Is Djokovic the most complete player ever?

skaj said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to explain you what is ATP tour, what are tennis events and which surfaces are there in tennis. Google it.
 
TMF said:
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
Click to expand...
I meant most complete accomplishment-wise, not gameplay-wise.
 
itrium84 said:
I'm not going to explain you what is ATP tour, what are tennis events and which surfaces are there in tennis. Google it.
Click to expand...

I hope not, since we have wasted enough of our time already on explaining the obvious to you. My (rhetorical)question was pointing out that there is a context in which those games were played and and those events were won.

I hope it is finally clear.
 
Last edited:
itrium84 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Firstly i said Federer is the most complete not Nadal lol. The fact Nadal is in your thoughts is funny though.
last time i checked no slams indoors.
Your argument collapses on the basis youbthink being complete is haviig the good fortune of 80pct of the tour on a players best surface.
if you go on social media.and i get you may ptefer not to and stsy where 80pct losters support the same player as you, you will see the overwhelming majority of posters say Nadal and Federer are greater precisely because they have won 20 majors when only one major is on their best surfsce and they did so without having a year both of their main rivals injured for an entire season when both 35 plus.
 
skaj said:
I hope not, since we have wasted enough our time already on explaining the obvious to you. My (rhetorical)question was pointing out that there is a context in which those games were played and and those events were won.

I hope it is finally clear.
Click to expand...
What other context are you proposing, except of ATP tour and Novak's domination?
 
goldengate14 said:
Firstly i said Federer is the most complete not Nadal lol. The fact Nadal is in your thoughts is funny though.
last time i checked no slams indoors.
Your argument collapses on the basis youbthink being complete is haviig the good fortune of 80pct of the tour on a players best surface.
if you go on social media.and i get you may ptefer not to and stsy where 80pct losters support the same player as you, you will see the overwhelming majority of posters say Nadal and Federer are greater precisely because they have won 20 majors when only one major is on their best surfsce and they did so without having a year both of their main rivals injured for an entire season when both 35 plus.
Click to expand...
I genuinely don't mean this as an insult - please read-proof your comments (use "preview" option) and be more coherent - I'm really having trouble understanding most of your points, even after 2nd and 3rd read.
 
In terms of all round player there is an argument for Djokovic.

Whilst Fed and Nadal have better forehands, their backhands are not on the same level.

Djokovic is less dynamic without a killer weapon but both his forehand and backhand are strong. Djokovics backhand is perhaps on par or slightly better than his forehand. So in that sense hes more balanced as a player.

Fed has a great serve, Nadal not so much, Djokovic again is solid in the serve without being spectacular.
 
a12345 said:
In terms of all round player there is an argument for Djokovic.

Whilst Fed and Nadal have better forehands, their backhands are not on the same level.

Djokovic is less dynamic without a killer weapon but both his forehand and backhand are strong. Djokovics backhand is perhaps on par or slightly better than his forehand. So in that sense hes more balanced as a player.

Fed has a great serve, Nadal not so much, Djokovic again is solid in the serve without being spectacular.
Click to expand...

You forgot: "Fad has a great net game, Nadal again is solid without being spectacular, Djokovic not so much".
 
Ok maybe to analyse we can create some criteria out of 10 for each player

Forehand
Backhand
Serve
Net Game
Slice
Movement

Although for me Forehand Backhand Serve are the 3 big ticket items and have much higher weighting in terms of importance.
 
a12345 said:
Ok maybe to analyse we can create some criteria out of 10 for each player

Forehand
Backhand
Serve
Net Game
Slice
Movement

Although for me Forehand Backhand Serve are the 3 big ticket items and have much higher weighting in terms of importance.
Click to expand...

I think movement is as important. Otherwise Safin, for example, wins this one against the big 3.

If we use these 6 elements as criteria, Sampras probably. Maybe even Rios, his serve was not much but it was actually okay, especially for his height.
 
itrium84 said:
I genuinely don't mean this as an insult - please read-proof your comments (use "preview" option) and be more coherent - I'm really having trouble understanding most of your points, even after 2nd and 3rd read.
Click to expand...
Dont resort to trolling when you hae no comeback. i hae repeatedly said Federer is the most complete player. You brought Nadal up lol.
 
goldengate14 said:
Dont resort to trolling when you hae no comeback. i hae repeatedly said Federer is the most complete player. You brought Nadal up lol.
Click to expand...
Nah, Fed didn't win all atp tour Big Titles, that was Novak and he did it twice. Fed is not even close to that level completeness, Novak is double-complete.
 
Djokovic literally has every achievement you can possible have that qualifies him for the most complete player. I don't know about comparing it to past eras cause the game was differnet but atleast in the modern era he has tested and proven his skills successfully on every level and against any player irrespective of surface.
 
RF-18 said:
Djokovic literally has every achievement you can possible have that qualifies him for the most complete player. I don't know about comparing it to past eras cause the game was differnet but atleast in the modern era he has proven his skills on every level and against any player irrespective of surface.
Click to expand...

As I said, in my previous post, no he does not.
 
skaj said:
As I said, in my previous post, no he does not.
Click to expand...

When assessing most complete player you are compared to other players, and Djokovic has the finest accolades wich was proven by his skill. No player in the modern era or the open era has the trophy cabinet like Djokovic does.
 
RF-18 said:
When assessing most complete player you are compared to other players, and Djokovic has the finest accolades wich was proven by his skill. No player in the modern era or the open era has the trophy cabinet like Djokovic does.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with what said in my post.
 
Last edited:
StrongRule said:
Murray an ATG? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Also, lol at hyping "domination" over 2015 Nadal on clay. Alright, Djokovic did what even Fognini could do. So Fognini is the GOAT now?
Click to expand...

Yes Murray is an ATG.

The Big 3 were simply better. But I think Murray is better than TTW gods like Edberg and Courier. And frankly is probably better than guys in the Becker tier as well.
 
One of them for sure but giving it to him outright goes back to the question Federer used to face all the time - how can he be the most complete player ever when there are question marks over him even being the most complete player of his own era?
 
RF-18 said:
And btw I don't see that I ever quoted you in my initial post. So I wasn't even responding you post. I came in here and gave my two cents.
Click to expand...

Dude, you wrote: " Djokovic literally has every achievement you can possible have"(post#168), I replied with with "no he does not"(post#169), and your reply to that post was: " When assessing most complete player you are compared to other players, and Djokovic has the finest accolades wich was proven by his skill. No player in the modern era or the open era has the trophy cabinet like Djokovic does."(post#170). To that I replied " That has nothing to do with what said in my post."(post #171). It really isn't hard to follow, however you asked "what post" in your next post.
 
itrium84 said:
Novak did do it, reality denial is strong within your spirit an mind. :)
Click to expand...

Well, I could call you telling me that "reality denial is strong within my spirit an mind" your projection, and in my case I would also have something to back that up, but unlike you I am not interested in other poster's psyche but in what is written here regarding tennis.

So, lets please get back to the topic, which is not me nor you. Do you have any proof that Novak has won all the big titles?
 
skaj said:
Well, I could call you telling me that "reality denial is strong within my spirit an mind" your projection, and in my case I would also have something to back that up, but unlike you I am not interested in other poster's psyche but in what is written here regarding tennis.

So, lets please get back to the topic, which is not me nor you. Do you have any proof that Novak has won all the big titles?
Click to expand...
I stand behind my factual statement:
"Nah, Fed didn't win all atp tour Big Titles, that was Novak and he did it twice. Fed is not even close to that level completeness, Novak is double-complete."
You can keep denying reality, but it won't help you.
 
although he's improved it a ton, i think his net game (and overheads) hold him back from 'most complete' player. most effective, maybe!

in terms of 'complete' in the open era: federer, stich, pete maybe? movement/groundies/net game/variety (and pete's backhand doesn't disqualify him imo, he was far from weak off that wing.
 
itrium84 said:
I meant most complete accomplishment-wise, not gameplay-wise.
Click to expand...
To me, a complete player is when a player can play/adapt to any different environment and different playing style.

Djokovic is a pure baseliner playing in a homogenized era playing one style. Unlike Federer who's so versatile and have demonstrated that he strives on playing fast, attacking style and adapt to full time baseliner after the ATP/ITF start slowing down all the courts
 
TMF said:
To me, a complete player is when a player can play/adapt to any different environment and different playing style.

Djokovic is a pure baseliner playing in a homogenized era playing one style. Unlike Federer who's so versatile and have demonstrated that he strives on playing fast, attacking style and adapt to full time baseliner after the ATP/ITF start slowing down all the courts
Click to expand...

Yes, but Djokovic wasn't given that opportunity was he to show if he could do it also?
 
when will djok reveals the real reason behind his us open loss to med in straight sets, not even one set to TB or djok couldnt win more than 4 games even in one set

1) the burden of whole world on his fragile shoulders
2) fatigue from 5 set semifinal
3) fatigue from playing tokyo olympics mix doubles
 
itrium84 said:
I stand behind my factual statement:
"Nah, Fed didn't win all atp tour Big Titles, that was Novak and he did it twice. Fed is not even close to that level completeness, Novak is double-complete."
You can keep denying reality, but it won't help you.
Click to expand...

And of course, you don't have proof for it. Just more ad hominem comments.

How could you have, since there isn't one.
 
Hitman said:
Yes, but Djokovic wasn't given that opportunity was he to show if he could do it also?
Click to expand...
What I disagree is his fans declare Nole is a "complete player" with no results in a serve/volley era while ignoring a player like Federer have played this style in the early 2000s. Fed beat Scud to win Wimbledon 2003 and Sampras in 2001 RD4 playing pure serve&volley.

In 2012, Federer won Madrid playing on blue clay which was introduce for the first time on the tour. The new clay was much more slippery than the traditional red clay. Sliding was the key but having less traction means a player losses court coverage and it frustrated the player, especially Nadal who at many times got out of position(doesn't affect him much on red clay). All players have to adjust and out the big 3 Federer managed to adapt better than Djokodal who both lost early and then threaten Triac about boycotting the tournament next year.
 
TMF said:
To me, a complete player is when a player can play/adapt to any different environment and different playing style.

Djokovic is a pure baseliner playing in a homogenized era playing one style. Unlike Federer who's so versatile and have demonstrated that he strives on playing fast, attacking style and adapt to full time baseliner after the ATP/ITF start slowing down all the courts
Click to expand...
It's funny how you say this after his last match where he beat the ultimate baseliner with S&W. :)

"A complete player is when a player can play/adapt to any different environment and different playing style." - 99% of tennis players, experts and pundits describe Novak with this exact words. :)
 
skaj said:
And of course, you don't have proof for it. Just more ad hominem comments.

How could you have, since there isn't one.
Click to expand...
Novak has won 2+ of every GS title, 2+ WTF and 2+ of every M1000 title. Fed did not. Not even once. So... There is your proof. You can use Google and Wikipedia to verify.
 
itrium84 said:
Novak has won 2+ of every GS title, 2+ WTF and 2+ of every M1000 title. Fed did not. Not even once. So... There is your proof. You can use Google and Wikipedia to verify.
Click to expand...

That is, of course, not the proof, because the ATP recognizes the title that is not on your list, nor in Djoko's collection, as a Big Title.
You can use Google and Wikipedia to verify.
 
TMF said:
What I disagree is his fans declare Nole is a "complete player" with no results in a serve/volley era while ignoring a player like Federer have played this style in the early 2000s. Fed beat Scud to win Wimbledon 2003 and Sampras in 2001 RD4 playing pure serve&volley.

In 2012, Federer won Madrid playing on blue clay which was introduce for the first time on the tour. The new clay was much more slippery than the traditional red clay. Sliding was the key but having less traction means a player losses court coverage and it frustrated the player, especially Nadal who at many times got out of position(doesn't affect him much on red clay). All players have to adjust and out the big 3 Federer managed to adapt better than Djokodal who both lost early and then threaten Triac about boycotting the tournament next year.
Click to expand...

Federer adjusting faster doesn't mean Djokovic wouldn't have been able to do at some point though. We know Djokovic can play in all conditions, was a time when he was not so sharp on grass, then became the dominant player on it.
 
TMF said:
To me, a complete player is when a player can play/adapt to any different environment and different playing style.

Djokovic is a pure baseliner playing in a homogenized era playing one style. Unlike Federer who's so versatile and have demonstrated that he strives on playing fast, attacking style and adapt to full time baseliner after the ATP/ITF start slowing down all the courts
Click to expand...
But you can say that Nadal dominated prime Federer due to attacking his BH will top spin so how can he be complete if his main rival held over him by attacking his weakness
 
skaj said:
That is, of course, not the proof, because the ATP recognizes the title that is not on your list, nor in Djoko's collection, as a Big Title.
You can use Google and Wikipedia to verify.
Click to expand...
Maybe somebody else claimed OG are not recognized by ATP, so you mixed him up with me. It happens. It's ok. Everybody gets confused from time to time. It's ok.
 
itrium84 said:
Maybe somebody else claimed OG are not recognized by ATP, so you mixed him up with me. It happens. It's ok. Everybody gets confused from time to time. It's ok.
Click to expand...

Recognized by the ATP as a Big Title. I did not mix you up with anyone, male or female, so you seems to be the one who is confused, yet again. It's ok. Everybody gets confused from time to time. It's ok.

So, what are you claiming then, that grand slams are ATP tour events? Or that the Olympic Gold is not among the Big Titles by the ATP tour?
 
skaj said:
Recognized by the ATP as a Big Title. I did not mix you up with anyone, male or female, so you seems to be the one who is confused, yet again. It's ok. Everybody gets confused from time to time. It's ok.

So, what are you claiming then, that grand slams are ATP tour events? Or that the Olympic Gold is not among the Big Titles by the ATP tour?
Click to expand...
OG are recognized by ATP. If you are claiming I have said they're not, you're lying.
GS tournaments are ATP tour events, you liar.
OG are included in ATP calendar as secondary type of event (no atp points), together with Davis cup and Laver cup.
Olympic gold is not atp tour Big Title. Stop lying.
 
itrium84 said:
OG are recognized by ATP. If you are claiming I have said they're not, you're lying.
GS tournaments are ATP tour events, you liar.
OG are included in ATP calendar as secondary type of event (no atp points), together with Davis cup and Laver cup.
Olympic gold is not atp tour Big Title. Stop lying.
Click to expand...



Liar? You are confused again I see. I did not say that grand slam tournaments are ATP tour events or that they are not, I merely asked you what are you claiming on the subject. For the Olympic games I did not even ask you if you think they are "recognized by the ATP", much less claimed that you had said that they aren't.

The Olympic games are by the way a part of ATP calendar like the grand slams, and like the grand slams they are not really an ATP event. They also, like grand slams, were bringing ATP points, by the way.

As for me lying about about the Olympic gold being among the ATP's Big Titles, here's their website.
www.atptour.com

Novak Djokovic Extends 'Big Titles' Lead With Record-Breaking Paris Win | ATP Tour | Tennis

Novak Djokovic won a record-breaking 37th ATP Masters 1000 title on Sunday at the Rolex Paris Masters, extending his lead in the 'Big Titles' race over Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer.
www.atptour.com www.atptour.com
 
DjokoLand said:
But you can say that Nadal dominated prime Federer due to attacking his BH will top spin so how can he be complete if his main rival held over him by attacking his weakness
Click to expand...

How much did Nadal accomplish outside clay doing all this?

Despite all these stunts Nadal just had 2 slams outside clay in Federer's prime..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lew II
  • Poll Poll
Is Djokovic the most complete player of all times?
5 6 7
Replies
314
Views
15K
MICHELUZZO
MICHELUZZO
Halba
nadal- the most complete player ever?
2
Replies
60
Views
8K
BeatlesFan
BeatlesFan
tennisaddict
Kyrgios : Djokovic most complete player I have ever played
2 3
Replies
131
Views
9K
Drlexus
D
DjokoGOAT
Djokovic is the best ever on 2 surfaces and top 2 another
2
Replies
50
Views
3K
Third Serve
Third Serve
P
Tim Henman: Djokovic Is Not The Most Complete Player Ever
2 3
Replies
117
Views
8K
MLRoy
MLRoy
Back
Top