falstaff78
Hall of Fame
I don't understand how a guy with a palpably weaker CV, palpably weaker competition chasing him during his 30s, and palpably inferior public personna, gets so overrated in these greatness discussions
Djokovic being the greatest male tennis player ever, as things currently stand, is such a ludicrous position that it doesn't even compute
Recency bias I guess?
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
1. Bahrami
2. Brown
3. Tomic
4. Kyrgios
5. Fognini
6. Rios
7. Monfils
The rest don't matter
Serious list:
1. Federer
2. Nadal
3. Djokovic
4. Laver
5. Sampras
6. Borg
7. Connors
8. Lendl
9. McEnroe
10. Agassi
Rosewall and Gonzales could fit in there somewhere.
2. Brown
3. Tomic
4. Kyrgios
5. Fognini
6. Rios
7. Monfils
The rest don't matter
Serious list:
1. Federer
2. Nadal
3. Djokovic
4. Laver
5. Sampras
6. Borg
7. Connors
8. Lendl
9. McEnroe
10. Agassi
Rosewall and Gonzales could fit in there somewhere.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
Top 4 in no particular order: Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Rod Laver, Pancho Gonzales.
Too lazy to share more than this. Enjoy this thread, guys.
Too lazy to share more than this. Enjoy this thread, guys.
D
Deleted member 768841
Guest
1. Federer
2. Nadal
3. Sampras
4. Djokovic
5. Laver
6. Agassi
7. Wawrinka
8. Becker
9. Edberg
10. Just for the hell of it, Monfils
2. Nadal
3. Sampras
4. Djokovic
5. Laver
6. Agassi
7. Wawrinka
8. Becker
9. Edberg
10. Just for the hell of it, Monfils
Code Violation
New User
You mean weeks, surely.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Gonzales
Laver
Fedr
Rosewall
Nadl
Djovak
PETE
Borg
Tilden
?
Laver
Fedr
Rosewall
Nadl
Djovak
PETE
Borg
Tilden
?
D
Deleted member 768841
Guest
There is your last one.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Fail...
D
Deleted member 768841
Guest
I beg to differ.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Palpably weaker CV? The big 3 are basically tied at age 32, ie they have roughly the same CV when you compare what they accomplished at the same age
F
FRV3
Guest
As of right now:
1. Federer
2. Djokovic
3. Nadal
4. Laver
5. Sampras
6. Borg
7. McEnroe
8. Connors
9. Becker
10. Lendl
Federer is my favorite player. Him and Djokovic are pretty much interchangeable at the top, but I give Federer the slight edge because he was still competitive with Djokovic at age 37. I pretty much just randomly chose everyone after Sampras lol. I think all said and done, Djokovic will top the list for me.
1. Federer
2. Djokovic
3. Nadal
4. Laver
5. Sampras
6. Borg
7. McEnroe
8. Connors
9. Becker
10. Lendl
Federer is my favorite player. Him and Djokovic are pretty much interchangeable at the top, but I give Federer the slight edge because he was still competitive with Djokovic at age 37. I pretty much just randomly chose everyone after Sampras lol. I think all said and done, Djokovic will top the list for me.
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
battle between lendl and connors?a really good question
Federev
G.O.A.T.
Too lazy or too wise?
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
Both.
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
both
D
Deleted member 758560
Guest
djo 1st?
JaoSousa
Hall of Fame
The disrespect to Laver is insane. Recency bias at its finest.
D
Deleted member 768841
Guest
Well granted many of us weren’t alive, I still respect his accomplishments.The disrespect to Laver is insane. Recency bias at its finest.
The disrespect to Laver is insane. Recency bias at its finest.
I watched Laver, Borg etc. many times when I was a boy. What players can do today, they could not imagine. They are on the list for historical reasons. If you send Dzumhur by time machine to 1968 (each playe with own equipment), he would beat Laver easily. Play that is common today was impossible then; players over 6ft could not walk etc.
danglarND2010
Rookie
Rosewall is pretty underrated... I think he should be close to laver in "all time rankings"(this debate is really annoying at this point).
For the "modern" era- its big 3(fed is the most accomplished at the moment, might change pretty soon).
In the mid 20th century era- laver and rosrwall
Prehistoric era- probably gonzales
Ranked by accomplishments(as objectively as possibly, considering its very subjective topic):
1. Federer(for the time being).
2. Nadal(for now).
3. Djokovic(if he ties with nadal on majors I will consider him more accomplished).
4. Laver
5. Rosewall
6. Sampras
7. Gonzales
8. Tildan
9. Borg
I don't know about 10. 1-3 might change soon, and the 3 are pretty much tied at the moment IMO. 6-8 are pretty much ties as well.
For the "modern" era- its big 3(fed is the most accomplished at the moment, might change pretty soon).
In the mid 20th century era- laver and rosrwall
Prehistoric era- probably gonzales
Ranked by accomplishments(as objectively as possibly, considering its very subjective topic):
1. Federer(for the time being).
2. Nadal(for now).
3. Djokovic(if he ties with nadal on majors I will consider him more accomplished).
4. Laver
5. Rosewall
6. Sampras
7. Gonzales
8. Tildan
9. Borg
I don't know about 10. 1-3 might change soon, and the 3 are pretty much tied at the moment IMO. 6-8 are pretty much ties as well.
JaoSousa
Hall of Fame
The consversation is about "All Time Greats". Let us say that someone in 100 years wins an ATP 250 title, they could still beat Djokovic 6-1 6-1. That doesn't mean they are greater than Djokovic.
Beckerserve
Legend
1. Nadal ( most Majors at 34 most m1000s and Olympic Gold and has won at least two Majors on each surface which is unique out of Big 3. The FO record itself automatically would have him top 3. )
2. Federer ( took the game to new heights, amazing longevity and unlucky no m1000s on grass. But for Federer unlikely we would have had the joys of Nadal)
3. Borg (the guy who made tennis big time and ushered in professionalism. But for Borg the sport may have been still relatively obscure rather than the billion pound industry it is now)
4. Sampras (hardest era ever which he totally dominated)
5. Djokovic ( arguably should be top of the pile but has a comparatively average win loss ratio in Major finals compared to the above 4 and has dominated the 4th Major, a Major the likes of Borg and Sampras were not that interested in)
6. Becker (revolutionised European tennis and took the power from America and the youngest ever winner at Wimbledon will be remembered arguably longer than anything else and at his best was the complete player)
7. Agassi (the Golden Slam, one of only two to manage it)
8. Connors (awesome player and unlucky to be same era as Borg otherwise would have won many more Majors)
9. Mcenroe ( defined Borg in some ways and was the bridesmaid to Borg but was part of the duo who made tennis big time. Plus a great player who had he won FO may have been top of pile)
10. Edberg (beckers great rival and traded Majors with him. Best serve volleyer of all time)
11. Lendl (should be much higher but no Wimbledon, the biggest pot in the game means he has to be below the above)
I have not included Laver as the game was different plus i have never seen him play but of course he is a legend in his own right.
2. Federer ( took the game to new heights, amazing longevity and unlucky no m1000s on grass. But for Federer unlikely we would have had the joys of Nadal)
3. Borg (the guy who made tennis big time and ushered in professionalism. But for Borg the sport may have been still relatively obscure rather than the billion pound industry it is now)
4. Sampras (hardest era ever which he totally dominated)
5. Djokovic ( arguably should be top of the pile but has a comparatively average win loss ratio in Major finals compared to the above 4 and has dominated the 4th Major, a Major the likes of Borg and Sampras were not that interested in)
6. Becker (revolutionised European tennis and took the power from America and the youngest ever winner at Wimbledon will be remembered arguably longer than anything else and at his best was the complete player)
7. Agassi (the Golden Slam, one of only two to manage it)
8. Connors (awesome player and unlucky to be same era as Borg otherwise would have won many more Majors)
9. Mcenroe ( defined Borg in some ways and was the bridesmaid to Borg but was part of the duo who made tennis big time. Plus a great player who had he won FO may have been top of pile)
10. Edberg (beckers great rival and traded Majors with him. Best serve volleyer of all time)
11. Lendl (should be much higher but no Wimbledon, the biggest pot in the game means he has to be below the above)
I have not included Laver as the game was different plus i have never seen him play but of course he is a legend in his own right.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Beckerserve
Legend
What is 9 plus 4 plus 1?
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
No offense, but you must be about 13 years old. McEnroe with 7 slams and a season like 1984 is placed below Becker and Edberg with 6 slams? No Jimbo? No Andre? It's laughably bad.
No words for this hot mess of a list. And the sheer idiocy of placing Djokovic above Federer speaks volumes about the level of your idolatry and complete lack of objectivity or tennis knowledge. Try better next time.
Federer and Del Potro
Bionic Poster
1. Berdych
2. Santoro
3. Tomic
4. Federer
5. Djokovic
6. Nadal
7. Laver
8. PETE
9. Agassi
10. Borg
2. Santoro
3. Tomic
4. Federer
5. Djokovic
6. Nadal
7. Laver
8. PETE
9. Agassi
10. Borg
canta_Brian
Hall of Fame
Far too many people equate statistical success and greatness.
the best example is the Nadal has more M1000 titles. I mean, there are what, 30 clay m1000s each year? That’s about right isn’t it. 0 Grass, but people still claim the stat holds water.
I don’t have a list, but for me it needs to be about people who have elevated the game.
Nadal for his clay game, utilising poly strings.
Fed for his shot making
Mac for his touch and hands
Edberg for serve and volley excellence
Djokovic for running side to side more than any human before him, and all without the aid of peds
that sort of thing.
the best example is the Nadal has more M1000 titles. I mean, there are what, 30 clay m1000s each year? That’s about right isn’t it. 0 Grass, but people still claim the stat holds water.
I don’t have a list, but for me it needs to be about people who have elevated the game.
Nadal for his clay game, utilising poly strings.
Fed for his shot making
Mac for his touch and hands
Edberg for serve and volley excellence
Djokovic for running side to side more than any human before him, and all without the aid of peds
that sort of thing.
Street
Semi-Pro
You say djokovic has a "comparatively average" win loss ratio in slam finals compared to the 4 players you placed above him and you list it as a con but he has a better win loss ratio in major finals than federer.
Tshooter
G.O.A.T.
Beckerserve
Legend
I kind of factor in Federer age though. Peak federer does not lose wimbledon 2019 2015 or 2014.
N01E
Hall of Fame
Good to know. Let the organisers know so they can remove his losses, so that your argumentation can start making sense.
Street
Semi-Pro
That is a very subjective way to view things. That would be like saying Djokovic doesn't lose 2012-2014 grand slam finals if he was playing like he played in 2011. Then again, lists are subjective and i heavily disagree with a lot of it so all's good.
Beckerserve
Legend
With Federer post 2008 he lost his swagger and often got nervous in big moments which never happened when he was younger. On grass Federer at his best was as unbeatable as Nadal at his best on clay. Funnily enough both at their best on their best surfaces pre2008/2009That is a very subjective way to view things. That would be like saying Djokovic doesn't lose 2012-2014 grand slam finals if he was playing like he played in 2011. Then again, lists are subjective and i heavily disagree with a lot of it so all's good.
Beckerserve
Legend
So do you think Federer in 2014 was as good as he was in 2004? Watch some matches from both years then decide. Its like Nadal 2019 was nowhere near the player he was in 2010. Djokovic not the player he was in 2011. All three are benefiting from a shocking era
Street
Semi-Pro
Well djokovic certainly lost his swagger from 2012 to 2014 but you can't just delete those grand slam final losses and be selective of what results you take into account lol. I mean, you can, but you have to be fair and do it to for all the players you're evaluating if you don't want to sound subjective.
Genie Of the Bank
Hall of Fame
Current list :
1. Federer
2. Nadal
3. Djokovic
4. Laver
5. Borg
6. Sampras
7.Agassi
8. Lendl
9. Becker
10. Connors
In 5 years :
1. Djokovic
2. Nadal
3. Federer
4. Laver
5. Borg
6. Sampras
7.Agassi
8. Lendl
9. Becker
10. Connors
1. Federer
2. Nadal
3. Djokovic
4. Laver
5. Borg
6. Sampras
7.Agassi
8. Lendl
9. Becker
10. Connors
In 5 years :
1. Djokovic
2. Nadal
3. Federer
4. Laver
5. Borg
6. Sampras
7.Agassi
8. Lendl
9. Becker
10. Connors
Beckerserve
Legend
Djokovic was only 25 in 2012. Out of form yes but not in permanent decline in the way Roger has been since 2010 due to age.
Street
Semi-Pro
Federer was in decline because of age since he was 28?
I still have Laver ahead of Djokovic.
Similar threads
