Algo
Hall of Fame
When all is said and done, you will have to say nobody "had"Are you for real? Nobody wins that many slams after turning 28.
When all is said and done, you will have to say nobody "had"Are you for real? Nobody wins that many slams after turning 28.
It's not crazy if you consider the age/level of people he's competing with. I mean my God and people have the nerve to say that Federer had it easy with prime Hewitt, Nalbandian, Roddick, Safin, Coria, a young Nadal, a still very good Agassi. They would've all occupied the top 10 today with ease.
Nah. When Roger was in his prime in 2004-2008, let's see what Hewitt, Nalbandian, Roddick, Safin, Coria, and Agassi were doing in the majors during those 5 years.
Agassi: missed 4 majors, 1st round x2, 3rd round x2, 2 QF, 1 SF, 1 F, and retired in 2006.
Coria: missed 7 majors!, 1st round x3, 2 round x1, 3rd round x1, 4th round x3, 1 QF, 1 F
Hewitt: missed 2 majors, 2nd round x2, 3rd round x2, 4th round x6, 4 QF, 2 SF, 2 F
Nalbandian: missed 1 major, 1st round x1, 2nd round x3, 3rd round x5, 4th round x3, 4 QF, 3 SF, 0 F
Roddick: missed 1 major, 1st round x3, 2nd round x3, 3rd round x2, 4th round x1, 5 QF, 2 SF, 3 F
Safin: missed 2 majors, 1st round x3, 2nd round x3, 3rd round x3, 4th round x3, 1 F, 1 Australian Open win
Only Hewitt and Roddick impresses. Nalbandian is definitely a top 10 player, but all the others are wildly inconsistent. Despite winning the Australian Open and reaching one final, Safin was completely mediocre in majors during this time reaching no quarters or semis.
Can we define GOAT as,Four letters. G-O-A-T!
All depends on if he wins FO. If he never manages to win it, he probably will be about par with Connors, i.e top of the Tier 2 Legends. If on the other hand he never wins FO but gets 5 W then he will probably be equal with Sampras and Agassi just behind Nadal and Federer.Novak Djokovic is moving at rocket speed past countless tennis legends. Fan rivalries aside, where do you realistically see him ending up?
Right now the gap between him and the field is unprecedented. If I'm being quite conservative I'd say he'll win AT LEAST one more grand slam this year, but possibly two or even three getting him the coveted CYGS slam. He'll also be the favorite for the Olympic gold. I expect him to take no less than 3 masters, but probably more. He's also poised to stay number 1 for the entire year unless he drastically declines for some reason. That being said, some rather conservative estimates might put Djokovic at:
12-13 slams
29-31+ Masters (putting him in first place all time)
~230 weeks at number 1 (putting him close to striking distance of Connors/Lendl)
70+ titles (probably surpassing Nadal, who is at 67 right now)
5 year end number 1's, equaling Federer and being only behind Sampras.
Possible Career grand slam and career golden slam
And that's just 2016.
Let's say 2017, when Djokovic will be 30, he begins to slightly decline. And even if he does, who is going to challenge him for the no. 1 spot? Certainly not a 31 year old Nadal or 36 year old Federer. Murray? probably not. Young guns? They've been a large disappointment. So for this year let's say he's still rather dominate, but not GOATing anymore like he is currently. So, being conservative, let's say he takes 1-2 slams and 2-3 Masters. And finishes at year number one, because, again, who's going to take it from him?
So now he'd tentatively be at:
13-15 slams
32+ masters (completely eclipsing the record)
75-80 titles (Federer has 88 currently)
250-275 weeks at number 1 (being conservative- possibly someone overtakes him for a few weeks). This would put him 3rd all time behind Sampras and Federer.
6 year end number 1's, equally Sampras for first all time, and passing Federer.
Dominant H2H over all rivals.
So, by this point he's clearly within striking distance of becoming GOAT. And let's not forget that Djokovic has shown no signs of wear and tear on his body such as players like Nadal have and may continue to play top level for a long time as Federer has. So let's say after 2017 he won't be on top anymore but he wins about 2 more slams in his career (another conservative estimate IMO). So in the end we have this as a safe bet:
15-17+ slams
34+ masters
270+ weeks at number 1
6 year end number 1s
Dominant H2H over all rivals
Career Golden Slam, possible double career slam.
90+ titles
So, in my opinion, at the very least, Djokovic is on the way to becoming a firm #2 in the GOAT debate, only behind Federer. In these predictions I tried to be realistic yet conservative. He may very well exceed these expectations and become the undisputed GOAT, but I really can't see him doing any worse than the numbers I've laid out here. It really is crazy how someone can skyrocket through the record books in such a short time, but in the past year Djokovic has made a clear case that he is a part of absolute highest tier of players tennis has ever seen.
No, that is wrong. Nobody in the game, and i mean nobody, puts Djokovic close to Nadal and Federer due to not only having less Slams, but also no career slam. He is even behind Nadal in Masters 1000 so he has a lot of work to do still but the FO is critical for him.Slams are not everything. Context, contex, context.
He's blown past Nadal in my mind due to the WTFs and #1 ranking.
Why 2004-2008? By 2007 Federer had Nadal and Djokovic and by 2008 the big 4 was formed. So why this weird year selection?
I'm responding to your post stating "people have the nerve to say that Federer had it easy with prime Hewitt, Nalbandian, Roddick, Safin, Coria, a young Nadal, a still very good Agassi. They would've all occupied the top 10 today with ease." You didn't mention Djokovic, which is why I didn't. And 2004-2008 is when Federer won the bulk of his majors before Djokovic hit his prime. No one is saying Federer had weak opposition later. My post simply points out that Nadal, Hewitt, and Roddick aside, Fed's competition was pretty weak. Especially weak is including Coria and Agassi in here during this time period.
With RG he is at 12 slams. If he gets the gold that's 12 slams and a gold medal. That would be very impressive, but he needs other slams.All depends on if he wins FO. If he never manages to win it, he probably will be about par with Connors, i.e top of the Tier 2 Legends. If on the other hand he never wins FO but gets 5 W then he will probably be equal with Sampras and Agassi just behind Nadal and Federer.
Win the FO, and Olympic Gold and he is GOAT.
The Career Slam is everything. Without that he has no prospect of being ahead of Nadal and Federer. He knows it as wellWith RG he is at 12 slams. If he gets the gold that's 12 slams and a gold medal. That would be very impressive, but he needs other slams.
If he somehow gets to 18 slams I'd give him the edge in slams even if he doesn't win RG - though I think 17-18 without RG is very unlikely...
Hmm. I don't think that is exactly a rule!The Career Slam is everything. Without that he has no prospect of being ahead of Nadal and Federer. He knows it as well
Holy moly is Novak close to meet all the criteria...Can we define GOAT as,
G: GS leader
O: Off-the-charts seasons
A: Above all main rivals (H2H)
T: Top player for the longest time (YE and weeks at #1)
Are you for real? Nobody wins that many slams after turning 28.
Because Federer won 12 of his 17 before 2008. You are using the argument of the current weak era all the time but when real competition emerged he won only five more majors and he was 26 years old.Why 2004-2008? By 2007 Federer had Nadal and Djokovic and by 2008 the big 4 was formed. So why this weird year selection?
Because Federer won 12 of his 17 before 2008. You are using the argument of the current weak era all the time but when real competition emerged he won only five more majors and he was 26 years old.
Stop bringing up these names. They are good players but admit it, they are not all time great material, except for Nadal and Agassi of course.It's not crazy if you consider the age/level of people he's competing with. I mean my God and people have the nerve to say that Federer had it easy with prime Hewitt, Nalbandian, Roddick, Safin, Coria, a young Nadal, a still very good Agassi. They would've all occupied the top 10 today with ease.
I just wanted to point out that comparing eras in sports is imposible and meaningless as you can beat only the opponents which are in front of you on given day.Before 2008 is not 2008. Federer played poorly in 2008 - especially outside the Slams and it had nothing to do with Nadal or Djokovic.
What real competition are you talking about? The one who prevented Federer from reaching 8 consecutive Slam finals from 2008 FO until 2010 AO and it was Soderling of all people who snapped that streak? And the same competition which "allowed" Federer to nearly win 4 Slams in a row from 2009 FO to 2010 AO?
What am saying is that would be crazy longevity, Novak needs 1 slam to tie Feds slam winning longevity, Since 2010 Fed has won 2 slams, Novak has replicated what Fed did at 2010 AO, he needs 1 more slam to tie, and did I say Novak already won 3 slams after turning 28, only few people have better record after turning 28.so you are essentially saying no one in top 10 will win a slam this year? Nole is the 2nd youngest behind NIshikori, and basically tired with Murray.
There is no sense in comparing what Federer, Sampras, Laver did at 29. They are not Djokovic. Just sit back and watch what happens. If Ferrer can make slam finals after 30, and be top 5, what can Djokovic do?
I agree Djokovic has a lot of ways to becoming most accomplished players.I just wanted to point out that comparing eras in sports is imposible and meaningless as you can beat only the opponents which are in front of you on given day.
We shall compare only accomplishments between the players and yes Federer is the most accomplished player of all time at the moment regardless who he beat in his GS finals.
But if Djokovic wins at least 6 more Majors and has more weeks at No.1 and YE No.1 he will become most accomplished player in tennis history.
Simple as that.
As a long fan of Pantera(I still consider them the best metal band of all time) since 1996, you are lame as hell for putting a picture of Phil Anselmo as your avatar after what transpired this week. Phil used to be a hero, but at the end of the day he's a loser. One can only believe you support his loser, simpleton beliefs, or you are unable to see your idols for what they are. Curious as to what kind of statement are you trying to make? I write this as I'm listening to 'Slaughtered' @tennis_pro
Aside from that, ZYW is right. None of those players are all time greats except Nadal and Agassi, and at the time - Nadal was not the clay GOAT - he was a 1 dimensional top spinner who just happened to get lucky and beat Federer often - if you remember the narrative back then. Nadal didn't start getting proper respect as a GOAT until 2008. Until then he was just a thorn in Federer's side
That's because Federer wasn't good enough to reach him more often, doesn't take anything away from Coria who was one of the best clay courters in the world for a couple of years. If Coria was 22 now I'd count him as a Djokovic rival on clay of course.
As I said, name better consistently better clay courters today than Coria.
In djokovics second GS ever, the 2005 French Open, He took the first set off of Coria before losing the next two than retiring from injury. This is literally the least developed form of djokovic. The following year djokovic beat Coria the two times they met on Clay. Though its few meetings, the weakest forms of djokovic on has a favorable h2h on CLAY favoring against Coria, 2-1. Also its fair to note that Coria only made it passed the 4th round TWICE at the French, or any Grandslam for that matter, one time losing to an UNKNOWN named Martin Verkerk...... in the 2003 French Open final, than followed that up by losing to another unranked, fairly unknown in Gaudio in the finals in 2004... feds main "rival" on clay during his prime is fairly unimpressive if you ask me...I think it's fair to say a prime djokovic would handle Coria.
I never said that Coria was great after 2005. He played his best in 2003-2005 so 2/4 seasons in 2004-2007.
Notice, even during Coria's best years, 2003 and 2004, he lost to UNKNOWNS on the greatest clay stage, the French Open. 2005 He got PUSHED by a BABY djokovic, and 2006, at the tender age of 24 Coria's downfall started. Lol that's the Great Rival on Clay that Djokovic never had? Lol. Seriously come on.
And if he wins another slam he'd become the first player ever to win six after the age of 27.What am saying is that would be crazy longevity, Novak needs 1 slam to tie Feds slam winning longevity, Since 2010 Fed has won 2 slams, Novak has replicated what Fed did at 2010 AO, he needs 1 more slam to tie, and did I say Novak already won 3 slams after turning 28, only few people have better record after turning 28.
Novak soon will have better domination, consistency, longevity and prime over Federer! I think he can overtake Fed in Finals, Semis, Quarters, tier 1 titles, and much more. History will be made at RG in few months time.And if he wins another slam he'd become the first player ever to win six after the age of 27.
Dude Verkerk also beat Horna (who beat Federer), 29th seeded Spadea, 11th seeded Schuttler and Moya in the QF before beating Coria in the SF. It was one of those magic runs.
He wasn't pushed by Djokovic in 2005, he lost a set but since then it was all Coria.
How many people today can produce such high level of tennis on clay?
you have Sampras below Federer and Rosewall up that high? Better practice what you preach bud....******** list lol18-19 slams and a calendar slam this year and the masters record.
He will end up top 3 ever.
1. Laver
2. Pancho
3. Djokovic *
4. Rosewall
5.Tilden
6. Federer
7. Sampras/Nadal
One of the main reason I never rank players, not sure how to compare eras, but one thing I am sure is that Fed should be number one after 1970.you have Sampras below Federer and Rosewall up that high? Better practice what you preach bud....******** list lol
18-19 slams and a calendar slam this year and the masters record.
He will end up top 3 ever.
1. Laver
2. Pancho
3. Djokovic *
4. Rosewall
5.Tilden
6. Federer
7. Sampras/Nadal
Can we define GOAT as,
G: GS leader
O: Off-the-charts seasons
A: Above all main rivals (H2H)
T: Top player for the longest time (YE and weeks at #1)
Too funny. Maybe he will be the first human being to fly too? Don't you think you are going a little overboard? Relax and see how it all plays out. 8 more slams when he is almost 29? If that happens, I would check him to see if he has alien blood.