AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Highest Peak Per Surface:
AO: 1995 Agassi
RG: 2008 Nadal
WB: 1993 Sampras
USO: 1995 Sampras
YEC: Becker or Sampras its a toss up
Olympics:Agassi
Yea Djoker isn't on there
Sampras probably isn't, either.
Highest Peak Per Surface:
AO: 1995 Agassi
RG: 2008 Nadal
WB: 1993 Sampras
USO: 1995 Sampras
YEC: Becker or Sampras its a toss up
Olympics:Agassi
Yea Djoker isn't on there
Sampras probably isn't, either.
It’s hard to speculate on who would win between Peak Novak and Peak Fed, but I doubt the mental fragility would be much different.
Novak has more criteria out of slams in his favour. I agree he needs another slam though. Fed still just ahead. However, if they all on 20 then Novak is on top for me. If he gets ahead then it’s over unless Fed or Rafa win big again.Novak is still behind at Wimbledon and US Open. Novaks Wimbledon record is also heavily inflated considering the only competition he has had is Federer who was way past his best in every final they have met yet still pushed “Peak” Djokovic to his limits in 2 matches ( further proving Federer in his old age is still as good as Novak is at his apparent best)
His Wimbledon record is also Inflated due to Murray handily humiliating him at every grass match they have ever played including olympics and Wimbledon final. Fed has more WTF, more constant weeks at No1 , more slam finals in a row. The list is endless
I believe it is already the real truth, he has the most varied resume out of the 3 and has won everything there is to win at least twice. If he becomes GOAT to the public then it’s deserved.
Sure he is.. His peak at Wimbledon/USO is greater than anyone else's
I’ve already said in many threads if Novak gets #20 it’s a done deal, I’ll still always prefer Roger but that’s just because I love the guys game.Novak has more criteria out of slams in his favour. I agree he needs another slam though. Fed still just ahead. However, if they all on 20 then Novak is on top for me. If he gets ahead then it’s over unless Fed or Rafa win big again.
Djoko is best placed to take over. Fed is on his last legs. Unless something crazy happens the inevitable will happen.
”peak“ is subjective. You have players like Safin, Wawrinka and Soderling who have amazing peaks but are nowhere near ATGs. It’s not a accurate measurementOf course you believe it, but is that so?
A player whose peak isn't top 3, perhaps top 5, outside of a specific condition type wouldn't be the best, ho.
27-23 bud. Own it bud!Mental stuffs and such stuffs only matter when the gap is 51-49 in ability or 50-50
In this case Federer-Novak is like 65-35
Look at this video from 7:00 when both of them came to net
Djokovic just surrendered to Federer because he understood that Fed is like lightning
”peak“ is subjective. You have players like Safin, Wawrinka and Soderling who have amazing peaks but are nowhere near ATGs. It’s not a accurate measurement
Sure he is.. His peak at Wimbledon/USO is greater than anyone else's
27-23 bud. Own it bud!
Talk about white pants era.Pancho played club tennis
@Lleytonstation
It’s about consistency more than peak. Murray is a great example of that. No one fawns over “peakray” but he was consistent for years.ATG players have often had multiple runs close to peak though. When your top 5 performances at a venue probably aren't as good as another's top 5, that tells us.
On what basis do you feel Sampras's peak at the USO is greater than Federer's ?
Did Sampras win 4-5 times non stop?
He hasnt even won 3 times on trot, so much for being at peak
Djokovic owns Federer. Fed is a weak era champion. As soon as Djokovic improved his game, went gluten free on diet and improved physically and mentally he owned Fed overall.So thats your best answer to a realtime video ?
overall head to head ?
Fed led Djokovic in H2H until mid 2016 and you post that to prove what ? Peak vs Peak ?
Djoker has no peak. He just has played average tennis his whole career... Problem is, his average is better than anyone else...Peakovic >>> Peakerer >>> Peakdal
So be it
It’s about consistency more than peak. Murray is a great example of that. No one fawns over “peakray” but he was consistent for years.
Fed hasn't even won a USO title in 13 years. Sampras went out beating his greatest rival at the USO before he retired (took out Peak Agassi ( who beat Fed), Defending Champ Safin and USO champ Rafter in 2001 back to back to back before losing to peaking Hewitt in the finals) . Subsequently Fed at his peak 2005 struggled with far inferior 35 year old AGassi at the USO.
Sampras>>>Fed at the USO
This is gonna be tough since I've only watched live tennis from 1996-meow. But I'll give it a shot.
AO: Joker, Agassi, Ol' Rog (HM Safin) Probably the toughest for me to gauge, this can be moved around and be "right" imo.
RG: RAFA, Borg, Kuerten (HM Lendl)
WB: PETE, JMac, Ol'Rog (HM Borg)
USO: Lendl, JMac, Connors (HM Ol' Rog)
YEC: PETE, Becker, JMac (HM Lendl)
Olympics: RAFA, Agassi, Kafelnikov (HM MurrayGOAT)
The mob can flog me now.
From what I have seen, absolute peak is something useless. You can argue that Wawrinka hit higher clay peak than what Djokovic ever hope to hit. Or Soderling hit higher levels than Federer ever did.
Could could couldFederer could have won many more USO from 2010 if they had not made to bouncy to suit Nadal's game.
So if I assume that higher bounce favors Nadal from 2010 and lowers Federer there then Sampras would also be pwned there....
Could could could
IF IF IF
The fact is he is a weak era champion.
Agreed - it’s just hard to make comparisons because I believe Djokovic has the widest return radius and defensive coverage ever. I.e. if you hit 50 balls to Borg or Agassi or Sampras’ FH side and 50 to Djokovic’s FH side he would get the most back and commit the least errors. But when you try to take into account athleticism and technological differences, as well as the fact that Djokovic plays a more defensive, and thus less “dominant” playstyle due to the surface conditions he lived in… i.e. Pete’s serve+volley was nearly unstoppable when they landed but watching his BH sometimes makes me cringe, and would be heavily exploited by a player like Djokovic on a baseline heavy game like the one he played at USO 2011/15. Well, it confounds things.The less you give to the opponent (whether direct misses or opportunities to attack), the better you are playing - hasn't it always been like that? It seems obvious a hypothetical perfect level would entail blasting balls on the line / angle all match long without errors.
Agreed - it’s just hard to make comparisons because I believe Djokovic has the widest return radius and defensive coverage ever. I.e. if you hit 50 balls to Borg or Agassi or Sampras’ FH side and 50 to Djokovic’s FH side he would get the most back and commit the least errors. But when you try to take into account athleticism and technological differences, as well as the fact that Djokovic plays a more defensive, and thus less “dominant” playstyle due to the surface conditions he lived in… i.e. Pete’s serve+volley was nearly unstoppable when they landed but watching his BH sometimes makes me cringe, and would be heavily exploited by a player like Djokovic on a baseline heavy game like the one he played at USO 2011/15. Well, it confounds things.
I haven’t seen anywhere near enough Mac/Borg/Pancho highlights to accurately judge them. All I can say is peak Djokovic would be very competitive with any player who ever lived, as would Peak Federer or Nadal. I don’t think he has the same “truly unbeatable” moments as other players outside the AO but I also feel that none of Pete/Mac/Borg/Lendl would be able to do better on his surfaces or in his era, and would be forced to approach the game far differently.
I doubt Djokovic cares to be honest lmao. Djoko is very rich himself and actually earned more prize money than Fed as he’s won more since they bumped the money up for winning tournaments.He can hire Djokovic and make him his servant, he is that rich.
Federer is richer than Djokovic + Nadal + Sampras + Borg + Laver combined.
Billionaire .... money speaks
I doubt Djokovic cares to be honest lmao. Djoko is very rich himself and actually earned more prize money than Fed as he’s won more since they bumped the money up for winning tournaments.
Says a Federer fan where Federer has a losing H2H to over 25 players. Djoko only has a losing H2H to 11 players. Plus only 2 of those players have a more than 1 H2H lead over djoko. Being krygios and satin.If Peter or Borg or Mac were to compete with Djokovic then they are to be born in 1987, then they would be more athletic and have similar radius like him. Plus Sampras was also 1.85 cms like Federer, not a short man, plus give him a poly in his hands and he too would have the weapons + athletism to counter Djokovic
This Djokovic fellow is highly overrated, anyone who loses to Stan in 3 different grand slams cannot be considered the GOAT, hehe
Also might I add according to ole TTW morals, logic and standards Fed should have been racking up the majors starting in his 1st or 2nd year on the tour.Could could could
IF IF IF
The fact is he is a weak era champion.
Says a Federer fan where Federer has a losing H2H to over 25 players. Djoko only has a losing H2H to 11 players. Plus only 2 of those players have a more than 1 H2H lead over djoko. Being krygios and satin.
That also shows us another reason who the more complete player is.
He can hire Djokovic and make him his servant, he is that rich.
Federer is richer than Djokovic + Nadal + Sampras + Borg + Laver combined.
Billionaire .... money speaks
Jeff Bezos GOAT confirmed
And I would love to see that. 1980 Wimby is still one of the most impressive matches I’ve seen for what both players were working with. Is it enough to confirm that a mythical Djokovic peak at Wimby would lose to those guys? For me it isn’t but if you are willing to take leaps of faith like that, I can respect it.If Peter or Borg or Mac were to compete with Djokovic then they are to be born in 1987, then they would be more athletic and have similar radius like him. Plus Sampras was also 1.85 cms like Federer, not a short man, plus give him a poly in his hands and he too would have the weapons + athletism to counter Djokovic
The obsession and hate Djokovic is getting from some Fedal fans is insane. That french open win and double career slam really struck a cord haha.LOL djokovic is close to 6'3 and long and lean.
Great tennis players would adapt to whatever conditions were present at the time.
This is really a weird obsession.
LOL djokovic is close to 6'3 and long and lean.
Great tennis players would adapt to whatever conditions were present at the time.
This is really a weird obsession.
He is 6'2 and a half not "just" 6'2.He is not 6'3
He is 6'2 only.
Sharapova is a bit taller than him, Murray is 6'3.
Fed, Sampras, Nadal are all 6'1
Height and reach does matter, I think Murray has the perfect height.
He is 6'2 and a half not "just" 6'2.
Also the weak era started again.The obsession and hate Djokovic is getting from some Fedal fans is insane. That french open win and double career slam really struck a cord haha.
It was mentioned a lot.....Also the weak era started again.
Still remember the weak era ended soon after Djokovic was injured in 2016.
Scarecly a mention of it when fedal were racking em up.
Then starting around July 2018 or so it was back for some odd reason.
For the life of me never can figure out what triggers the "weak era".
wink wink![]()