Who is the Australian Open GOAT

Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil said:
Djokovic. More titles, awesome level, no easy/evaporated draws.
Click to expand...

2015/2016 AO combined for djoko were no tougher than 2006/07 AO combined for fed.

2015 AO SF - stan didn't play all that well, djoko not playing well ensured it went to 5. somewhat similar for fed vs haas in AO 06
2015 AO final murray ~ 2006 AO QF davydenko

2006 AO final baggy ~ 2016 AO final murray
2007 AO final gonzo > 2016 AO SF fed
 
abmk said:
2015/2016 AO combined for djoko were no tougher than 2006/07 AO for fed.

2015 AO SF - stan didn't play all that well, djoko not playing well ensured it went to 5. same for fed vs haas in AO 06
2015 AO final murray ~ 2006 AO QF davydenko

2006 AO final baggy ~ 2016 AO final murray
2007 AO final gonzo > 2016 AO SF fed
Click to expand...
Federer didn't have it easy either, I wasn't taking a dig at his draws, just focused on Djokovic.
 
timnz said:
Please elaborate on your point about the 95 AO final - thanks :)
Click to expand...

I posted a link to highlights of the match to do it for me. The shot making from the baseline (especially Sampras' running forehands), the serving and returns were remarkable. Watching the match on TV, I thought that that match was one of the highest levels of tennis I've ever seen. Peak level of play is my preferred measure of greatness.
 
metsman said:
with just numbers, it's still Djokovic and his h2h over Fed at the AO gives him the benefit of the doubt as well. However there is an argument for Fed which is based on line calls making a very real difference against Federer in 2005 and in favor of Djokovic in 2013. Also that Federer has faced more elite competition at the AO than Djokovic has. Reverse their positions and there's a real chance their AO totals are very different.
Click to expand...
I tend to ignore your biased drivel but this one is just to much even for your lofty standards
I'm actually struggling to believe that you're not programmed:confused:Pretty sure you wouldn't give one RG more to Djokovic because of Pascal overule in trying to pop up his RG resume .Gonzales and Baghdatis accounted for more elite competition :oops:
 
Noelan said:
Intesesting Djokovic was bashed for his USO records relentlessly, didn't see that some of you fanatcis gave him credit for 11 straights SF . Since he reached first GS Final at USO 2007 he never lost before semi
Click to expand...
When Fed and Nadal reach a semi and or a final its a moral victory.
Nadal actually has 21 majors and 3 finals.
Federer has 28 majors and 12 finals.
 
Noelan said:
I tend to ignore your biased drivel but this one is just to much even for your lofty standards
I'm actually struggling to believe that you're not programmed:confused:Pretty sure you would't give one RG more to Djokovic because of Pascal overule in trying to pop up his RG resume .Gonzales and Baghdatis accounted for more elite competition :oops:
Click to expand...
Its tripe not drivel.
Uncleaned tripe to be more specific.
 
metsman said:
he and Vilas were 1-1 at the USO, he was 1-3 against Mac with the only win being when Mac was a teenager, a very impressive teenager, but still pre-prime and not quite up to the challenge. pre-85 Lendl is hardly some kind of stiff competition, he was a mental midget in slam finals. Definitely no tougher than the Djokovic Federer beat in 07-08. His 1976 win over Borg was great but Borg was struggling with injuries and blisters in 1978. So the only truly elite competition he faced was Mac, but he was 1-3 against him with the record being 0-2 in prime for prime meetings so that's not some kind of advantage to him. The rest of the guys were hardly tougher than the competition Fed and Pete faced.

Argument for Connors is longevity, Pete and Fed have higher USO peaks imo.
Click to expand...

Hum maybe but you can also bring the same kind of argument for Pete and Fed. Actually it has been done ad noseam for Fed. It remains that the USO was the Grand Slam which had the deepest competition in his time, with a wide variety of players being successfull there.

Fed and Pete have probably higher peak everywhere. By this metric Connors cannot compare with them.
 
Last edited:
cc0509 said:
THIS!
Click to expand...
Djokovic might be in some views the AO Goat - but his lead is only razor thin over Federer. He basically is 1 set ahead (the AO 2009 final fifth set), but if by some chance Federer was to win another AO- Djokovic actually then is significantly behind. I mean currently 13 semi's or better for Federer compared to 6 for Djokovic?
 
timnz said:
Djokovic might be in some views the AO Goat - but his lead is only razor thin over Federer. He basically is 1 set ahead (the AO 2009 final fifth set), but if by some chance Federer was to win another AO- Djokovic actually then is significantly behind. I mean currently 13 semi's or better for Federer compared to 6 for Djokovic?
Click to expand...
An extra slam isn't 'razor thin'.
 
Flash O'Groove said:
Hum maybe but you can also bring the same kind of argument for Pete and Fed. Actually it has been done ad noseam for Fed. It remains that the USO was the Grand Slam which had the deepest competition in his time, with a wide variety of players being successfull there.

Fed and Pete have probably higher peak everywhere. By this metric Connors cannot compare with them.
Click to expand...
exactly, he can't
 
timnz said:
So the question is this. Is 1 slam worth more or less that 1 runner-up and 7 semi-finals? Particularly given Federer's runner-up (2009) was only lost in the 5th set?
Click to expand...

Yes. Next Question.
 
Noelan said:
I tend to ignore your biased drivel but this one is just to much even for your lofty standards
I'm actually struggling to believe that you're not programmed:confused:Pretty sure you wouldn't give one RG more to Djokovic because of Pascal overule in trying to pop up his RG resume .Gonzales and Baghdatis accounted for more elite competition :oops:
Click to expand...

It's not drivel. Nole has been quite fortunate at AO compared to Fed. If the latter didn't have mono in 08 then he'd have 6 AOs Nole would have 5.

Just like if Nole hadn't cheated vs Wawrinka in 2013 he'd only have 5 AO's.
 
KINGROGER said:
It's not drivel. Nole has been quite fortunate at AO compared to Fed. If the latter didn't have mono in 08 then he'd have 6 AOs Nole would have 5.

Just like if Nole hadn't cheated vs Wawrinka in 2013 he'd only have 5 AO's.
Click to expand...
Not that I think Djokovic cheated but could you really blame him if he did when taking into account some of the players he's had to get past over the years in Melbourne?! :eek:
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Not that I think Djokovic cheated but could you really blame him if he did when taking into account some of the players he's had to get past over the years in Melbourne?! :eek:
Click to expand...

Didn't he pretend the ball was out even though it was demonstrably and obviously in? Maybe he needs his eyes checking then :confused: still, lucky that Wawrinka stupidly didn't challenge.

Yeah he had tough competition but some of the Murray finals were cakewalks.
 
Rod Laver said:
An extra slam isn't 'razor thin'.
Click to expand...

timnz said:
Djokovic might be in some views the AO Goat - but his lead is only razor thin over Federer. He basically is 1 set ahead (the AO 2009 final fifth set), but if by some chance Federer was to win another AO- Djokovic actually then is significantly behind. I mean currently 13 semi's or better for Federer compared to 6 for Djokovic?
Click to expand...

I agree with Rod Laver here. An extra slam isn't razor thin. Right now Djokovic is the AO GOAT.
 
KINGROGER said:
It's not drivel. Nole has been quite fortunate at AO compared to Fed. If the latter didn't have mono in 08 then he'd have 6 AOs Nole would have 5.

Just like if Nole hadn't cheated vs Wawrinka in 2013 he'd only have 5 AO's.
Click to expand...
Look who is talking:rolleyes: honestly I don't know what interests has this site when creating such boring bots like yourself and couple of others:oops:
duaneeo said:
Yes.



Mostly in response to those calling a two-time USO champion the HC GOAT.
Click to expand...
Who said that , name please:oops:
 
duaneeo said:
Yes.



Mostly in response to those calling a two-time USO champion the HC GOAT.
Click to expand...
So no titles in 2016 AND quitting the season halfway through, chickening out of the WTF 2014 final, and losing to Djokovic in 3 consecutive slams makes Fed the GOAT? This is the same man with no titles in Monte Carlo or Rome, no slam after 5 years AND had to wait for Novak and Andy to be out of AO 2017 just to have a shot at winning a slam he hasn't won in 7 years. The same player with only a positive H2H against 1 member of the Big 4. The same guy who lost 2 consecutive Wimbledon finals to the very player that he loathes more than Nadal?

Are you f#cking mentally disabled or something? I want in on whatever drugs you're taking.
 
KINGROGER said:
Just like if Nole hadn't cheated vs Wawrinka in 2013 he'd only have 5 AO's.
Click to expand...

It´s not fair to claim Novak won that match by cheating. Stan should have won it, though, but that´s a different story...

Classic match, Novak played some of the best defence ever, especially towards the end :)
 
Noelan said:
Look who is talking:rolleyes: honestly I don't know what interests has this site when creating such boring bots like yourself and couple of others:oops:

Who said that , name please:oops:
Click to expand...

So no actual debate just another personal attack.

You're just proving yourself to be on the level on Blocker and other such trolls with this style of posting.
 
KINGROGER said:
Didn't he pretend the ball was out even though it was demonstrably and obviously in? Maybe he needs his eyes checking then :confused: still, lucky that Wawrinka stupidly didn't challenge.

Yeah he had tough competition but some of the Murray finals were cakewalks.
Click to expand...
Well the umpires said out too, the player didn't influence them. The point would have only been replayed if Wawrinka challenged, giving Djokovic a first serve.
 
KINGROGER said:
So no actual debate just another personal attack.

You're just proving yourself to be on the level on Blocker and other such trolls with this style of posting.
Click to expand...
What attack ? you're broken record , protected here thanks to your fandom and that is:rolleyes:
 
KINGROGER said:
Oh was it a first serve? The question then is why the hell didn't Wawrinka challenge. oh well he got his revenge the year after I suppose.
Click to expand...
I believe Molina told him it was out and Wawrinka believed him. Not sure whether Wawrinka hit that return on the line after the 1st or 2nd serve but a replayed point always brings 1st serve.
 
I didn't read the entire thread, but would you be happier if you won 6 AOs or if you reached the final/semifinal more times?
I think Lendl was more proud of his US Open titles than the amount of finals he made there.
 
FudgeControl said:
So no titles in 2016 AND quitting the season halfway through, chickening out of the WTF 2014 final, and losing to Djokovic in 3 consecutive slams makes Fed the GOAT? This is the same man with no titles in Monte Carlo or Rome, no slam after 5 years AND had to wait for Novak and Andy to be out of AO 2017 just to have a shot at winning a slam he hasn't won in 7 years. The same player with only a positive H2H against 1 member of the Big 4. The same guy who lost 2 consecutive Wimbledon finals to the very player that he loathes more than Nadal?

Are you f#cking mentally disabled or something? I want in on whatever drugs you're taking.
Click to expand...
This is gold.
 
To me the real tragedy of Laver and Rosewall going pro is that through the middle 60s we were robbed of the opportunity to see this glorious Australian golden generation lighting their home slam up. Granted you still had Emmo, and Rochey, Stolle and Newcombe, but throw Muscles and Rocket Rod in there too, and it'd be too beautiful for words.

Anyway, the point is it's tempting to say Emerson, but Laver clearly had the better of him before he left, so as good as his victories might have been against all those other guys, and they were, it's kind of a case of 'when the cat's away'.

In the tennis was invented yesterday category I'd give Federer the edge over Djokovic on account of the fact that he won 'em on rebound ace, and he won 'em on plexicushion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Open era leaders in the top 14 events
2
Replies
68
Views
6K
Dead Mosquito
Dead Mosquito
Fiji
Similarities between Lendl and Murray
Replies
3
Views
792
struggle
S
H
Active players ranked by Slam
Replies
0
Views
349
helterskelter
H
Chicharito
The 3 phases of del Potro's career?
Replies
9
Views
1K
Chanwan
Chanwan
T
Best male player per surface/conditions - 70s, 9080s, 90s, 00s, 10s
Replies
9
Views
1K
nolefam_2024
N
Back
Top