Doesn't change the part where Federer said was true.
The conditions today dramatically help Nole's chances of winning everywhere.
Everybody plays and trains under the same conditions and tailor their game in the best possible way to match the game. So It evens out in the end. Djokovic plays against these players, he isn't playing players from the ''specialist'' era.
Hard Courts, clay and grass is still different from each other and they play different. Players have gotten more complete as the years have gone by and the game has improved.
Interesting stats.Highest winning percentage on their worst surface, in bold active players (5 out of 27):
Djokovic 79.3
Nadal 77.4
Connors 76.6
Laver 76.2
Federer 75.9
Borg 75.2
Lendl 75.0
Agassi 72.7
Wilander 72.3
McEnroe 71.9
Newcombe 71.7
Ashe 70.9
Rosewall 70.5
Murray 69.9
Smith 69.8
Del Potro 69.6
Vilas 69.1
Okker 68.8
Edberg 68.3
Gerulaitis 67.1
Richey 67.1
Mecir 66.7
Becker 66.3
Stich 66.1
Nastase 66.1
Nalbandian 65.6
Ramirez 65.5
They are pretty small. But there are inherent differences in the surfaces that cannot be discounted and I've talked about them before, yet you keep ignoring that part for your own purposes.If surfaces are similar, difference in results would be smaller. Fed is good on grass, why? He likes green color? And Nadal on the other hand like red color?
And again, most important is Federer is picking sore grapes, diminishing someones results, its all about.
Yeah because there's nobody decent around today like everyone has been telling you.astronautzor said:Players(Excl. Big3) nowadays can't even make 2 conseq. SF GS appearances let alone win 4 in a row
Q.E.D.Hey Plato, it’s doubtful but you might sound mildly more coherent if you could spell the word intellectually and use basic grammar. And every person should feel included and competent [self-censored].
That's what I thought. Sometimes you see the same thread twice, and the second time it is fine because people are marginally more polite.Yes, deleted due to trolling and fighting. The usual.
That's what I thought. Sometimes you see the same thread twice, and the second time it is fine because people are marginally more polite.
I really did not mean to criticize Fed heavily for his remarks. I think there are about 80% fair, with perhaps a little bit of push-back defending his own place in tennis. I think all these top guys want to be considered at least the best of their era, so they are probably more competitive with the guys they play against. In the 90s it was crystal clear that Pete was the best. It's not at all clear right now, subject to what happens now and in the near future.
That's what I thought. Sometimes you see the same thread twice, and the second time it is fine because people are marginally more polite.
I really did not mean to criticize Fed heavily for his remarks. I think there are about 80% fair, with perhaps a little bit of push-back defending his own place in tennis. I think all these top guys want to be considered at least the best of their era, so they are probably more competitive with the guys they play against. In the 90s it was crystal clear that Pete was the best. It's not at all clear right now, subject to what happens now and in the near future.
That's what I thought. Sometimes you see the same thread twice, and the second time it is fine because people are marginally more polite.
I really did not mean to criticize Fed heavily for his remarks. I think there are about 80% fair, with perhaps a little bit of push-back defending his own place in tennis. I think all these top guys want to be considered at least the best of their era, so they are probably more competitive with the guys they play against. In the 90s it was crystal clear that Pete was the best. It's not at all clear right now, subject to what happens now and in the near future.
I have been saying the same thing on this subject for a while now. If Novak gets a double straight slam he is the GOAT for me. I will always be a Fed fan first and foremost but I also agree with you here that Fed shouldn't say it is easier to do it these days when he hasn't done it. It's all on him. He had the chance in USO 09 and blew it. I am sure Fed fans will cling tighter than ever to slam tally and Nadal fans will also find new value in this stat, having hitherto droned on about H2H. Nole's first straight slam in 2015-16 itself didn't get the acknowledgement it deserved and I doubt that's going to change. But for me, that will surely move the needle.Why was it deleted? The subject should be fine. There must have been trolling and fighting.
I do have a couple thoughts. Fed says it's easier to do today. But doesn't make us immediately ask, "If it is now easier, why couldn't he do it?"
I can't help but think that he is subtly degrading the importance of what is happening. Mind you, RG is anything but a done deal. Rafa is not the only guy who can steal that upcoming major from him. But if Gumby does it again, I have to say he'll have as strong bragging rights for GOAT as any other player. Even Laver only did it once as a pro.
First, versatile players have already existed, as I showed in post #6.
Second, players are now more complete. Federer is a Sampras with better movement/backhand, which allows him to be good on clay too (but still not as good as on fast courts).
I have been saying the same thing on this subject for a while now. If Novak gets a double straight slam he is the GOAT for me. I will always be a Fed fan first and foremost but I also agree with you here that Fed shouldn't say it is easier to do it these days when he hasn't done it. It's all on him. He had the chance in USO 09 and blew it. I am sure Fed fans will cling tighter than ever to slam tally and Nadal fans will also find new value in this stat, having hitherto droned on about H2H. Nole's first straight slam in 2015-16 itself didn't get the acknowledgement it deserved and I doubt that's going to change. But for me, that will surely move the needle.
Surprisingly against Novak 5-4Then Djoker GOAT, Fedr fraud. There's also the matchups to consider... But Fed fans bring up Roddick as legit competition. LOL! Does he even have a winning head to head against anyone?
No one will ever be the GOAT for me because I loathe the whole concept of picking one person as the best of all time. I've been fighting against that endlessly. I don't like comparing eras. But that's just my view.I have been saying the same thing on this subject for a while now. If Novak gets a double straight slam he is the GOAT for me. I will always be a Fed fan first and foremost but I also agree with you here that Fed shouldn't say it is easier to do it these days when he hasn't done it. It's all on him. He had the chance in USO 09 and blew it. I am sure Fed fans will cling tighter than ever to slam tally and Nadal fans will also find new value in this stat, having hitherto droned on about H2H. Nole's first straight slam in 2015-16 itself didn't get the acknowledgement it deserved and I doubt that's going to change. But for me, that will surely move the needle.
No one will ever be the GOAT for me because I loathe the whole concept of picking one person as the best of all time. I've been fighting against that endlessly. I don't like comparing eras. But that's just my view.
As for this era - right now - I think it's awfully close. I sort of think Nadal is falling to #2 or #3 because of a combination of injuries and inability to produce enough big wins on faster surfaces, BUT: surely being such an incredibly dominant player on clay is going to make him a guy who will never be forgotten.
As for the competition between Fed and Djokovic, the 6 years difference in age makes it hard. It is so clear that Fed was the better player up until 2011, and historically we have always judged a player up to around 30, with Laver getting the GS at 30-31. With Djokovic sitting on 3 majors after turning 31, he has the possibility of outdoing Laver by holdomg all four at the age of 31-32, but that assumes RG. Novak's level right now is hard to judge. He looked great at the AO, not so good at the WTF and after AO, so we have to watch.
Absolutely true, but I think the Big Three are a lot closer than three top players were in other eras. One of the reasons is the extended careers, which may be just what we will see now in the future. When ATGs have careers that overlap more, it's going to get more complicate. For me it was very similar for a short while with Connors, Borg and McEnroe, but only Connors kept playing, and his level over age 30 was nothing like the players we see now. I don't think it was possible without modern training methods, physios and all the other extra stuff they have now.That is because their story is not over yet...
Cool video
No one will ever be the GOAT for me because I loathe the whole concept of picking one person as the best of all time. I've been fighting against that endlessly. I don't like comparing eras. But that's just my view.
As for this era - right now - I think it's awfully close. I sort of think Nadal is falling to #2 or #3 because of a combination of injuries and inability to produce enough big wins on faster surfaces, BUT: surely being such an incredibly dominant player on clay is going to make him a guy who will never be forgotten.
As for the competition between Fed and Djokovic, the 6 years difference in age makes it hard. It is so clear that Fed was the better player up until 2011, and historically we have always judged a player up to around 30, with Laver getting the GS at 30-31. With Djokovic sitting on 3 majors after turning 31, he has the possibility of outdoing Laver by holdomg all four at the age of 31-32, but that assumes RG. Novak's level right now is hard to judge. He looked great at the AO, not so good at the WTF and after AO, so we have to watch.
If you look at the state of his biggest challengers on both streaks you will know why what you say is bogus.
Just compare Del Potro from 2009 and 2018 and tell me with a straight face that he was the same (quality) player.
That's like 180 pounds. There's no way a 6'6" guy with a big frame and big legs weighs anything under 195-200. Delpo recently I agree was probably around 215-220. Dimitrov is probably like 180 and he's a skinny 6'2" guy.2009 Fed like 2009 Delpo where faster more damaging on both sides than today.
Delpo was 80-82kg in 2009 vs 98-102k 2018-2019 playing weight.
Todays ATP/LTA selfie homogenized tour is on its last legs of court craft tennis.
Soon crafty all court tennis will be a distant memory like serve and volley are.
Absolutely true, but I think the Big Three are a lot closer than three top players were in other eras. One of the reasons is the extended careers, which may be just what we will see now in the future. When ATGs have careers that overlap more, it's going to get more complicate. For me it was very similar for a short while with Connors, Borg and McEnroe, but only Connors kept playing, and his level over age 30 was nothing like the players we see now. I don't think it was possible without modern training methods, physios and all the other extra stuff they have now.
Delpo jat 19/20 had a skinny Azev like frame but with less muscle than gym training Azev.That's like 180 pounds. There's no way a 6'6" guy with a big frame and big legs weighs anything under 195-200. Delpo recently I agree was probably around 215-220. Dimitrov is probably like 180 and he's a skinny 6'2" guy.
against top10:
2011-15 Djokovic 69.7%
2004-08 Federer 55%
Djokovic is better than Federer on clay in every stat.
Is it easier to win all four titles when one plays completely different to the other three, or is it easier to win all four titles when all four tournaments only play slightly different to each other?
Probably easier in Laver's day due to surfaces, lack of depth in world tennis and apathy towards the Australian Open by many top players.