GabeT
G.O.A.T.
No one said it´s the same exact thing as the CYGS. But it’s still the most impressive streak measure in the Open Era. 4 consecutive slams in 3 different surfaces.
Pistol Pete or Djoker??
- Thread starter Djokodalerer31
- Start date
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
He had some dominant runs as well. I'm actually seeing the 142-9 stretch from RG 1979 through Wimbledon 1981 but that would be 5/8 Slams and 7/10 Big Titles since I'm assuming you are including the Masters. If we were to move the needle a bit and not include Wimbledon 1981 since he lost, he would have a 136-8 record which would be 5/7 Slams and 7/9 big titles. So yea very impressive from Borg and close but you have to give the edge to Djokovic's 136-9 where he won 5/6 Slams and 7/8 Big Titles including the WTF.
Instead of 95-2 I am seeing 98-3 from 1979-1980 but he did have a walkover in there that didn't count as a loss for him, when it probably should be 98-4 if we're being technical and if he didn't avoid the loss by withdrawing before the match. But he did win 4/5 Slams through this stretch and 5/6 Big Titles so definitely very dominant. From Oct 2014-Feb 2016, Djokovic went 106-6 with no walkovers and won 4/5 Slams and 6/7 Big Titles. It's basically splitting hairs but once again, Djokovic probably edges it because of the strike rate in big tournaments.
Last edited:
NatF
Bionic Poster
There's probably more than a few events unsanctioned by the ATP that should count as well tbh.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
Of course he did. That's called recency bias. Not saying Djokovic doesn't deserve to be above Pete, but that too many people here only know one frame of reference. I fall in that boat too to be honest, but my point is that most people here don't even take the time to acknowledge arguments for Sampras and actually put them in the context of his era simply because they're more familiar with Djokovic.
Then they use Djokovic's achievements in this era to say he's better than Sampras, but they're not comparing like for like. They're comparing apples and oranges and most of them don't even realize it. The 90's was too different to compare with today.
And I'm sure Sampras is happy enough to say he was the undisputed best of his era. Right now, as great as Novak undoubtedly is, that distinction does not belong to him, at least from an achievement perspective.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
Do you have these already? I hope they aren't too much for you
Oh my eyes! my eyes!
Thank you, Nat I am now blind.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Hard to say really but possibly.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
Well I'm essentially counting the Masters as the 4th slam, or 4th big event in this case. Not really fair to count the AO when it probably wasn't even one of the 10-15 biggest events (WCT, Pepsi probably above it too, and most of the higher grand prix events drew more top players and gave way more money).
Yeah it's close both ways, but point is that he was nearly as dominant if not as dominant considering the polarization.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Both are on 14 Slams and 5 YECs but Djokovic has the GGS and almost 3 times as many Masters titles (31-11). Sampras remains ahead on weeks at #1 (286-223) and YE #1s (6-4).
As things stand, I call it a draw (although I gave the edge to Djokovic in the poll). Djokovic however is still very much active and very likely to increase his tally of big titles whereas Sampras' record is now frozen in time.
As things stand, I call it a draw (although I gave the edge to Djokovic in the poll). Djokovic however is still very much active and very likely to increase his tally of big titles whereas Sampras' record is now frozen in time.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Yea I didn't count the AO for Borg and yes he was very dominant as well and very close with Djokovic, and it's basically splitting hairs but it's Djokovic's 4/4 run that pushes him forward by a bit.
xFedal
Legend
Federer above Laver?
metsman
G.O.A.T.
sure, I think if Borg had won 1-2 USOs beating Mac/Connors he'd have a strong GOAT case.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Yeah, I think he's arguably the best player (relative to his era) that we've seen but in terms of achievements he's in that second rung of players probably.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
I think as good as he was he should have won it and probably would have if he played a couple of years longer before walking away.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
well I think it's fair to give him the equivalent of 13-14 majors with surface versatility, 200+ weeks at #1, dominant peak. That's definitely first tier accomplishments to me, even in the modern inflation era.
xFedal
Legend
Laver has a case for 8 years at No.1 1964-71 same as Gonzalez ...... By extension of rating Gonzo above laver you have Fed>Gonzo>Laver>Nadal>Djokovic>Sampras ?Nail on the head. Zara is a huge Federer fan. She's like one of those people you see on TV, painting their faces with the Swiss colours and donning a Swiss flag onsie.
I rank him below Gonzalez who was probably #1 for nearly a decade
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
I don't even think it's arguable.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
He would have had chances in 82-83 if he could have kept up even the 1981 level, and added 1-2 more RGs and maybe another Wimby in 82, but who knows. Guy was just burned out.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
The brightest lights burn out the fastest. He would have had chances if he could have maintained that level for a year or two longer but it's wasn't meant to be for him.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
That’s true.
I think Novak is firmly ahead though. NCYGS + two 3 slams years (Sampras never had one) and doing this all in an era with Fed and Nadal puts him ahead of Pete.
People say Fed took advantage of a weak era. ROFLMAO. Pete is the biggest weak era vulture of them all.
Until Zverev that is..
Listen to enough people and everybody becomes a vulture, ya know. Timing is everything. Pete is still the guy. Kiss the ring.
I do agree that Djokovic is ahead.
xFedal
Legend
Just relax yourself..... Djokovic might not even surpass Nadal..... Djokovic has a long way to go to surpass Pete Samprass.....
Zara
G.O.A.T.
Some of the newcomers aren't aware that I am a big Nole fan - right after MuryGoat. I mean COME ON!!!
Personally I think it will be incredibly cool if Nadal, Nole and Fred all end up with the same amount of Slams. Imagine that.
Djokodalerer31
Hall of Fame
Like one more GS title! Lol
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
Sounds cool but it’s not a pretty picture in my head.
All I can imagine is Fed, Rafa and Nole fans arguing on here for the rest of eternity.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Why not?
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Yes they are not familiar but I know this.
'Mon!It would be cool and yet the fan wars would never end because everyone would say their favorite is the best. I think it would also be cool if they ended up with 18, 19 and 20 Slams, or any combination like that separated by 1 Slam.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
Listen to enough people and everybody becomes a vulture, ya know. Timing is everything. Pete is still the guy. Kiss the ring.
I do agree that Djokovic is ahead.
He's the King - the Godfather of tennis. Rest are a bunch of wannabees - a mere followers.
T
TennisFan97068
Guest
Unlike when Sampras-Nadal were tied at 14 slams this one goes quite easily to Djokovic.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Who are we going to rate over Borg from his era?
Enceladus
Legend
Djokovic has more ATP titles and two seasons with at least 10 titles, Sampras only one season.
Not to mention that Djokovic owns non-CYGS, career GS, two season with 3 GS titles, 4 YEC in a row and Golden Masters. Djoker is better.
metsman
G.O.A.T.
I think he meant Borg relative to his era was the best, of any era.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Ah sorry I thought you mean it's not arguable in a negative way.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
Yes they are not familiar but I know this.
It would be cool and yet the fan wars would never end because everyone would say their favorite is the best. I think it would be cool if they ended up with 18, 19 and 20 Slams, or any combination like that separated by 1 Slam.
Should that happen I will be here 24 hours eating popcorn while being entertained. Will crack a joke or two from time to time to spice up the argument. Can't wait. lmho
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
MuryGOAT.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
We're joking but they are probably going to end up pretty close at the end, and closer than people think. I guess everybody will be in the retired pro section with never ending threads on why their player is the best.
xFedal
Legend
Pete won 7 Wimbledon titles...6 Year End No.1 ....5 US Opens....... 5 World Tour Finals.....2 Australian Opens....2 Grand Slam Cups...286 weeks at No.1..... As for as I am concerned Pete has plenty of artillery and firepower when it comes to achievements.....
robincarlin
New User
Though I don’t like Sampras personally I must say the fact he won everything without the aid of poly strings (even winning the ‘02 Open after most everyone had made the change) puts him very high historically on the list for me.
Btw can you allow yourself temporarily to be added to convos please? I have a surprise for you.
Plamen1234
Hall of Fame
It is impressive but you know what would have been more impressive - winning 4 Slams in 2015.He had a chance to do it and he blew it up.
TheGreatOne1997
Rookie
You can't settle it. Sampras played in a completely different universe full of Surface Specialists, the most polarized conditions in the history of the game and no Bazaooka Racket/String support and various styles of play with clashing styles.
Djoker plays in an homogenized era with the same game being played ALL YEAR ROUND, just on a different colored surface, Everything is slow. Medium at best, and its just a baseline slugfest with pushes or brainless Ball whackers
You can't compare Pete's time to today. Nole would probably only win the Australian Open in Sampras' day. ROFLMAO
Djoker plays in an homogenized era with the same game being played ALL YEAR ROUND, just on a different colored surface, Everything is slow. Medium at best, and its just a baseline slugfest with pushes or brainless Ball whackers
You can't compare Pete's time to today. Nole would probably only win the Australian Open in Sampras' day. ROFLMAO
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
It is impressive but you know what would have been more impressive - winning 4 Slams in 2015.He had a chance to do it and he blew it up.
That's OK. You can't win them all
Djokodalerer31
Hall of Fame
This is not contest of who plays more eye-candy tennis! This is to determine who is greater achiever! Got nothing to do with what you personally preffer or like! Lol For example i like Santoro, doesn't mean he is better than Hewitt!
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Serious question: what was the point in you posting this poll if the only answer you’ll accept is Novak Djokovic?
Zara
G.O.A.T.
Sorry but who is this?
Zara
G.O.A.T.
But if you know for sure Nole is greater than Pete then why do you need anything else? Why does it matter if someone agrees with you or not? Why this incessant need for others approval?
Sport
G.O.A.T.
If we consider the history of tennis overall (not only the Open Era), it is still more impressive to achieve the CYGS twice than achieving the NCYGS only once, regardless of the surfaces' argument.
Also, Nadal won 3 consecutive Grand Slams on 3 surfaces in 2010. If Djokovic's 4 consecutive Grand Slams represent "the most impressive streak measure in the Open Era", then Nadal in 2010 represents "the second most impressive streak measure in the Open Era".
Last edited:
titoelcolombiano
Legend
Djoker > Pete
Djokovic has a more rounded CV and won all 4 slams.
It’s worth noting that 1. Sampras had a much high peak on grass and medium-fast HC and 2. Homogenised conditions made it easier to dominate all slams. Imagine if Sampras had a medium-fast AO/USO, fast Wimbledon, medium RG... that’s what Nole has had since 2011.
It’s worth noting that 1. Sampras had a much high peak on grass and medium-fast HC and 2. Homogenised conditions made it easier to dominate all slams. Imagine if Sampras had a medium-fast AO/USO, fast Wimbledon, medium RG... that’s what Nole has had since 2011.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Sampras never faced Djokovic on grass or vice versa.
Sampras had a better career on grass, but whether he had a higher peak than Djokovic is untestable, since he didn't face Djokovic.
I meant faster 90s Wimbledon grass.
Similar threads
