Who is greater now?

[Phoenix1983]

This minus the snarkiness and that last part about the third wheel. If they were tied I'd put Djokovic ahead for owning a French but a 1 slam deficit is still too big when trailing in those other primary categories.

Why are you discounting the third wheel part?

 

[Autodidactic player]

Why are you discounting the third wheel part?

For me, "third wheel" is a bit harsh. Federer and Nadal are, in virtually everyone's estimation, top five of all time and Djokovic, after (and probably before) this latest Wimbledon win, is indisputably top ten. Even if you put Dojkovic at the bottom of this barrel and make him #10; the tenth best player of all time is hardly a third wheel.

 

[Phoenix1983]

For me, "third wheel" is a bit harsh. Federer and Nadal are, in virtually everyone's estimation, top five of all time and Djokovic, after (and probably before) this latest Wimbledon win, is indisputably top ten. Even if you put Dojkovic at the bottom of this barrel and make him #10; the tenth best player of all time is hardly a third wheel.

I place Novak Djokovic at 6th all time - yet, he is the third wheel of his era, since Federer and Nadal are greater than him.

No inconsistency there.

 

[Autodidactic player]

I place Novak Djokovic at 6th all time - yet, he is the third wheel of his era, since Federer and Nadal are greater than him.

No inconsistency there.

Fair enough. I always defined a "third wheel" as someone who was included out of pity and not someone who deserved inclusion on their own merits. If your definition is third best of his era then I agree, Djokovic is (currently) the third best player among the three giants we've been discussing.

 

[Sport]

They're different players from different eras with different values so maybe better to compare them as
1st Serve - Sampras
2nd Serve - Sampras {signifigantly)
Volley - Sampras
Smash - Sampras {significantly}
Forehand - Sampras
Backhand - Djokovic {Signifigantly}
Movement - Djokovic
Mental - Equal. {maybe Sampras}
Fitness - Djokovic

I have anywhere where serve, volleying, big winner {FH} Sampras is better
Anywhere where volley is compromised Djokovic is better.
Both have glaring weaknesses comparing Top Shelf play. Sampras was exposes on Clay, Djokovic has rarely been exposed due to surface homogenisation.

Sampras a better forehand than Djokovic? I do not doubt Sampras' forehand was great. I also know he had decent baseline skills. But Djokovic's forehand is far more dangerous than Sampras' one for baseline game. Sampras did nothing on clay, and Nadal/Djokovic would have eaten him alive on slower hard court. Even on slower grass Sampras would be in trouble. Djokovic could handle Nadal's baseline game this Wimbledon, with a great forehand. Sampras' forehand would be useless against Nadal/Djokovic in rallies. No offense, but Sampras was serve and volley, serve and volley. His forehand was good, but I personally prefer Djokovic's one.

 

[Service Ace]

Sampras a better forehand than Djokovic? I do not doubt Sampras' forehand was great. I also know he had decent baseline skills. But Djokovic's forehand is far more dangerous than Sampras' one for baseline game. Sampras did nothing on clay, and Nadal/Djokovic would have eaten him alive on slower hard court. Even on slower grass Sampras would be in trouble. Djokovic could handle Nadal's baseline game this Wimbledon, with a great forehand. Sampras' forehand would be useless against Nadal/Djokovic in rallies. No offense, but Sampras was serve and volley, serve and volley. His forehand was good, but I personally prefer Djokovic's one.

Lol so disrespectful to Sampras. Clearly you never watched him play.

 

[jukka1970]

UPDATED VERSION of Djokovic vs Sampras Stats in Comparison:

Majors: Adv. Pete (1-0 Pete)
Djokovic- 13
Sampras- 14
WTFs: Tie (1-0-1 Pete)
Djokovic- 5
Sampras- 5
Weeks at N.1: Adv. Pete (2-0-1 Pete)
Djokovic- 223
Sampras- 286
Cons. Weeks at N.1: Adv. Djokovic (2-1-1 Pete)
Djokovic- 122
Sampras- 102
YE N.1: Adv. Pete (3-1-1 Pete)
Djokovic- 4
Sampras- 6
Career Slam: Adv. Djokovic (3-2-1 Pete)
Djokovic- Yes
Sampras- No
Masters Titles: Adv. Djokovic (3-3-1 Tie)
Djokovic- 30
Sampras- 11
Olympic Gold: Adv. Djokovic (Bronze medal) (4-3-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 0
Sampras- 0
"Big Titles" (Majors, WTF, Masters & Olympics): Adv. Djokovic (5-3-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 48
Sampras- 30
Overall Titles: Adv. Djokovic (6-3-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 69
Sampras- 64
Total Match Wins: Adv. Djokovic (7-3-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 808
Sampras- 762
Overall win pct.: Adv. Djokovic (8-3-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 82%
Sampras- 77%
Slam Distribution: Adv. Djokovic (9-3-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 6(A), 1(F), 4(W), 2(U)
Sampras- 2(A), 0(F), 7(W), 5(U)
Slam Distribution (by surface): Adv. Djokovic (10-3-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 4(G), 8(H), 1(C)
Sampras- 7(G), 7(H), 0(C)
3+ slam seasons: Adv. Djokovic (11-3-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 2
Sampras- 0
2+ slam seasons: Adv. Pete (11-4-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 3
Sampras- 4
1+ slam seasons: Adv. Pete (11-5-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 8
Sampras- 10
Major Finals: Adv. Djokovic (12-5-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 22
Sampras- 18
Major Semis: Adv. Djokovic (13-5-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 32
Sampras- 23
Major Quarterfinals: Adv. Djokovic (14-5-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 41
Sampras- 29
Major Match Wins: Adv. Djokovic (15-5-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 251
Sampras- 203
Major Match Win Percentage: Adv. Djokovic (16-5-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 86%
Sampras- 84%
Longest Overall Win Streak: Adv. Djokovic (17-5-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 43
Sampras- 29
Wins over Top 10 players: Adv. Djokovic (18-5-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 183
Sampras- 124
Wins over anyone who’s been in the top 10 at any point: Adv. Djokovic (19-5-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 421
Sampras- 321
Majors Conversion Rate: Adv. Pete (19-6-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 13/54 (24%)
Sampras- 14/52 (27%)
Number of slams played to get to #13: Adv. Pete (19-7-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 54
Sampras- 44
Non-Calendar Slams: (20-7-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- 1
Sampras- 0
Top Rivals: Adv. Djokovic (21-7-1 Djokovic)
Djokovic- Federer & Nadal
Sampras- Agassi & Becker
Final Score: 21-7-1 Djokovic

Pretty much says it all. Djokovic took this away from Sampras a while ago

 

[Sport]

Lol so disrespectful to Sampras. Clearly you never watched him play.

Isn't the forehand more of a weapon for rallies? Federer has some good baseline game and suddenly makes powerful forehands. But Sampras? Sampras was:
1. Serve
2. Approach the net
3. Repeat the operation

On clay you get to see how Sampras' forehand was not his main weapon but his serve. I still prefer Djokovic's forehand over Sampras' one. Djokovic's forehand is more dangerous for rallies on slower hard courts and slower grass. Sampras' main weapon in the old faster grass was not his forehand but his serve and volley.

 

[Service Ace]

Isn't the forehand more of a weapon for rallies? Federer has some good baseline game and suddenly makes powerful forehands. But Sampras? Sampras was:
1. Serve
2. Approach the net
3. Repeat the operation

On clay you get to see how Sampras' forehand was not his main weapon but his serve. I still prefer Djokovic's forehand over Sampras' one. Djokovic's forehand is more dangerous for rallies on slower hard courts and slower grass. Sampras' main weapon in the old faster grass was not his forehand but his serve and volley.

1. Sampras has the best forehand on the run of all time. The only player close is Nadal. And this was in the era before poly and oversized racquets.
2. Just because S&V was the primary style of the time does not mean that is all Sampras could do. In fact, Pete shares the record for longest rally of all time so this fairy tale that all he did was S&V is a joke.
3. Outside of clay, Sampras was a more accomplished player than Nadal on all surfaces and better on grass, equal on hard to Djokovic. So stop using his clay limitations as the baseline for which you go about comparing him to two guys he outperformed relative to his era.

 

[DerekNoleFam1]

Sampras until Nole equals him in Slams, hopefully another USO will do it. (the Slam he has underperformed at the most)
Pistol Pete was very dominant in his era, 6 YE#1's, which even as a non-fan of his is difficult to look past.

 

[Checkmate]

Sampras until Nole equals him in Slams, hopefully another USO will do it. (the Slam he has underperformed at the most)
Pistol Pete was very dominant in his era, 6 YE#1's, which even as a non-fan of his is difficult to look past.

But Nole has 20 more Masters 1000.
Novak CYGS
Roland Garros
Many more Finals
Many more Semi Finals
Many more Quarter Finals

 

[smoledman]

I'll take the guy who won 4 straight slams over the guy who couldn't win the French Open because he didn't eat pizza.

 

[axlrose]

1. Sampras has the best forehand on the run of all time. The only player close is Nadal. And this was in the era before poly and oversized racquets.
2. Just because S&V was the primary style of the time does not mean that is all Sampras could do. In fact, Pete shares the record for longest rally of all time so this fairy tale that all he did was S&V is a joke.
3. Outside of clay, Sampras was a more accomplished player than Nadal on all surfaces and better on grass, equal on hard to Djokovic. So stop using his clay limitations as the baseline for which you go about comparing him to two guys he outperformed relative to his era.

IMHO Sport has a point here. He clearly said Djoker's forehand is far more dangerous than Sampras' one for baseline game, you ignore the most important part for baseline game. It's obvious that Pete's running FH is better than anyone in history except Rafa's on clay, but running FH just contributes a small part in the whole game. If tennis is purely groundstrokes exchange, I'm pretty sure that Djoker beats Pete at least 70% on any surface.

However, since a Slam is a Slam - in this Era, I'd say Nole won't surpass Pete until his 15th and it's likely that he would get it very soon. It's Pete's fault when he quit too soon, retiring at peak is not always the best choice.