Who is the true goat in Tennis ?

[FreoRicci]

Players have their own era/generation.
The fact Federer comes in, dominates and Nadal comes not even years later. Novak quietly comes along and does his thing. Three players within 5-10 years suddenly GOATs.

Astounding all at once.

Amongst all that, Murray in any other era would’ve won 10+ majors easily. He managed to be year end 2016 World Number 1 is pretty insane. Unfortunately that was the end for him injuries wise.

 

[Jazny]

Want to put some arguments with that opinion?
Perhaps some statistics wouldn't go astray.

This is Nadal

This is Djokovic

 

[eaglespremiers]

This is Nadal

This is Djokovic
View attachment 1799911

Your lack of an argument is telling.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Djokovic clear GOAT for me. Federer/Nadal/Djokovic the clear best trio of any era imo.

Nadal second imo. Federer has had the benefit of winning against lesser opponents earlier in his career before Nadal and Djokovic arrived. Nadal sandwiched between Federer and Djokovic's dominance. But while that's the case, Nadal always had the clay court as his surface and couldn't excel against either Federer or Djokovic on other surfaces. So he's the most specialised of the 3 and will go down as the clay GOAT (if that's a thing).

Not sure how much longer Djokovic has with Alcaraz arriving, but he's done enough to be considered GOAT at this stage. And if he wins another 2-3 titles I think even his detractors will have to question their position. There's only so far the "GOAT is a personal opinion" argument can get you when the stats are stacked in one player's favour.

I dont get this argument. Why does Novak get a pass for the last 4 years or so but not Federer, for example?

I think it is a tired argument. Kevin Anderson made the 2018 Wimbledon and US Open final. Add in Kasper bloody Ruud.....Do I need to say any more?

No one is dismissive of Novaks recent achievements the same way they have always done with Federer. You beat who you have to beat. You play on the surface you have to play on.

 

[Vdubs]

This is Nadal

This is Djokovic
View attachment 1799911

We get it, the admiration is purely physical now.

 

[Vdubs]

The stats don't lie, Its Novak. Fed is my favorite ever player but Novak just gets it done. He is the Goat.

same for me

 

[Xtreme]

Martina Navratilova
59 grand slam titles in total

Novak has some catching up to do!!

 

[Kangapirate]

I dont get this argument. Why does Novak get a pass for the last 4 years or so but not Federer, for example?

I think it is a tired argument. Kevin Anderson made the 2018 Wimbledon and US Open final. Add in Kasper bloody Ruud.....Do I need to say any more?

No one is dismissive of Novaks recent achievements the same way they have always done with Federer. You beat who you have to beat. You play on the surface you have to play on.

Because Djokovic is doing it as an old man, look how many slams he had when Covid started and look how many he has now. It’s truly staggering What he’s done in his 30s. The scary thing is Wimbledon 2020 was cancelled, he was disqualified at the US open in a freak accident and then the 2 slams he wasn’t allowed to compete in. It’s frightening that he could easily have 2-3 more.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Because Djokovic is doing it as an old man, look how many slams he had when Covid started and look how many he has now. It’s truly staggering What he’s done in his 30s.

Not my issue or care.

My issue is the fact you dismiss Federers record due to the quality of the opponent yet you are not doing the same for Novak. It's inconsistent reasoning. Personally, as I said before, you play who you play and when. A grand slam title is massive

I also think the early 2000's has gotten a bad rap.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Martina Navratilova
59 grand slam titles in total

Novak has some catching up to do!!

If you're being serious (which I don't think you are) don't take this the wrong way but I don't give a toss about a players doubles history.

 

[RobbyRoy]

Not my issue or care.

My issue is the fact you dismiss Federers record due to the quality of the opponent yet you are not doing the same for Novak. It's inconsistent reasoning. Personally, as I said before, you play who you play and when. A grand slam title is massive

I also think the early 2000's has gotten a bad rap.

Why ask if you're going to dismiss the perfectly valid answer?

 

[BobbyMorri]

Why ask if you're going to dismiss the perfectly valid answer?

What, so because Novak is old, the quality of his opponent doesn't count, but it counts against Federer, because he was young?

 

[Xtreme]

If you're being serious (which I don't think you are) don't take this the wrong way but I don't give a toss about a players doubles history.

Deadly serious

Novak needs to get to 60 grand slams to be the GOAT

 

[GoTheSwannies]

I dont get this argument. Why does Novak get a pass for the last 4 years or so but not Federer, for example?

I think it is a tired argument. Kevin Anderson made the 2018 Wimbledon and US Open final. Add in Kasper bloody Ruud.....Do I need to say any more?

No one is dismissive of Novaks recent achievements the same way they have always done with Federer. You beat who you have to beat. You play on the surface you have to play on.

I get your point, and it's a valid one and should be applied evenly to all 3 players. Although, it's not a straight forward thing to do.

To add a bit of context to my perspective.

Federer started racking up GSs when there was a bit of a lull after Sampras's reign. Not that it was a prolonged period, but Federer won 4 of 7 GS from his first to the point Nadal won his first. It also took Nadal a few years from the time he won his first GS to the point he started become a dominant force (e.g. in the 11 GS from the point Nadal won his first. Federer won 8 of them, Nadal the other 3). At that stage, tennis was literally a 2 horse race, and Federer had a head start over Nadal and was already in his peak while Nadal was still developing.

In saying that, the end came quicker for Federer given he had 2 other all time greats in their peak as he was winding down. But he was overtaken at a point where he should have still been at his peak.

Nadal spent his whole career contending with 1 or 2 all time greats, his peak also coincided with Federer at the start of his career and Djokovic towards the end. So he didn't have a period where he wasn't competing with one or the other at their absolute peaks.

Federer and Djokovic's peaks didn't really intersect a great deal.

Just my take. There are many ways to look at it and a lot of different valid perspectives.

 

[eaglespremiers]

Deadly serious

Novak needs to get to 60 grand slams to be the GOAT

Again, don't care about doubles achievements one iota.
I don't think your proposal is a valid argument.

What, so because Novak is old, the quality of his opponent doesn't count, but it counts against Federer, because he was young?

As far as I was aware the "weak era" argument is one perpetrated by one-eyed Federer and Nadal fans. Djokovic fans simply respond to this argument by pointing out the level of some of Federer's competition pre-2007/2008.
As a a general rule Djokovic fans are perfectly happy with all majors having an equal footing.

 

[Xtreme]

Again, don't care about doubles achievements one iota.
I don't think your proposal is a valid argument.

As far as I was aware the "weak era" argument is one perpetrated by one-eyed Federer and Nadal fans. Djokovic fans simply respond to this argument by pointing out the level of some of Federer's competition pre-2007/2008.
As a a general rule Djokovic fans are perfectly happy with all majors having an equal footing.

A grand slam title is a grand slam title
man, woman, singles, doubles, wheelchair events

Novak needs 36 more to be the GOAT of all GOAT's

 

[eaglespremiers]

A grand slam title is a grand slam title
man, woman, singles, doubles, wheelchair events

Novak needs 36 more to be the GOAT of all GOAT's

Nobody in their right mind is suggesting that Navratilova is the greatest tennis player of all time.
Heck, she probably isn't even considered in the top 3 women of all time.
We're going to have to agree to disagree. A doubles major is wholly irrelevant to the question of who is singularly the greatest tennis player of all time.

 

[Xtreme]

Nobody in their right mind is suggesting that Navratilova is the greatest tennis player of all time.
Heck, she probably isn't even considered in the top 3 women of all time.
We're going to have to agree to disagree. A doubles major is wholly irrelevant to the question of who is singularly the greatest tennis player of all time.

We already know the answer and the answer is MARTINA!

 

[pepsi]

A grand slam title is a grand slam title
man, woman, singles, doubles, wheelchair events

Novak needs 36 more to be the GOAT of all GOAT's

Your trolling has no limits. Good for you!

I mean the Bryan brothers with 16 men's doubles slams are much better players than Sampras, Laver and Agassi!

Djokovic continues to break records and looks like he wants to continue doing that.

You can bring emotion into it if you like, compare to non relevant stats like doubles or women's slam titles. But he is one of the great athletes of all time in sport, not just tennis.

 

[Kangapirate]

Again, don't care about doubles achievements one iota.
I don't think your proposal is a valid argument.

As far as I was aware the "weak era" argument is one perpetrated by one-eyed Federer and Nadal fans. Djokovic fans simply respond to this argument by pointing out the level of some of Federer's competition pre-2007/2008.
As a a general rule Djokovic fans are perfectly happy with all majors having an equal footing.

Again, don't care about doubles achievements one iota.
I don't think your proposal is a valid argument.

As far as I was aware the "weak era" argument is one perpetrated by one-eyed Federer and Nadal fans. Djokovic fans simply respond to this argument by pointing out the level of some of Federer's competition pre-2007/2008.
As a a general rule Djokovic fans are perfectly happy with all majors having an equal footing.

Absolutely, ultimately he has the numbers now. Put everyone on an equal footing and he still stands alone.

I have no skin in the game but when you hear stuff like "he cant be the goat because of his personality" " he will never be loved like fedal so he cant be the goat" you know the argument has reached a point of desperation.

 

[FreoRicci]

Not my issue or care.

My issue is the fact you dismiss Federers record due to the quality of the opponent yet you are not doing the same for Novak. It's inconsistent reasoning. Personally, as I said before, you play who you play and when. A grand slam title is massive

I also think the early 2000's has gotten a bad rap.

Novak is doing this at age 36. Reached all 4 finals. Won 3.
Federer last won at 37.

Federer’s prime was against Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian.

It was a weak era.

 

[FreoRicci]

Crazy to also think that Novak in his first 25 grand slam tournament appearances, only won 2 majors.

47 appearances after, 22 majors won.

Nuts.

Have made the finals 9 times in last 10 appearances with 7 wins. Crazy

 

[YeoShuey]

Medvedev.

Not only is he a great player but he doesn’t put up with rubbish. Whether it be Tsitsipas or some random in the crowd.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

I would rate them;
1. Djokervic
2. Borg ( retired at 26)
3. Federer
4.Nadal

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I would rate them;
1. Djokervic
2. Borg ( retired at 26)
3. Federer
4.Nadal

Agree but for me switch 3 and 4 purely on their Head to head record.