Pete Sampras: Djokovic is the "complete package" mentally/physically, could reach 16, 17 slams..

V

VexlanderPrime

Guest
Also says around 2:40 "Roger's almost playing better now than he did 10 years ago, he's improving".
keyword: almost.

Look the reality is that at age 30-31 certain things begin to slow down and there is NOTHING you can do about it. Your fast twitch muscles don't fire as fast, your reaction time is a lil slower, you don't heal/recover as fast.

All this stuff has happened to Fed. He's compensated by improving his serve and maxing out his technique. But even with those improvements he can't overcome aging. You can see it in his inconsistency. His FH might have the same strength and technique but it's not as consistent. His movement is plainly a notch below what it was.

So, there u have it. His 2015 version was damn good, probably equivalent to an average ATG but not his GOAT level.
 

6august

Hall of Fame
Then there is the whole Nole Slam and holding all 4 titles at once.... you know that big elephant in the room - that doesn't matter apparently

That's it.
Actually it's very very big - he's the only one in history holds all 4 majors on 4 different surfaces.

However, it's qualitative - which may causes never-ending discussions.

18 - he would end every discussion once for all. Even haters would have to accept that he's the GOAT.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
I wouldn't be too sure. It depends on the next 2 slams. If he gets to 14 by end of this year, Federer's record will last another year or 2, at the most.

Djokovic is still very far away from 17, and chances are slim that he'll ever reach that. And yet, you read this kind of posts every day. Although, when you think of it, if by any chance he does win 5 more, there will be no place to run for Federer. Every career defining streak he has pales in comparison to what Djokovic accomplished on the 5th of June 2016. 10 straight GS finals, 23 straight GS semis...You name it. If he indeed gets to 17 he'll probably reach 300 weeks at #1, too.
 

swordtennis

Legend
LOL, Djokovic2011 and Sword bhais are in overdrive today. But I think the Federer fans brought it upon themselves by constantly belittling Djokovic :)



They sure as hell did, Sunny.
just got sick of bending over for these trolls.
Great gif btw.
The thing is with me is that the biggest reason I like Novak is that he had the nerve to break up the fedal duopoly.
Oh and he is NOT Federer or Nadal!
Same reason I like Murray as well.
Give em hell Murrovic!
The constant bashing and weak era arguments are logically flawed and not reality based as well.
Now one can argue it is not the strongest era in the history of tennis.
have not a problem with that. However if all it is based on negative agenda based hatred then there are going to be problems.
Also this is a deep era just like Murray said. strong and deep are not inclusive to each other.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
Great post X 10,000, Sword bhai! Yes I found that gif to be very indicative of any sane tennis fan's reaction upon hearing the complaints against Djokovic :) There are at least 50 posts every day about weak era, LOL :)

My point is that it may be a weak era but that isn't Djokovic's fault. There is a reason Laver calls him the GOAT. If you take this version of DJokovic and stick him in any era, he'll still be winning grand slams at a rate that will make even the great champions do this-



They sure as hell did, Sunny.
just got sick of bending over for these trolls.
Great gif btw.
The thing is with me is that the biggest reason I like Novak is that he had the nerve to break up the fedal duopoly.
Oh and he is NOT Federer or Nadal!
Same reason I like Murray as well.
Give em hell Murrovic!
The constant bashing and weak era arguments are logically flawed and not reality based as well.
Now one can argue it is not the strongest era in the history of tennis.
have not a problem with that. However if all it is based on negative agenda based hatred then there are going to be problems.
Also this is a deep era just like Murray said. strong and deep are not inclusive to each other.
 

Achilles82

Professional
In this thread: TW's resident armchair pundits tell us why they know more about tennis than Pete Sampras.


In the above interview with CNN, Sampras discusses how impressed he is with Djokovic's dominance, says "mentally/physically he's the complete package", is "dominating at a time when the game is strong", and "to beat Rafa at the French, truly he's one of the greatest of all time", can "pass me, get to 16, 17...(pause), you just never know". Also discussed why he won't coach on the ATP tour.
Nah, screw Sampras. Fed fans on this forum say Novak is average player who is using weak era to win all these titles.
 

swordtennis

Legend
^^^
wow fantastic gif @Sunny Ali!!!! LMAO
I see Sunny is a fan of Mountain Hardwear!
Great company still produce most of their product in the states.
I was one of the first Mountain Hardwear customers way back.
Have gone through several of their 600 fill phantom line down jackets.
Still have one that is duct taped together that thing kept me alive when we got trapped up in the high desert mountains for 10 days. lol.
Nearly had to walk out of that Alive style. lol
They have exploded in maketing popularity.
My dad was one of the first North Face customers back in the 70's and had a few canoe adventures sponsored by them.
Low key company back in the day.
Damn straight about Djokovic.
If one thinks The Great Rod Laver talks nonsense and fluff you know little about the great Rocket Rod and tennis in general.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
Sword bhai, you are a genius! The next time I plan on buying some expensive apparel, I know who to consult first :)

Speaking of apparel, poor Nike. They invested millions of dollars on the supposedly 2 most popular tennis stars but look who's getting most of the air time. Uniqlo must be laughing all the way to the bank! :)

^^^
wow fantastic gif @Sunny Ali!!!! LMAO
I see Sunny is a fan of Mountain Hardwear!
Great company still produce most of their product in the states.
I was one of the first Mountain Hardwear customers way back.
Have gone through several of their 600 fill phantom line down jackets.
Still have one that is duct taped together that thing kept me alive when we got trapped up in the high desert mountains for 10 days. lol.
Nearly had to walk out of that Alive style. lol
They have exploded in maketing popularity.
My dad was one of the first North Face customers back in the 70's and had a few canoe adventures sponsored by them.
Low key company back in the day.
Damn straight about Djokovic.
If one thinks The Great Rod Laver talks nonsense and fluff you know little about the great Rocket Rod and tennis in general.
 

D.Nalby12

Legend
I never believed Nadal would ever threaten Fed's top position but Djokovic? I always thought he would. He has that potential but the way he was underachieving during 2012-14, I thought he would settle with 9-10 Slams. Last 17 months in Tennis have been truly dramatic. Nobody saw it coming, the guy who losing Slam finals after finals which got him tag of Choker (Some said Chokovic), went on to win NCYGS. Now he is undisputed GOAT candidate with very rounded resume and still going very strong although ageing. I think Pete is right here. Federer's top position IS in danger. Djokovic is chasing him in all categories, Slam titles, WTF, weeks, Top 10 wins, various steaks and you name it. He has already established himself more dominant champion than Federer, He has more Masters titles, h2h lead already. So he is on track, I believe. He is no longer set to finish career as underachiever.
 
Last edited:
If we were just to compare slam count alone and IF Nole wins 17 slams, the tie-breaker would be the difference in number of Wimbledon. Not all slams are equally prestigious and people valued each one over the others. The consensus is that Wimbledon has always been the holy grail of tennis. I mean just imagine Borg won 5 AO instead of 5 Wimbledon, he wouldn't be placed more in goat argument, less of a sport icon and not as much famous/popular.
Borg would've won 5 Aussie Opens IN ADDITION TO his Wimbledon championships had he played them..... your "either/or" rings hollow there "#1 poster!"
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
Borg would've won 5 Aussie Opens IN ADDITION TO his Wimbledon championships had he played them..... your "either/or" rings hollow there "#1 poster!"
I would doubt it! Aussie grass a totally different condition with the heat, bugs, and terrible bounces! Lendl tried and never got over the hump until they went HC! :rolleyes:
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I would doubt it! Aussie grass a totally different condition with the heat, bugs, and terrible bounces! Lendl tried and never got over the hump until they went HC! :rolleyes:
yeah, because lendl won 5 wimbledons on grass like borg did, oh wait :oops:
 

GabeT

Legend
He will win more slams than Fed after 29 because he doesn't have a 24-25 year old version of himself to stop him.
But Federer's decline at 29 was not because of Nadal or Djokovic, even if Nole stopped him at a few Slams.

If you look at Federer art 28/29 he was much weaker than Nole at 28/29. At 28 Fed reached all four Slam finals winning two. But at the same age Nole reached all four finals and won three. And at 28 Nole reached the finals in all 8 Masters he played in, winning 6. Federer reached only two finals, winning both.

Looking at the performance I think it's clear that Nole is aging much better than Federer. At least for now.
 

mike danny

Talk Tennis Guru
But Federer's decline at 29 was not because of Nadal or Djokovic, even if Nole stopped him at a few Slams.

If you look at Federer art 28/29 he was much weaker than Nole at 28/29. At 28 Fed reached all four Slam finals winning two. But at the same age Nole reached all four finals and won three. And at 28 Nole reached the finals in all 8 Masters he played in, winning 6. Federer reached only two finals, winning both.

Looking at the performance I think it's clear that Nole is aging much better than Federer. At least for now.
Most definetely.

Still not having a younger ATG to play against will help Djokovic in the future as he ages.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
But Federer's decline at 29 was not because of Nadal or Djokovic, even if Nole stopped him at a few Slams.

If you look at Federer art 28/29 he was much weaker than Nole at 28/29. At 28 Fed reached all four Slam finals winning two. But at the same age Nole reached all four finals and won three. And at 28 Nole reached the finals in all 8 Masters he played in, winning 6. Federer reached only two finals, winning both.

Looking at the performance I think it's clear that Nole is aging much better than Federer. At least for now.
This is correct.

Fed just dropped level after AO 2010. Several close losses to Baghdatis, Davydenko, Berdych, Soderling, Monfils came one after the other.
 

xFedal

Legend
This is correct.

Fed just dropped level after AO 2010. Several close losses to Baghdatis, Davydenko, Berdych, Soderling, Monfils came one after the other.
It takes a lot of effort and hard work to be as dominant and consistently winning multiple slams every year like Fed some of multiple 3 slam seasons must have added a lot mileage on Fed?
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
It takes a lot of effort and hard work to be as dominant and consistently winning multiple slams every year like Fed some of multiple 3 slam seasons must have added a lot mileage on Fed?
True. But I think it boils down to "What is my next goal" ?

Sampras target was to cross Emerson, Fed's was to cross Sampras.

Once those are accomplished it is really hard to motivate yourself for the next challenge. If Fed knew Djokovic will be on his rear like he is today, I am pretty sure he would have been more serious.

The same will occur for Djokovic also. Should he cross Fed's record there will be let down .
 

xFedal

Legend
True. But I think it boils down to "What is my next goal" ?

Sampras target was to cross Emerson, Fed's was to cross Sampras.

Once those are accomplished it is really hard to motivate yourself for the next challenge. If Fed knew Djokovic will be on his rear like he is today, I am pretty sure he would have been more serious.

The same will occur for Djokovic also. Should he cross Fed's record there will be let down .
True some of those losses to Berdych, Tsonga and others could definitely have been prevented if the hunger was still there. Talking of let downs did you see GSW vs Cavs?
 

ultradr

Legend
In this thread: TW's resident armchair pundits tell us why they know more about tennis than Pete Sampras.


In the above interview with CNN, Sampras discusses how impressed he is with Djokovic's dominance, says "mentally/physically he's the complete package", is "dominating at a time when the game is strong", and "to beat Rafa at the French, truly he's one of the greatest of all time", can "pass me, get to 16, 17...(pause), you just never know". Also discussed why he won't coach on the ATP tour.

Well, modern baseline era will produce a few 4 consecutive slams, maybe calendar one. And a dominant player will amass ~20+ slams.
It's basically back to pre-Open era.

It's just 70s-90s when it was hard to win many slams on the most diverse, polarized surface conditions.

Wait until Nole does 6+ year end #1.
 

BrooklynNY

Hall of Fame
Well, modern baseline era will produce a few 4 consecutive slams, maybe calendar one. And a dominant player will amass ~20+ slams.
It's basically back to pre-Open era.

It's just 70s-90s when it was hard to win many slams on the most diverse, polarized surface conditions.

Wait until Nole does 6+ year end #1.
I've mentioned before, that I think tennis should be viewed as distinct eras
  • Pre Open Era
  • Open Era 1968-2003
  • Open Era 2003-Present (Poly String/More regulated conditions)
    • This era we've seen 3 consecutive dominant players collect the career slam and put up unheard of numbers - everyone including former and current players and fans alike conclude that tennis in 2016 is a different game than tennis in 1993. It's almost like hard-bat ping pong paddles verses Sponge Bats in table tennis - it's a completely different game.

It's clear that every dominant player from now on will amass a career slam. Hell Murray might even end his career with a career slam - it's really not out of the realm of discussion.

Nole 6+ #1s is all but a forgone conclusion barring something freak happening(injury - another player becoming as dominant)
both of those are unlikely...

I wonder what year we are going to see a player go undefeated the entire year - Nole was the closest yet - except maybe Federer when he lost 4 matches - Noles 41-0 start to 2011 was ridiculous
 

xFedal

Legend
I've mentioned before, that I think tennis should be viewed as distinct eras
  • Pre Open Era
  • Open Era 1968-2003
  • Open Era 2003-Present (Poly String/More regulated conditions)
    • This era we've seen 3 consecutive dominant players collect the career slam and put up unheard of numbers - everyone including former and current players and fans alike conclude that tennis in 2016 is a different game than tennis in 1993. It's almost like hard-bat ping pong paddles verses Sponge Bats in table tennis - it's a completely different game.

It's clear that every dominant player from now on will amass a career slam. Hell Murray might even end his career with a career slam - it's really not out of the realm of discussion.

Nole 6+ #1s is all but a forgone conclusion barring something freak happening(injury - another player becoming as dominant)
both of those are unlikely...

I wonder what year we are going to see a player go undefeated the entire year - Nole was the closest yet - except maybe Federer when he lost 4 matches - Noles 41-0 start to 2011 was ridiculous
Will Novak become more dominant than Federer? We know Nadal never had Feds Consistency or Dominance but Novak is Rod Lavers Successor.
 

ultradr

Legend
I've mentioned before, that I think tennis should be viewed as distinct eras
  • Pre Open Era
  • Open Era 1968-2003
  • Open Era 2003-Present (Poly String/More regulated conditions)
    • This era we've seen 3 consecutive dominant players collect the career slam and put up unheard of numbers - everyone including former and current players and fans alike conclude that tennis in 2016 is a different game than tennis in 1993. It's almost like hard-bat ping pong paddles verses Sponge Bats in table tennis - it's a completely different game.

It's clear that every dominant player from now on will amass a career slam. Hell Murray might even end his career with a career slam - it's really not out of the realm of discussion.

Nole 6+ #1s is all but a forgone conclusion barring something freak happening(injury - another player becoming as dominant)
both of those are unlikely...

I wonder what year we are going to see a player go undefeated the entire year - Nole was the closest yet - except maybe Federer when he lost 4 matches - Noles 41-0 start to 2011 was ridiculous
I completely agree with your distinctions eras above.
And You are right about "more regulated conditions": surface, ranking and tournament seeding systems. even more regulated tennis balls.

I think we are witnessing a making of the best player of Post-2003 era, after maybe Laver and Gonzales (pre Open era), and Sampras of Open era pre 2003, IMHO.
 

BrooklynNY

Hall of Fame
I completely agree with your distinctions eras above.
And You are right about "more regulated conditions": surface, ranking and tournament seeding systems. even more regulated tennis balls.

I think we are witnessing a making of the best player of Post-2003 era, after maybe Laver and Gonzales (pre Open era), and Sampras of Open era pre 2003, IMHO.
Yeah i think people didn't realize the changes made in 2003 are still playing out. Fed was the first of the new-era players when he recognized court slowdown, became stronger and improved his baseline game- but also Fed played the 1st 5 yrs of his career in the pre 2003 era - Guys now are taking advantage of conditions they grew up in - hence Nole usurping Fed's master title count - and likely all title count


Those changes made in 2003 are finally solidifying - it was still evolving from 2003-2010, you still had guys like Henman and even Roddick coming to net on what is now considered a kamikaze play - where in 1993 it was a standard approach shot.


Just my opinion
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
18 and I'll put Djoker above Fed.

17 then they're equal.

16 - Fed is still the best.

That's it.
I disagree that they are equal at 17 unless if Nole wins 7 Wimbledon. Not all 4 slams are equal and most fans, experts, ex-players value Wimbledon as the biggest and most prestigious tennis tournament. At 18 I can agree that he moves ahead of Federer in slam count.

Just to note that this is about who's greater player at the grand slam tournaments, not about goat. Evaluation the players in all time great includes more than just slam count, but consists of major criteria based on the following...

PLAYER CRITERIA
* Number of Major Titles won
* Overall performance at Grand Slam Events
* Player Ranking
* Performance at ATP/WTA events
* Performance(Win/loss record) at Davis & Fed Cup events
* Records held or broken
* Intangibles(contribution to tennis)
 

6august

Hall of Fame
So according to your standard:

Federer > Sampras > Nadal > Djokovic > Borg > Connors > Agassi > Lendl > Mc Enroe > Wilanders > Becker > Edberg >...... Hewitt > Safin???

No, I don't think Wimby is that much important.

Pls be noted that in the Open Era Djokovic has unique records: Aus GOAT and NCYGS on 4 surfaces (much more impressive than Laver's 69 CYGS with 3 on grass).

@TMF
 
I would doubt it! Aussie grass a totally different condition with the heat, bugs, and terrible bounces! Lendl tried and never got over the hump until they went HC! :rolleyes:
Really? Yes and Lendl also tried at Wimbledon on the AELTC's grass as well and never "got over the hump" as well so I'm not exactly sure how much water that's supposed to hold.

Oh and btw, Lend's also the one who cheekily begged out of a grass court GS by saying he was "allergic to grass."

Me? I'll put my money on an all-time GOAT candidate to have won the AO several times.....that is, had he CHOSE to fly down and 'pad' his GS stats.​
 

ultradr

Legend
Yeah i think people didn't realize the changes made in 2003 are still playing out. Fed was the first of the new-era players when he recognized court slowdown, became stronger and improved his baseline game- but also Fed played the 1st 5 yrs of his career in the pre 2003 era - Guys now are taking advantage of conditions they grew up in - hence Nole usurping Fed's master title count - and likely all title count


Those changes made in 2003 are finally solidifying - it was still evolving from 2003-2010, you still had guys like Henman and even Roddick coming to net on what is now considered a kamikaze play - where in 1993 it was a standard approach shot.


Just my opinion
yeah, people either not aware of it or denying it. I remember around 2004 people argued about Wimbledon's 2001-2003 change. People refused to believe it. Then saw rafa wins. Some still denied the change.
from 2008 or so, tennis has been dominated by players who fully grew up on new conditions.

Then we have had Nadal, such an anormally on clay. imagine we did not have Nadal.
let's say we had just a "normal" clay dominater for 4-5 years (still all tiem greats, just not the "never-ever-happened"10 frigging years).
We would have multiple 4 consecutive slams by now or even calendar one, possibly from Federer....(although Rafa was a factor on all surfaces for Roger)
 

ultradr

Legend
Will Novak become more dominant than Federer? We know Nadal never had Feds Consistency or Dominance but Novak is Rod Lavers Successor.
"dominant" is relative term. Novak does not have the nadal factor in Federer's lagacy.

I think 6+ YE#1 will be more important factor for Novak than slam count which is specific era bound.

He then will be surely considered the best player of post-2003 modern power baseline era by many IMHO.
True long term dominator. Successing exclusive club of Gonzalez-Laver-Sampras line, IMHO.
 

BrooklynNY

Hall of Fame
@ultradr I think your analysis is pretty spot on - i see many of the same things you are seeing - i think more and more people are beginning to see it as well.

I think his NBC article is telling of where the general tennis media stands - there have not been many articles like this in english-media at all. Compared this to the "RF as a religious experience" "he may be able to win 4 in a row slam" hype of 2006
http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/the-djoker-slam/?utm_network=twitter&utm_post=5895521&utm_source=TW @NBCSports&utm_tags=srm[olympics]

These conditions have created such a rank+file effect where unless there is truly an equal to the dominant player(nadal vs Fed) (nadal vs Nole) (Nole vs Fed)(Nadal vs Nole) - the dominant player will do exactly that - dominate.
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
Really? Yes and Lendl also tried at Wimbledon on the AELTC's grass as well and never "got over the hump" as well so I'm not exactly sure how much water that's supposed to hold.

Oh and btw, Lend's also the one who cheekily begged out of a grass court GS by saying he was "allergic to grass."

Me? I'll put my money on an all-time GOAT candidate to have won the AO several times.....that is, had he CHOSE to fly down and 'pad' his GS stats.​
I can only remember Seles and Agassi skipping with that excuse! It's possible, but been over 30 years so it's not exactly ringing in my ear! :rolleyes: ;) :p

Update: Why do you hate Lendl?

- http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/why-do-you-hate-lendl.107920/ -

He also thought he used excuse of being allergic when we all knew how much he loved to golf! :p :confused: :oops: o_O
 
Last edited:

Tenez101

Hall of Fame
High performance in a sport doesn't automatically mean one can give accurate or insightful analysis of the sport.
All meaningless excuses. Bottom line is Fed is current GOAT, and will probably end up that way too.
Bump with just a few gems from frednatics on the first page. Also:
Also says around 2:40 "Roger's almost playing better now than he did 10 years ago, he's improving".
What do ppl think now that Fed is on the verge of being overtaken?
 

Tenez101

Hall of Fame
Can you imagine if there was no nadalovic Tenez?
Fed would probably be on 30+ majors.
No complaints i bet from his fans about weak era and all the other gobblygook.
It would be annoying with his fans circlejerking each other ad finitum and literally nothing stopping Fed from dominating (maybe Delpo would rise up finally and challenge him). Fednatics are glory hunters first and foremost, they invest so much of their self-worth into him and his achievements that they perceive any challenges to them as an attack on themselves.
 
Last edited:

swordtennis

Legend
It would be annoying with his fans circlejerking each other ad finitum and literally nothing stopping Fed from dominating (maybe Delpo would rise up finally and challenge him). Fednatics are glory hunters first and foremost, they invest so much of their self-worth into him and his achievements that they perceive any challenges to them as an attack on their own self-worth.
I fear you are right. Because we never hear about the weak era or tennis dying when fed wins or other players win majors. Unless they beat fed it seems. Agree with the circle jerk. I made a post awhile ago about how that works. It is damned if you do damned if you dont circle jerk.
 

swordtennis

Legend
Simple question for all Federer fans and I hope someone from their can answer honestly. If Nadal or Djokovic weren't around and Federer had won 30+ slams, would you have considered this a weak era?
That is all i ask. The weak era and tennis dying and all the negativity seems to increase. You were here when djokovic was winning. We were not allowed to celebrate. We would get shamed and end up drawn into arguments over the banal and mendacious trivial things.
We need an answer on this lol.
 

Tenez101

Hall of Fame
That is all i ask. The weak era and tennis dying and all the negativity seems to increase. You were here when djokovic was winning. We were not allowed to celebrate. We would get shamed and end up drawn into arguments over the banal and mendacious trivial things.
We need an answer on this lol.
Someone should make a thread on this lol. Fednatics need to answer it once and for all.
 

Sunny Ali

Hall of Fame
That is all i ask. The weak era and tennis dying and all the negativity seems to increase. You were here when djokovic was winning. We were not allowed to celebrate. We would get shamed and end up drawn into arguments over the banal and mendacious trivial things.
We need an answer on this lol.
Yes Sword bhai, that is the reason I quit this forum for so long that I forgot the password to my ksbh moniker and had to create another one :-D

If you said anything complimentary about any of Sampras, Nadal or Djokovic, the hordes of Federer lovers descended upon you :oops: Now that Federer's records are on the verge of being broken, Sampras/Nadal/Djokovic threads are popping up all over the place and the Federer fans resistance has waned considerably :-D
 

swordtennis

Legend
Yes Sword bhai, that is the reason I quit this forum for so long that I forgot the password to my ksbh moniker and had to create another one :-D

If you said anything complimentary about any of Sampras, Nadal or Djokovic, the hordes of Federer lovers descended upon you :oops: Now that Federer's records are on the verge of being broken, Sampras/Nadal/Djokovic threads are popping up all over the place and the Federer fans resistance has waned considerably :-D
Ditto i left for over 6 months after 2016. It was unbearable.
 
Top