Is djokovic the most complete player in history?

He looks complete because he is so solid from both wings on hard courts. But does his game look complete on Grass or Clay? How about his overheads and his play at the net? How is his backhand slice? When you question his game from a different points of view, you see the truth that he is not the most complete player in history.
 
Just to mention that Djokovic was never associated to Bollettieri and never trained with him, so Bollettieri has no reason to be biased here.

Also I would take Bollettieri's opinion, over opinion of biased fanboys here any day.

Don't need to take anyone's opinion, one can have their own opinion, like adults thinking by themselves.
 
Boletieri is a long time fake...none, absolutley none of the players he ever coached knew what a good serve, a touch shot or a good volley was.His expertise is about 50% of the game so he is unqualified to judge.

....and thanks to his assbrained bias against everything other than the largely one dimensional game he pushed, his opinion on Djokovic is not only expected, but must be dismissed as agenda-fueled.
 
This is tricky. What does complete mean? Having all parts of the game the same? Or having all parts of the game top notch?

I mean one guy can be complete in terms, that he equally sucks in all aspects of the game.

I mean Djokovic is jack of all trades, master of none, compared to other greats. If that is the definition of most complete.

Let's say on a scale from one to ten, Djokovic's forehand, serve,backhand, net game, volleys, foowork is 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8
Fed for example is 10, 9, 7, 9, 7, 10.

Does that really make player Djokovic more complete?

I guess it's how we define things.

Is Rafa not an all-surface player just because he has too many RG titles? This is absurd. So, if Rafa returns a few RG titles, he will be more complete?

So, Fed has to worsen his forehand, footwork and serve a bit to be considered complete?

So, in my definition, Federer is much more complete player than Djokovic. And Djokovic more complete than Murray.
 
I dont know why people bring the volleys, but for the indoor season his volleys were at very good level. In China against Nadal he was something like 14 from 15 at the net.
 
joker might be the most complete backboard in history.
 
Well if Nadal does become GOAT by having the most slams, and when both played their best, Djokovic thoroughly owned Nadal across all surfaces, that certainly would hint to him being the most complete even if he doesn't end up with most slams.
 
....and thanks to his assbrained bias against everything other than the largely one dimensional game he pushed, his opinion on Djokovic is not only expected, but must be dismissed as agenda-fueled.

Bolletieri would´ve been a great military...
 
Well if Nadal does become GOAT by having the most slams, and when both played their best, Djokovic thoroughly owned Nadal across all surfaces, that certainly would hint to him being the most complete even if he doesn't end up with most slams.

We're you just transported here from an alternate universe where that is true? Otherwise, call your doctor, your meds need adjusting.
 
he is the most complete uncomplete player...

Yeah this complete is overrated. Like it's a good being jack of all trades and master of none.

For me complete player is when most of his elements in his game are great.

Not when a guy has all elements that are equally average.


By this definition, I'm complete player too. All elements of my game suck equally. I guess I'm more complete than Karlovic :).
 
Yeah this complete is overrated. Like it's a good being jack of all trades and master of none.

For me complete player is when most of his elements in his game are great.

Not when a guy has all elements that are equally average.


By this definition, I'm complete player too. All elements of my game suck equally. I guess I'm more complete than Karlovic :).

Hahahah good one.I am completely uncomplete.
 
Why this thread turned into Djokvic bashing????

So much hate and under-appreciation. Why? Why are fanboys of certain player so insecure?
 
Last edited:
maybe but that is a minor part in today's game. also I think his volleys are not that bad. his overheads are below average but in today's game they are not really a big factor, they are not costing him matches usually.

there is not really a way of exploiting his net game as a go to strategy (not sure if fed ever tried to short slice him).

in contrast to that feds BH on clay or nadals pace tolerance on fast courts cost them a lot of matches.

Your OP title said "in history" and has little to do with today's game. The best all around players came from at least 10-15 years ago.
 
Why this thread turned into Djokvic bashing????

So much hate and under-appreciation. Why? Why are fanboys of certain player so insecure?

No bashing. I just don't think Djokovic is the most complete player in history.

And nobody even gave any good definitions what complete actually means.
 
Hmm, no? Absolutely not. Nolan is a pusher and it is beyond my mind how can everybody not see it.

Bamosss.
 
Bolletieri would´ve been a great military...
True, but for now, he makes for a fine, fine raisin.



Why this thread turned into Djokvic bashing????

So much hate and under-appreciation. Why?

Why are fanboys of certain player so insecure?
Why the hate? Good question...I don't know.

But if I were to guess........hmmmm, I think it's probably Djoko's insecure fanboys.

What do you think? : )

__________________
 
Last edited:
Back
Top