OT: Djokovic one match away from Calendar Grand Slam

[Michael Lucky]

I stated earlier that Djoker's resume makes a great argument for GOAT status.

But people using H2H results with Roger are being disingenuous. Many of those H2H matches occurred when Federer was clearly out of his physical prime. Roger has been able to hang around because of his insane talent, but he's been physically declining since 2013.

Yeah, esp when Fed is beat juggernauts like Roddick and Hewitt in his prime.

Who exactly did Djoker beat this year to win 3 Majors? Nothing but young, unproven players. Most who had never even been in a Major final.


You beat who they put in front of you.

He beat Rafa at the French.

[maxpower8888]

I stated earlier that Djoker's resume makes a great argument for GOAT status.

But people using H2H results with Roger are being disingenuous. Many of those H2H matches occurred when Federer was clearly out of his physical prime. Roger has been able to hang around because of his insane talent, but he's been physically declining since 2013.

Yeah, esp when Fed is beat juggernauts like Roddick and Hewitt in his prime.

Who exactly did Djoker beat this year to win 3 Majors? Nothing but young, unproven players. Most who had never even been in a Major final.


You beat who they put in front of you.

Lol what? He beat Nadal at the French Open, and Nadal is the best ever clay player. He beat Medvedev in the Australian Open Final, and Medvedev won the ATP Finals last season.

Some of the arguments against Djokovic in this thread have been laughable, like "he played in a weak era."

- Most Grand Slam Wins (tied with Nadal and Federer, he will hold the record if he wins tomorrow)
- Most ATP 1000 wins (tied with Nadal)
- Only player ever to win every Grand Slam at least twice
- Only player ever to win all nine ATP 1000 events
- Most weeks ranked #1 (still growing)
- Most year-end no. 1 (tied with Sampras, he will hold the record at the end of the year)
- Highest ever men's singles winning %
- Winning record vs. Nadal
- Winning record vs. Federer

He's the GOAT, deal with it.

[DaPessimist]

Yeah, esp when Fed is beat juggernauts like Roddick and Hewitt in his prime.

Who exactly did Djoker beat this year to win 3 Majors? Nothing but young, unproven players. Most who had never even been in a Major final.


You beat who they put in front of you.

Lol what? He beat Nadal at the French Open, and Nadal is the best ever clay player. He beat Medvedev in the Australian Open Final, and Medvedev won the ATP Finals last season.

Some of the arguments against Djokovic in this thread have been laughable, like "he played in a weak era."

- Most Grand Slam Wins (tied with Nadal and Federer, he will hold the record if he wins tomorrow)
- Most ATP 1000 wins (tied with Nadal)
- Only player ever to win every Grand Slam at least twice
- Only player ever to win all nine ATP 1000 events
- Most weeks ranked #1 (still growing)
- Most year-end no. 1 (tied with Sampras, he will hold the record at the end of the year)
- Highest ever men's singles winning %
- Winning record vs. Nadal
- Winning record vs. Federer

He's the GOAT, deal with it.

I never made any of those arguments. I even said Djoker has the best resume. I simply said using H2H to rank players when their primes didn't overlap is disingenuous. I only brought up strength of opponent because someone was using it against Federer... and I clearly stated that you can only beat who they put in front of you. Beating guys like Tsitsipas and Berrettini to win Majors is no different than beating guys like Roddick or Hewitt.

[DaPessimist]

Yeah, esp when Fed is beat juggernauts like Roddick and Hewitt in his prime.

Who exactly did Djoker beat this year to win 3 Majors? Nothing but young, unproven players. Most who had never even been in a Major final.


You beat who they put in front of you.

He beat Rafa at the French.

The same Nadal who was injured at the French Open and hasn't completed a Tennis match since?

[ceiling raiser]

I do think Djokovic should be the GOAT, however in Grand Slams:

ND vs RN: 7-10 overall, 4-5 in finals, 2-4 in semis
ND vs RF: 11-6 overall, 4-1 in finals, 7-4 in semis
RN vs RF: 10-4 overall, 6-3 in finals, 4-1 in semis

A lot of Nadal's advantage is due to his dominance on Clay, but we can't discount that. We also can't ignore that Djokovic is the only player to beat Nadal at RG twice.

[Johnny Firpo]

Their primes overlapped enough for everybody to form an educated opinion that Djokovic is simply the goat.

Nah. Their resumes are extremely close, anyone who understands tennis, understands that they are clearly the three best ever, and none of them will be called the undisputed GOAT. We already know that there will be no MJ, Phelps, Brady or Gretzky situation here, and literally only Djokovic fans claim that he is the undisputed GOAT. It's a ridiculous argument. If he wins 25-26, then probably yes, but to me, playing style will STILL become a factor. There is a reason why MJ is the undisputed GOAT in basketball, and not Bill Russell, and it's not just about their era. It's about playing style. It matters, and the main reason why most tennis fans - not just the casuals - still think that Roger's absolute best beats Rafa's and Nole's absolute best. Anyway, it's hard to argue with Djoker fans, because they are emotionally invested in their idol's war against the whole world, and cannot understand why he is still rated lower than the other two, and has to overcompensate for it.

[maxpower8888]

Who exactly did Djoker beat this year to win 3 Majors? Nothing but young, unproven players. Most who had never even been in a Major final.


You beat who they put in front of you.

Lol what? He beat Nadal at the French Open, and Nadal is the best ever clay player. He beat Medvedev in the Australian Open Final, and Medvedev won the ATP Finals last season.

Some of the arguments against Djokovic in this thread have been laughable, like "he played in a weak era."

- Most Grand Slam Wins (tied with Nadal and Federer, he will hold the record if he wins tomorrow)
- Most ATP 1000 wins (tied with Nadal)
- Only player ever to win every Grand Slam at least twice
- Only player ever to win all nine ATP 1000 events
- Most weeks ranked #1 (still growing)
- Most year-end no. 1 (tied with Sampras, he will hold the record at the end of the year)
- Highest ever men's singles winning %
- Winning record vs. Nadal
- Winning record vs. Federer

He's the GOAT, deal with it.

I never made any of those arguments. I even said Djoker has the best resume. I simply said using H2H to rank players when their primes didn't overlap is disingenuous. I only brought up strength of opponent because someone was using it against Federer... and I clearly stated that you can only beat who they put in front of you. Beating guys like Tsitsipas and Berrettini to win Majors is no different than beating guys like Roddick or Hewitt.

I never said you made those arguments specifically, I've just been seeing people say silly things. In the case who Federer played against vs who Djokovic played against, Djokovic's prime overlapped with Nadal and Murray, who are both better players than Andy Roddick. 15 of Federer's 20 Slams came before 2010, Djokovic and Nadal weren't exactly in their primes in the early 2010s either. He's only 6 years older than them, so to say that you can't compare them is a little disingenuous.

[maxpower8888]

Their primes overlapped enough for everybody to form an educated opinion that Djokovic is simply the goat.

Nah. Their resumes are extremely close, anyone who understands tennis, understands that they are clearly the three best ever, and none of them will be called the undisputed GOAT. We already know that there will be no MJ, Phelps, Brady or Gretzky situation here, and literally only Djokovic fans claim that he is the undisputed GOAT. It's a ridiculous argument. If he wins 25-26, then probably yes, but to me, playing style will STILL become a factor. There is a reason why MJ is the undisputed GOAT in basketball, and not Bill Russell, and it's not just about their era. It's about playing style. It matters, and the main reason why most tennis fans - not just the casuals - still think that Roger's absolute best beats Rafa's and Nole's absolute best. Anyway, it's hard to argue with Djoker fans, because they are emotionally invested in their idol's war against the whole world, and cannot understand why he is still rated lower than the other two, and has to overcompensate for it.

Yeah, only Djokovic fans are invested emotionally, and not at all Fed fans.

Djokovic is already being called the GOAT by many Fed and Nadal fans who still like Fed and Nadal more. It's funny how the goal posts shifted since Nadal and Djoker caught up to Federer in the Slam count. When Federer had the most Slams, and most weeks at no.1, those were the reasons why he was the GOAT, but now all of a sudden it's about playing style lol.

[ceiling raiser]

If he does win the finals, I wonder if he can continue the streak in Australia? Laver never won a major after his 69 pro Calendar Slam. Some of that was due to the competing tours, but still an interesting datapoint.

[DaPessimist]

Style of play is an interesting argument. From an objective standpoint, it shouldn't matter, but for many people, including myself, it does.

An example I like to use from another individual sport is Floyd Mayweather. All the records and stats point to him being the GOAT Boxer, but there are plenty of people who don't rank him that high because of his style of fighting. Personally, I have him ranked under a guy like Sugar Ray Leonard, despite the fact that Sugar clearly has an inferior resume.

The difference is style of play. Leonard was more offensive, took more risks, and finished more opponents (%). Could Leonard have gone undefeated if he never took any risks? Probably. He only lost 3 fights in his career. Would Floyd be 50-0 if he took more risks and tried to finish opponents? Probably not.

Anyways, it's an interesting topic and I don't think there is a right answer. I think it's fair to lean mostly on objective stats and records, but I also don't think you can completely discount style of play when ranking individual athletes. How you win matters to some people, including myself.

[Doctor MJ]

I do think Djokovic should be the GOAT, however in Grand Slams:

ND vs RN: 7-10 overall, 4-5 in finals, 2-4 in semis
ND vs RF: 11-6 overall, 4-1 in finals, 7-4 in semis
RN vs RF: 10-4 overall, 6-3 in finals, 4-1 in semis

A lot of Nadal's advantage is due to his dominance on Clay, but we can't discount that. We also can't ignore that Djokovic is the only player to beat Nadal at RG twice.

So, I agree that Djokovic already has a great case for GOAT and completing the Calendar Slam would seem to put things beyond reasonable debate.

Wanted to say that while I love you breaking it down by surface, I think it's actually extremely important not to just let the surface two guys happened to play the most head-to-head shape perception of the rivalry too much. It's not unreasonable to, say, weigh hard court performance more than clay and clay more than grass based on the surfaces' prominence in the modern tennis calendar, but beyond that, excess play on one surface actually has the opposite implications as what people typically think. (Nadal plays these guys so much on clay because they are more consistent on clay than he is on grass or hard court, and this is part of the argument against Nadal in general.)

[Doctor MJ]

Style of play is an interesting argument. From an objective standpoint, it shouldn't matter, but for many people, including myself, it does.

An example I like to use from another individual sport is Floyd Mayweather. All the records and stats point to him being the GOAT Boxer, but there are plenty of people who don't rank him that high because of his style of fighting. Personally, I have him ranked under a guy like Sugar Ray Leonard, despite the fact that Sugar clearly has an inferior resume.

The difference is style of play. Leonard was more offensive, took more risks, and finished more opponents (%). Could Leonard have gone undefeated if he never took any risks? Probably. He only lost 3 fights in his career. Would Floyd be 50-0 if he took more risks and tried to finish opponents? Probably not.

Anyways, it's an interesting topic and I don't think there is a right answer. I think it's fair to lean mostly on objective stats and records, but I also don't think you can completely discount style of play when ranking individual athletes. How you win matters to some people, including myself.

It matters to me because when I do comparisons across all eras, I have to reckon with the fact that some players have a style that would work better across all eras (along with all surfaces) than others.

I also have aesthetic preferences, but when using style of play in GOAT rankings, I'm really thinking about a player's range of capabilities.

[EH15]

Adding to Djokavic's case:

He's the only player to win all 9 ATP 1000 titles twice. No player has ever won all 9 once.
His grip on weeks at number 1 is going to be near unbreakable.

Nadal's lack of a WTF win is a glaring hole.

[Doctor MJ]

Only done twice before, by Rod Laver, but more than 50 years ago. Incredible feat.

Don Budge did it as well in the 1930s.

Things to point out:

For both Budge and Laver's 1st Grand Slam, they weren't the best players in the world. The best players had turned pro and weren't eligible to compete in amateur-only event.

For Laver the 2nd Grand Slam is the BIG accomplishment because it was in the Open Era, and he wasn't young at the time.

It must be understood though that this is coming on the heels of a select group of pros constantly touring with each other and then being brought back into the fold against wet-behind-the-ears younger guys who'd never had the same opportunity. Laver deserves a ton of credit for what he did, but he also had a unique opportunity that made things easier for him.

I'll also say that I don't think Laver would be able to compete with the best in the modern game, and neither would his contemporary Ken Rosewall (who actually won more pro majors than Laver did). Just too small. (Their contemporary Pancho Gonzales on the other hand wouldn't have that problem and I'd generally give him the nod over, say, Pete Sampras.)

[Johnny Firpo]

Their primes overlapped enough for everybody to form an educated opinion that Djokovic is simply the goat.

Nah. Their resumes are extremely close, anyone who understands tennis, understands that they are clearly the three best ever, and none of them will be called the undisputed GOAT. We already know that there will be no MJ, Phelps, Brady or Gretzky situation here, and literally only Djokovic fans claim that he is the undisputed GOAT. It's a ridiculous argument. If he wins 25-26, then probably yes, but to me, playing style will STILL become a factor. There is a reason why MJ is the undisputed GOAT in basketball, and not Bill Russell, and it's not just about their era. It's about playing style. It matters, and the main reason why most tennis fans - not just the casuals - still think that Roger's absolute best beats Rafa's and Nole's absolute best. Anyway, it's hard to argue with Djoker fans, because they are emotionally invested in their idol's war against the whole world, and cannot understand why he is still rated lower than the other two, and has to overcompensate for it.

Yeah, only Djokovic fans are invested emotionally, and not at all Fed fans.

Djokovic is already being called the GOAT by many Fed and Nadal fans who still like Fed and Nadal more. It's funny how the goal posts shifted since Nadal and Djoker caught up to Federer in the Slam count. When Federer had the most Slams, and most weeks at no.1, those were the reasons why he was the GOAT, but now all of a sudden it's about playing style lol.

Nah, it was always a combination of things, and Roger's playing style was always factored in. Yes, records matter, yes, stats matter, but they are not the only thing that matter. And yes, Djokovic fans are generally more blinded than Federer and Nadal fans, because of Djokovic's behavior, and inability to accept that fans just do not like him, and will root against him just about anywhere outside of Serbia. He cannot accept that, and his fans cannot accept it either, so they always have this attitude.

[eminence]

Bring back wood courts

[Drakeem]

Their primes overlapped enough for everybody to form an educated opinion that Djokovic is simply the goat.

Nah. Their resumes are extremely close, anyone who understands tennis, understands that they are clearly the three best ever, and none of them will be called the undisputed GOAT. We already know that there will be no MJ, Phelps, Brady or Gretzky situation here, and literally only Djokovic fans claim that he is the undisputed GOAT. It's a ridiculous argument. If he wins 25-26, then probably yes, but to me, playing style will STILL become a factor. There is a reason why MJ is the undisputed GOAT in basketball, and not Bill Russell, and it's not just about their era. It's about playing style. It matters, and the main reason why most tennis fans - not just the casuals - still think that Roger's absolute best beats Rafa's and Nole's absolute best. Anyway, it's hard to argue with Djoker fans, because they are emotionally invested in their idol's war against the whole world, and cannot understand why he is still rated lower than the other two, and has to overcompensate for it.

The reason why MK is the undisputed at the moment is because of his accomplishments relative to his era and his team, and obviously his legacy keeps his standing intact. To chalk it up to his playstyle is nuts. Bill Russell doesn't get his due because basketball was a much different game back then, with skill sets, teams, and rules. It's hard to compare. Fed, Nadal, and Novak all played at the same time.

You can say you prefer Fed or Nadal, you can say you hate Novak, but if he wins this, it's as good as over. He might be the most disliked or meh thought of GOAT in any sport, but he's still the greatest. All metrics point to him, all arguments end with his accomplishments.

[Drakeem]

Nah. Their resumes are extremely close, anyone who understands tennis, understands that they are clearly the three best ever, and none of them will be called the undisputed GOAT. We already know that there will be no MJ, Phelps, Brady or Gretzky situation here, and literally only Djokovic fans claim that he is the undisputed GOAT. It's a ridiculous argument. If he wins 25-26, then probably yes, but to me, playing style will STILL become a factor. There is a reason why MJ is the undisputed GOAT in basketball, and not Bill Russell, and it's not just about their era. It's about playing style. It matters, and the main reason why most tennis fans - not just the casuals - still think that Roger's absolute best beats Rafa's and Nole's absolute best. Anyway, it's hard to argue with Djoker fans, because they are emotionally invested in their idol's war against the whole world, and cannot understand why he is still rated lower than the other two, and has to overcompensate for it.

Yeah, only Djokovic fans are invested emotionally, and not at all Fed fans.

Djokovic is already being called the GOAT by many Fed and Nadal fans who still like Fed and Nadal more. It's funny how the goal posts shifted since Nadal and Djoker caught up to Federer in the Slam count. When Federer had the most Slams, and most weeks at no.1, those were the reasons why he was the GOAT, but now all of a sudden it's about playing style lol.

Nah, it was always a combination of things, and Roger's playing style was always factored in. Yes, records matter, yes, stats matter, but they are not the only thing that matter. And yes, Djokovic fans are generally more blinded than Federer and Nadal fans, because of Djokovic's behavior, and inability to accept that fans just do not like him, and will root against him just about anywhere outside of Serbia. He cannot accept that, and his fans cannot accept it either, so they always have this attitude.

You're well within your rights to hate him. Call him the worst sportsman in the history of the sport. But he's also the greatest.

And when you're judging who is the best, results DO matter. Personal preference and affinity != best.

[Hobo4President]

He's the undisputed goat and anyone who says otherwise is just stanning.

His record against top 10 players is unmatched.

[clyde21]

Can you elaborate why he's an a.....e, because Western media demonizes him like they did Lendl??? Do you live with him, did you spend any time alone with him so you know that from the experience I am pretty sure he's loved and respected in the other countries outside of the Western Hemisphere He pooped at Federer's and Nada's party, owned both of them head to head and he's on the brink to cement the Goat status , haters gonna hate

djokovic is an anti-vaxxer, but other than that, i don't think the media demonises him all that much

he's just not as marketable as federer or nadal, because he plays brick wall defensive tennis

another reason why hes the goat