Just think, if Nadal never existed, Djokovic would be the undisputed GOAT of all time.
- Thread starter Matheson
- Start date
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
A player without an allcourt game cannot be GOAT
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
CYGS x 4?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
No, without Nadal Fed would be the undisputed GOAT.
Matheson
Semi-Pro
Federer? Lol yeah sure ok the guy has a few extra slams, but he is like 10 years older and won most of them beating unformidable opponents in a weak era eons ago.
Nadal_Django
Legend
The only Slam in which Fed have really stopped Djokovic from winning the title was 07 USO. Maybe 09 USO also were I think he would have a great shot against Delpo that year.
11 RG Djoker is losing to Nadal in the final, and 12 WB is losing to Murray in the final.
So Fed is kinda irrelevant for the topic at hand, don't you think!?
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
Exactly. He is the Alpha of the group and without Nadal and later Djo he would ha e had a weak decade of feasting instead of those first years until Nadal exploded on scene.
But, Fedal has been epic and made tennis what it is today.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic is the most complete player, he is the only who won all big tournaments.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Djokovic has beaten weak era opponents as early as 2015, so much more recent than eons ago
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Nah, he would have had it a bit easier until 2007 when Djojovic would break onto the scene and play Fed in all 4 slams.
J
joohan
Guest
You can’t propose an alternate universe without one of the major influences in said environment and just assume everything else would happen the same way as in reality minus/plus some hard data.
Now in plain words - you can’t just assume that without Rafa, Djoker would win exactly as much as he has plus I don’t know what on top. The big three are pushing themselves because of the “other two” all the time and their success is in big part owed to their rivalries. To contemplate ones potential success in an alternate reality will therefore be wildly inaccurate and thus utterly pointless...
Now in plain words - you can’t just assume that without Rafa, Djoker would win exactly as much as he has plus I don’t know what on top. The big three are pushing themselves because of the “other two” all the time and their success is in big part owed to their rivalries. To contemplate ones potential success in an alternate reality will therefore be wildly inaccurate and thus utterly pointless...
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
You mean Federer x5, Nadal x3, Murray x4?Djokovic has beaten weak era opponents as early as 2015, so much more recent than eons ago
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
This makes way too much sense!
Bagel Boy
Rookie
You don't have to be the most complete player, to win all the big tournaments, do you?
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Winning all tournaments on all surfaces is the best you can do to prove you're a complete tennis player.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Imagine if this is the alternate universe and the real GOAT had been wished he was never born by his haters, allowing Federer, Nadal and Djokovic to scavenge away his titles....
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
Presumably you speak of Berdych?
OldschoolKIaus
Hall of Fame
Just think, if court speed never dropped down to ridiculous levels Djoko would be a one slam wonder (AO 2008).
ibbi
G.O.A.T.
You can pretty much say that about any of the three of them.
No Federer -
Novak surely has at least one or two more USO, more than likely RG 11, Nadal has likely 2 more Wimbledons to his name, plus AO17.
No Nadal -
Federer must have minimum 5 RG titles, another Wimbledon, AO14, and he probably wouldn't have minded his chances at AO12 either. Djokovic probably has 5 RG titles as well, 2 more USO's.
No Djokovic -
Rog has almost surely got 3 more Wimbledon titles to his name, will have liked his chances at for sure 3 more Aussie Opens, maybe 4 at a stretch, he won't probably have minded his chances at 10/11 USO, and he'd almost certainly have the 2015 one in the bag. Nadal would have almost for sure 2 more Wimbledons, 2 more AO, one more USO.
No Federer -
Novak surely has at least one or two more USO, more than likely RG 11, Nadal has likely 2 more Wimbledons to his name, plus AO17.
No Nadal -
Federer must have minimum 5 RG titles, another Wimbledon, AO14, and he probably wouldn't have minded his chances at AO12 either. Djokovic probably has 5 RG titles as well, 2 more USO's.
No Djokovic -
Rog has almost surely got 3 more Wimbledon titles to his name, will have liked his chances at for sure 3 more Aussie Opens, maybe 4 at a stretch, he won't probably have minded his chances at 10/11 USO, and he'd almost certainly have the 2015 one in the bag. Nadal would have almost for sure 2 more Wimbledons, 2 more AO, one more USO.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
Last edited:
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
... this version ?Post Imagine, while you're at it
Imagine there's no nadal,
It's easy if you try,
No clay below us,
Only low bouncing carpet,
Imagine all the players
Playing entertaining tennis...
Imagine there's no nadal
It isn't hard to do
No cheating to bear
And no faking too
Imagine all the players
Playing tennis in peace...
Imagine no topspin plague,
I wonder if you can,
No need for buttpick or phony uncle,
A brotherhood of man,
Imagine all the players
Butchering the golden bull...
You may say I'm a dreamer,
But I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And tennis will be saved.
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
Tennis_Hands
Banned
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Your definition of ‘complete ‘ player is laughable .Even Zverev or Medvedev can win all tournaments, but that proves zilch
Djokovic does not have an allcourt game . Plain and simple.
Sudacafan
Bionic Poster
I think that applies more for Federer. Nadal not existing, Federer retires with 30 psalms in 2015, because with his confidence up, he would not be beaten by Djokovic.
Cup8489
G.O.A.T.
He would have had 10 straight majors if not for Nadal. I don't care about the weak or strong era argument.. if a player does that on top of holding the record for majors and two CYGS, he's the GOAT.
Bagel Boy
Rookie
Right, and Djokovic is "the most" complete tennis player because...? He's the equivalent of a stat sheet stuffer? More to it than checking off boxes.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Without Nadal Fed wins like 11 Slams in a row
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Undisputed? Yeah right.
MurraysMetalHip
Hall of Fame
But he does, so he isn’t.
Hurry up Miami and IW.
Hurry up Miami and IW.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
Interesting to think how many times Federer would have been #1 had neither Nadal nor Djokovic taken up tennis. In those circumstances, and assuming nobody else developed better than they did to fill the gap, it's conceivable that Federer would have been #1 for nine straight years (2004-2012), two further years after recovering from injury (2014-15, although by 2015 it is pretty likely that Murray would have got #1 overall by doing better in minor tournaments even if Federer got the best of him in majors), and one to three further years after recovering from injury again (2017-19, although I don't think 2018 or 2019 can be taken for granted by any means).
It's also possible that in a Nadal/Djokovic-less tour, some of Federer's contemporaries such as Roddick would have played for longer and been well placed to take advantage of any dips in Federer's form.
JacksonColt
Rookie
Shankerer got thrashed up and down the globe by a Spanish clay boy because he couldn't hit a proper backhand for most of his career. Jajajajaja! He's so goaty though, no?
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Oh and I thought that winning on all surfaces is a proof of being complete. The proof is the eye test from Fed fans, as always...
ChaelAZ
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, I think Djo would have taken some, but early Djo wasn't as big a challenge for Fed, and by 2007 Fed would have had several years of winning about everything. Crazy to even think about...
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
Which is exactly what would happen if Nadal was taken out of Djokovic’s era.
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
The original comment is that he doesn't have an all-court game. That refers to the ability to play in the backcourt, midcourt and net. Not the ability to win on any type of court surface.
You guys are arguing apples & oranges.
RelentlessAttack
Hall of Fame
Nole wouldn’t be who he is without Nadal, and Nadal wouldn’t be who he is with Federer. And Wawrinka wouldn’t be who he is without Djokovic, and so on. Just confusing why no other players were similarly forged from adversity thereafter
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
If you knew to watch and analyze the game , you would know that Djokovic is a baseliner
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Simplistic view. There are many different types of baseline game. Do you think Agassi and Brugera played the same way just because they were baseliners?
Djokovic masters the most of them, as the results prove.
RudyHuxtable
Semi-Pro
This might be some exceptional trollery
I Am Finnish
Bionic Poster
Behave
