Realistically, where do you see Novak ending up now in the history books?

mika1979

Professional
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.
Flash in the pan all those guys. They apart from hewitt had short bursts of good play but career wise they are not making top 5 right now in this era. Well maybe now that fed is out.
 

mika1979

Professional
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.
On what planet is agassi tier 1 or in the same group with sampras or nadal or Federer. It is insulting to the three.
 

joekapa

Legend
If Djokovic get's to 14-15 slams, including the FO, and Cinci, he will be the GOAT. No need to reach Federer's 17.
 

PHS_10

Banned
This year holds the key, if he can somehow win the French open and Olympics then he will certainly cement his place at the top as one of the best ever to play this sport. After a scintillating 2011, Djoko did win AO in 2012 after that he didn't win any that year. Hope 2016 is not going to be a repeat of 2012.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
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 against Coria on his best surface, 2-1.

2006 Coria was not the same player. He was riddled with double faults. Strangely, Coria had one match when he didn't serve any double faults in 2006, and that was when he beat Djokovic in Miami.

Also its fair to note that Coria only made it passed the 4th round TWICE at the French, or any Grandslam for that matter

Coria reached the US Open quarter finals in 2003 and 2005. Coria's career near the top was 2003-2005, and only 2003 went smoothly throughout without off-court distractions or problems. In 2004, he had several problems with kidney stones and injuries, including shoulder surgery in August 2004. From July 2005 onwards, Coria had increasing problems with the service yips and the resultant double faults, which finished his career at the top.

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.

Coria would make him run a lot, that's for sure. He wouldn't just rally from the baseline without doing drop shots, lobs and all sorts of stuff to mix up the pace.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
2006 Coria was not the same player. He was riddled with double faults. Strangely, Coria had one match when he didn't serve any double faults in 2006, and that was when he beat Djokovic in Miami.



Coria reached the US Open quarter finals in 2003 and 2005. Coria's career near the top was 2003-2005, and only 2003 went smoothly throughout without off-court distractions or problems. In 2004, he had several problems with kidney stones and injuries, including shoulder surgery in August 2004. From July 2005 onwards, Coria had increasing problems with the service yips and the resultant double faults, which finished his career at the top.



Coria would make him run a lot, that's for sure. He wouldn't just rally from the baseline without doing drop shots, lobs and all sorts of stuff to mix up the pace.
people are seriously underrating Coria I mean wow...Coria was a choker but he was a ridiculously good clay courter. He was absolutely done in 06..those matches don't mean anything. He'd definitely give Djoker problems because he can hang with Djoker from the baseline on clay. Djoker probably edges him out at the biggest stages because of his much better serve and mental strength but he would definitely be a very worthy rival and would score wins off him and way better than anyone on clay today.
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
people are seriously underrating Coria I mean wow...Coria was a choker but he was a ridiculously good clay courter.

The irony is that before the 2004 French Open final, Coria's reputation was that of a fighter and certainly not a choker. His comebacks from the dead during 2004 Miami and 2004 Hamburg were big. The best was against Gonzalez in the semis of 2004 Miami. Mary Carillo was already talking like Gonzalez was in the final during the second set.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
people are seriously underrating Coria I mean wow...Coria was a choker but he was a ridiculously good clay courter. He was absolutely done in 06..those matches don't mean anything. He'd definitely give Djoker problems because he can hang with Djoker from the baseline on clay. Djoker probably edges him out at the biggest stages because of his much better serve and mental strength but he would definitely be a very worthy rival and would score wins off him and way better than anyone on clay today.
coria and ferrero were both awesome clay courters whose careers fizzled out due to unfortunate circumstances...too bad.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
The irony is that before the 2004 French Open final, Coria's reputation was that of a fighter and certainly not a choker. His comebacks from the dead during 2004 Miami and 2004 Hamburg were big. The best was against Gonzalez in the semis of 2004 Miami. Mary Carillo was already talking like Gonzalez was in the final during the second set.
that's true I also remember a 1-6 1-5 comeback from him somewhere, don't remember where..but man to blow the 04 RG final and 05 Rome final like that...pretty tough blow. Imo the 05 Rome final really killed him even moreso than the RG final because while he suffered the shoulder injury after RG and his serve was diminished so he wasn't quite as good on clay in 05 as 04, he was still really good. But then nadal beat him a bunch of times culminating in Rome, he was subpar at the French that year and started falling off a cliff after that with his serve.
 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
If Djokovic get's to 14-15 slams, including the FO, and Cinci, he will be the GOAT. No need to reach Federer's 17.
Why would he be better with less? Also, aren't you forgetting a few standard measures of greatness?
 

Mustard

Bionic Poster
that's true I also remember a 1-6 1-5 comeback from him somewhere, don't remember where..

2006 Monte Carlo against Paul-Henri Mathieu. Coria was 1-6, 1-5 down and came back to win 1-6, 7-6, 6-4, despite hitting around 20 double faults. The double faults decreased in the latter period of the match.

but man to blow the 04 RG final and 05 Rome final like that...pretty tough blow. Imo the 05 Rome final really killed him even moreso than the RG final because while he suffered the shoulder injury after RG and his serve was diminished so he wasn't quite as good on clay in 05 as 04, he was still really good. But then nadal beat him a bunch of times culminating in Rome, he was subpar at the French that year and started falling off a cliff after that with his serve.

Those matches were obviously crushing blows for Coria. They would be, but the service yips killed his career at the top. His serve was okay during the 2005 clay season, but it was in the latter months of the year that it started becoming a serious problem, especially from the 2005 US Open onwards. The commentators were mentioning during the Nadal vs. Coria final in Beijing how Coria still had a serve in Rome, but now he has a very serious problem.
 

Diehard

Semi-Pro
On what planet is agassi tier 1 or in the same group with sampras or nadal or Federer. It is insulting to the three.
Career Golden Slam givves automatic membership of Tier 1. Without any concrete evidence to substantiate the doubters as to sudden improovements i simply take on face value what i saw.
 

Diehard

Semi-Pro
A slams is a slam
Well then why is Laver always put on a pedestal? He 'only' won 11! And in his day there were only 2 surfaces. Nadal, Federer and Agassi only 3 guys to win Majors on 3 surfaces. Sampras, Borg and probably Djokovic are the other tier 1 players due to double digit majors and all being triple or more W winners.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
There is such a dearth of good young players that Novak Djokovic may continue to win many more slams.

Sadly, I think he may overtake the likes of Sampras and Nadal, and end his career ranked third in the GOAT list behind only Federer and Laver.

I pray to God he does not become GOAT. It would be a disgrace for a major sport like tennis to have such a man acknowledged as its GOAT.
 

Algo

Hall of Fame
Well then why is Laver always put on a pedestal? He 'only' won 11! And in his day there were only 2 surfaces. Nadal, Federer and Agassi only 3 guys to win Majors on 3 surfaces. Sampras, Borg and probably Djokovic are the other tier 1 players due to double digit majors and all being triple or more W winners.
CYGS.
Has anyone done it since?
 

mika1979

Professional
Well then why is Laver always put on a pedestal? He 'only' won 11! And in his day there were only 2 surfaces. Nadal, Federer and Agassi only 3 guys to win Majors on 3 surfaces. Sampras, Borg and probably Djokovic are the other tier 1 players due to double digit majors and all being triple or more W winners.
A grand slam is in one year peanut
 

swizzy

Hall of Fame
if he wins a golden slam this year he will surpass federer in my mind, [ i am a federer/nadal fan..so it hurts to think about] that is how gargantuan a thing it would be.. eesh
 

Ogi44

Rookie
There is such a dearth of good young players that Novak Djokovic may continue to win many more slams.

Sadly, I think he may overtake the likes of Sampras and Nadal, and end his career ranked third in the GOAT list behind only Federer and Laver.

I pray to God he does not become GOAT. It would be a disgrace for a major sport like tennis to have such a man acknowledged as its GOAT.
Why do you think it would be a disgrace?
There is such a dearth of good young players that Novak Djokovic may continue to win many more slams.

Sadly, I think he may overtake the likes of Sampras and Nadal, and end his career ranked third in the GOAT list behind only Federer and Laver.

I pray to God he does not become GOAT. It would be a disgrace for a major sport like tennis to have such a man acknowledged as its GOAT.
Disgrace is a very strong word. I understand that you as few other Roger fans don't like the guy. I feel that few years ago you also didn't like certain player from Spain but now he don't bothers you that much. I am sure he annoys you much less than Djokovic currently which was unthinkable just few years ago. Maybe God will hear your prayers and Nole will decline like Rafa before him very soon and put your mind at ease.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
Why do you think it would be a disgrace?

Disgrace is a very strong word. I understand that you as few other Roger fans don't like the guy. I feel that few years ago you also didn't like certain player from Spain but now he don't bothers you that much. I am sure he annoys you much less than Djokovic currently which was unthinkable just few years ago. Maybe God will hear your prayers and Nole will decline like Rafa before him very soon and put your mind at ease.

You are wrong. I am a fan of both Federer and Nadal, and always have been. I am also a fan of Murray, Hewitt, Del Potro, Soderling, Sampras, Henman, Kuerten and many others.

Only Novak Djokovic, the tennis anti-Christ, makes my blood boil.
 

5555

Hall of Fame
There is such a dearth of good young players that Novak Djokovic may continue to win many more slams.

Sadly, I think he may overtake the likes of Sampras and Nadal, and end his career ranked third in the GOAT list behind only Federer and Laver.

I pray to God he does not become GOAT. It would be a disgrace for a major sport like tennis to have such a man acknowledged as its GOAT.

5d5.gif
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
You are wrong. I am a fan of both Federer and Nadal, and always have been. I am also a fan of Murray, Hewitt, Del Potro, Soderling, Sampras, Henman, Kuerten and many others.

Only Novak Djokovic, the tennis anti-Christ, makes my blood boil.
Lol, what is it about Djokovic that makes you dislike him so much?
 

joe sch

Legend
I think he will be the open GOAT before he retires but only time will tell. Probably over take Fed by end of 2017. Maybe tied by end of this year 2016. If he grand slams 2016 then he is historic and immediately the all time GOAT candidate. Below is my post from a diff thread.

Open era:

1. Federer (17)
2. Sampras (14)
3. Nadal (14)
4. Djokovic (11)
5. Borg (11)

Novak will surely rise as he is now dominating both Federer and Nadal. With eleven (11) slam championships including six (6) AO titles, three (3) Wimbledon, and two (2) USO title, Novak only needs a FO to have a career slam. 2016 should be a good indication of just how much higher Novak climbs on the open GOAT list, maybe better than Federer if he wins a grand slam and increases his total to an active 14 total. He will still be less than Federer just by the numbers. I think he will be the open GOAT before he retires but only time will tell.
 
Last edited:

Ogi44

Rookie
You are wrong. I am a fan of both Federer and Nadal, and always have been. I am also a fan of Murray, Hewitt, Del Potro, Soderling, Sampras, Henman, Kuerten and many others.

Only Novak Djokovic, the tennis anti-Christ, makes my blood boil.
Why if I may ask? You don't like his style of play? Or his looks? Or its something else that bothers you?
 
Last edited:

Diehard

Semi-Pro
CYGS.
Has anyone done it since?
No they havent but surely in Lavers day it was easier as three of the tournaments were on grass, one on clay. The more surfaces the harder it is because there are more players who excel on one type of surface. Im not denigrading Laver, far from it, im simply saying you cant compare what he did to what is happening today.
 

Algo

Hall of Fame
No they havent but surely in Lavers day it was easier as three of the tournaments were on grass, one on clay. The more surfaces the harder it is because there are more players who excel on one type of surface. Im not denigrading Laver, far from it, im simply saying you cant compare what he did to what is happening today.
What about surface homogenization?
It's not like AO/USO/WB play the exact same but it's not like they're all that different, either.
It's good you didn't say the field was weaker, though.
 

Jaitock1991

Hall of Fame
The way he's dominating now, it's hard to see him lose. But these things have a way of changing very quickly. Who could have predicted Fed's downfall in 2008? In the words of Chuck Nolan: Who knows what the tide will bring?
 

Diehard

Semi-Pro
What about surface homogenization?
It's not like AO/USO/WB play the exact same but it's not like they're all that different, either.
It's good you didn't say the field was weaker, though.
The weak field argument does my head in!! It is so disrespectful to so many great players. Try saying that to Federer or Nadal or Djokovic and they would just smile and walk off thinking muppet!

Yes i do take your point about homogenization, but that dare i say is a very technical point that the history books wont record unlke what surface was played on. But you are correct, Nadal would never have won W in the 90's simply because in those days standing as far back as he does to return serve would have been suicidal against serve volleyers.
 

Algo

Hall of Fame
The weak field argument does my head in!! It is so disrespectful to so many great players. Try saying that to Federer or Nadal or Djokovic and they would just smile and walk off thinking muppet!

Yes i do take your point about homogenization, but that dare i say is a very technical point that the history books wont record unlke what surface was played on. But you are correct, Nadal would never have won W in the 90's simply because in those days standing as far back as he does to return serve would have been suicidal against serve volleyers.
Yes, it's going to be a "you had to be there" kinda thing. They won't write about it for more reasons than one i.e marketing.
History books will be flawed in that respect, but they always are one way or another.

I think it might be guys reading them too literally e.g "he can't be an ATG he only had 11 GS", "he can't be an ATG he didn't win AO" and yadda yadda yadda that do the underrating of players like Laver or Borg or whomever they underrate.
 

WarrenMP

Professional
The way he's dominating now, it's hard to see him lose. But these things have a way of changing very quickly. Who could have predicted Fed's downfall in 2008? In the words of Chuck Nolan: Who knows what the tide will bring?
As long as Djokovic stays injury free, he has the game to keep winning.
 

Diehard

Semi-Pro
Yes, it's going to be a "you had to be there" kinda thing. They won't write about it for more reasons than one i.e marketing.
History books will be flawed in that respect, but they always are one way or another.

I think it might be guys reading them too literally e.g "he can't be an ATG he only had 11 GS", "he can't be an ATG he didn't win AO" and yadda yadda yadda that do the underrating of players like Laver or Borg or whomever they underrate.
Agreed. Everyone has their own way of defining GOATness so its an impossible debate really
 

roger presley

Hall of Fame
Yes, it's going to be a "you had to be there" kinda thing. They won't write about it for more reasons than one i.e marketing.
History books will be flawed in that respect, but they always are one way or another.

I think it might be guys reading them too literally e.g "he can't be an ATG he only had 11 GS", "he can't be an ATG he didn't win AO" and yadda yadda yadda that do the underrating of players like Laver or Borg or whomever they underrate.
Agree.If Laver played all GS in his career we wouldn't be talking or discussing about who's the GOAT. Gary20 or Diehard probably wasn't interested in tennis before Nadal.
 

Algo

Hall of Fame
Agree.If Laver played all GS in his career we wouldn't be talking or discussing about who's the GOAT. Gary20 or Diehard probably wasn't interested in tennis before Nadal.
Wanna think it's a typo and you didn't mix it up.

Agreed. Everyone has their own way of defining GOATness so its an impossible debate really
Yeah, best we can is define ATGness. And that's kinda hard already.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
No they havent but surely in Lavers day it was easier as three of the tournaments were on grass, one on clay. The more surfaces the harder it is because there are more players who excel on one type of surface. Im not denigrading Laver, far from it, im simply saying you cant compare what he did to what is happening today.

Laver won the biggest HC tournaments in 1969 as well, btw. He would have won the CYGS regardless.
 

5555

Hall of Fame
If I had to guess, I'd say you thought this going into 2014 and 2015 as well. Maybe even 2009 and 2010 if you've been a Djokovic fan when it wasn't so glamorous and easy.

Just two years ago, you predicted that Djokovic will end his career with 8 or 9 slams.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Just two years ago, you predicted that Djokovic will end his career with 8 or 9 slams.

I also predicted last year that Djokovic wouldn't win the CYGS, and I was right. That's the nature of predictions. Sometimes you're right and sometimes you're not. It's not a big deal either way.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
I also predicted last year that Djokovic wouldn't win the CYGS, and I was right.
That's about the safest prediction one can make given that no one has ever done it on the male tour (on 3 surfaces). It's like me predicting the martians are not gonna land on earth this year. I'd deserve credit for that? Give me a break.
What is really hard to predict is which player (if any) will go on a tear (and predict it the season before). Now, that is a tricky one.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
That's about the safest prediction one can make given that no one has ever done it on the male tour (on 3 surfaces). It's like me predicting the martians are not gonna land on earth this year. I'd deserve credit for that? Give me a break.
What is really hard to predict is which player (if any) will go on a tear (and predict it the season before). Now, that is a tricky one.

Read the whole conversation. The poster I quoted expects Djokovic to win all 4 slams and then added "maybe" the OG too. Hence my response about Djokovic not winning the CYGS last year amidst the craze that comes around that topic after Djokovic wins the AO. And I get the feeling that most of the Djokovic CYGS predictors actually believe what they're typing. That's the sad part about it.
 

5555

Hall of Fame
Read the whole conversation. The poster I quoted expects Djokovic to win all 4 slams and then added "maybe" the OG too.

No. The poster you quoted is me and I said something different.

I also predicted last year that Djokovic wouldn't win the CYGS, and I was right. That's the nature of predictions. Sometimes you're right and sometimes you're not. It's not a big deal either way.

Those who predicted that Djokovic would win the Calendar Grand Slam in 2015 were not far off. Novak won 3 slams and reached the final at FO where he won the first set so he was very close to winning CYGS. But your prediction that Novak will end his career with 8 or 9 slams will probably turn out to be terrible forecast because it's likely he wlll end up with significantly more.

So even claiming that the younger generations are mediocre is being butthurt?

Have you read what Phoenix1983 said? I quote:

"I pray to God he does not become GOAT. It would be a disgrace for a major sport like tennis to have such a man acknowledged as its GOAT."
 
Last edited:
Top