BackhandDTL
Hall of Fame
Nole Slam or CYGS?
Which one takes the cake as a greater achievement in the sport of tennis?
Poll
Which one takes the cake as a greater achievement in the sport of tennis?
Poll
Pick the better one: Nole Slam or CYGS
- Thread starter BackhandDTL
- Start date
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
It is the CYGS, but that's like asking which is the bigger achievement, landing a man on Neptune or Pluto
Well you can't really land on Neptune but I understand your point.
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
Yes, we need more SPENCER!
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Well you can't really land on Neptune but I understand your point.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
That's just 3 Slams in a row. 4 is better.
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
King No1e
G.O.A.T.
Only CYGS would think of nicknaming Federer "Cow". There's just something really funny about the most graceful mover in the game being called a cow.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
In terms of the achievement: CYGS
In terms of the poster: @Nole Slam
In terms of the poster: @Nole Slam
CYGS
Legend
Wrong
CYGS
Legend
He is when playing Milkman.
Cortana
Legend
People in 2050 after someone wins the French Open: But he didn't beat Nadal!!!1
GoldenMasters
Semi-Pro
CYGS obviously. Are you looking for Djokovic fanatics who would argue over an obvious answer?
Rafa4LifeEver
G.O.A.T.
@Nole Slam the gif supplier
If the Nole Slam is so insignificant, then why is it that neither Rafa or Roger were able to achieve it? IMO, one slam mentioned is as impressive as the other.
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
GoldenMasters
Semi-Pro
Where did I say that it was insignificant?
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Which one? Or both?
CYGS
Legend
Both
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Sorry but Laver's achievement > greater than Novak Djokovic's. More pressure trying to win 4 in a row in a single year than split across 2 years.
Agreed upon by all objective tennis observers.
CYGS
Legend
3 surfaces + full field on AO + rarer > 2 surfaces + no full field on AO + less rare
but apology accepted
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
You're delusional. Btw Laver won big hard court tournaments in 1969 as well, they just weren't slams at that point. He was supreme on all surfaces.
Your idol doesn't have to be the best at everything you know. He might end up with the best career (hope not) but he won't end up with the most dominant year. That honour remains with the great Rodney George Laver.
CYGS
Legend
So no real argument. Again apology accepted.
it depends:
3 surfaces CYGS (no one did it) > No1eslam > 2 surfaces CYGS (only Laver did it in OE) !!!!!!!!!!
it should be mentioned that in addition to AO 1969 being almost 60% OZI players (28 of a total of ONLY 48 players), Laver needed to win only 5 matches (no WO) to win AO. 3 of those against other OZI players.
3 surfaces CYGS (no one did it) > No1eslam > 2 surfaces CYGS (only Laver did it in OE) !!!!!!!!!!
it should be mentioned that in addition to AO 1969 being almost 60% OZI players (28 of a total of ONLY 48 players), Laver needed to win only 5 matches (no WO) to win AO. 3 of those against other OZI players.
Last edited:
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
My real argument was my second and third sentences. Laver was the best on all surfaces in 1969.
I'll let you off though because you're a bit dense.
CYGS
Legend
Only all surfaces in Laver's time = 2, and Djokovic's all = 3 surfaces. End of discussion.
Fact is though that, on the pro tour, important tournaments were played on grass, wood, carpet and hard courts. Great players like Laver, Gonzalez and Rosewall would have won on various hard court surfaces. Again, IMO, players should only be judged by achievements at their peak, in the era they competed in.
CYGS
Legend
Apples to apples, we are talking about the four slams in a row they each won - stay focused.
From what I have read here quite often is that, in 1969, the grass courts were faster than they are today and RG clay was slower than today. Also, the grass of Wimbledon, USO and AO were different in speed and bounce. Therefore your opinion is wrong and biased. Try reading up on tennis history as tennis did not begin in the twenty first century.
CYGS
Legend
Your opinion does not change/address anything about the fact that Nole Slam was achieved across three different surfaces vs. Laver's CYGS only two (plus fewer matches and not full filed on AO, etc). Try again.
Fact is that I have been a Nole fan for the past several years, so I have no desire to diminish his great achievement which I consider equal to Laver's in 69. I do, however, I think you are being unfair in diminishing Laver's achievements in 69 as he played under the conditions as they were then. Whether you believe it or not, the grass courts of the slams then were not the same in speed or bounce.
CYGS
Legend
Nobody cares.
Sure, but Nadal will be retired by then, they had no opportunity. Djokovic had plenty since 2011.
CYGS
Legend
Not interested in hypothetical achievements.I wonder what CYGS's answer would be, had Novak actually won CYGS and Fed the other thing
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
You can disagree about the impact of the different surfaces, but he very clearly explained that it's not as simple as just playing on 2 surfaces. It's been addressed.
You can disagree without outright dismissing.
CYGS
Legend
Grass is still grass, unless you think every single hard court/clay court (since they are also different; bounces and speed etc) currently is considered one extra surface? Let me examine your consistency
MeatTornado
Talk Tennis Guru
I mean, winning Miami is vastly different from winning Shanghai. Same for Monte-Carlo vs Madrid. I didn't think that was really up for debate.
Do you think it's just a coincidence that Rafa struggles indoors despite having a great hard court resume overall?
CYGS
Legend
Nobody was saying that. But when it comes to different surfaces, we should not use such a loose meaning to define them. If you have nothing more to add, this will be my final reply to this.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
CYGS (the poster) being owned by various people in this thread LOL.
YOU seem to, sore loser-LOL!
CYGS
Legend
You.
