Which big 3 player "overachieved" the most given their abilities?

Which big 3 player "overachieved" the most given their abilities?

  • Total voters
    128
Entername

Entername

Professional
I know they all technically "overachieved" because who in their right mind goes into a tennis career thinking of winning 20+ slams, sure they may have dreamed it but no way they never thought it would actually happen.

In terms of what happened in their careers, their abilities, and limitations, which player made the most of their abilities and probably achieve better numbers than they maybe should have

Federer didn't win his first slam until his age 22 season, and you felt all his slams won after age 30 were bonuses unlike Djokodal where most of their slams after age 30 were more expected

Nadal has the slam record despite his favourite being clay, being born in between two other GOATs, having to "clutch out" to win the most, and the lengthy injury history he's had

Djokovic had the gluten problem in his early 20s, and as recent as 2010, he only had one major to his resume. Even as recent as 2018, no one though he'd be able to win this much. He's won 21 majors and counting without a truly deadly weapon (Fedal had their forehands and Pete had his serve), but rather being the mot complete player ever
 
Last edited:
Dennis Peterson said:
Djokovic's GOAT Backhand, GOAT return and his flexibility are his deadly weapons.
He is the only person in history who has "tamed" Nadal, everyone else old/young have succumbed to the bull, people 12-14 years younger don't like to face his forehand, only Novak's supreme backhand provides him the means to tame the bull.
Click to expand...
To paraphrase Federer's fans, if Nadal were younger than Djokovic, the head to head would be favorable to the Spanish player.
:cool:
 
Last edited:
Fed who dismantled himself when Rafa became dangerous and even more when Novak has risen. He just couldn't cope well and became Andy Murray.
 
Dennis Peterson said:
IFs and BUTs have no limit

If Nadal was 3+ younger to Djokovic then Nadal would have a greater H2H
If Federer was younger to Djokodal he would have fav head to head to both
If Federer was born in Serbia then he would be mentally toughest.
If Djokovic was born in America then he would have most fans.
If Murray was born 10+ years younger than Djokodal, he might end up as GOAT.
If Sampras did not have Thalassemia and played in this era then he would have 20+ slams.

No limit to fantasy, but in reality we are what we are.
Click to expand...
Exactly, to make definitive deductions it is necessary to extrapolate thousands of data and scientific evidence to give a conclusion that approaches the nature of the facts.
8-B
 
NoleFam said:
When you look at Nadal's win percentage against the top 10 on hardcourt, his limitations on certain types of hardcourt (laykold, indoor hardcourt, etc.) and then look at his Slam count on hardcourt compared to his total Masters count on the surface, it has to be him.
Click to expand...
I feel like Nadal is probably the one as well. He's had to overcome the most limitations away from his best slam, he's missed the most time due to injuries and he was born in between Fed/Djoker so he never fully had his era for that reason. The fact that he has the most majors along with the double career slam is something no one would've saw coming, he's definitely squeezed out everything he's had in his tank
 
Entername said:
I feel like Nadal is probably the one as well. He's had to overcome his limitations away from his best slam the most, he's missed the most time due to injuries and he was born in between Fed/Djoker so he never really had his era for that reason. The fact that he has the most majors along with the double career slam is something no one would've saw coming
Click to expand...
Nadal has been incredibly fortunate in his career. This is not to take anything away from what he achieved but it's really the truth. Which is why I was surprised so many of his fans voted that he was the unluckiest in that thread recently. Lol. He is so fortunate to have won 4 USOs and 2 AOs imo, putting him on par with Agassi who is far superior on hardcourt in my opinion.
 
NoleFam said:
Nadal has been incredibly fortunate in his career. This is not to take anything away from what he achieved but it's really the truth. Which is why I was surprised so many of his fans voted that he was the unluckiest in that thread recently. Lol. He is so fortunate to have won 4 USOs and 2 AOs imo, putting him on par with Agassi who is far superior on hardcourt in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say he's fortunate because he's clearly an insanely good player who's also very clutch (one of the GOATs for sure) but I certainly think he's squeezed out the most in his tank and more, I think he himself is the most surprised by his own achievements whereas Fed/Djoker expect this out of themselves
 
NoleFam said:
Nadal has been incredibly fortunate in his career. This is not to take anything away from what he achieved but it's really the truth. Which is why I was surprised so many of his fans voted that he was the unluckiest in that thread recently. Lol. He is so fortunate to have won 4 USOs and 2 AOs imo, putting him on par with Agassi who is far superior on hardcourt in my opinion.
Click to expand...
How many slams should Djokovic have won in each place?
 
The Fedfather said:
Federer with a better BP and MP conversion solos most records, so it's definitely not him.
Click to expand...
Lowkey think Fed underachieved despite all his achievements, part of me can't believe he's gonna be third best in his era. Easily the most talented player I've ever witnessed and it's not like he didn't use his talent well either the guy won 20 majors but it still feels like he could've done even more
 
RS said:
How many slams should Djokovic have won in each place?
Click to expand...
I know it's not an answer to your question but in terms of underachieve, properly achieve and overachieve among ATGs (6+ slams won), I'd say:

Overachievers are Nadal, Sampras, Lendl, Connors, and Wilander

Proper achievers are Djokovic, Borg, Agassi, Becker, and Edberg

Underachievers are Federer and McEnroe
 
Entername said:
Lowkey think Fed underachieved despite all his achievements, part of me can't believe he's gonna be third best in his era. Easily the most talented player I've ever witnessed and it's not like he didn't use his talent well either the guy won 20 majors but it still feels like he could've done even more
Click to expand...
He's third in achievements but he definitely didn't play like third best. And yeah, the most talented in my opinion too.
 
Entername said:
I know it's not an answer to your question but in terms of underachieve, properly achieve and overachieve among ATGs (6+ slams won), I'd say:

Overachievers are Nadal, Sampras, Lendl, Connors, and Wilander

Proper achievers are Djokovic, Borg, Agassi, Becker, and Edberg

Underachievers are Federer and McEnroe
Click to expand...
Lendl was an underachiever as well in my opinion.
 
NoleFam said:
Lendl was an underachiever as well in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I think Lendl overachieved because he didn't win until he was 24 although he did leave more on the table than others on the overachievers list.

Nadal and Sampras definitely overachieved as their games had clear limitations but their clutchness helped them prevail on many occasions. Wilander was the least talented among ATGs so to win 7 majors is one heck of an achievement even if he burned out after age 24, and Connors is probably the second least talented ATG but still ended with 7 majors and 109 titles.

Djokovic is a mix of both because no one would've imagined 21 majors but at the same time he's let many slams slip away sometimes due to his own wrongdoing. Borg retired at 25 but I don't think he would've won much more if he stuck around anyways; Agassi would've been the biggest underachiever ever if he retired in 1998 but what he did from 1999-2005 makes up for that.

Federer and McEnroe were the two most talented players ever, they both clearly should have won more than they did
 
Entername said:
I think Lendl overachieved because he didn't win until he was 24 although he did leave more on the table than others on the overachievers list.

Nadal and Sampras definitely overachieved as their games had clear limitations but their clutchness helped them prevail on many occasions. Wilander was the least talented among ATGs so to win 7 majors is one heck of an achievement even if he burned out after age 24, and Connors is probably the second least talented ATG but still ended with 7 majors and 109 titles.

Djokovic is a mix of both because no one would've imagined 21 majors but at the same time he's let many slams slip away sometimes due to his own wrongdoing. Borg retired at 25 but I don't think he would've won much more if he stuck around anyways; Agassi would've been the biggest underachiever ever if he retired in 1998 but what he did from 1999-2005 makes up for that.

Federer and McEnroe were the two most talented players ever, they both clearly should have won more than they did
Click to expand...
That's why he underachieved. Lol. 8-11 record in Slam finals as all time great is the worst rate of them I think.

Sampras didn't overachieve. He just upped his level when it mattered. He used other tournaments mainly as tuneups. It was really all about the Slams for him. Sampras won more where he was really good (fast surfaces) less where he wasn't as good (slower surfaces). Which is why he did nothing on clay and only won 2 AOs. I agree with Wilander and Connors though.
 
Entername said:
I think Lendl overachieved because he didn't win until he was 24 although he did leave more on the table than others on the overachievers list.

Nadal and Sampras definitely overachieved as their games had clear limitations but their clutchness helped them prevail on many occasions. Wilander was the least talented among ATGs so to win 7 majors is one heck of an achievement even if he burned out after age 24, and Connors is probably the second least talented ATG but still ended with 7 majors and 109 titles.

Djokovic is a mix of both because no one would've imagined 21 majors but at the same time he's let many slams slip away sometimes due to his own wrongdoing. Borg retired at 25 but I don't think he would've won much more if he stuck around anyways; Agassi would've been the biggest underachiever ever if he retired in 1998 but what he did from 1999-2005 makes up for that.

Federer and McEnroe were the two most talented players ever, they both clearly should have won more than they did
Click to expand...
How many more, according to you?
:cautious:
 
RS said:
Everywhere else par?
Click to expand...
Yea pretty much. Maybe one more RG and one less Wimbledon but that would have been the max he should have gotten in this era at RG though. I still think he let 2015 slip through his fingers. He should have tamed the beast that day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
NoleFam said:
Yea pretty much. Maybe one more RG and one less Wimbledon but that would have been the max he should have gotten in this era at RG though. I still think he let 2015 slip through his fingers. He should have tamed the beast that day.
Click to expand...
That Stan beats any Djokovic at RG ;)
 
RS said:
In 4/5?
Click to expand...
He wouldn't lose in 5. If he had gotten Stan to 5, I think he would have won in 2015. Up 3-0 in the 4th but couldn't stop the bs passive play. I think he would lose to Tsistipas in 4. He was tight as a drum in 2015 final.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
NoleFam said:
He wouldn't lose in 5. If he had gotten Stan to 5, I think he would have won in 2015. Up 3-0 in the 4th but couldn't stop the bs passive play. I think he would lose to Tsistipas in 4. He was tight as a drum in 2015 final.
Click to expand...
Was Tpas fairly close in level to Stan RG 2015 in your view?
 
IMO 2015 Djokovic beats Tpas 2021 and his 2021 self in a competitive match. But my knowledge on tennis is poor :p:(
 
RS said:
Was Tpas fairly close in level to Stan RG 2015 in your view?
Click to expand...
No. Tsitsipas was better in 1st and 2nd sets, but Stan was wayyy better in 3rd and 4th sets compared to Tsitsipas, so Stan was better. Wawrinka actually played pretty nervous himself for a set and half before he settled into the match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Surprised by poll results! LOL I was convinced Djokovic would be leading by a huge mile, considering almost partisan agenda against him around these parts of the internet...But hey who am i kiddin', right? The night is still young, so it won't be long until Bull brigade all rush in to suddnely flip the script...
 
For me RG 15 Djokovic is underrated because of how Stan played. Against his 2021 Djokovic he wouldn't be so scared of the power and would show his older version who was boss.

:D
 
NoleFam said:
Nadal has been incredibly fortunate in his career. This is not to take anything away from what he achieved but it's really the truth. Which is why I was surprised so many of his fans voted that he was the unluckiest in that thread recently. Lol. He is so fortunate to have won 4 USOs and 2 AOs imo, putting him on par with Agassi who is far superior on hardcourt in my opinion.
Click to expand...
A player who missed 4 years of his career due to injuries is very fortunate. This is something else... :rolleyes:
 
Sampras-Bruguera 1993 said:
I think its safe to say all 3 guys seriously overachieved. I mean 63 slams between them? You'll be lucky to ever see a player get double digit slams again
Click to expand...

It'll happen dude! Just nothing crazy like 20+ territory!...maybe we are talking low 10's here, but that's about it...like i'm sitting really really low 10's, either exactly 10 or 11 like Borg, at very most - 12...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Entername
  • Poll Poll
Which big 3 member made the most of their abilities?
Replies
12
Views
529
D.Nalby12
D
AgassiSuperSlam11
  • Poll Poll
Which Big 3 player wins most slams if they got 3 out of 4 slams played in their favorite surface?
Replies
11
Views
407
Nate7-5
Nate7-5
mike danny
The Big 3 and their comebacks
Replies
2
Views
241
tennisaddict
tennisaddict
T
  • Poll Poll
Based on talent: which slamless player 'deserves' a slam the most?
Replies
30
Views
2K
Chillaxer
C
D
Big 3 in their 20s
Replies
5
Views
434
Bruno Santiago
Bruno Santiago
Back
Top