Is Djokovic the most complete player of all times?

Most complete


  • Total voters
    135

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
91NW2MuMlaL._SX425_.jpg
 

skaj

Legend
Won all big events, and 13 of them twice. Beat Federer at Wimbledon, Nadal at Roland Garros.

Is Djokovic the most complete player of all times?

It's a bit like saying Federer beat Djokovic at the Australian Open(plus Rolland Garros).
 

nov

Hall of Fame
No. It's like saying Federer beat Novak at AO, and beat Nadal at RG, which he has never done.
Nadal never beat Novak at AO.
Let that sink in for a moment.
To have advantage on Clay its much easier than on Hard court. Most tournaments are played on hard court, so like everyone used to that surface. Still Djokovic owns Nadal on HC.
 

K-H

Hall of Fame
When you think of Djokovic, he has no weaknesses. But i wouldn't say complete.

Federer for example, can slug it out from the baseline. But he can also play short points and attack the net at will. Djokovic can't really do the latter so how can we say he's the most complete.

But in terms of weakness, nothing there to exploit.
 

uscwang

Hall of Fame
Won all big events, and 13 of them twice. Beat Federer at Wimbledon, Nadal at Roland Garros.

Is Djokovic the most complete player of all times?
Novak is not perfect. But in term of having no weakness for any player to exploit anywhere, he is the best.
 

StrongRule

Talk Tennis Guru
Sadly for you it's already and forever in the history books. Novak Djokovic is the only player to straight set the The Bull of Dirt on Philippe Chatrier. #Roastovic.
The fact that Djokovic fans have to hype a win over 2015 Nadal so much only proves one thing: that they know their guy doesn't have any real impressive wins in Roland Garros.
 

mehdimike

Hall of Fame
But your wish came true in RG 2016, when Nadal withdrew one round before meeting Thiem. Happy then?
Thiem was not going to beat Rafa at RG.;)
Like Nadal tanked AO 2020 against Thiem?:sneaky:
Losing in 3 Tie-breaks doesn't sound tanking to me. Also he had the chance to tank against Zverev if he wished. He could gain 360 more points without losing to Nole.:)
Although I don't believe in tank thing myself even if it happens it should follow some logic.
 

uscwang

Hall of Fame
Borg.

Grinded his way to RG titles, then came back to S&V his way to Wimbledon titles right after. The game was less homogenous back then.

Djoko is the best and most impenetrable ever, though.
But Borg couldn't win a single USO although he made the final there 4 times. Something gave.
 

skaj

Legend
No. It's like saying Federer beat Novak at AO, and beat Nadal at RG, which he has never done.
Nadal never beat Novak at AO.
Let that sink in for a moment.

No. We know what Nadal's shape was in that match, that was the point.
 

uscwang

Hall of Fame
Agreed, that's a hole for Björn.

I tend to give him a pass because the game was so much more varied between different conditions back then.

But yeah - big three have more complete résumés, but Borg arguably a more complete game

You are assuming that Borg possessing red and blue on a spectrum guarantees that he has yellow.
 

skaj

Legend
Agreed, that's a hole for Björn.

I tend to give him a pass because the game was so much more varied between different conditions back then.

But yeah - big three have more complete résumés, but Borg arguably a more complete game

Djokovic did not have clay court slams at 26 though.
 

mehdimike

Hall of Fame
Agreed, that's a hole for Björn.

I tend to give him a pass because the game was so much more varied between different conditions back then.

But yeah - big three have more complete résumés, but Borg arguably a more complete game
I think he had a good chance to win at least one USO if he hadn't retired so soon. Even Djoko won 1 USO in his first 6 finals which is absurd to me!
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
You are assuming that Borg possessing red and blue on a spectrum guarantees that he has yellow.
Not quite.

What I feel is that Borg possessing red and blue gives him more range than the big three who only possess yellow, crudely put. These days it's the same power baselining on every surface, with minor adjustments. Borg showed real range in his game.

If you are interested in trophies, then I agree, the answer is not Borg. If we mean a diverse, complete game, then I think he has a great argument.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Borg.

Grinded his way to RG titles, then came back to S&V his way to Wimbledon titles right after. The game was less homogenous back then.

Djoko is the best and most impenetrable ever, though.
Impenetrable is a good way to put it.

As for Borg, don't really wanna get into comparing eras that far apart, but the least I'll say is Mac also almost won the channel Slam and that Borgs tantrum game was nonexistent.
 

Beckerserve

Legend
Won all big events, and 13 of them twice. Beat Federer at Wimbledon, Nadal at Roland Garros.

Is Djokovic the most complete player of all times?
No. Needs another FO. Only Nadal has that claim of completeness as he has the best resume on his weakest surface .
 

Shaolin

Talk Tennis Guru
No. Needs another FO. Only Nadal has that claim of completeness as he has the best resume on his weakest surface .

Nadal has no claim on completeness in any way.

He has zero Tour Finals titles and only 2 titles ever indoors. Compare that to Fed and Novak.

Novak is definitely the most complete player, all he lacks is a good overhead which hasn't held him back at all.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
Difficult to tell because of homogenized surfaces. His net game, for example, is a definite weakness of his (not that it’s so bad, but just lacking compared to the rest of his game), but he hasn’t been held back by it because there’s often no reason for him to use it. Today’s courts don’t call for a good net game so why bother?

I don’t think we’ll ever see something along the likes of Borg playing grinding rallies on the clay at RG and then switching to a serve and volley game for Wimbledon.
 

Beckerserve

Legend
Nadal has no claim on completeness in any way.

He has zero Tour Finals titles and only 2 titles ever indoors. Compare that to Fed and Novak.

Novak is definitely the most complete player, all he lacks is a good overhead which hasn't held him back at all.
Nadal clearly the most complete. Only one with a Golden Career Slam and the only one with more than one major on each surface and the only one with 3 Majors in one calendar year on each surface. The evidence is there for all to see. Federer is more complete than Djokovic btw.
 
Top