D
Deleted member 22147
Guest
In terms of achievements, possibly.
Federer is by far the most complete in terms of ability.
Federer is by far the most complete in terms of ability.
Is Djokovic the most complete player ever?
- Thread starter NoleIsBoat
- Start date
But to be fair, isn't Fed more complete even with achievements? He won at least five majors and WTF titles in 4/5 of main events and also has 5 FO finals on top. Plus he won on different types of courts, he won on old AO and grass courts and on new grass courts.
On top of that Fed is dominating indoor too.
D
Deleted member 22147
Guest
Most of Federer's achievements are in a homogenised era, too, although one could argue that he could have achieved more in a 2000 landscape, for example. But one could also argue that he would end up achieving less. Courts were considerably different in 2002 than they were in 2000.
Federer was a proponent of the abolishment of carpet, so he acted in his own self-serving interests. He's not a tennis purist, although you'd think he would be with his style of play.
You say that he is dominating indoors, but not really. I don't think Basel has a lot of pull. Djokovic has won Paris 5 times, but even that is not the event it once was. I don't think there's a big difference between them and indoors is not what it used to be anyway, so who cares. Indoors used to be a particular arena with which you could say a player has demonstrated a particular expertise, in fast courts. Now, it is not fast and it has lost its significance. Wimbledon is not a fast court anymore, so it's all a much of a muchness to me.
I think Djokovic will end up winning several more slams than Federer and he has won all of the TMS x 2. He will also end up with more Masters Cup titles. That's enough for me to say he has a more comprehensive list of achievements.
You make a good point and there would have been a time I would have agreed.
What, you lost a lot of credibility here. In Djokovic era things are even more homogenizes. And Fed has around 81% winnrate indoor, Djokovic has around 78% winnrate and that includes not taking into an account that Nole's win will drop due to decline.
You are using anecdotal biased evidence, stats don't support your views. I also think Fed has more indoor wins than Djokovic and Nadal combined.
D
Deleted member 22147
Guest
I am not sure why you seem aggrieved and why you are suggesting that I have "biased evidence". Not much of what I say is based on "evidence", but as you say, anecdote. It's my opinion. I don't believe that greatness or completeness is necessarily judged by statistics, but more so a combination of statistics and a supporting theoretical framework. A compelling argument, in this context, is based on far more than statistics. My bias, if anything, would lie with Federer, considering he is by far the only player of the current top dogs I have ever enjoyed watching. It is ludicrous to suggest that I have a bias toward Djokovic!
Everything is definitely more homogenised, but the vast majority of Federer's indoor wins came on courts which are truly not fast. It is not anecdotal to suggest that Federer was a catalyst in the abolishment of carpet, that is a fact. And the concept of greatness and in this case, completeness, is not scientifically defined. It is a matter of opinion and weighting - and one's arguments can of course and should be, to a degree, supported by statistics. My weighting has stayed consistent for decades and it is the case that once a player reaches a certain standard, 250 and 500 events are of far lesser importance. A few percentage points certainly do not sway my evaluation. Federer's indoor record if enormously bolstered by his record in Basel.
According to some, Novak Djokovic may end up being more complete on grass than Pete Sampras. Djokovic currently has a higher win percentage. I think that Djokovic could very well overtake Pete Sampras' tally of 7 W, but would Djokovic be greater or more complete than Sampras on grass? If things continue the way they have developed over the last decade, I would argue not. The difference between eras brings about an interesting discussion, but that discussion does not exist if we were to replace Sampras with Federer, as the courts were already much slower in 2003 - whether people like it or not.
In summary, if Djokovic were to eclipse Federer's slam tally and Masters Cup record, no amount of Basel titles would sway me the other way, not even 50 more. I also have to say it shows just how far Federer has dropped, or how far Djokovic has risen, that some are arguing that "indoor record", which is pretty tight whatever way you look at it, sways this in Federer's favour. It's clutching at straws.
More weeks at #1
More year end #1
More slams
More TMS (inc. all TMS)
More Masters Cup
This is more than enough for me to conclude that his achievements are more complete.
canta_Brian
Hall of Fame
In that case we need to talk about Nadal's lack of success on blue clay.
PeoplesChamp
Legend
To be the most complete player one needs every shot in the book and as great as Djokovic is, he doesn't.
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
itrium84
Hall of Fame
You should refresh your stats
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
Game? No.. Can't hit an overhead. Resume.? Sure I guess he has the most complete resume. . But how do we measure it. None of these guys played in those varying degree of surfaces of eras past.
goldengate14
Professional
No as Federer is only player with more than 10 titles on all surfaces.
Federer never had one m1000 on grass. Djokovic got 6 on hard court.
if there were four surfaces like there used to be across the season hard grass clay and indoor carpet at Wtf and at Paris masters and say here were three m1000 on hard three on clay 2 on grass 1 indoor carpet and Wtf then it is undisputably the case Federer would be comfortably ahead on M1000 table with Nadal 2nd as he would have taken a number of the Djokovic titles and would be close to 10 wtf as well.
Federer unquestionably has been royally shafted not having any 2nd tier events on his best surface.
Coaches almost exclusively want kids to watch Federer in his prime.
Federer never had one m1000 on grass. Djokovic got 6 on hard court.
if there were four surfaces like there used to be across the season hard grass clay and indoor carpet at Wtf and at Paris masters and say here were three m1000 on hard three on clay 2 on grass 1 indoor carpet and Wtf then it is undisputably the case Federer would be comfortably ahead on M1000 table with Nadal 2nd as he would have taken a number of the Djokovic titles and would be close to 10 wtf as well.
Federer unquestionably has been royally shafted not having any 2nd tier events on his best surface.
Coaches almost exclusively want kids to watch Federer in his prime.
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
Fed's game is obsolete under these conditions.. This is a slow court 2 handed BH pusher's paradise now. Yea its pretty but wouldn't be nearly as effective as during his time in the early-mid 2000s
Even then it showed a weakness that Nadal fully exposed. As I said before Fed completeness is always harmed by the fact Nadal bullied his BH
itrium84
Hall of Fame
Yeah, and if there was 1 grass M1000 + 1 hc M1000 + 7 clay M1000, Rafa would be most complete.
In any and every imaginary story and alternative tennis history - Fedal are much much better, greater and more complete players than Novak.
In reality - Novak is by far most complete tennis player in history. This is one of the main pillars of his GOAThood.
Sampras-Bruguera 1993
Legend
Djoker was GOAT after winning the double career slam at the French. That really separated him from Fedal. Anything after that was gravy.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Oval_Solid
Hall of Fame
his energy conservation is really good
zagor
Bionic Poster
I know you're baiting but the bolded is very debatable.
What would we use as proof of it? 2008 when according to his own fans Rafa just stopped wearing diapers? Or 2010 when he beat mighty Berdych in the final and had to fight for his dear life in the 1st week (as usual).
Also since we're talking about all time here, there's little doubt Novak would have adapted to old school grass better than Nadal. Novak overall has had much better results when the ball stays low and very rarely got into dogfights in early Wimbledon rounds.
RS
Bionic Poster
If we had 3 grass masters how many do you think each of the big 4 win?
Who said Nadal was in diapers in 2005-2007 he was a great player no? I agree Nadal wouldn’t do as well as Novak low bouncing surfaces off clay but I honestly believe the Nadal who played in W 2008 was better but who can prove it
RaulRamirez
Legend
His OE resume, right now, is the best and most complete.
I don't know if his game is most complete - that's more subjective in nature. Of the great players, he's probably the most balanced - backhand and forehand. He also has a very strong Serve/ROS combo. Who else who is considered a great returner -- Connors, Agassi, Murray - has as good of a serve?
His frontcourt game is better than many give him credit for, but not as strong as Roger's or Rafa's or many other past greats.
So...how do you combine all these elements?
I don't know if his game is most complete - that's more subjective in nature. Of the great players, he's probably the most balanced - backhand and forehand. He also has a very strong Serve/ROS combo. Who else who is considered a great returner -- Connors, Agassi, Murray - has as good of a serve?
His frontcourt game is better than many give him credit for, but not as strong as Roger's or Rafa's or many other past greats.
So...how do you combine all these elements?
zagor
Bionic Poster
If we had 3 grass masters how many do you think each of the big 4 win?
Who said Nadal was in diapers in 2005-2007 he was a great player no? I agree Nadal wouldn’t do as well as Novak low bouncing surfaces off clay but I honestly believe the Nadal who played in W 2008 was better but who can prove it
I don't know, like the vast majority of TTW Nadal fans maybe? Kinda hard to take their peak on grass argument seriously considering that.
2008 Wimbledon proves peak Rafa was better on grass, also 2007 Nadal was a toddler who could only play on clay. Maybe Nadal fans should make up their mind whether they hate Fed more than they love Rafa or vice versa.
skaj
Legend
I don't know what's a "great player" to you, for me Agassi was a great player and his backhand+forehand combo was better, for example.
Safin was a great returner, not as great as Agassi or Djokovic for example, but still very good, while his serve was a weapon, bigger than Nolo's.
RS
Bionic Poster
Nah 2007 Nadal was like the 3rd best Nadal at RG and Wimbledon so that is wrong from other Nadal fans to say this but it never came from me
Make a poll about who peaked higher on grass between the big 3 and I am confident Federer wins it and Nadal comes last
goldengate14
Professional
How is a guy with 7 of 10 2nd tier events on hard court his best surface and half the majors on hard court and 3 of four olympics he has comepeted in on hard court the most complete player when not leading slam race outright has not one OG despite havig 3 goes on his best surface and barely leadin m1000 race and behimd Federer at Wtf.
I get there is frustration about summer events but at least try and be neutral to an extent when making a point.
By any criteria Federer is the most complete player. Can even win on blue clay!
Strale
Semi-Pro
This is completely wrong on so many levels lol
fluffyyelloballz
Rookie
No. Roger Federer is.
itrium84
Hall of Fame
Your arguments are getting fuzzy and complicated, it's hard to understand the point you're making... Anyway - Hard court is same for all players. It's not Novak's fault Rafa is not good enough player to win more on HC. If Rafa was better/greater HC player, he would win more and consequentialy become more complete. Unfortunately, he is literally the worst ATG indoors. Let that sink in.
itrium84
Hall of Fame
Fed was most complete player in history until Novak became even more complete than him.
fluffyyelloballz
Rookie
You think Djokovic is the most complete player?
Ok then.
itrium84
Hall of Fame
When talking about "most complete", there's often confusion between 2 concepts, leading to misunderstanding:
1. Most complete gameplay of player
2. Most versatile player on tour
When I claim Novak is most complete player, I always mean this under no.2. It's very quantifiable and measurable concept. Easy to compare player's career achievements.
Novak has won all atp tour Big Titles... Twice. No other player was/is even close to doing it once. That's what makes him most complete player in tennis history.
skaj
Legend
And how is that "very quantifiable and measurable"? I think you are confusing being versatile and career stats.
fluffyyelloballz
Rookie
Yeah ok.
We just have different opinions.
itrium84
Hall of Fame
How are you still confused with this?
Most versatile on tour = Most versatile tour-wise = Capable to win any event = Most adaptable to any surface = Most complete.
I hope this is clear enough.
itrium84
Hall of Fame
Opinions about wording and definitions I provided, or about my claim on Novak as most complete player (under those definitions)?
skaj
Legend
Confused? Still? Me? I was never confused, nor have I been confused in my previous post.
I said that you are confused.
Back to versatility. What tour/event, which surfaces? I hope this is clear enough.
Novak is clearly, far and away the most complete player of the modern, homogenized, baseline game. Not even close. And it won’t be till he’s worn out.
With respect to the game of tennis, in its totality, as I know it, he’s not at the top. Fed, then Sampras, …and a bunch of others…gotta be okay with the overhead!
With respect to the game of tennis, in its totality, as I know it, he’s not at the top. Fed, then Sampras, …and a bunch of others…gotta be okay with the overhead!
When Djokovic play serve/volley in an era and win slams like Federer did in the early 2000s, then we might have an open for debate, otherwise it's pointless.
Even Nole's coach Becker said he can't survive in an serve/volley era
fluffyyelloballz
Rookie
It’s all opinion.
Nadal_Django
Legend
RS
Bionic Poster
all big 3 have unique achievements CV
so u can not compare one achievement with other
tennis headline that we will never see
nadal kicks fed out of 2008 wimbledon
djok sends fed packing home at 2019 Wimbledon
Last edited:
Similar threads
