If you take Djokovic's career alone versus everyone elses clay career in history, where does he rank?

Kralingen said:
I mean all I’m saying here is if we use this logic then we have to say Murray is one of the greatest AO champions of all time

which no one would do

Murray has 1 epic 5 set loss (2012) and 2 disappointing losses (2011/16) and 2 somewhat close but still disappointing losses (13/15) to Djo at the AO

Djokovic has 2 losses where he was clearly overmatched as a young player (06/07), 4 competitive ones (08/12/14/22), 1 epic 5 set loss (2013), an embarrassment (2020) and of course the two wins over a struggling Nadal in 15/21. Murray could’ve beaten 10/17 Djokovic at AO too if we want to go there.

obviously Djoker is an amazing clay player especially at Rome and lost to the best clay tennis ever multiple times. But is his resume that different from Murray’s at the AO?
Click to expand...
Nadal wasn't struggling anymore in 2021 than he did in 2022 leading up to the tournament. So many trying their best to take the shine off that 2021 epic win. :eek: Is Djokovic's clay resume any better than Murray's resume at AO? Of course it is.
 
NoleFam said:
Nadal wasn't struggling anymore in 2021 than he did in 2022 leading up to the tournament. So many trying their best to take the shine off that 2021 epic win. :eek: Is Djokovic's clay resume any better than Murray's resume at AO? Of course it is.
Click to expand...
I am trolling a bit with 2021 but Nadal was 35 afterall. It was a great win for Djoker don’t get me wrong. But when you’re both mid 30s it’s hard to say it has any relevance to prime level tennis

To the bolded: how about AO to RG only?
 
RS said:
Peak Murray vs Peak Ferrero 10 matches at RG?
Click to expand...
Murray. By an amount.
Kralingen said:
I mean all I’m saying here is if we use this logic then we have to say Murray is one of the greatest AO champions of all time

which no one would do

Murray has 1 epic 5 set loss (2012) and 2 disappointing losses (2011/16) and 2 somewhat close but still disappointing losses (13/15) to Djo at the AO

Djokovic has 2 losses where he was clearly overmatched as a young player (06/07), 4 competitive ones (08/12/14/22), 1 epic 5 set loss (2013), an embarrassment (2020) and of course the two wins over a struggling Nadal in 15/21. Murray could’ve beaten 10/17 Djokovic at AO too if we want to go there.

obviously Djoker is an amazing clay player especially at Rome and lost to the best clay tennis ever multiple times. But is his resume that different from Murray’s at the AO?
Click to expand...
In the case of Nadal, you really that convinced any of the 90s RG champions wouldn't be eating sh*t against him at RG?

As for the Murray at the AO, how many of those runs would Djokovic have lost to other players? Because Nadal and Federer also never beat him at that stage of the tournament either. But I'm sure dudes like Kafelnikov, Safin, and Thomas Johanson would do much better. Fun fact, SIMPras never beat Agassi in Oz either.
 
Red Rick said:
Murray. By an amount.

In the case of Nadal, you really that convinced any of the 90s RG champions wouldn't be eating sh*t against him at RG?

As for the Murray at the AO, how many of those runs would Djokovic have lost to other players? Because Nadal and Federer also never beat him at that stage of the tournament either. But I'm sure dudes like Kafelnikov, Safin, and Thomas Johanson would do much better. Fun fact, SIMPras never beat Agassi in Oz either.
Click to expand...
I do think Nadal would beat basically anyone at RG except hypothetical Borg so it’s no insult for Djoko to lose to him in 06-08, 12-14

I’m just saying his argument isn’t built on the same foundations of the other guys. It relies on hypotheticals and “showing heart in losses” which is the same foundation of Murray’s at the AO.

plus there’s the existence of Soderling and Wawrinka (who actually beat prime Dal/Djok)
 
Kralingen said:
I am trolling a bit with 2021 but Nadal was 35 afterall. It was a great win for Djoker don’t get me wrong. But when you’re both mid 30s it’s hard to say it has any relevance to prime level tennis

To the bolded: how about AO to RG only?
Click to expand...
Well Nadal has won RG 5 times in his 30s. Prime tennis doesn't really matter if he's won 5/6 of them since he hit 31 years of age.

Djokovic is still better. Better in longevity, has reached something like 13 straight QFs, and has the higher peak argument in his favor. Murray had a 6 year window where he was great at AO but not ouside of that.
 
Kralingen said:
I do think Nadal would beat basically anyone at RG except hypothetical Borg so it’s no insult for Djoko to lose to him in 06-08, 12-14

I’m just saying his argument isn’t built on the same foundations of the other guys. It relies on hypotheticals and “showing heart in losses” which is the same foundation of Murray’s at the AO.

plus there’s the existence of Soderling and Wawrinka (who actually beat prime Dal/Djok)
Click to expand...

Except Murray showed no heart in those losses lol.
 
Djokovic RG 13 SF > Murray AO 12 SF
Djokovic RG 12 F > Murray AO 13 F
Djokovic RG 08 SF >~ Murray AO 15 F
Djokovic RG 21 SF > Murray AO 16 F
Djokovic RG 08 SF >> Murray AO 11 F

Nah Djokovic winner
 
RS said:
Djokovic RG 13 SF > Murray AO 12 SF
Djokovic RG 12 F > Murray AO 13 F
Djokovic RG 08 SF >~ Murray AO 15 F
Djokovic RG 21 SF > Murray AO 16 F
Djokovic RG 08 SF >> Murray AO 11 SF

Nah Djokovic winner
Click to expand...
You are paving the road to FedLandia as I said before :oops:
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Red Rick said:
Murray. By an amount.

In the case of Nadal, you really that convinced any of the 90s RG champions wouldn't be eating sh*t against him at RG?

As for the Murray at the AO, how many of those runs would Djokovic have lost to other players? Because Nadal and Federer also never beat him at that stage of the tournament either. But I'm sure dudes like Kafelnikov, Safin, and Thomas Johanson would do much better. Fun fact, SIMPras never beat Agassi in Oz either.
Click to expand...
7-3?
 
Kralingen said:
I do think Nadal would beat basically anyone at RG except hypothetical Borg so it’s no insult for Djoko to lose to him in 06-08, 12-14

I’m just saying his argument isn’t built on the same foundations of the other guys. It relies on hypotheticals and “showing heart in losses” which is the same foundation of Murray’s at the AO.

plus there’s the existence of Soderling and Wawrinka (who actually beat prime Dal/Djok)
Click to expand...
I mean if the rationalizations rely heavily in peak level over stats and the only stat that matters is RG or AO titles than wtf are we discussing. Especially if peak level assessment have to be wins, and not former or future champions are automatically weak competition at a tournament.
 
Kralingen said:
Did Novak?
Click to expand...

Does playing possum count?

gty_462647370_705154741.jpg
 
NoleFam said:
MC is prestigious but Rome has always been the most prestigious. Both are old as dirt so doesn't really matter. Djokovic still has 2 of those, same as Vilas, so he gains no ground there either.

Borg missed the tournament because he didn't want to face Panatta? Come on. Even you have to laugh at this.
Click to expand...
Every time you post, I laugh.

Thanks for being so seriously funny.

You only defend Djokovic, I guess is your patriotic duty.

Me, I have nothing to do with Argentina or South America.

I consider Djokovic a terrific dirtballer
MichaelNadal said:
Without Rafa, he'd probably be clay GOAT.
Click to expand...
Without Rafa, Fed woulda had several CYGS in a row, then Djokovic woulda taken over an got himself a few CYGS.

But then, we have Rafa, long live the King!!
 
NoleFam said:
MC is prestigious but Rome has always been the most prestigious. Both are old as dirt so doesn't really matter. Djokovic still has 2 of those, same as Vilas, so he gains no ground there either.

Borg missed the tournament because he didn't want to face Panatta? Come on. Even you have to laugh at this.
Click to expand...
Every time you post, I laugh.

Thanks for being so seriously funny.

You only defend Djokovic, I guess is your patriotic duty.

Me, I have nothing to do with Argentina or South America.

I consider Djokovic a terrific dirtballer, but I think Vilas was more dominant.
 
Topspin_80 said:
Every time you post, I laugh.

Thanks for being so seriously funny.

You only defend Djokovic, I guess is your patriotic duty.

Me, I have nothing to do with Argentina or South America.

I consider Djokovic a terrific dirtballer

Without Rafa, Fed woulda had several CYGS in a row, then Djokovic woulda taken over an got himself a few CYGS.

But then, we have Rafa, long live the King!!
Click to expand...
I'm glad I am entertaining for you. :laughing: I like Djokovic but not because of patriotic duty. Not sure why people associate patriotic with being a Djokovic fan since we couldn't be more different in every way in regards to nationality and ethnicity. Back to the main topic, Vilas just doesn't have a serious argument over Djokovic on clay. I pretty much explained why. Their win percentage in top 10 wins on clay is the final nail in that argument.
 
Red Rick said:
I mean if the rationalizations rely heavily in peak level over stats and the only stat that matters is RG or AO titles than wtf are we discussing. Especially if peak level assessment have to be wins, and not former or future champions are automatically weak competition at a tournament.
Click to expand...
I do think Djokovic could be 3rd best clay player ever given his ridiculous competition and basically goat tier longevity but I don’t see it as such a slam dunk
 
Topspin_80 said:
Further proof that Vilas is a notch above Djokovic on clay.

Look at this stats from 2018 when Nadal notched his 400 win on clay.

Vilas 659 wins 80.3%
Djokovic 189 wins 79.4%

Since then, Novak has scored 69 more wins for a grand total of 258 wins, not bad, but far from the 659 wins Vilas scored.

www.atptour.com

Tribute: Rafael Nadal Records 400th Match Win On Clay Courts | ATP Tour | Tennis

www.atptour.com www.atptour.com
Click to expand...

Vilas won 49 Clay titles and 28 (most open era) required a Bo5 Final. He won more Bo5 clay titles than Borg (23) and Nastase (23). Moreover, he had a Clay winning streak of 53 matches that wasn't surpassed until Nadal broke it. Sure, the man took some losses to Borg, Connors, Nastase, and Orantes but he did something that Borg didn't do which is win Clay slams both in Red Clay and Green Clay (Har-Tru). In fact, he is the only male player to do it (Evert did it in the WTA).

I think Djokovic fans make a fair point that many of his losses in Clay and went to the Clay ATG and that should be considered when rating his clay ability. Paradoxically, this same argument can be made for Nadal who took 31 losses in HC to arguably the two HC Open Era ATG in Djokovic and Federer. Moreover, he still had a 6-5 record against them in Slams and Olympics. Lendl was 0-2 against Becker in HC Slam Finals and the German was known more for his Carpet and Grass ability.
 
Phoenix* said:
Idk, i don't care about a minor surface. Let me know when he straight sets Djo at AO.
Click to expand...

As a prodigious Tennis Historian as yourself I thought you knew that both Grass and Clay go back over a century in slam competition while HC wasn't utilized in Slams until 1978. A variation of Clay included early "Sand" surfaces and the earliest HC was much different than some of the acrylic and asphalt used today. All three surfaces wouldn't be classified as "minor." However, other than Wimbledon many players skip Grass tournaments making the sport closer to dual surface sport (HC. Clay).
 
Last edited:
AgassiSuperSlam11 said:
As a prodigious Tennis Historian as yourself I thought you knew that both Grass and Clay go back over a century in slam competition while HC wasn't utilized in Slams until 1978. A variation of Clay included early "Sand" surfaces and the earliest HC was much different than some of the acrylic and asphalt used today. All three surfaces wouldn't be classified as "minor." However, other than Wimbledon many players skip Grass tournaments making the sport closer to dual surface sport (HC. Clay).
Click to expand...
Cool. Still a minor surface on tour.
 
Humphrey20133 said:
And far more minor than clay is by some bit.
Click to expand...
If clay is minor, grass basically is nonexistent.

Every player in continental Europe plays on clay, ditto for South Americans.

Out of the top 100 only 30 don't fit that profile, and I'm counting every player from neither areas, including people like Taro Daniel, that even though
he is Japanese, he practised many years in Spain, the same for Andy Murray, Maxime Cressy was raised on clay in France.

Clay is a minor surface only for people with a minor mind, that can't see the whole picture.
 
Last edited:
Topspin_80 said:
Further proof that Vilas is a notch above Djokovic on clay.

Look at this stats from 2018 when Nadal notched his 400 win on clay.

Vilas 659 wins 80.3%
Djokovic 189 wins 79.4%

Since then, Novak has scored 69 more wins for a grand total of 258 wins, not bad, but far from the 659 wins Vilas scored.

www.atptour.com

Tribute: Rafael Nadal Records 400th Match Win On Clay Courts | ATP Tour | Tennis

www.atptour.com www.atptour.com
Click to expand...

Record against top 10 players on clay
Djokovic = 48-35 (57.8%)
Vilas = 41-53 (43.6%)

Record against top 5 players on clay
Djokovic = 25-26 (49%)
Vilas = 15-24 (38.5%)

quality > quantity
 
Kralingen said:
I do think Djokovic could be 3rd best clay player ever given his ridiculous competition and basically goat tier longevity but I don’t see it as such a slam dunk
Click to expand...
I never thought I would see a day it was possible Djokovic is being argued to being at worst the 3rd best and at a push 2nd best or better on all 3 surfaces :unsure:
 
Topspin_80 said:
NoleFam, you have to be pretty young to say Rome is the biggest title outside FO like it has always been.

Monte Carlo used to be the most prestigious clay event outside the FO, then Hamburg, then Rome.

Vilas has won all 3.

Borg absence was irrelevant he was not the champion and didn't want to face Panatta at the FO where Borg had a negative H2H 1-2, and a negative
overall of 5-6.

So yes, Borg absence was irrelevant, I watched that tournament, and at that time Borg was my favorite player.
Click to expand...
Lol at thinking Borg was afraid to face Panatta, also to what is this 5-6 H2H referring? Borg had a positive H2H against Panatta both overall and on clay. As for whether Borg’s absence was irrelevant, it was not only Borg who skipped the 77 FO, there were Connors, Vitas and several others who chose to play WTT.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
Lol at thinking Borg was afraid to face Panatta, also to what is this 5-6 H2H referring? Borg had a positive H2H against Panatta both overall and on clay. As for whether Borg’s absence was irrelevant, it was not only Borg who skipped the 77 FO, there were Connors, Vitas and several others who chose to play WTT.
Click to expand...
The final h2h is Borg 10 Panatta 6, and that is because Borg won the last 5 matches.

So before those 5 matches in a row, the count was Panatta 6 Borg 5, the last 2 back to back matches that Panatta won were 1 in SWEDEN, and the last at
the FO, and I was very upset because I was a Borg fan since he beat Onny Parun in 1972

But we can't change history, it is what it is.

Panatta and Borg played 3 times at the FO, Panatta won 2, Borg won 1, so Panatta has a positive h2h at the FO vs Borg.
Furthermore, Panatta is the ONLY player that beat Borg at the FO, and he did it twice.

And, yes he was scared of Panatta, because he was the only one that gave him hard time on clay, Panatta was 26 yo and Borg was 19.
 
Repeated same comment in a previous post due to not reading the entire 143 posts in this thread. Mods can delete this message.
 
Last edited:
Topspin_80 said:
The final h2h is Borg 10 Panatta 6, and that is because Borg won the last 5 matches.

So before those 5 matches in a row, the count was Panatta 6 Borg 5, the last 2 back to back matches that Panatta won were 1 in SWEDEN, and the last at
the FO, and I was very upset because I was a Borg fan since he beat Onny Parun in 1972

But we can't change history, it is what it is.

Panatta and Borg played 3 times at the FO, Panatta won 2, Borg won 1, so Panatta has a positive h2h at the FO vs Borg.
Furthermore, Panatta is the ONLY player that beat Borg at the FO, and he did it twice.

And, yes he was scared of Panatta, because he was the only one that gave him hard time on clay, Panatta was 26 yo and Borg was 19.
Click to expand...


Borg skipped RG 77 to play WTT because WTT offered a sh*tload of money.

Borg beat Pannatta in the most hostile environment in Davis Cup in the 5th set in 1978.

In 1978, Bjorn Borg, the most serene of players, beat Italian idol Adriano Panatta 1-6, 6-3, 6-1, 4-6, 6-3 in the final in Rome. It was a remarkable performance considering he was not only booed and hissed for three hours, but had coins fired at him.

Crowds can cost players games

A men's tennis match in Rome the other day reminded me of the sport's bad old days.
www.stuff.co.nz www.stuff.co.nz

So please stop making up stuff like Borg was afraid of Panatta.
 
Last edited:
Kralingen said:
I do think Djokovic could be 3rd best clay player ever given his ridiculous competition and basically goat tier longevity but I don’t see it as such a slam dunk
Click to expand...

nope, given his best win vs in-form prime opponent at RG is like Tsonga at RG 12 . Djoko losing to fed in RG 11/stan in RG 15. Should have won one of those. If he had won either of those (and not won RG 21 also), he'd be better.
 
Fabresque said:
Oh you do not wanna start this road. Djokovic has about 50 things over Nadal pal. Real people know who the Great One is.
Click to expand...
I could name a few.. Djokovic has been deported from one country and banned from entering another. Djokovic has also been disqualified from a tournament. That's 3. What are the other 47?
 
clayqueen said:
I could name a few.. Djokovic has been deported from one country and banned from entering another. Djokovic has also been disqualified from a tournament. That's 3. What are the other 47?
Click to expand...
It’s very telling and quite sad you have to bring up non-sporting metrics because deep down you know the truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

THE FIGHTER
Where does djokovic's 2015 season stand, so far, in history?
Replies
13
Views
972
Russeljones
Russeljones
6-1 6-3 6-0
Is Nadal the most talented left-hander in world history?
2
Replies
85
Views
12K
Doubles
Doubles
Elite
Where does Djokovic rank amongst the best defenders the sport has seen?
Replies
2
Views
921
FlashFlare11
FlashFlare11
zill
Where does Wawrinka's backhand rank in the grand scheme of backhands??
Replies
5
Views
660
erosblue
E
6-1 6-3 6-0
  • Poll Poll
Nadal is the first man in world history to win slams for 10 consecutive years
Replies
0
Views
504
6-1 6-3 6-0
6-1 6-3 6-0
Back
Top