Novak fans, do you think there has been a player you have watched that is superior to him ? If yes why ?

What say you Nolefam

  • No, he is the best player I have seen

    Votes: 36 50.0%
  • Yes, Fraud is slightly better

    Votes: 17 23.6%
  • No, but he might be tied with another

    Votes: 3 4.2%
  • Yes, Ralph is slightly better.

    Votes: 9 12.5%
  • All the big 3 are tied

    Votes: 5 6.9%
  • Xyz is slightly better (specify)

    Votes: 2 2.8%

  • Total voters
    72

Lleytonstation

Hall of Fame
To be honest, Djoker gets to everything, and when he is on, he is basically boringly unbeatable. But he is beatable, as Fed almost showed. Then again, he did not beat him.

Djoker, is just simply the best when he is playing is A+ game. He should only fear himself.

The Rafa "never loses to anyone if he is healthy" is false. However, Djoker "never loses to anyone if he does not beat himself" is true.
 

chimneysweep

Semi-Pro
No. The fact that Federer was already several years removed from his peak years of being the dominant force on tour just reinforces my point.
So he was supposably past his prime at only 26. :-D The same guy who was no teen phenom by a long shot, and is still playing top tennis at 38. And when years later Djokovic himself is the dominant player at age 32. Not a very good point. I rate Federer over Djokovic like I said, but it isnt based on that reasoning.

Anyway the reverse could easily be done, Federer stopped being dominant once Nadal and later Djokovic reached full maturity.
 

FiReFTW

Legend
So he was supposably past his prime at only 26. :-D The same guy who was no teen phenom by a long shot, and is still playing top tennis at 38. And when years later Djokovic himself is the dominant player at age 32. Not a very good point. I rate Federer over Djokovic like I said, but it isnt based on that reasoning.

Anyway the reverse could easily be done, Federer stopped being dominant once Nadal and later Djokovic reached full maturity.
But Federer started losing to alot of players that he used to destroy before, so you can't ignore that, something is there for sure, Federer's prime years (where he was trully at the peak level) were 2003-2007 which is a 5 year period, a very long time, usually peak levels happen shorter than that, he had quite a long peak period, during which he decimated everyone.
In 2008 he got mononucleosis and his training was lacking and he was not 100%, then he got a huge loss at RG and even lost the Wimbledon final, so his confidence surely dropped, as did his aura of invincibility, and we all know confidence is huge in tennis, as is mental strenght, he also started to have back problems stretching to AO 2009 where he again lost to Ndal, some huge blows for his mentality and confidence.

Its the same for all other players aswell, Djokovic also had a similar long peak as Federer did around 5 years from 2011 to 2016, he is playing quite good now but he is not at his peak anymore, just like Fed was not at his peak anymore after then.

Nadal had a much much shorter peak even and had many spurs of good form and bad form.

All these 3 champions have years when they are in not so great shape, or in extremely good shape and form, but they all had some period when they were truly at the peak level, best level they produced on a tennis court.

For Federer it was 2003-2007, For Djokovic 2011-2016, For Nadal probably 2007-2008 and 2010
 

Xavier G

Professional
There's not much between Fed and Novak, and Rafa is very close too. They're the Big 3 of the Open era.
Fed was the better player on offense with a nicer style to watch imo, but Novak's like a brick wall on the baseline, defends so well and is more clutch in the big moments than Roger.
 
There's not much between Fed and Novak, and Rafa is very close too. They're the Big 3 of the Open era.
Fed was the better player on offense with a nicer style to watch imo, but Novak's like a brick wall on the baseline, defends so well and is more clutch in the big moments than Roger.
I would add Pete in the mix and call it a Big 4 of the Open era.
 

aman92

Hall of Fame
A man who can't execute the overhead - one of the most basis shots in Tennis is considered the greatest player people have ever seen? Dearie me.. This forum has gone down the drain after Djokovic's Wimbledon win
 

Tony48

Legend
Honestly, no. Djokovic does everything well and has no weaknesses that can be exploited. And what really makes Djokovic so great is his mental toughness. You can look great all you want against a nobody in the 2nd round of a slam, but Djokovic’s fearlessness is present in every single round....and as we saw last Sunday, even in the championship round.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic is the best I’ve seen at Miami, slow Paris indoors and plexicushion AO

For everywhere else it’s between Nadal on clay and Federer on most HC and grass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann
To be honest, Djoker gets to everything, and when he is on, he is basically boringly unbeatable. But he is beatable, as Fed almost showed. Then again, he did not beat him.

Djoker, is just simply the best when he is playing is A+ game. He should only fear himself.

The Rafa "never loses to anyone if he is healthy" is false. However, Djoker "never loses to anyone if he does not beat himself" is true.
Welcome back ma man! :)
 

Lleytonstation

Hall of Fame
Welcome back ma man! :)
Took a week to settle the mind, but it is a tennis match afterall. I think I had to just accept the fact that djoker is virtually unstoppable and might just be the greatest tennis player ever.

My tennis brain is trying to recalibrate everything that went down.
 
Took a week to settle the mind, but it is a tennis match afterall. I think I had to just accept the fact that djoker is virtually unstoppable and might just be the greatest tennis player ever.

My tennis brain is trying to recalibrate everything that went down.
Yeah, it was quite surreal! It's just a tennis match, but with everything at stake and all the drama, it's still lingering and taking up loads of time from my GMAT prep (~_\)

Now that you are warming up to him, time to change your sig ;)
 

Lleytonstation

Hall of Fame
Yeah, it was quite surreal! It's just a tennis match, but with everything at stake and all the drama, it's still lingering and taking up loads of time from my GMAT prep (~_\)

Now that you are warming up to him, time to change your sig ;)
Hahaha, not warming up to him, just accepting reality. Plus, I said MIGHT.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Professional
To be honest, Djoker gets to everything, and when he is on, he is basically boringly unbeatable. But he is beatable, as Fed almost showed. Then again, he did not beat him.

Djoker, is just simply the best when he is playing is A+ game. He should only fear himself.

The Rafa "never loses to anyone if he is healthy" is false. However, Djoker "never loses to anyone if he does not beat himself" is true.
This is a too simplified statement. It needs to be broken down to surfaces. On clay for instance peak Nadal will always beat every version of Djokovic no matter whether Novak beats himself or not. Talking about Wimbledon peak for peak I would also give a small edge to Federer even though this might be closer. If we are including now fast surfaces that unfortunately do not exist anymore (90s grass, carpet) then there is no way any version of Djokovic beats peak Federer or peak Sampras. This leaves us in the end with slow HC where your statement is true. On slow HC peak Djokovic > everybody else in history.
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
To be honest, Djoker gets to everything, and when he is on, he is basically boringly unbeatable. But he is beatable, as Fed almost showed. Then again, he did not beat him.

Djoker, is just simply the best when he is playing is A+ game. He should only fear himself.

The Rafa "never loses to anyone if he is healthy" is false. However, Djoker "never loses to anyone if he does not beat himself" is true.
You've been reading way too much Ultronian garbage lol
 

Ann

Hall of Fame
So, why don't you leave this ridiculous thread and continue watching matches on youtube or write some comments anywhere else where you can pick even more likes than you have right now?

Don't worry, we can live without you. We could live without tennis before 2015, we can live without your posts as well.
Why don't you post with your usual account, instead of using one of your backups? Or do you know I already have those on ignore?

And you actually admit you started watching tennis in 2015 and don't think anything before that counts. Thank you for proving my case. Please keep posting.
 

kevaninho

Hall of Fame
Depends on the surface. Taking into account everything it's between him and Fed for the modern era for me. Second tier would be Nadal/Sampras/Lendl/Borg etc...
I guess people aren't reading the original question. It has nothing to do with tiers, it asks is there anyone you consider better than Djokovic.

Why are people turning this into the usual garbage? :rolleyes:
 
Why don't you post with your usual account, instead of using one of your backups? Or do you know I already have those on ignore?

And you actually admit you started watching tennis in 2015 and don't think anything before that counts. Thank you for proving my case. Please keep posting.
You and ignore - a match made in heaven innit Ann ?
 

Nadal_Django

Hall of Fame
Based on consistency, no. Based on peak tennis, Safin and Federer have higher peaks. Wawrinka, Del Potro and Nadal are about tied with Djokovic in their peaks.


Past greats: Kuerten has higher clay peak, Sampras has higher indoor and grass peak. Wooden racket era I won't talk about as it's a different sport
Peak Djokovic would smoke both of this guy's easily. Safin :-D:laughing:
 

SamprasisGOAT

Semi-Pro
I genuinely the 2 greatest players to ever pick up a racket are Sampras and Djokovic.

I was saying this when I saw Djokovic play in 2012.

I see it this way.

Sampras is the best on fast surfaces just better than Federer.

Djokovic is the best on slow surfaces just washing out nadal.
 

mental midget

Hall of Fame
tough call. they win in different ways. i started watching tennis post-borg but i think he and novak share that “this guy just isn’t going to miss” inevitability about their games. on the other side of the spectrum you have roger, and for me, pete when he was firing on all cylinders—more a feeling of, doesn’t matter if the other guy won’t miss, they’re going to play right though them. more of a high wire act of course, harder to pull off. but when they’re clicking, i give that style a slight edge.

so, i suppose id put federer just above novak, zone for zone playing...but against anybody not federer, i don’t see novak losing.
 

mental midget

Hall of Fame
does anybody remember pete’s first uso victory v agassi btw? agassi was playing great, but along comes this kid and it was just like...a different story. bombing aces, 115 mph second serves which was not really a thing at the time, blasting winners from back of court, and just like a wall at the net...shoestring volley winners, etc. I remember we were all at a lesson the next day, and everyone was just like, “what in the world was that?!?”
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
Sampras is the best on fast surfaces just better than Federer.
Because Sampras actually had fast surfaces to play on. Since 2003 (the vast majority of Roger's career), he's been denied carpet, fast grass and generally fast HC's. And anyway, Roger beat your guy the one and only time they met... on a very fast surface. Put Pete on today's Wimbledon grass and Agassi beats him like a drum every time there.

You must literally have been living in some random basement since 2009 thinking Sampras is better at anything than Fed (besides 6 straight YE #1's). Roger surpassed him in June, 2009 in every other department.
 

mavsman149

Hall of Fame
"Hardly ever comes in" according to people who don't watch him play matches unless it's against their favorite.

The actual stats tell a different story. Djokovic played 1545 total points at Wimbledon this year, and came to net 230 times, winning 170 of those points. That's good for a 15% net approach rate, and 74% net points won.
For comparison, Fed came in 256 times on 1572 points, and won 203 of those net points. This is a 16% approach rate with a 79% success rate. 1% higher approach rate than Novak despite having a better serve, giving him a better chance of attacking.

In short, Djokovic comes to net 1% less than Federer, who should be our frame of reference. Wow, what a humongous difference! Unless you mean to tell me Fed also "hardly ever comes in"
“But Federer has a one handed backhand, he has to be good at volleys!” Most tennis fans probably

I’m by no means saying Fed isn’t a good volleyer but at no point during his slam winning days has he really been a net rusher. Having a one hander automatically makes a baseline player gets your style of play updated to “all court player” or something like that.
 

MeatTornado

Legend
A man who can't execute the overhead - one of the most basis shots in Tennis is considered the greatest player people have ever seen? Dearie me.. This forum has gone down the drain after Djokovic's Wimbledon win
Also an extremely mediocre net game.

He's got a game tailor-made for today's courts though.
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
Didn't like the fact that my fav got troubled by a 38 year old pensioner. But let us make hay while sun shines.
Is the Swiss Army paying him a pension for his services during the WW1 or 2 where I am told he injured his back.

Or is it the government ?
 

Cashman

Professional
He is the greatest based on the style of play tennis currently demands and rewards.
This is the answer as far as I am concerned. I don't think I have ever seen anyone play Djokovic's style of tennis better than Djokovic himself, and his style of tennis is clearly dominant under current circumstances.

However "better" or "superior" are IMO subjective terms. The players that I regard as the pinnacle of the sport are the ones I most enjoy watching, or who play the style that I most enjoy playing. Few of those would be considered as 'GOAT candidates' by those who care about such things.
 

Pantera

Hall of Fame
Novak is moving near GOAThood status with every slam , but many have always called him the best ever and he might really be.


Do you,as a fan, think he is the best player *you* have seen?

Personally, I think he really might be. The greatest combination of grit , athleticism and controlled offense.

I think he just mastered his strengths and improved his weaknesses to the point he is , as an article rightfully said, a fortress.

The only player I might put over him is Fred. Not because I like him too but because Fred at his best has a lot of attacking options and his game might be more suited across the surfaces.

With him and Novak I am at 50-50. Maybe Novak edges it due to being better mentally.


Note : As the OP , I do not want this to descend into an usual big 3 beauty contest. I request people to respect each other's opinion, simply state their own and not indulge in unnecessary argument,keep that for other zillion threads .

Only Novak Fans, anyone who's not one if he wishes to post , must post about someone who is superior to his favorite.
Im a Nadal fan. Djokovic superior on Asian HC and grass, Nadal is better on clay and in my view American hard courts.

Djokovic and Nadal are too hard to split uniformly as to who is better overall. What we do know is Nadal is better than Federer everywhere but grass, and Djokovic is better than Federer everywhere.

I suppose that sort of puts Djokovic as the boss man.
 

Pantera

Hall of Fame
Depends on the surface. Taking into account everything it's between him and Fed for the modern era for me. Second tier would be Nadal/Sampras/Lendl/Borg etc...
LMAO..the contradictions of Federer fans is priceless. Nadal and Djokovic are tier 1 clearly, Federer tier 2. Its as clear as a bell...Federer career has two parts, one pre Nadal/Djokovic the 2nd less impressive post Nadal/Djokovic.
 
Guys, Federer still deserves this distinction until it is snatched from him!

Let’s also not forget that if Fed had played match points differently in 2011 and 2019, he might well be sitting on 23 slams and Novak at 14. Kudos to Nole for legendary mental fortitude on those points but still...
 

Lew II

Hall of Fame
Wow, is that true? If so, then that’s unreal!
WI 14 - b. Federer
UO 14 - b. Murray
AO 15 - b. Murray
RG 15 - b. Nadal
RG 15 - b. Murray
WI 15 - b. Federer
UO 15 - b. Federer
AO 16 - b. Federer
AO 16 - b. Murray
RG 16 - b. Murray
WI 18 - b. Nadal
AO 19 - b. Nadal
WI 19 - b. Federer

I know, it's unreal.
 

thrust

Hall of Fame
He is the greatest based on the style of play tennis currently demands and rewards.

What I find even more interesting is that in 2 years or fewer, he is almost sure to have the Slam record and weeks at #1 record. And that’s after going on a 2 year “walk about”. Had he not done that, he’d already have both records now
As a Novak fan I would have to admit that Roger, Novak and Rafa are equal but in different aspects of the game. My wish for Novak I wish he would take more shots out of the air and play more of a net game in order to shorten points. In this respect Roger is definitely superior to Novak.
 
Top