OT: Djokovic one match away from Calendar Grand Slam

[jokeboy86]

If he wins tomorrow there should be no debate that he wins every athlete of the year award and if he doesn't lead every national sports show it shows how truly bias American media is against foreign athletes. And it has nothing to do with tennis because when Serena was close the coverage was there. A win tomorrow not only gives him the grand slam but also makes him the leader in career grand slams. Djokovic and Trout are the most underappreciated and under-covered athletes on the planet and it's flat out ridiculous. Greatness is greatness no matter whose doing it or where they're from or their personality. How Djokovic's quest isn't the top sports story in the world is bonkers to me.

[ceiling raiser]

If he wins tomorrow there should be no debate that he wins every athlete of the year award and if he doesn't lead every national sports show it shows how truly bias American media is against foreign athletes. And it has nothing to do with tennis because when Serena was close the coverage was there. A win tomorrow not only gives him the grand slam but also makes him the leader in career grand slams. Djokovic and Trout are the most underappreciated and under-covered athletes on the planet and it's flat out ridiculous. Greatness is greatness no matter whose doing it or where they're from or their personality. How Djokovic's quest isn't the top sports story in the world is bonkers to me.

Well Trout in the past makes sense, but he's been unlucky (or lucky, depending on your view) enough to be playing on the same roster as the first true two-way player since Babe Ruth in Ohtani.

[Bobbymcgee]

As an aside, the Netflix documentary series "Untold: Breaking Point" has an episode on U.S. Tennis player Mardy Fish. Highly recommended if you are into tennis.

[akiman911]

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.

This is like saying Shaq isn't the most dominant centre of his era because he can't shoot free throws and his game isn't aesthetically pleasing...

Good thing stats don't lie. Novak is the goat


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Michael Lucky]

If he wins tomorrow there should be no debate that he wins every athlete of the year award and if he doesn't lead every national sports show it shows how truly bias American media is against foreign athletes. And it has nothing to do with tennis because when Serena was close the coverage was there. A win tomorrow not only gives him the grand slam but also makes him the leader in career grand slams. Djokovic and Trout are the most underappreciated and under-covered athletes on the planet and it's flat out ridiculous. Greatness is greatness no matter whose doing it or where they're from or their personality. How Djokovic's quest isn't the top sports story in the world is bonkers to me.

The american media lost interest in men's tennis a long time ago and even more so when it became clear that Federer was no longer the best tennis player in the world.

[Mickey8]

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?

Stop lying, if you are injured you don't play, Nadal made it to the finals, was the better player for the set and half but Djokovic upped up his game and he won square and fair, you can grab your pillow and cry, just keep making excuses to devalue somebody's achievements , that's the definition of haters

[Mickey8]

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.

Its the grand slams that counts the most in tennis, thats the measuring stick for the greatness in that sport , and if Djokovic wins tomorrow there is no more discussion who's the goat unless Nadal or Federer win some more grand slams in the future which is unlikely, yet Djokovic have the greater chance to add even more to his tally the next season. Federer was considered the Goat in the media until Nadal have tide him in the GS race . You can prefer some other tennis players styles over the others, but the number of GS won is what's counts at the end .

[Mickey8]

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

He never said he was against vaccines nice try, its a western media that are spinning and twisting his words, it should be the personal choice anyways , only morons can trust snake oil salesmen like doctor Fauci.

Yeah cause Fauci is the only doctor in the world who believes in vaccines...

Fauci is the leading figurehead and the most recognizable face worldwide during this COVID crisis and he was caught in so many lies , he was changing his narrative every other week , about masks, vaccinations, quarantines etc. The guy's main purpose is to scare people every day, if you don't wear mask you will die, if you don't get vaccinated you will die, he's a human scarecrow , yet he donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Chinese lab from which the virus supposedly came from , the guy is corrupted like any other politician, his words mean nothing,worthless and he obviously caries agenda in all of this madness .

[C3H6N6O6]

I am a Nadal fan and I still think that Djokovic is the GOAT though not by much right now but he will run away with it in an year and no one will even doubt it.
If Djokovic, Nadal and Federer all had their primes at the same time then only Djokovic and Nadal would be close. Federer would lag behind by a good margin.

[Mickey8]

He didn't stole anything, he played great under the pressure against his opponent and disgusting crowds. Yeah they should go back to the wooden racquets and play amateur tennis

I wasn’t dissing Joker. Quite the contrary. With two serves to win the US Open, Federer hits a great shot wide of his forehand that could have been an ace. Joker practically dives for it and hits it with everything he’s got and slams it into the near corner. Just brilliant. The next serve, Fed goes for a serve and volley, which he again executes perfectly, and then, somehow, manages to push the gimme volley into the net. He was shook, and Joker closed him. As I said, he just damn stole that title.

When I saw McEnroe play Borg, in Richmond, I assure you they didn’t look amateur. True, Connors had his 2000 when I saw him play Borg, same place, but that small head was just wild enough to keep him from the boring top spin game. Back in ‘79-‘80 we used to drive from court to court, looking for a free one. People used to hang their wooden rackets up on the board to get into line to play a set. Everybody playing back then, and it was hellacious fun.

You are aware that Djokovic was playing in the atmosphere which was even worse than that of the Davis Cup matches, the crowd was cheering Dokovic's service errors , thats how disguating and petty they were, Djokovic had to fight both Federer and the crowd, Djokovic have made clutch service returns, which they ended up being winners , thats the defensive -offensive skill not the stealing , afterwards "entitled" Federer was crying in the presser , talking how he doesn't play that "kind of tennis", in the sense that Djokovic was somehow cheating in those situations , the nerve of Djokovic to try to win the points against Federer

[NYPiston]

Nadal is better

On clay, where Djokovic beat him this year. Everywhere else, it's Djoker although they've had some classics on the Hard Courts.

An argument can be made for any of Federer, Nadal or Djokovic but Djokovic is starting to separate himself and he might have at least another 5 Slams added to his resume as he might be better than he ever was right now considering how superior his serve is now compared to a few years ago so he'll likely end this conversation in the next few years.

[rzzzzz]

You are aware that Djokovic was playing in the atmosphere which was even worse than that of the Davis Cup matches, the crowd was cheering Dokovic's service errors , thats how disguating and petty they were, Djokovic had to fight both Federer and the crowd, Djokovic have made clutch service returns, which they ended up being winners , thats the defensive -offensive skill not the stealing , afterwards "entitled" Federer was crying in the presser , talking how he doesn't play that "kind of tennis", in the sense that Djokovic was somehow cheating in those situations , the nerve of Djokovic to try to win the points against Federer

I know the crowds tend to cheer for Federer. And I think I do remember something about Federer griping after losing that US Open match. He was shocked that he had it in hand and Joker managed to….reverse the outcome dramatically, snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. As I said, Joker is a fantastic player. I don’t have a bad word to say about the guy. Or Federer or Rafa.

Mac had some pretty embarrassing tantrums, but I loved to watch him play. Connors had some bad boy moments on and off the court, but I wouldn’t have missed any of his matches. Nobody’s perfect, but I ain’t going to denigrate any of them.

[AleksandarN]

Djokovic is the Tom Brady of tennis. He is most clutch player I have seen. His will power is unmatched.

[Ballerhogger]

not huge tennis fan but thats great !!!

[Noctilux]

Djokovic is the only anti-vaxxer I give a free pass. The rest can drop dead. He’s my second favorite player of all time, behind the great Borg.

Watching older movies, I always wondered how the hunan psyche could devolve to a point where tgey participate in large groups of gathering to watch a decapitation (Braveheart), a fight to the death (The Gladiator), a lynching (Rosewood), human ritual sacrifice (Apocolypto), or a game show where multiple people are murdered (The Running Man and The Hunger Games).

These stories, some fictional, some historical, of the devolution of the human spirit seem to be playing out in these times, a time where we openly and brazenly can wish death on another group of people based on a fear of losing a hospital bed.

I hope people realize that we are sinking to extreme moral low ground. History repeats itself. If you hate a group of people, going so far as to wish death, then you are but a hair away from gathering them all up, throwing them all in an oven, and flipping the switch. Sound familiar? The people who did this, they also feared annihilation. They feared being overrun too.

Let me find the worlds smallest violin so I can play it while I reading this drivel.

[HEKTOR]

To me, Djokovic is already the GOAT but a win tomorrow would solidify it.

[LordCovington33]

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.)

Laver’s physique and skills-set is not built for the modern game, just as we don’t know how the modern players would perform in the wooden racquet era (assuming they have the same conditioning and amount of training as the 1960’s players). Futile to speculate. Different games and different skills sets required. His accomplishments are incredible either way.
Federer saw Laver as the GOAT just as Laver sees Federer as the greatest. Immense respect for each other’s game. Anything beyond that is speculation as the game resembles very little to old one due mainly to racquet technology.

[Alonzo_Morning]

Disqualified

[gp2015]

I'm a Federer fan but like it or not, Djokovic is not being close to done, and he'll likely win at least 5-6 more majors. By the time he retires, he's going to have a clear case as GOAT. None of the young guys are ready to challenge him yet.

I don't see Federer winning any more majors and Nadal might win 1 or 2 more if he's lucky but his body is breaking down.

Might as well start preparing for that day now as it's inevitable barring major injuries.

[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.)

Laver’s physique and skills-set is not built for the modern game, just as we don’t know how the modern players would perform in the wooden racquet era (assuming they have the same conditioning and amount of training as the 1960’s players). Futile to speculate. Different games and different skills sets required. His accomplishments are incredible either way.
Federer saw Laver as the GOAT just as Laver sees Federer as the greatest. Immense respect for each other’s game. Anything beyond that is speculation as the game resembles very little to old one due mainly to racquet technology.

Not remotely futile to speculate any more than it's futile to do such comparisons in basketball. To think we can't at least apply logic to the situation is far too cynical.

You talk of physique, but consider that Ken Rosewall was 5'7". A half foot shorter than Federer & Nadal, who themselves suffered because they were short relative to Djokovic. I don't know what the theory would even be that would conclude Rosewall would be able to match up to them in today's game. And while Rod Laver was taller than Rosewall and it would be reasonable to expect him to fare better than Rosewall, he's just plain by today's standards.

What about in the other direction? Hard to be as sure that player's of today couldn't be great back then, but I'll say Nadal simply could not his the ball like he does now if he played with a wooden racket. You'd shank like crazy, and even when you got it perfect, you'd not produce enough topspin to really make the ball kick in such a devastating way. So the question with Nadal is how well he'd play with more traditional strokes.

Federer, by contrast, to me has shown a complete mastery of every stroke you could want to hit while playing with a too-traditional racket during his prime - which held him back in this era, but it did allow him to really make the case that he could master the game in all eras. Doesn't mean he'd necessarily be better than Nadal in olden days (Nadal would still have the mental toughness edge, among other things), but certainly more of a sure thing.