The full list of would be ATG players, younger than Djokodal

6august

Hall of Fame
The most important thing OP failed to mention: Fred had easier competition during his peak years compared to Nadal and Djokovic.

Just accept that all Fedalovic had easy and hard period in their careers.

I swear that Fred fans complain about Djokovic's competition MORE than Djokovic fans complain about Fred's.

I've just thought of developing a tool which can accumulate all the times Big 3 fans talk about "weak era" and show it to you. However, it takes time and money. How about a funding? Calling for all Big 3 fans.
 
who said that?

I know that ATP is publishing every week a thing called ranking, and you know what? it starts with #1
I can't find on ATP page a section called GS race or something similar
that's something only in some fanz heads
Forgetting Murray too much eh? He has as many slams as Hewitt and Roddick combined.

Wawrinka is a far greater clay courter than those guys could even hope for playing. Wawrinka beat prime Nadal/Novak at the HC slams.

Roddick, for how much he was called a 'grass court specialist' couldn't even win a Wimbledon. Its a sad story, but it is what it is
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Forgetting Murray too much eh? He has as many slams as Hewitt and Roddick combined.

Wawrinka is a far greater clay courter than those guys could even hope for playing. Wawrinka beat prime Nadal/Novak at the HC slams.

Roddick, for how much he was called a 'grass court specialist' couldn't even win a Wimbledon. Its a sad story, but it is what it is

1. check the previous post
2. tennis is played on clay, HC and grass. Some time in the past it was played as well on carpet. Some more time in the past it was played as well on wood.
if you want to compare Wawrinka greatness on clay, go ahead, compare it to Nadal or Kuerten
 
Hewitt was #1 during 80 weeks
for me getting to #1 is more challenging than winning 1 GS, so Hewitt reached more from my point of view
Hahahaha that's your opinion mate, that's fine. The majority of the world won't agree with you, but who cares? More power to you :giggle:
 
D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
Hewitt is obviously greater than Wawrinka, but Stan arguably peaked higher.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Will you rate Novak with more weeks at #1 with 19 slams greater than Fed? I won't, but according to your scheme he should no?

if you ignore the fact that Novak competition was weaker -> there there is no issues in evaluating it that way
as I said many times, a few years after Big 3 will retire, all these weak era, stronk era bs will be forgotten, and all that will remain will be numbers
so, yes, at some point Novak weeks at #1 will be the benchmark without any discussion
just like at some point, the amount of GS serving as benchmark will be the biggest mathematically number, without any ifs, buts, and so on
 
if you ignore the fact that Novak competition was weaker -> there there is no issues in evaluating it that way
as I said many times, a few years after Big 3 will retire, all these weak era, stronk era bs will be forgotten, and all that will remain will be numbers
so, yes, at some point Novak weeks at #1 will be the benchmark without any discussion
just like at some point, the amount of GS serving as benchmark will be the biggest mathematically number, without any ifs, buts, and so on
Weak competion argument? You saying Hewitt getting 80 weeks at number 1, 2 slams before Fed's ascent isn't weak? Compare Murray who had to go through the might of the Big 3
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Weak competion argument? You saying Hewitt getting 80 weeks at number 1, 2 slams before Fed's ascent isn't weak? Compare Murray who had to go through the might of the Big 3

are you saying that at the moment of Hewitt ascension the #1 slot was empty and ranking started from #2?
seriously, aren't you guys fed up with tennis started in 2011?

FYI.
In order to become #1 he defeated Sampras at the USO 2000
Sampras, Agassi, Kuerten, Ferrero, Safin, these are some of the folks he had to keep defeating to maintain his 80 weeks at #1
 
are you saying that at the moment of Hewitt ascension the #1 slot was empty and ranking started from #2?
seriously, aren't you guys fed up with tennis started in 2011?

FYI.
In order to become #1 he defeated Sampras at the USO 2000
Sampras, Agassi, Kuerten, Ferrero, Safin, these are some of the folks he had to keep defeating to maintain his 80 weeks at #1
Fed was the game changer. Sampras and Agassi, the latter being more were on their last career stretches, there was a significant vaccum that was created for someone new to come up.

I'm taking nothing away from Hewitt. But comparing his reaching #1 to Murray? The Big 3 are the greatest tennis players ever to have graced the earth. Getting #1 in that era, winning 3 slams, 2 Gold medals, a multitude of more masters is just awe inspiring. Murray is also a greater grass courter and Clay courter than Hewitt
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
Often fans here throw "Djokodal kept at bay" the "would be ATG" in any other era arguments
let's compare how the younger players are comparing with some of the greats of the past.
a metric proposed by @socallefty , how many GS QF reached during their first 15 GS tournaments

Here are some examples from the (not so distant) past:
FO 1988 = SF
USO 1988 = SF
USO 1989 = SF
FO 1990 = finalist
USO 1990 = finalist
FO 1991 = finalist
Wim 1991 = QF
FO 1992 = SF
Wim 1992 = winner
Becker = 7 times reached the QF or better
AO 1984 = QF
Wim 1985 = winner
FO 1986 = QF
Wim 1986 = winner
USO 1986 = SF
FO 1987 = SF
Wim 1988 = finalist
FO 2005 = winner
FO 2006 = winner
W 2006 = finalist
USO 2006 = QF
AO 2007 = QF
FO 2007 = winner
Wim 2007 = finalist
USO 2001 = QF
USO 2002 = QF
AO 2003 = SF
Wim 2003 = SF
USO 2003 = winner
AO 2004 = QF
Wim 2004 = finalist
FO 2006 = QF
FO 2007 = SF
Wim 2007 = SF
USO 2007 = finalist
AO 2008 = winner
FO 2008 = SF
Sampras = 6 times reached the QF or better
USO 1990 = winner
USO 1991 = QF
FO 1992 = QF
Wim 1992 = SF
USO 1992 = finalist
AO 1993 = SF
FO 2000 = QF
USO 2000 = winner
Wim 2001 = QF
USO 2001 = SF
AO 2002 = finalist

-------------------------------------------------
FO 2016 = SF
FO 2017 = SF
AO 2019 = SF
FO 2020 = SF
USO 2019 = SF
USO 2019 = finalist
USO 2017 = QF
FO 2018 = QF

I thought also about the generation in-between, but wasn't sure which of the 26-28 years old players are in the "would be ATG" category beyond Thiem.
Could you help me to choose the right candidates?
Checchinato
Gerasimov
Caruso
Vesely
Londero
Thompson
Monteiro
Basilashvili
Krajinovic
Schwartzman
You are not being fair to current generation, as they must deal with goat over-30 players like RBA, Anderson, Isner, Lopez, Fognini, Monfils, and Simon.
 
D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
Peak Hewitt = peak Murray

So yeah, Hewitt's era was somewhat weak. Fed failed to win more Slemz in the 01-03 vacuum.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Fed was the game changer. Sampras and Agassi, the latter being more were on their last career stretches, there was a significant vaccum that was created for someone new to come up.

I'm taking nothing away from Hewitt. But comparing his reaching #1 to Murray? The Big 3 are the greatest tennis players ever to have graced the earth. Getting #1 in that era, winning 3 slams, 2 Gold medals, a multitude of more masters is just awe inspiring. Murray is also a greater grass courter and Clay courter than Hewitt

well, great, let's compare Murray reaching to #1.
If I remember well

Djokovic.
After winning RG, his results were:

Wimbledon. Lost in R3 to Querrey
Olympic Games. Lost in R1 to Del Potro
USO. Lost the final to Wawrinka
Shanghai. Lost in QF to RBA
Paris. Lost in QF to Cilic

Federer.
I see a glaring hole in 2016 activity, which followed Wimbledon
Hint. He had a surgery.

Nadal.
At FO he lost in R3 to Granollers.
Shall we look into any further details of the Nadal 2016 season?

and you are telling me that Murray path to #1 is glorious while Hewitt caught "a significant vaccum"?
get your facts straight if you want to troll

Murray in 2016
Lost to Novak at the AO. Didn't meet neither Roger nor Rafa
Lost to Delbonis in IW. Didn't meet anyone from Big 3
Lost to Dimitrov in Miami. Didn't meet anyone from Big
Lost to Rafa in MC
Lost to Novak in Madrid
Lost to Novak at FO
didn't meet anyone from Big 3 en-route to Wim title
Lost to Nishikori at USO

truly glorious path to #1 by chasing Vienna title...

Not only weaker ascent than Hewitt's, but also shorter stay
 
D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
Murray and Hewitt are both weak era #1s. End of.
 
well, great, let's compare Murray reaching to #1.
If I remember well

Djokovic.
After winning RG, his results were:

Wimbledon. Lost in R3 to Querrey
Olympic Games. Lost in R1 to Del Potro
USO. Lost the final to Wawrinka
Shanghai. Lost in QF to RBA
Paris. Lost in QF to Cilic

Federer.
I see a glaring hole in 2016 activity, which followed Wimbledon
Hint. He had a surgery.

Nadal.
At FO he lost in R3 to Granollers.
Shall we look into any further details of the Nadal 2016 season?

and you are telling me that Murray path to #1 is glorious while Hewitt caught "a significant vaccum"?
get your facts straight if you want to troll

Murray in 2016
Lost to Novak at the AO. Didn't meet neither Roger nor Rafa
Lost to Delbonis in IW. Didn't meet anyone from Big 3
Lost to Dimitrov in Miami. Didn't meet anyone from Big
Lost to Rafa in MC
Lost to Novak in Madrid
Lost to Novak at FO
didn't meet anyone from Big 3 en-route to Wim title
Lost to Nishikori at USO

truly glorious path to #1 by chasing Vienna title...

Not only weaker ascent than Hewitt's, but also shorter stay
Count everything starting from 2015 shouldn't we? If we are calculating #1? Fed was pretty good in 2015, Novak and Wawrinka were peak.

AO, RG final (Hewitt didn't do anything close on clay) winning Wimbledon in 2016....ending the season by beating Novak at WTF is a great achievement.

Hewitt has a 70% win rate compared to Murray's 77% (close to Sampras) if I remember correctly! Murray has so many more titles than Hewitt. It's a no Brainer for me that Murray is better, throughout their careers.

We can agree to disagree
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 748597

Guest
Count everything starting from 2015 shouldn't we? If we are calculating #1? Fed was pretty good in 2015, Novak and Wawrinka were peak.

AO, RG final (Hewitt didn't do anything close on clay) winning Wimbledon in 2016....ending the season by beating Novak at WTF is a great achievement.

Hewitt has a 70% win rate compared to Murray's 77 if I remember correctly! Murray has so many more titles than Hewitt. It's a no Brainer for me that Murray is better, throughout their careers.

We can agree to disagree
Hewitt was Fed's rival so he has to be better.
 
N

Nuclear Warhead Sinner

Guest
majority of the world?
that would be approximately 4+ Billion people on the planet
please bring some data to back up your loud mouth
You need to take a break man. This website will cause you brain damage. Lots of posters here don't have to worry about it because they have no brain to begin with.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Count everything starting from 2015 shouldn't we? If we are calculating #1? Fed was pretty good in 2015, Novak and Wawrinka were peak.

no, because 2015 result were irrelevant when Murray reached #1

lol
:-D :-D

Hewitt has a 70% win rate compared to Murray's 77% (close to Sampras) if I remember correctly! Murray has so many more titles than Hewitt.

irrelevant
80 weeks at #1

It's a no Brainer for me that Murray is better, throughout their careers.

We can agree to disagree

I can see that it's a no brainer.
 
no, because 2015 result were irrelevant when Murray reached #1

lol
:-D :-D



irrelevant
80 weeks at #1



I can see that it's a no brainer.

80 weeks at number 1 for Hewitt, who did he lose the number 1 to Agassi, Ferrero, Roddick. (He took it from Kuerten 2001)


Murray? He lost the #1 to Federer/Nadal (He took it from Djokovic 2016)

Fedal>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agassi, Ferrero (lol), Roddick (lol)
Djokovic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kuerten
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
80 weeks at number 1 for Hewitt, who did he lose the number 1 to Agassi, Ferrero, Roddick. (He took it from Kuerten 2001)


Murray? He lost the #1 to Federer/Nadal (He took it from Djokovic 2016)

Fedal>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agassi, Ferrero (lol), Roddick (lol)
Djokovic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kuerten

Time to start using your brain buddy
 
Hewitt's vacuum lasted longer due to Murray breaking his own body and Fedal coming back.
Precisely, Murray lost the ranking to none other than GOATS Fedal. Hewitt losing it to the likes of Ferrero and Roddick begs the question of how he amassed them at the first place.

80 weeks in a power vaccum, which is not Hewitt's fault to be fair, but he got thoroughly exposed when Fed joined the party. Murray was beating Fed as a teenager and was atleast competitive with him lol


Baby Murray beating Hewitt in a final. BuT hEwiTt was post prime no? XD
 
Here is the full list of younger than Nadal/Djokovic generation ATGs:













smiley_emoticons_santagrin.gif
 

MeatTornado

Talk Tennis Guru
The ability to stop the Next Gen is crucial in the GOAT resume of any sport. Nadal and Djokovic suceeded in stopping the Next Gen, unlike Federer. Stopping the Next Gen is a sign of greatness and a necessary ability to be the GOAT.
But is stopping the next gen more important than stopping your own gen? Federer crushed all of his contemporaries but failed to stop those behind him. Nadal and Djokovic stopped their next gen, but neither one took a stronghold over their own generation.

Now you could rightfully say that it's unfair to expect Nadal or Djokovic to single handedly dominate when the other one was also so good. But then I could say the same thing about Federer's inability to stop them as nextgen opponents, compared to their ability to stop the likes of Dimitrov, Thiem, Zverev, etc.

I think it very much evens out between them. The level of competition they faced just came at different stages in their careers.
 

NoleIsBoat

Hall of Fame
Djokovic faced ATGs his entire career from 2008-2020 ->

First slam: 08 AO defeated peak Federer in SF
20 AO defeated red hot Federer in SF (was 5 - 3 0 - 40 down in 1st set) and potential ATG Thiem in the F.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Precisely, Murray lost the ranking to none other than GOATS Fedal. Hewitt losing it to the likes of Ferrero and Roddick begs the question of how he amassed them at the first place.

80 weeks in a power vaccum, which is not Hewitt's fault to be fair, but he got thoroughly exposed when Fed joined the party. Murray was beating Fed as a teenager and was atleast competitive with him lol


Baby Murray beating Hewitt in a final. BuT hEwiTt was post prime no? XD

Once again you use your 'nobrainers' when you were advised to start using your brain
Murray should have been stopped by the generation coming after Djokodal. But hey, wait, it is Krajinovic, Sonego, Djere, Mager.
So of course you choose a nobrainer name over form & logic
And then you accuse Hewitt of losing #1 to Roddick? During his prime?

Lol
& lol at your vacuum era
If something, the vacuum era is happening now.
12 years we see zero young talent capable to challenge 3 guys that get older & older & older
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
Often fans here throw "Djokodal kept at bay" the "would be ATG" in any other era arguments
let's compare how the younger players are comparing with some of the greats of the past.
a metric proposed by @socallefty , how many GS QF reached during their first 15 GS tournaments

Here are some examples from the (not so distant) past:
FO 1988 = SF
USO 1988 = SF
USO 1989 = SF
FO 1990 = finalist
USO 1990 = finalist
FO 1991 = finalist
Wim 1991 = QF
FO 1992 = SF
Wim 1992 = winner
Becker = 7 times reached the QF or better
AO 1984 = QF
Wim 1985 = winner
FO 1986 = QF
Wim 1986 = winner
USO 1986 = SF
FO 1987 = SF
Wim 1988 = finalist
FO 2005 = winner
FO 2006 = winner
W 2006 = finalist
USO 2006 = QF
AO 2007 = QF
FO 2007 = winner
Wim 2007 = finalist
USO 2001 = QF
USO 2002 = QF
AO 2003 = SF
Wim 2003 = SF
USO 2003 = winner
AO 2004 = QF
Wim 2004 = finalist
FO 2006 = QF
FO 2007 = SF
Wim 2007 = SF
USO 2007 = finalist
AO 2008 = winner
FO 2008 = SF
Sampras = 6 times reached the QF or better
USO 1990 = winner
USO 1991 = QF
FO 1992 = QF
Wim 1992 = SF
USO 1992 = finalist
AO 1993 = SF
FO 2000 = QF
USO 2000 = winner
Wim 2001 = QF
USO 2001 = SF
AO 2002 = finalist

-------------------------------------------------
FO 2016 = SF
FO 2017 = SF
AO 2019 = SF
FO 2020 = SF
USO 2019 = SF
USO 2019 = finalist
USO 2017 = QF
FO 2018 = QF

I thought also about the generation in-between, but wasn't sure which of the 26-28 years old players are in the "would be ATG" category beyond Thiem.
Could you help me to choose the right candidates?
Checchinato
Gerasimov
Caruso
Vesely
Londero
Thompson
Monteiro
Basilashvili
Krajinovic
Schwartzman
Great thread, but I'm most impressed at your use of spoilers to organize what would've otherwise looked like an endless stat dump.
 
Top