OT: Djoker Becomes Undisputed GOAT

[schnakenpopanz]

Just to see who is the goat you have to see who played vs the other big2 most of the time during their peak. it was nadal. djokovic and federer had slightly worse competition later and early on. an in terms of injuries nadal by a wide margin.

[falcolombardi]

Just to see who is the goat you have to see who played vs the other big2 most of the time during their peak. it was nadal. djokovic and federer had slightly worse competition later and early on. an in terms of injuries nadal by a wide margin.

.

Doesnt djokovic win the head to head vs both?

[schnakenpopanz]

Just to see who is the goat you have to see who played vs the other big2 most of the time during their peak. it was nadal. djokovic and federer had slightly worse competition later and early on. an in terms of injuries nadal by a wide margin.

.

Doesnt djokovic win the head to head vs both?

It is a difference when you play someone at their peak or at the backend. I look at it more like a time line. In an overlapping period of their peaks Nadal was superior overall Djokovic and early on Federer.
It is the same discussion about longevity and peak. Karl Malone is not in conversation for best PF because he had to go throught peak MJ.
Duncan is the best PF because he won vs Peak Lebron etc
To each their own

[maxpower8888]

Just to see who is the goat you have to see who played vs the other big2 most of the time during their peak. it was nadal. djokovic and federer had slightly worse competition later and early on. an in terms of injuries nadal by a wide margin.

.

Doesnt djokovic win the head to head vs both?

It is a difference when you play someone at their peak or at the backend. I look at it more like a time line. In an overlapping period of their peaks Nadal was superior overall Djokovic and early on Federer.
It is the same discussion about longevity and peak. Karl Malone is not in conversation for best PF because he had to go throught peak MJ.
Duncan is the best PF because he won vs Peak Lebron etc
To each their own

What a bunch of cope.

[schnakenpopanz]

.

Doesnt djokovic win the head to head vs both?

It is a difference when you play someone at their peak or at the backend. I look at it more like a time line. In an overlapping period of their peaks Nadal was superior overall Djokovic and early on Federer.
It is the same discussion about longevity and peak. Karl Malone is not in conversation for best PF because he had to go throught peak MJ.
Duncan is the best PF because he won vs Peak Lebron etc
To each their own

What a bunch of cope.

Oh well then thanks for the input

[schnakenpopanz]

Someone at anther forum said it in other words and this sums it up for me:
Peak Rafa can take down Peak Federer on grass - 2008 Wimbledon (2007 Wimbledon Final 5-setter loss).

Peak Rafa can take down Peak Djokovic on hard - USO'10 & USO'13 (2012 AO Final 5-setter loss).

Peak Federer and Peak Djokovic cannot take down Peak Rafa on clay. Rafa's peak was 2008 RG - 2014 RG.

Djokovic didn't beat Federer at Wimbledon until 2014 and didn't beat Rafa at Roland Garros until 2015. Peak Rafa > Peak Federer > Peak Djokovic.

The level of Peak Rafa and the level of Peak Federer were without a doubt higher than the level of Peak Djokovic, because Rafa and Federer lost only one grand slam final to a non-Big 3 player (Rafa to Stanimal and Federer to Tower of Tandil), while Djokovic lost 5 grand slam finals to a non-Big 3 player (Murray-2, Stanimal-2, Medvedev-1) during the time all Big-3 were active. Also, Djokovic never won a grand slam without losing a set, while Rafa and Federer did the same multiple times. It is not Peak Djokovic. It is Push Djokovic.

[Felixians4]

Someone at anther forum said it in other words and this sums it up for me:
Peak Rafa can take down Peak Federer on grass - 2008 Wimbledon (2007 Wimbledon Final 5-setter loss).

Peak Rafa can take down Peak Djokovic on hard - USO'10 & USO'13 (2012 AO Final 5-setter loss).

Peak Federer and Peak Djokovic cannot take down Peak Rafa on clay. Rafa's peak was 2008 RG - 2014 RG.

Djokovic didn't beat Federer at Wimbledon until 2014 and didn't beat Rafa at Roland Garros until 2015. Peak Rafa > Peak Federer > Peak Djokovic.

The level of Peak Rafa and the level of Peak Federer were without a doubt higher than the level of Peak Djokovic, because Rafa and Federer lost only one grand slam final to a non-Big 3 player (Rafa to Stanimal and Federer to Tower of Tandil), while Djokovic lost 5 grand slam finals to a non-Big 3 player (Murray-2, Stanimal-2, Medvedev-1) during the time all Big-3 were active. Also, Djokovic never won a grand slam without losing a set, while Rafa and Federer did the same multiple times. It is not Peak Djokovic. It is Push Djokovic.

Bad analysis

[iamoti]

I just cant see Djoko as the goat. Even tho he has the accolades, i just cant put him on the same level as Rafa/Roger. Those guys had the full package. Djokovic has a boring game, has a much worse personality and most of his achivements were done after peak Federer/Rafa. He vultured the weak era that followed.

Thank god for Sinner/Alcaraz who are good enough to stop this vulturing.

Sent from my SM-G990B2 using RealGM mobile app

[-Luke-]

Someone at anther forum said it in other words and this sums it up for me:
Peak Rafa can take down Peak Federer on grass - 2008 Wimbledon (2007 Wimbledon Final 5-setter loss).

Peak Rafa can take down Peak Djokovic on hard - USO'10 & USO'13 (2012 AO Final 5-setter loss).

Peak Federer and Peak Djokovic cannot take down Peak Rafa on clay. Rafa's peak was 2008 RG - 2014 RG.

Djokovic didn't beat Federer at Wimbledon until 2014 and didn't beat Rafa at Roland Garros until 2015. Peak Rafa > Peak Federer > Peak Djokovic.

The level of Peak Rafa and the level of Peak Federer were without a doubt higher than the level of Peak Djokovic, because Rafa and Federer lost only one grand slam final to a non-Big 3 player (Rafa to Stanimal and Federer to Tower of Tandil), while Djokovic lost 5 grand slam finals to a non-Big 3 player (Murray-2, Stanimal-2, Medvedev-1) during the time all Big-3 were active. Also, Djokovic never won a grand slam without losing a set, while Rafa and Federer did the same multiple times. It is not Peak Djokovic. It is Push Djokovic.

You just take the information that suits you to make your point and ignore all the others. If Djokovic beats Nadal on clay, it's because it wasn't peak Nadal. If Djokovic beats Federer on grass, it's because it wasn't peak Federer. Yet somehow when the others beat Djokovic, it's always peak Djokovic. Could it be that part of the GOAT case for Djokovic is that his peak lasted way longer than that of Federer or Nadal? How is that an argument against Djokovic?

That peak Djokovic lost five grand slam finals against players who weren't Federer or Nadal is somehow an argument against him and in favor of Federer/Nadal. That's like saying losing in the finals is worse than losing in the first round. Also, losses against non big-3 players only count in the finals. So we conveniently ignore when peak Nadal loses to David Ferrer or when peak Federer loses to Jo-Wilfried Tsonga or when both Federer and Nadal lose to Robin Söderling before the final, but we do not ignore when Djokovic loses to Murray or Wawrinka in the final (in years when neither Federer nor Nadal made it to the final), two players who played on a very high level against the big three for multiple years.

[TheGOATRises007]

I just cant see Djoko as the goat. Even tho he has the accolades, i just cant put him on the same level as Rafa/Roger. Those guys had the full package. Djokovic has a boring game, has a much worse personality and most of his achivements were done after peak Federer/Rafa. He vultured the weak era that followed.

Thank god for Sinner/Alcaraz who are good enough to stop this vulturing.

Sent from my SM-G990B2 using RealGM mobile app

That's irrelevant.

Djokovic and Nadal also are both less attractive in their style than Federer.

All 3 of them likely did peak at different times than the other, but Rafa/Federer also beat Novak when he wasn't at his peak either, so it goes both ways.

And I'm a bigger Fed/Nadal fan than Novak, but there's just very flimsy arguments against him not being the greatest.

[Sgt Major]

Am I really reading that Nadal is better than Djokovic One guy benefited from Nadal and Djokovic being too young, the other one ruled specific surface only.

[p0peye]

In Nadal's own words, Federer and him both had their own strengths and weaknesses, so both had very specific plans on how they want to play each other. Playing against Novak was a whole different game and you could never fully prepare as Djokovic was a complete player that can change his approach and tactics during the match and win. As Federer said, you have to be at the very top of your game every match against Djokovic and still you can lose.

[FinnTheHuman]

Djokovic vs Nadal on clay 9-20.
Djokovic vs Nadal on hard courts 20-7.

They played more games on clay than they did on hard courts, even tho there are only 3 masters and one GS on clay while there are 6 masters, 2 grand slams and ATP tour finals on hard court, with 1 on grass. That means 4 clay tournaments vs 9 hard court tournaments, meaning 70% of clay+hard court tournaments are hard court.

Why did they play more games on clay than they did on hard courts? It was not because of Nadal's injuries. It was because:
1. Nadal would often not be able to reach the semis and finals of hard court tournaments, losing to the lower ranked opponents, so he often wouldn't even be able to reach the tournament stage in which Djokovic would dominate him on hard courts.
2. Nadal would strategically avoid participating in hard court tournaments, without being injured, while burning his knees on the clay tournaments, because he knew he stood more chance of winning on clay tournaments.

If ratio of hard court/clay matches played was proportional to the ratio of clay/hard surface masters out there, Nadal would most definitely have a much worse head to head score vs Djokovic, something along the lines of 42-32. Nadal avoiding the hard court Djokovic made his h2h with Djokovic look closer to equal than it should've looked, but it also made Nadal be 4 tiers below Djokovic in weeks spent as number 1 in the ATP rankings (428 vs 209 weeks), which is one of the essentials of claiming goat status. It also led to less money earned and less tournament wins.

Nadal dudes are coping hard.

[Laimbeer]

People lost interest in tennis when the automatic line officiating took the place of good old-fashioned arguments.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using RealGM mobile app

[azcatz11]

That was a beat down. 6-0 6-0

[therealbig3]

The fact that Djokovic is still one of the best players in the world and is still making semis in Grand Slams is amazing.

He passed Federer and Nadal a long time ago. Nadal is 3rd imo. Can't be the GOAT if you're nowhere close to it outside of a single surface. Federer dominated grass and hard court, and he still won a French Open along the way, and made the Finals multiple other times, only to lose to Nadal, who is the GOAT clay court player. But Nadal is far from dominant on grass or hard court.

Djokovic dominates all surfaces and won the H2H against them. He's also smashed the GS record. Pretty easy choice here.

[MissileMike]

Yesterday was sad. Not because I have anything against "the new two", but seeing father time claim another victim.

[Rubios]

Huge Nadal fan as I'm Spaniard. Djokovic has been established as the best ever way back, and it's not even close.

[rockmanslim]

Anisimova's nerves got the better of her. She's no doubt a better player than that.

But after such a brutal result, her speech afterwards was one of the most impressive things I've seen in a while. I think it's cruel how they make the loser give speeches in front of a live crowd, but in this case it gave us a chance to see her composure and grace in the midst of a disaster. I'm now a fan of hers.

[azcatz11]

Anisimova's nerves got the better of her. She's no doubt a better player than that.

But after such a brutal result, her speech afterwards was one of the most impressive things I've seen in a while. I think it's cruel how they make the loser give speeches in front of a live crowd, but in this case it gave us a chance to see her composure and grace in the midst of a disaster. I'm now a fan of hers.

Are you a fan of Iga?