always this way.
Change, not evolve. Evolution implies improvement. Anyway, I'd rather it happened naturally then at the insistence and pressure of particular groups, because that's manipulative. Also, the less involvement from the local linguistic authority, the better; telling people how to speak/write easily slips into telling them how to think. That's where English leads at least, tons of regional variations allowed and welcome, with the writing standard mostly down to common sense / custom.
[/QUOTE]
 
Languages evolve, don't they? There are many words in the English language that are considered offensive now, but weren't always this way.

There's also been a similar movement to use Ms. instead of Mrs./Miss in English

It's fallen out of use because it was considered discriminatory; to me that is nearly synonymous with it being considered offensive.

Duden's recommendation to steer clear from the word unless explicitly told otherwise also tells me it can be considered offensive
Duden explicitly states when a word is considered offensive/pejorative, so you trying to fit such claim in your original position doesn't work as there is no such reference.

As far as it is known, the moving towards the neutral Frau is more related to the word not be misused based on lack of information (as for example, if a woman looks too young to be married, or too inexperienced to be of certain older age), than that someone feeling offended just based on its original meaning.

Of course, the influence of the modern trends cannot be underestimated, and in the future the word might be classified as offensive, but it isn't now.

You also missed the comment about its myriad of other uses, which are alive and well today, and don't even have much in common with the distinction that is now being made by some feminists (but I admit that that might also change, judging by the rampant madness in certain areas of life).

As for the French, the Mademioselle is also alive in some areas, but it is quickly retreating to make place for the more neutral variant Madame, although it is amusing to me that Madame actually carries more bourgeois meaning than Mademoiselle, yet is officially considered more appropriate.

Am I to understand that you will be the person to write to the company Chanel a protest letter to remove the shameful name Mademoiselle from their perfume line? That would be most appropriate.

:cool:
 
Last edited:
Duden explicitly states when a word is considered offensive/pejortive, so you trying to fit such claim in your original position doesn't work as there is no such reference.

As far as it is known, the moving towards the neutral Frau is more related to the word not be misused based on lack of information (as for example, if a woman looks too young to be married, or too inexperienced to be of certain older age), than that someone feeling offended just based on its original meaning.

Of course, the influence of the modern trends cannot be underestimated, and in the future the word might be classified as offensive, but it isn't now.

You also missed the comment about its myriad of other uses, which are alive and well today, and don't even have much in common with the distinction that is now being made by some feminists (but I admit that that might also change, judging by the rampant madness in certain areas of life).

As for the French, the Mademioselle is also alive in some areas, but it is quickly retreating to make place for the more neutral variant Madame, although it is amusing to me that Madame actually carries more bourgeois meaning than Mademoiselle, yet is officially considered more appropriate.

Am I to understand that you will be the person to write to the company Chanel a protest letter to remove the shameful name Mademoiselle from their perfume line? That would be most appropriate.

:cool:
That's fair. I'm just relaying the impression I got that using the word may offend a seemingly large number of people. This isn't really the place to debate this. But for everyone else I'd suggest reading up on it and making your own choices.
 
Federer is the GOAT because of his style and the way he plays the game. He has variety and hits the one hander which all men should do. You have to laugh at all of these guys who need a second hand to hit the backhand.
 
I’m very tired of the 3 camps talking about the Goat. I’ve been watching tennis since the 80s. From what I’ve seen, these are the best 3 of all time. The fact that they’ve had the opportunity to play each other in the same era is pretty incredible. When they are all retired, I don’t think there will ever be anything to rival what we are witnessing.

If just going by slam counts:
Fed+Nadal+Djokovic = 52 and counting
The next 4
Sampras+Emerson+Laver+Borg = 48
 

mxmx

Professional
Well, I'm talking about a hypothetical fantasy world where all the greats had grown up in the same era and played on the same surfaces, with the access to the same training/nutrition etc, and all played against each other regularly, year after year.

One man is bound to come out as GOAT in this scenario.
Borg?
 

mxmx

Professional
Duden explicitly states when a word is considered offensive/pejorative, so you trying to fit such claim in your original position doesn't work as there is no such reference.

As far as it is known, the moving towards the neutral Frau is more related to the word not be misused based on lack of information (as for example, if a woman looks too young to be married, or too inexperienced to be of certain older age), than that someone feeling offended just based on its original meaning.

Of course, the influence of the modern trends cannot be underestimated, and in the future the word might be classified as offensive, but it isn't now.

You also missed the comment about its myriad of other uses, which are alive and well today, and don't even have much in common with the distinction that is now being made by some feminists (but I admit that that might also change, judging by the rampant madness in certain areas of life).

As for the French, the Mademioselle is also alive in some areas, but it is quickly retreating to make place for the more neutral variant Madame, although it is amusing to me that Madame actually carries more bourgeois meaning than Mademoiselle, yet is officially considered more appropriate.

Am I to understand that you will be the person to write to the company Chanel a protest letter to remove the shameful name Mademoiselle from their perfume line? That would be most appropriate.

:cool:
I think in society it has become such that women rights needs be defended so much, that it is actually counterproductive and actually making them appear weaker. Whereas, if there was not this constant need to be feminist, it would actually make them stronger in true womanhood, which by the way is not a bad thing but a great thing.

Woman trying to be like men is denying the true self in which lies its own strength.
 

mxmx

Professional
I’m very tired of the 3 camps talking about the Goat. I’ve been watching tennis since the 80s. From what I’ve seen, these are the best 3 of all time. The fact that they’ve had the opportunity to play each other in the same era is pretty incredible. When they are all retired, I don’t think there will ever be anything to rival what we are witnessing.

If just going by slam counts:
Fed+Nadal+Djokovic = 52 and counting
The next 4
Sampras+Emerson+Laver+Borg = 48
Don't you think its a coincidence that 3 greats magically are in the same era?

Or could it possibly be that they are for example the same level (that was possible for that time) that Borg was, except that the big 3 just had an easier field?

To me they are like 3 sole lions at the water hole chasing all weak animals away. They are still lions, but in the past there were many more hyenas and stronger animals competing for water.

I'm sorry. But there really is a reason that only 3 men share so many titles between them. And its not just because they are lions.
 
I am surprised the WTF titles seem not to weight much in the debate between Nadal-Federer-Djokovic being the GOAT. I mean, every year, you take the 8 best tennis player and Nadal couldn't beat them all once whereas Djokovic did 5 times and Federer 6.
Sure the fact it has always been played on HC is somehow debatable but these figures clearly puts the debate in some perspective imo
 
Nole won all masters once, and 8 of them twice. Federer misses two.

Fed has won Hamburg Clay Masters x 4 (ourtight record throughout 31 year span @ Masters level .Dowgraded to ATP 500 in '08) & Madrid Indoors Masters x 1 . Neither of which Djoker has won . 2 distinct Masters 1000s that Fed has over Djoker to compensate for Djoker having M.C & Rome over Fed.

In terms of slots it's Djoker with 9/9 & Fed @ 8/9. (won Madrid clay in Rome slot)


Barely any difference here. Djoker edges it on slots by 1 but they're dead even in distinct Masters 1000s won .

Honourable mentions to Djoker's wins in both Montreal & Toronto for the Canadian Masters slot (Fed missing Montreal) & Fed winning Madrid on Blue Clay in 2012.

Djoker edges Fed in terms of owning Masters 1000 events @ 3-2 . Miami (tied with Agassi) Shanghai & Paris Masters (4 apiece) . Fed owns Hamburg/Cincy . (can add his third outright #1 record @ a Masters 1000 with a win in Indian Wells this Sunday)
 
Last edited:
I am surprised the WTF titles seem not to weight much in the debate between Nadal-Federer-Djokovic being the GOAT. I mean, every year, you take the 8 best tennis player and Nadal couldn't beat them all once whereas Djokovic did 5 times and Federer 6.
Sure the fact it has always been played on HC is somehow debatable but these figures clearly puts the debate in some perspective imo
Nadal and his fans don't want to take into account WTF because he's never been able to win it. It is as simple as that. On the other hand Monte Carlo is fully taken into account as a masters 1000 even though it's the only event not mandatory for top players.

Of course winning 6 and 5 (4 in a row) WTF is a great achievement. That's why in my opinion Nadal is nowhere near Fed and Novak has already overtaken him as being the GOAT.
 
Don't you think its a coincidence that 3 greats magically are in the same era?

Or could it possibly be that they are for example the same level (that was possible for that time) that Borg was, except that the big 3 just had an easier field?

To me they are like 3 sole lions at the water hole chasing all weak animals away. They are still lions, but in the past there were many more hyenas and stronger animals competing for water.

I'm sorry. But there really is a reason that only 3 men share so many titles between them. And its not just because they are lions.
If you think about soccer, both Ronaldo and Messi can be considered the best players of all time ahead of Maradonna, Pelé, Beckenbauer, etc. For sure their rivalry has helped them to improve and continue to seek greatness in order to stay ahead of the other, Sampras didn't have that.
 
Don't you think its a coincidence that 3 greats magically are in the same era?

Or could it possibly be that they are for example the same level (that was possible for that time) that Borg was, except that the big 3 just had an easier field?

To me they are like 3 sole lions at the water hole chasing all weak animals away. They are still lions, but in the past there were many more hyenas and stronger animals competing for water.

I'm sorry. But there really is a reason that only 3 men share so many titles between them. And its not just because they are lions.
I’m a bit too young to have watched Borg live, but I did watch McEnroe, Wilander, Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Agassi, and Sampras throughout their careers. I think Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic are all better than any of those players. I’m not saying that if all of them were to play in their primes at the same time that there wouldn’t be a distribution of wins, but I think relative number of slams would still be about the same.
 
Nadal and his fans don't want to take into account WTF because he's never been able to win it. It is as simple as that. On the other hand Monte Carlo is fully taken into account as a masters 1000 even though it's the only event not mandatory for top players.

Of course winning 6 and 5 (4 in a row) WTF is a great achievement. That's why in my opinion Nadal is nowhere near Fed and Novak has already overtaken him as being the GOAT.
Novak is nowhere near being the GOAT yet. He needs closer to 20 to be in the conversation.
 
Last edited:

mxmx

Professional
If you think about soccer, both Ronaldo and Messi can be considered the best players of all time ahead of Maradonna, Pelé, Beckenbauer, etc. For sure their rivalry has helped them to improve and continue to seek greatness in order to stay ahead of the other, Sampras didn't have that.
He did in maybe not on his level, but many just below him, like Agassi and Becker.
 

mxmx

Professional
I’m a bit too young to have watched Borg live, but I did watch McEnroe, Wilander, Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Agassi, and Sampras throughout their careers. I think Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic are all better than any of those players. I’m not saying that if all of them were to play in their primes at the same time that there wouldn’t be a distribution of wins, but I think relative number of slams would still be about the same.
I disagree. And I have watched the same players you have (also not Borg). I believe the slams etc. will be distributed much more with everyone having less slams. Sampras would edge head to heads against Federer with Federer edging ye ranking and consistency.
 
I disagree. And I have watched the same players you have (also not Borg). I believe the slams etc. will be distributed much more with everyone having less slams. Sampras would edge head to heads against Federer with Federer edging ye ranking and consistency.
Maybe you’re right, but it’s pretty hard to truly compare eras. I think Lendl and Sampras would have the most success today.
 
Yeah because beating Murray at RG is even remotely comparable to 05-07 Nadal :laughing: he beat a crap version of Nadal then lost to Fed’s pigeon Wawrinka LOL

Nole is the weak era king. Majority of slams won vs old Fed, washed up Nadal and Mauresmo Murray. Weakest era of all time.
:-D(n)
14 of 15 GS titles (93,33 %) Djoker won when defeating another Big 4 member - Federer, Nadal or Murray on his way to the title. And these were victories over competitive versions of rivals, not over weak versions like Fed 2013 or Nadal 2015.
 
:-D(n)
14 of 15 GS titles (93,33 %) Djoker won when defeating another Big 4 member - Federer, Nadal or Murray on his way to the title. And these were victories over competitive versions of rivals, not over weak versions like Fed 2013 or Nadal 2015.
Safin missed 2003 because of injuries and reached AO 04 final while being ranked around number 90. Federer beat him, so in that instance is Safin a bad player or a top 4?Same thing happened with Hewitt, he skipped half a season in 2003 - his ranking dropped and he met Federer at AO, Wimbledon, Us Open with a "bad" ranking! But your flawled logic ignores that. According to you is better to beat a "name" rather than an actual inform player. For example, Federer did beat Djokovic at AO 07 but his ranking was bad and it isnt considered a good win. After he proceeds to win the title against Gonzalez with 3-0 whom is considered a mug but the same mug completely destroyed Nadal before that. See how life works? Its not just names.
 
:-D(n)
14 of 15 GS titles (93,33 %) Djoker won when defeating another Big 4 member - Federer, Nadal or Murray on his way to the title. And these were victories over competitive versions of rivals, not over weak versions like Fed 2013 or Nadal 2015.
6 of 15 slams won over Old Fed and “djokolite” Murray... most recent 3 won vs likes of Anderson and Del possum.
 
6 of 15 slams won over Old Fed and “djokolite” Murray...
Again old Fed. :unsure: He was 32-34 years old when Djoker defeated him at Wimbledon 2014-15, USO 2015 and AO 2016, but his results was proving, that he is still competitive. And at all the matches of that period he took Djoker at least a set.
Murray also was no simple opponent either. Confrontations with Andy at AO 2015, FO 2015 & 16 was no walk in the pink orchard.

most recent 3 won vs likes of Anderson and Del possum.
I'm not surprised that at Wimbledon 2018, you concealed Djoker's hard win over Nadal in the SF.
And unlike Roger, No1e proved to beat Del Potro on the USO :-D
 
Top