Novak fans: would you "sign up" for 3 more slams?

tennis_pro said:
Every sane person knows that if Federer and Djokovic were the same age it wouldn't be 50-50 but more like 70-30 or better for Federer. He's that much better than Djokovic.
Click to expand...

When Fed fan explains what sane person should know. :rolleyes:
 
OhYes said:
When Fed fan explains what sane person should know. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Compare the number of times that they played in 2011-2015 to 2006-2007 (2008-2010 are neutral years). It's a slap in the face. And the h2h is dead even. Djokovic is taking full advantage of Federer's age in 2011-2015, if Federer was in his prime now now would Djokovic would be winning 3 Slams a year LOL not even close, especially against that pathetic field. Prime Federer would have won 3 Slams easily this year against the grinder.
 
tennis_pro said:
Compare the number of times that they played in 2011-2015 to 2006-2007 (2008-2010 are neutral years). It's a slap in the face. And the h2h is dead even. Djokovic is taking full advantage of Federer's age in 2011-2015, if Federer was in his prime now now would Djokovic would be winning 3 Slams a year LOL not even close, especially against that pathetic field. Prime Federer would have won 3 Slams easily this year against the grinder.
Click to expand...
I assume that you are aware of Novak's years back in 2006-2007 as Feds years ofcourse (19 yo vs 25 yo). They've played 6 times in 2006-2007 meaning Djokovic was very young and had trouble getting to Fed. Federer on the other hand, never sank so low even in his 30s, that he couldn't be recognized as BIG 2,3 or 4. Except in 2013 but they only played twice in that year. As Novak had a slump in 2010, when he thought of retiring, they've played 5 times.
 
OhYes said:
I assume that you are aware of Novak's years back in 2006-2007 as Feds years ofcourse (19 yo vs 25 yo). They've played 6 times in 2006-2007 meaning Djokovic was very young and had trouble getting to Fed. Federer on the other hand, never sank so low even in his 30s, that he couldn't be recognized as BIG 2,3 or 4. Except in 2013 but they only played twice in that year. As Novak had a slump in 2010, when he thought of retiring, they've played 5 times.
Click to expand...

There are multiple more matches that they played when Djokovic had the age advantage compared to the other way round. Not to mention the gap widens with every passing day and I'm 100% sure they're going to play another 5-10 matches until Fed retires. The younger player always ends up with the better h2h, this ain't no new philosophy. The fact that Federer hasn't trailed the h2h at all despite the fact that they've played more than half of their matches in 2011-2015 says how much he's better than Djokovic. A 34-year old Djokovic wouldn't stand a chance against a 28-year old Federer, man there would be bagels and breadsticks everywhere.
 
tennis_pro said:
Name me one other 5+ Slam winning player who has less Slams than another all-time great and is considered greater. And if not, don't tell me Djokovic is going to be first.
Click to expand...

Laver and Emerson.

Although, I do agree with you. Djokovic needs to at least equal Nadal, for other things like WTF and weeks at number one to be brought into consideration.
 
Hitman said:
Laver and Emerson.

Although, I do agree with you. Djokovic needs to at least equal Nadal, for other things like WTF and weeks at number one to be brought into consideration.
Click to expand...
Why don't you think those other achievements of Djokovic would be enough to fill the one slam deficit?
 
Hitman said:
Laver and Emerson.

Although, I do agree with you. Djokovic needs to at least equal Nadal, for other things like WTF and weeks at number one to be brought into consideration.
Click to expand...
So Nadal with 18 GS titles would be greater than Federer even with not even half of weeks at #1, no WTF titles and just one 3 slam season?
 
Federer/Novak matches 2006/2015
2006- 2 0
2007- 3 1
2008- 2 1
2009- 2 3
2010- 4 1
2006/2010 (19 matches 13 6 in Federer favour)

2011- 1 4
2012 -2 3
2013 -0 2
2014- 3 2(3 if not that shameful w/o that Roger gave to Novak at WTF14)
2015- 2 4
2011/2015 (23 matches 15 8 in Novak favour)

Notice the following
-in a year of worst Novaks slump since he became Top player 2010 they played 5 matches, also 2009 was pretty poor year for Novak still they played 5 matches. In those 2 years they split victories 5 5
-in best Novaks year 2011 they played 5 matches
-in worst Federer year as a Top player 2013 they played 2 matches
-2006/2007 Novak was just about to break through in top mens tennis they played 7 matches


Surfaces
Clay 4 4
Hard 16 15
Grass 1 2

GS
AO - 1 2
RG- 1 1
Wim- 1 2
USO -3 3

GS Finals 1 3

Match up is even as it looks like now, although I could swear that until recently you fanatics considered that Novak has match up disadvantages against Federer.
So please, spare us off your useless all day long blabbing here driven by megalomania and false sence of superiority in this case.
tennis_pro said:
Compare the number of times that they played in 2011-2015 to 2006-2007 (2008-2010 are neutral years). It's a slap in the face. And the h2h is dead even. Djokovic is taking full advantage of Federer's age in 2011-2015, if Federer was in his prime now now would Djokovic would be winning 3 Slams a year LOL not even close, especially against that pathetic field. Prime Federer would have won 3 Slams easily this year against the grinder.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
tennis_pro said:
There are multiple more matches that they played when Djokovic had the age advantage compared to the other way round. Not to mention the gap widens with every passing day and I'm 100% sure they're going to play another 5-10 matches until Fed retires. The younger player always ends up with the better h2h, this ain't no new philosophy. The fact that Federer hasn't trailed the h2h at all despite the fact that they've played more than half of their matches in 2011-2015 says how much he's better than Djokovic. A 34-year old Djokovic wouldn't stand a chance against a 28-year old Federer, man there would be bagels and breadsticks everywhere.
Click to expand...

Even you know that Novak is not that kind of guy who would stay in the game in his 34. That's why Fed 28 would beat him.
Younger player Novak has negative H2H vs Roddick, Safin, Gonzales, because they couldn't give prime Novak chance to level things up. So older players should have better h2h over younger players - that's no new philosophy.
 
OhYes said:
Even you know that Novak is not that kind of guy who would stay in the game in his 34. That's why Fed 28 would beat him.
Younger player Novak has negative H2H vs Roddick, Safin, Gonzales, because they couldn't give prime Novak chance to level things up. So older players should have better h2h over younger players - that's no new philosophy.
Click to expand...

Depends on how many matches you play at what stages. Djokovic faced Roddick mostly before 2010. Against Federer he played as many as 22 matches in 2011-2015 which is crazy. If Federer retired at the same age as Roddick or Sampras he would've led the h2h comfortably.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I often see Becker and Edberg above Wilander in greatest of all time lists.
Click to expand...

That's because Wilander won 2 AO's in the early 80's. If Slams have the same values, the player with more Slam will be considered greater. Only when the Slam count is identical other factors come into play. So if Djokovic ends up with 13 Slams, 50 Masters, 10 WTF's, 500 weeks at no 1 Nadal will still be considered greater.
 
Hitman said:
Laver and Emerson.

Although, I do agree with you. Djokovic needs to at least equal Nadal, for other things like WTF and weeks at number one to be brought into consideration.
Click to expand...

Well if you count all the Slam equivalents Laver has like 19 Slams compared to 12 for Emerson (Rosewall has 22 btw).
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Why don't you think those other achievements of Djokovic would be enough to fill the one slam deficit?
Click to expand...

Because you will always have people arguing, "But he trails in slams", that argument will not exist, if he equals Nadal. And I do feel, all he has to do is equal him, and with everything else, it will make it difficult for Nadal to be placed ahead of him.
 
tennis_pro said:
That's because Wilander won 2 AO's in the early 80's. If Slams have the same values, the player with more Slam will be considered greater. Only when the Slam count is identical other factors come into play. So if Djokovic ends up with 13 Slams, 50 Masters, 10 WTF's, 500 weeks at no 1 Nadal will still be considered greater.
Click to expand...
He really won't t_p lol. Why should all those other achievements of Djokovic only come into play if he has the same amount of slams? Tennis is played throughout January-November, not just eight weeks of the year.
 
Cortana said:
So Nadal with 18 GS titles would be greater than Federer even with not even half of weeks at #1, no WTF titles and just one 3 slam season?
Click to expand...

He will certainly have a strong case for it. The thing is, so much importance is placed upon slam count, many people start to have that narrow tunnel vision, and nothing else matters. This all came about from Sampras, he has changed the way we see the game forever.
 
tennis_pro said:
Depends on how many matches you play at what stages. Djokovic faced Roddick mostly before 2010. Against Federer he played as many as 22 matches in 2011-2015 which is crazy. If Federer retired at the same age as Roddick or Sampras he would've led the h2h comfortably.
Click to expand...
Yes, but if Federer really declined and sucked big time in 2011-2015, he wouldn't ever be in position to play so many matches against Djokovic. Look just at Nadal and his form. He couldn't even get to QF in UO to play vs Novak.
 
OhYes said:
Yes, but if Federer really declined and sucked big time in 2011-2015, he wouldn't ever be in position to play so many matches against Djokovic. Look just at Nadal and his form. He couldn't even get to QF in UO to play vs Novak.
Click to expand...

That's because Federer can still play well but he will never play as well as he did in his mid 20's. He's just better in decline than Nadal that's why he keeps reaching the latter rounds of tournaments.
 
Hitman said:
Because you will always have people arguing, "But he trails in slams", that argument will not exist, if he equals Nadal. And I do feel, all he has to do is equal him, and with everything else, it will make it difficult for Nadal to be placed ahead of him.
Click to expand...
Fair enough but I disagree. I think if there's no more than a 2 slam gap between two players' resumes and the guy with less majors is superior in the next two most important metrics(weeks at #1, WTF) there's an argument that can be made in his favour. Don't forget that there's a 4 slam gap between Graf and Navratilova and yet there are still some people to this day who argue that Martina is greater.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
He really won't t_p lol. Why should all those other achievements of Djokovic only come into play if he has the same amount of slams? Tennis is played throughout January-November, not just eight weeks of the year.
Click to expand...

WTF's, rankings and other tournaments only come into play when 2 players have amassed the same number of Slams.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Fair enough but I disagree. I think if there's no more than a 2 slam gap between two players' resumes and the guy with less majors is superior in the next two most important metrics(weeks at #1, WTF) there's an argument that can be made in his favour. Don't forget that there's a 4 slam gap between Graf and Navratilova and yet there are still some people to this day who argue that Martina is greater.
Click to expand...

You can make a poll if you like. 95% of people would say that Nadal would still be greater.
 
tennis_pro said:
You can make a poll if you like. 95% of people would say that Nadal would still be greater.
Click to expand...
I'd imagine they'd probably be about equal if Nole gets to 12 slams including RG. What do you think he needs to do to be placed above Nadal t_p? Looking forward to this.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Fair enough but I disagree. I think if there's no more than a 2 slam gap between two players' resumes and the guy with less majors is superior in the next two most important metrics(weeks at #1, WTF) there's an argument that can be made in his favour. Don't forget that there's a 4 slam gap between Graf and Navratilova and yet there are still some people to this day who argue that Martina is greater.
Click to expand...

That is fine, we don't have to agree. The situation is this, you are here constantly arguing this point with others, which shows that many don't see eye to eye with other metrics being brought into place before slam count. Why do Nadal fans want 18, because they know that despite all the other stats in which is falling behind, the biggest one of them all will belong to Nadal, strengthening his case. Djokovic gets 14, he surpasses Nadal in my eyes, because he will have everything else, providing Nadal doesn't win additional titles.
 
When two players are in the same slam count, the one who reached first would always be listed higher by the general media.

Novak's goals should be 15 and 18, not 14 and 17
 
tennis_pro said:
That's because Federer can still play well but he will never play as well as he did in his mid 20's. He's just better in decline than Nadal that's why he keeps reaching the latter rounds of tournaments.
Click to expand...
He is better in decline ? This is the first time I've heard about such thing. You should say - he never declined (2013 excluded).
 
tennisaddict said:
When two players are in the same slam count, the one who reached first would always be listed higher by the general media.

Novak's goals should be 15 and 18, not 14 and 17
Click to expand...

When Federer reached Sampras, many had already put him ahead.
 
Novak needs 15 majors to be rated clearly above Rafa.

Anything else, Rafa will be ahead, given the immense popularity, aura he has already created.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I'd imagine they'd probably be about equal if Nole gets to 12 slams including RG. What do you think he needs to do to be placed above Nadal t_p? Looking forward to this.
Click to expand...

Reach 14 Slams, the rankings, WTF's, Masters (probably), overall titles (probably) will do the job. No number of WTF's, Masters, titles is worth as much as 1 Slam, period.
 
Nah I'm selling this. I feel like he takes such good and meticulous care of his body that he'll extend his prime through age 31/32 and then tail off like Fed's last act here. So I think he can win 4-7 more. Heck he could win 4 more next year alone if he plays like he did in 2015.
 
Cortana said:
I would sign up for all 4 Majors in 2016. That makes it a 6-1-4-3, 6 slams in a row, CYGS and a total of 14 titles.

It woulnd't matter if Nadal would end up with more slam titles. Djokovic would be the GOAT without discussion.
Click to expand...

Oh there would be discussion lol.
 
tennis_pro said:
No number of WTF's, Masters, titles is worth as much as 1 Slam, period.
Click to expand...
So what's the point in even playing them if there's no way for it to add to your overall greatness? I'd argue Djokovic's 4 WTFs are the equivalent to at least one slam, possibly even two.
 
Cortana said:
So a player with no GS titles, 2-3 WTFs, 15-20 Masters and 50-100 weeks #1 is not better than a 1 slam wonder like Cilic?
Click to expand...

If a player who is capable of winning 2-3 WTF's, 15-20 Masters and be ranked no 1 for 50-100 weeks is incapable of winning even 1 Slam (I don't know how that's even possible) then he's only himself to blame.

You took a big extreme but you can do even better. Come on. Maybe 1000 WTF'S, 10.000 titles and 50 years at no 1 but no Slams?
 
tennis_pro said:
If a player who is capable of winning 2-3 WTF's, 15-20 Masters and be ranked no 1 for 50-100 weeks is incapable of winning even 1 Slam (I don't know how that's even possible) then he's only himself to blame.

You took a big extreme but you can do even better. Come on. Maybe 1000 WTF'S, 10.000 titles and 50 years at no 1 but no Slams?
Click to expand...
Would you consider Wawrinka a greater player than Murray if he wins one additional slam?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hitman
How would you feel if Alcaraz and Sinner take all four slams this season?
2 3 4
Replies
160
Views
4K
messiahrobins
M
Djokodal Fan
Time to chin up Novak fans!
Replies
11
Views
801
thrust
T
M
If Novak doesn't finish 2014 as #1, would you fire Boris Becker
Replies
27
Views
2K
TMF
T
N
Which of these scenarios would you prefer rafa fans?
Replies
30
Views
1K
BeatlesFan
BeatlesFan
M
Federer Fans - Would you rather: he retires tomorrow but Nadal/Djokovic never win another Grand Slam or Federer keeps playing but they win more slams
Replies
14
Views
662
lelopez
lelopez
Back
Top