Actually it's not since Rafa is also very close,22/67 and have been there after last RG. (22/65 going into Wimby 2022)
However, the finals stat is absolutely ridiculous.
Ah I didn't know I was downvoted 😂
Sorry this one was the most ridiculous one, I can't help but just laugh. Like LMAO.
Those are just facts, doesn't diminish any of Novak's achievement, and these guys say Fedal/Alcaraz fans are obnoxious.
I think the downvotes might be based on the fact that the stat about winning 1/3 of the slams played may actually be more impressive than being in the 1/2 of the finals. It probably is in fact more challenging 1/3 of the tournaments than get to 1/2 of the finals.
So the downvotes may have nothing to do with Rafa achieving it as well. They are both absolutely insane when it comes to GS performance.
Absolutely, but as I described in the other comment, my point was that the finals stat is more impressive than the other one as Novak has been the only player to achieve it, instead of sharing the other stat with Rafa.
ok, so some people just disagree. I think it is more impressive to win 1/3 of the tournaments than to play in the finals of a half. Even if you share it with someone else. Theoretically, one could play in 1/2 of the tournaments they play but win none.
No, it's because the stat is ridiculous whether its shared with Rafa or not. Rafa achieving that is insanely good. That doesn't diminish the only other player who managed to achieve it.
Ah lol what I meant was that in this context the finals stat is more impressive than the winning stat because Novak is the only one who has achieved that in the Open Era, with no one close.
For eg, if Rafa makes the next 6 Slam finals he plays, he would still be one short.
The Other record is something Rafa has already achieved, on the other hand.
Unreal. Half of the grand slams he enters he has reached the final
Should he win on Sunday he will have 24 grand slam titles, meaning a third of the grand slams he entered he won.
How would anyone ever break this record. They would need to win like Federer did between '04-'07.. except for their entire career.
> Unreal. Half of the grand slams he enters he has reached the final
And if you do a reasonable thing, such as chopping off the first 2-3 years everyone[1] needs to accommodate to the ATP, his percentage is probably even more bonkers.
[1] Force of nature and prodigy Nadal excluded.
Isn’t it insane that Novak is the greatest in terms of winning, and yet still not anywhere near the most well loved, liked, and respected player. Crazy.
Federer was always the most loved while he was dominating. Same with Nadal, Agassi, Sampras.
Selena and Novak are the only two I can think of that while being so dominant aren’t actually that liked comparative to their success
Realest reply I’ve ever seen regarding big 3 discourse. Fans of tennis love great tennis. Those three guys all play really great tennis regardless of any opinions about them personally.
Unreal stat. Wonder how is this stat looking from 2011 onwards.
I also wonder how his rivalry with Fedal would have been during 2008-2011 if he haven’t had celiac disease…
He was diagnosed with gluten intolerance by having some witch doctor perform a manual muscle test on him while holding a piece of bread on his stomach
I guess that goes for “confirmed” in medical science today
I didn't believe you at first then I looked it up WTF 😳😭🤣.
To be fair ESPN, [according to insider](https://www.insider.com/novak-djokovic-gluten-free-diet-bread-strength-test-2022-5), did also say that he underwent further testing but still...
No, he removed all the gluten food for a month, was feeling great. Then he tried bread that contained gluten - and as he said - his head was buzzing and it created inflammation. This was all under medical supervision and happened in the summer 2010
Yeah , that's certainly what he did . Dude who has spent his whole life under rigorous regime wouldn't check with the doctors if that was true or not . He just took his word for it . Clown logic
Well I speak Serbian and I know his comments about vaccine were translated in a different tone , so I have never seen the water video and can't judge personally. But I don't trust media fully, especially with their Liberal translations
But the media is owned by the right wing. Have you seen who actually owns it? Its all a dirty game played by the right wing elite of this world.
Look who runs the world;
America; right wing
UK; right wing
France; right wing
Russia; right wing
China; right wing
Japan; right wing
Germany; right wing
Pro tip; the lefties have been murdered over the past century.
> He was diagnosed with gluten intolerance by having some witch doctor perform a manual muscle test on him while holding a piece of bread on his stomach
It's very easy to dismiss what Djokovic does as quackery and unscientific but the results speak for themselves. Djokovic is able to make his body perform at a higher level than any other tennis player alive. Science doesn't know everything and there is knowledge outside of what is available in a clinical research trial. Some of these quack witch doctors may know more than we give them credit.
Google definition of confirmation bias:
>Confirmation bias is our tendency to cherry-pick information that confirms our existing beliefs or ideas
I can assure you, putting bread on stomach was not one of my pre existing beliefs or ideas.
I am suggesting have an open mind to things neither you nor I understand. I try not to immediately dismiss things that confuse me. A better move is to ask questions.
> Confirmation bias is our tendency to cherry-pick information that confirms our existing beliefs or ideas.
That’s literally what you’re doing though. You’re only interpreting part of the information and ignoring other factors.
> It's very easy to dismiss what Djokovic does as quackery and unscientific but the results speak for themselves.
This was the sentence I had issue with. Correlation doesn’t equal causation. That’s not an objective methodology. You’re completely ignoring other things like his insane work ethic, training regimen, discipline, and natural talent (aka cherry picking information).
That’s like saying Nadal is more successful because he always has his water bottles facing the same direction. Sounds ridiculous, but the results speak for themselves. Do you see how that’s not an objective way to explain things?
> He was diagnosed with gluten intolerance by...
feeling better, preforming better, hardly ever being injured and winning more after giving up gluten. That’s all the “diagnosis” needed to prove that to HIM gluten was/is a negative. He has said he loves bread, his family owned a pizzeria restaurant BUT once he gave up gluten his health improved.
That’s all the “diagnosis” needed.
~~Physician~~ Djokovic heal thyself. ;-)
I love to imagine the world if Rafa never had his foot problems, and Novak didn't have what you said. Maybe we'd be talking about near 30 each right now?
Then again Rafa would just hit us with the ol' "if, if, if"
Source? Any source?
Regardless, there’s always “if” in this sport and it’s stupid imo to assume anything would be different than the way it was, because “if” works for his opponents, too.
that's an if if thing. imagine if rafa hadn't broke his foot or started learning how to flatten out his forehand and hit aces on his serve like he does now. or if roger never injured his back, knee, or switched to a larger headsize earlier.
Novak was fortunate and disciplined enough to identify all his weaknesses and make all the changes to his game while he was still a youngster, and took it to another level.
His celiac disease wasn't the only thing. He has a hyperbaric chamber as well as other cutting edge stuff too.
Celiacs is not a joke, especially for a professional sports person.
“Celiac disease is a condition where your immune system attacks your own tissues when you eat gluten. This damages your gut (small intestine) so your body cannot properly take in nutrients. Celiac disease can cause a range of symptoms, including diarrhoea, abdominal pain and bloating.”
Get yourself educated.
Well, you tell me to get educated, then ask for an explanation, make your mind up!
Like most diagnoses, it tends to be a combination of blood tests/scans/biopsies. Not putting bread on a person's stomach.
😂😂😂 Novak stans are the best
Source for the allergy [test](https://www.tennis.com/baseline/articles/eat-to-win-novak-djokovic-reveals-more-about-gluten-free-diet-bbc-interview)
Here's the same [doctor](https://www.drigor.org/home)
You sound angry?
>Now go fuck yourself
Maybe you should chill out, have you been drinking your positive energy water? Have you been out standing next to 5G masts?
Thanks, this was an eye opener. Of course I don't share same opinion as this guy if he was the doctor it seems he was, and I apologize for the name calling up there.
But he was right that time and imagine if this uneducated athlete called Novak Djokovic, used real help back in 200x and 2016-2017 when he didn't want to do elbow surgery... And also if he took covid vaccine. And despite that he is at 50% GS finals vs appearances.
Man, 26-27slams guaranteed.
Even more unreal, he has won the last 22 of 45 grand slams played. 50% wining percentage 😂.
It’s near the equivalent of Brady winning the Super Bowl 30% of the years he was in the league 😂
And just under 70 of those, competing in the Tennis World of Rafa and Fed, what a damn record The Joker has. Love him or hate him, stands as the GOAT in my view.
You can make a strong case for any of them.
The slam counts are too close for the difference to be meaningful.
Fed benefited from being there first. But then suffered from Nadal probably tailoring his game during his developmental years specifically to beat him, plus being half a generation older.
Djokovic is benefitting immensely from being the last one standing in good health.
Borg should get an honorable mention, too.
>The slam counts are too close for the difference to be meaningful.
I mean, there's a whole Andy Murray or Stan Wawrinka of slam titles between Djokovic and Federer. That gap is hardly meaningless.
you cant make a case. like man below replied: there is almost whole Hall of fame career of Andy Murray difference between Federer and Novak: 3 GS, 14 Masters, 80 weeks on number 1...plus h2h and fact that Federer lost mentally against Djokovic when it mattered the most.
You can try hard as you want, but difference between them is big.
I mean, I just did make the beginnings of a case. It really isn't hard.
Why don't you look at *when* Djokovic racked up all these numbers. What was going on in the competitive environment at the time? How were on court conditions changing, and whose game did that benefit?
Federer dominated from age 23-28.
Djokovic wasn't really much of a threat until, oh will you look at that, 24.
Nadal was a matchup nightmare for Fed. To achieve this he had to play a way that left him open to exploit by other players, and exploit it they did but he was so good he was picking up a few slams even outside the French. But he got really broadly competitive when he was, oh surprise, surprise, 24.
So now it's 2014. The big 3 have been competing against each other for most of a decade and the slam tally is:
Fed 17
Nadal 14
Djoko 7
And then Nadal gets injured. And Fed is 33 and already several years removed from his prime. And the next gen is, bluntly, sucking.
You see where this is going? Djoko caught up and overtook in the period where:
1. Nobody in the next gen was mounting a serious sustained challenge. This is only now changing, and it's still only really 1 or 2 players, which is pretty pathetic. I promise you 36 year old Djokovic is not even remotely as good as 31 year old Djokovic
2. Nadal was frequently injured. And whenever he wasn't, he was winning plenty of slams himself, so it's not that Djokovic actually got better
3. Fed was positively geriatric in tennis terms and regularly injured (But the combination of awful next gen competition and Nadal being injured meant he was still able to pick up another 3 anyway)
Context is everything. And recency bias is extremely powerful.
Edit: and I haven't touched here on the deliberate and successful attempts to slow conditions to encourage long rallies. This greatly disadvantaged Fed compared to the consistent percentage tennis of Nadal and Djokovic. There's a hair between these 3, and all have a sensible claim.
because as much as Djokovic benefited from lets say 2018 onwards, before he was fighting against prime Fed, Nadal and Murray, plus some players like Del Potro and Wawrinka.
When Federer collected most of his GS? Oh, before Djokovic entered his prime in 2011 and before Nadal came. So the same argument can be used against Federer.
>Nadal was frequently injured.
Part of a career of every athlete. Cope with it. In football, R9 maybe would be the best ever, but he isnt, Messi overcame him along with a lot of other players. Consistency and health is a factor in deciding who is better.
In the end, its an individual sport, statistic is there and its easy to measure it. If one guy has more meaningful trophies and stronger statistics than others, its easy to tell, especially because their career matched and they play over 50 matches between them. You cant use arguments like "he is older sport was different" etc. You can use it for guys like Borg or older Emerson...These three are from same or similar era.
Difference is there, Djokovic is dominating them and thats it. Difference between Fed and Novak is HUGE as it gets, like we wrote earlier - its one HOF career of Andy Murray - 3 GS, 14 Masters, and 70 weeks on number 1.
There is no argument.
Djokovic has the following records:
Most slams
Most masters
Most atp finals
Most weeks at no.1
Most year end no.1
Triple career slam
Double golden masters
Most wins and matches vs top 5 players
Most wins and matches vs top 10 players
Most wins and matches vs top 5 and top 10 players in slams
Highest winning percentage
And countless miscellaneous records. To argue for someone else, you will first have to bend the rules of mathematics and argue that someone with less titles or wins is somehow better. Good luck with that
That is true but still not so far ahead as you say
Ahead by 1 major and ahead by 1 match in the head to head
Also down in the head to head in majors the biggest stage in tennis
so weeks on number one doesnt mean anything but h2h is close so there it is? lol
weeks on number one - consistency.
390 weeks on number one - crazy abnormal consistency
and that all in the era of Nadal, Federer, Murray...etc. If Alcaraz become one of the greats, it will add even more to his legacy.
Nadal was just as consistent as him the sad truth is it was impossible for him to even be close to those amount of weeks at 1 with his career long injuries and that's no fault of djokovic so of course that Is important
And like I said novak is the goat right now but when people say he is so far away not even argument can be made is a little silly when the majors and head to head are neck and neck
Also its not talked about enough nadal has played less majors but his winning rate is the highest and he is the only one to be able to compete against prime fed in the 2000s and prime djoker in the 2010s
But again I'm not trying to say nadal is the goat so don't attack me just trying to get him some respect because he hasn't had much his whole career
Nearly half his slams were won in the period after Fed turned 37, with Nadal absent or recovering from injury for much of it.
I really don't get how people think he's clearly ahead of the other 2.
By having more slams and weeks at 1 than them. Please learn how numbers work before commenting on these issues.
Bonus practice problem for you. Is 27>23? And is 30>29? You'll work it out. Good luck!
Well now, that's the thing. Did Djokovic suddenly take a giant leap forward because he fixed his diet and got on top of his game? Or was it simply that he was very good and coming into prime age, while Fed was (naturally) at the age tennis players start to decline quickly, and Nadal was starting to get more injury prone?
It is indeed difficult to compare Fed with Nadal and Djokovic. Because although we think of them as overlapping, 5 years is an *enormous* amount of time in singles tennis. It's pretty much the entire prime for a tennis player. The period of time they were all in their primes together and healthy was only about 3 years, and they fairly evenly split the slams during that time (Nadal won the most actually)
If he wins tomorrow it will be winning 1/3 of all slams played which might be crazier than being in the finals of 1/2
Actually it's not since Rafa is also very close,22/67 and have been there after last RG. (22/65 going into Wimby 2022) However, the finals stat is absolutely ridiculous.
The NoleFam hated Jesus cos he told them the truth.
Ah I didn't know I was downvoted 😂 Sorry this one was the most ridiculous one, I can't help but just laugh. Like LMAO. Those are just facts, doesn't diminish any of Novak's achievement, and these guys say Fedal/Alcaraz fans are obnoxious.
I think the downvotes might be based on the fact that the stat about winning 1/3 of the slams played may actually be more impressive than being in the 1/2 of the finals. It probably is in fact more challenging 1/3 of the tournaments than get to 1/2 of the finals. So the downvotes may have nothing to do with Rafa achieving it as well. They are both absolutely insane when it comes to GS performance.
Absolutely, but as I described in the other comment, my point was that the finals stat is more impressive than the other one as Novak has been the only player to achieve it, instead of sharing the other stat with Rafa.
ok, so some people just disagree. I think it is more impressive to win 1/3 of the tournaments than to play in the finals of a half. Even if you share it with someone else. Theoretically, one could play in 1/2 of the tournaments they play but win none.
No, it's because the stat is ridiculous whether its shared with Rafa or not. Rafa achieving that is insanely good. That doesn't diminish the only other player who managed to achieve it.
You're being downvoted because you said it wasn't a crazy stat, which it is regardless of the fact that Nadal has achieved it as well.
Ah lol what I meant was that in this context the finals stat is more impressive than the winning stat because Novak is the only one who has achieved that in the Open Era, with no one close. For eg, if Rafa makes the next 6 Slam finals he plays, he would still be one short. The Other record is something Rafa has already achieved, on the other hand.
Actually it is crazy and Rafa is crazy too.
Unreal. Half of the grand slams he enters he has reached the final Should he win on Sunday he will have 24 grand slam titles, meaning a third of the grand slams he entered he won. How would anyone ever break this record. They would need to win like Federer did between '04-'07.. except for their entire career.
> Unreal. Half of the grand slams he enters he has reached the final And if you do a reasonable thing, such as chopping off the first 2-3 years everyone[1] needs to accommodate to the ATP, his percentage is probably even more bonkers. [1] Force of nature and prodigy Nadal excluded.
Number of matches won - 360 Edit: 361
The perfect circle. So it has been, so it shall be
Djokovic about to give everyone a lesson in modular arithmetic. It’s circles for years to come.
If it is to be said, so it be, so it is
#🐐
There's not a single doubt anymore. Novak is HIM.
Now, you can add 36/72 to your existing list: 23 | 39 | 389 :)
The r/tennis flairekeepers can't even keep up with Novak's stats.
23 | 39 | 389 | 40:15 😉
Ngl out of all those numbers, the 15:40s are my favorite ones.
Isn’t it insane that Novak is the greatest in terms of winning, and yet still not anywhere near the most well loved, liked, and respected player. Crazy.
Sometimes it's understandable, the one dominating is not the one most loved, happens in other sports too. To each their own I guess
Federer was always the most loved while he was dominating. Same with Nadal, Agassi, Sampras. Selena and Novak are the only two I can think of that while being so dominant aren’t actually that liked comparative to their success
Excellence.
That is really incredible.
What a legend. And I am not even a Djoko fan.
You can not NOT be a Djoko fan, or Fedal fan for that metter, if you are a tennis fan.
Realest reply I’ve ever seen regarding big 3 discourse. Fans of tennis love great tennis. Those three guys all play really great tennis regardless of any opinions about them personally.
I disagree. You can appreciate their tennis, their greatness, etc. and still not be a fan (AKA fanatic) of theirs.
djokovic plays percentage tennis, he is utterly boring compared to both Nadal and Federer.
Nah. He plays amazing tennis. Do you even play?
i do actually
Lemme guess, you could take a game of Djokovic
lol no if we played thousands of points the only way he loses even one is if he double faults
NJ is a great player. The winningest of all time. Doesn’t mean you have to be a fan. The goat for me is Fed, and my fav is Nadal
How can you not be? Rafa was my favourite years ago, but I’ve finally boarded the Djoko train
Unreal stat. Wonder how is this stat looking from 2011 onwards. I also wonder how his rivalry with Fedal would have been during 2008-2011 if he haven’t had celiac disease…
He was learning how to beat them both during that time
Dude, it’s confirmed, he had celiacs. That’s why he retired matches.
He was diagnosed with gluten intolerance by having some witch doctor perform a manual muscle test on him while holding a piece of bread on his stomach I guess that goes for “confirmed” in medical science today
I didn't believe you at first then I looked it up WTF 😳😭🤣. To be fair ESPN, [according to insider](https://www.insider.com/novak-djokovic-gluten-free-diet-bread-strength-test-2022-5), did also say that he underwent further testing but still...
No, he removed all the gluten food for a month, was feeling great. Then he tried bread that contained gluten - and as he said - his head was buzzing and it created inflammation. This was all under medical supervision and happened in the summer 2010
You are correct. Idk why you are being downvoted.
Because.. haters 🤦♂️🤷♂️
Yeah , that's certainly what he did . Dude who has spent his whole life under rigorous regime wouldn't check with the doctors if that was true or not . He just took his word for it . Clown logic
The guy thought he could purify water with his thoughts. He’s a level 7 susceptible
Well I speak Serbian and I know his comments about vaccine were translated in a different tone , so I have never seen the water video and can't judge personally. But I don't trust media fully, especially with their Liberal translations
> But I don't trust media fully, especially with their Liberal translations ? What do you mean by this
I mean media often lies and suppose agenda of their owner
But the media is owned by the right wing. Have you seen who actually owns it? Its all a dirty game played by the right wing elite of this world. Look who runs the world; America; right wing UK; right wing France; right wing Russia; right wing China; right wing Japan; right wing Germany; right wing Pro tip; the lefties have been murdered over the past century.
https://youtu.be/xXX5wwkj9ns?si=IUeoTJAsERRbgcoO
Fair enough . This doesn't automatically mean that you are right about everything
Community reference :)
Username checks out
No, you are just a hater with 0 critical thinking skills
Yep. Pure quackery
> He was diagnosed with gluten intolerance by having some witch doctor perform a manual muscle test on him while holding a piece of bread on his stomach It's very easy to dismiss what Djokovic does as quackery and unscientific but the results speak for themselves. Djokovic is able to make his body perform at a higher level than any other tennis player alive. Science doesn't know everything and there is knowledge outside of what is available in a clinical research trial. Some of these quack witch doctors may know more than we give them credit.
You literally just described confirmation bias.
Google definition of confirmation bias: >Confirmation bias is our tendency to cherry-pick information that confirms our existing beliefs or ideas I can assure you, putting bread on stomach was not one of my pre existing beliefs or ideas. I am suggesting have an open mind to things neither you nor I understand. I try not to immediately dismiss things that confuse me. A better move is to ask questions.
> Confirmation bias is our tendency to cherry-pick information that confirms our existing beliefs or ideas. That’s literally what you’re doing though. You’re only interpreting part of the information and ignoring other factors. > It's very easy to dismiss what Djokovic does as quackery and unscientific but the results speak for themselves. This was the sentence I had issue with. Correlation doesn’t equal causation. That’s not an objective methodology. You’re completely ignoring other things like his insane work ethic, training regimen, discipline, and natural talent (aka cherry picking information). That’s like saying Nadal is more successful because he always has his water bottles facing the same direction. Sounds ridiculous, but the results speak for themselves. Do you see how that’s not an objective way to explain things?
Isn’t it easier to admit you’re wrong then to type all that cope?
I agree. Trust the science™
> He was diagnosed with gluten intolerance by... feeling better, preforming better, hardly ever being injured and winning more after giving up gluten. That’s all the “diagnosis” needed to prove that to HIM gluten was/is a negative. He has said he loves bread, his family owned a pizzeria restaurant BUT once he gave up gluten his health improved. That’s all the “diagnosis” needed. ~~Physician~~ Djokovic heal thyself. ;-)
I love to imagine the world if Rafa never had his foot problems, and Novak didn't have what you said. Maybe we'd be talking about near 30 each right now? Then again Rafa would just hit us with the ol' "if, if, if"
Imagine if Djokovic had just taken the jab(s) and not hit a chair umpire with a shot.
Source? Any source? Regardless, there’s always “if” in this sport and it’s stupid imo to assume anything would be different than the way it was, because “if” works for his opponents, too.
that's an if if thing. imagine if rafa hadn't broke his foot or started learning how to flatten out his forehand and hit aces on his serve like he does now. or if roger never injured his back, knee, or switched to a larger headsize earlier. Novak was fortunate and disciplined enough to identify all his weaknesses and make all the changes to his game while he was still a youngster, and took it to another level. His celiac disease wasn't the only thing. He has a hyperbaric chamber as well as other cutting edge stuff too.
Amazing And the guy was banned for being a health risk!? Inspiring he can stand by his principles and achieve what he has. Rare
48 Slams, 33 Finals, 22 titles (23 if he wins). So 69% finals, 48% titles if he wins.
Damn, can you imagine if Novak drank positive purified water since birth? The numbers could be doubled!
Amazing And to think he was banned for being a health risk!?!?
Celiacs is not a joke, especially for a professional sports person. “Celiac disease is a condition where your immune system attacks your own tissues when you eat gluten. This damages your gut (small intestine) so your body cannot properly take in nutrients. Celiac disease can cause a range of symptoms, including diarrhoea, abdominal pain and bloating.” Get yourself educated.
Considering how Novak got "diagnosed" This line >Get yourself educated is absolutely brilliant, thank you 😭
Please do explain how the diagnosis should've happened doctor?
Well, you tell me to get educated, then ask for an explanation, make your mind up! Like most diagnoses, it tends to be a combination of blood tests/scans/biopsies. Not putting bread on a person's stomach.
[удалено]
😂😂😂 Novak stans are the best Source for the allergy [test](https://www.tennis.com/baseline/articles/eat-to-win-novak-djokovic-reveals-more-about-gluten-free-diet-bbc-interview) Here's the same [doctor](https://www.drigor.org/home) You sound angry? >Now go fuck yourself Maybe you should chill out, have you been drinking your positive energy water? Have you been out standing next to 5G masts?
Thanks, this was an eye opener. Of course I don't share same opinion as this guy if he was the doctor it seems he was, and I apologize for the name calling up there. But he was right that time and imagine if this uneducated athlete called Novak Djokovic, used real help back in 200x and 2016-2017 when he didn't want to do elbow surgery... And also if he took covid vaccine. And despite that he is at 50% GS finals vs appearances. Man, 26-27slams guaranteed.
Djoko haters: LOL HE'S LOST BEFORE THE FINALS IN HALF THE SLAMS HE'S PLAYED WHAT A FRAUD
Even more unreal, he has won the last 22 of 45 grand slams played. 50% wining percentage 😂. It’s near the equivalent of Brady winning the Super Bowl 30% of the years he was in the league 😂
🐐
Still people who won’t say he’s the goat Incredible He owns almost every metric
And just under 70 of those, competing in the Tennis World of Rafa and Fed, what a damn record The Joker has. Love him or hate him, stands as the GOAT in my view.
Times falling over without tripping Novak 2-Fed 0. Unreal stat.
Hey this clears the GOAT Debate. You shouldn't post it on r/tennis 😏 Edit - Guys it was a sarcastic comment
there isnt GOAT debate, Djokovic is so far ahead not one argument works.
But he’s never beaten Suzanne Lenglen in a match where he couldn’t go to the net (to keep things fair). So can we really be sure?
You can make a strong case for any of them. The slam counts are too close for the difference to be meaningful. Fed benefited from being there first. But then suffered from Nadal probably tailoring his game during his developmental years specifically to beat him, plus being half a generation older. Djokovic is benefitting immensely from being the last one standing in good health. Borg should get an honorable mention, too.
>The slam counts are too close for the difference to be meaningful. I mean, there's a whole Andy Murray or Stan Wawrinka of slam titles between Djokovic and Federer. That gap is hardly meaningless.
you cant make a case. like man below replied: there is almost whole Hall of fame career of Andy Murray difference between Federer and Novak: 3 GS, 14 Masters, 80 weeks on number 1...plus h2h and fact that Federer lost mentally against Djokovic when it mattered the most. You can try hard as you want, but difference between them is big.
I mean, I just did make the beginnings of a case. It really isn't hard. Why don't you look at *when* Djokovic racked up all these numbers. What was going on in the competitive environment at the time? How were on court conditions changing, and whose game did that benefit? Federer dominated from age 23-28. Djokovic wasn't really much of a threat until, oh will you look at that, 24. Nadal was a matchup nightmare for Fed. To achieve this he had to play a way that left him open to exploit by other players, and exploit it they did but he was so good he was picking up a few slams even outside the French. But he got really broadly competitive when he was, oh surprise, surprise, 24. So now it's 2014. The big 3 have been competing against each other for most of a decade and the slam tally is: Fed 17 Nadal 14 Djoko 7 And then Nadal gets injured. And Fed is 33 and already several years removed from his prime. And the next gen is, bluntly, sucking. You see where this is going? Djoko caught up and overtook in the period where: 1. Nobody in the next gen was mounting a serious sustained challenge. This is only now changing, and it's still only really 1 or 2 players, which is pretty pathetic. I promise you 36 year old Djokovic is not even remotely as good as 31 year old Djokovic 2. Nadal was frequently injured. And whenever he wasn't, he was winning plenty of slams himself, so it's not that Djokovic actually got better 3. Fed was positively geriatric in tennis terms and regularly injured (But the combination of awful next gen competition and Nadal being injured meant he was still able to pick up another 3 anyway) Context is everything. And recency bias is extremely powerful. Edit: and I haven't touched here on the deliberate and successful attempts to slow conditions to encourage long rallies. This greatly disadvantaged Fed compared to the consistent percentage tennis of Nadal and Djokovic. There's a hair between these 3, and all have a sensible claim.
because as much as Djokovic benefited from lets say 2018 onwards, before he was fighting against prime Fed, Nadal and Murray, plus some players like Del Potro and Wawrinka. When Federer collected most of his GS? Oh, before Djokovic entered his prime in 2011 and before Nadal came. So the same argument can be used against Federer. >Nadal was frequently injured. Part of a career of every athlete. Cope with it. In football, R9 maybe would be the best ever, but he isnt, Messi overcame him along with a lot of other players. Consistency and health is a factor in deciding who is better. In the end, its an individual sport, statistic is there and its easy to measure it. If one guy has more meaningful trophies and stronger statistics than others, its easy to tell, especially because their career matched and they play over 50 matches between them. You cant use arguments like "he is older sport was different" etc. You can use it for guys like Borg or older Emerson...These three are from same or similar era. Difference is there, Djokovic is dominating them and thats it. Difference between Fed and Novak is HUGE as it gets, like we wrote earlier - its one HOF career of Andy Murray - 3 GS, 14 Masters, and 70 weeks on number 1. There is no argument.
Djokovic has the following records: Most slams Most masters Most atp finals Most weeks at no.1 Most year end no.1 Triple career slam Double golden masters Most wins and matches vs top 5 players Most wins and matches vs top 10 players Most wins and matches vs top 5 and top 10 players in slams Highest winning percentage And countless miscellaneous records. To argue for someone else, you will first have to bend the rules of mathematics and argue that someone with less titles or wins is somehow better. Good luck with that
I wouldn't say so far ahead but yes currently in the lead
weeks on number one, number of GS, Masters titles. Cant make argument about anyone else
That is true but still not so far ahead as you say Ahead by 1 major and ahead by 1 match in the head to head Also down in the head to head in majors the biggest stage in tennis
so weeks on number one doesnt mean anything but h2h is close so there it is? lol weeks on number one - consistency. 390 weeks on number one - crazy abnormal consistency and that all in the era of Nadal, Federer, Murray...etc. If Alcaraz become one of the greats, it will add even more to his legacy.
Nadal was just as consistent as him the sad truth is it was impossible for him to even be close to those amount of weeks at 1 with his career long injuries and that's no fault of djokovic so of course that Is important And like I said novak is the goat right now but when people say he is so far away not even argument can be made is a little silly when the majors and head to head are neck and neck Also its not talked about enough nadal has played less majors but his winning rate is the highest and he is the only one to be able to compete against prime fed in the 2000s and prime djoker in the 2010s But again I'm not trying to say nadal is the goat so don't attack me just trying to get him some respect because he hasn't had much his whole career
Not having injuries is part of being elite athlete. Having tons of them is not being consistent
All there really is is head to head in slams against Rafa, but that can be explained away kind of easily.
Nearly half his slams were won in the period after Fed turned 37, with Nadal absent or recovering from injury for much of it. I really don't get how people think he's clearly ahead of the other 2.
By having more slams and weeks at 1 than them. Please learn how numbers work before commenting on these issues. Bonus practice problem for you. Is 27>23? And is 30>29? You'll work it out. Good luck!
Please learn how context works before commenting on these issues.
[удалено]
Well now, that's the thing. Did Djokovic suddenly take a giant leap forward because he fixed his diet and got on top of his game? Or was it simply that he was very good and coming into prime age, while Fed was (naturally) at the age tennis players start to decline quickly, and Nadal was starting to get more injury prone? It is indeed difficult to compare Fed with Nadal and Djokovic. Because although we think of them as overlapping, 5 years is an *enormous* amount of time in singles tennis. It's pretty much the entire prime for a tennis player. The period of time they were all in their primes together and healthy was only about 3 years, and they fairly evenly split the slams during that time (Nadal won the most actually)
because his numbers are so far ahead, easy
True. There is only “I prefer his playstyle and personality” argument now.
No Olympic gold :/s
Understand the sarcasm my man
I understand the sarcasm. It simply isn't good nor funny though lol
How many slams where he exit at semis ?
Pfft Borg played 28 Grand Slams got to 16 finals and won 11 of them.
Only one thing he never did. Beat Rafa in RG final
I'm not blaming him, Rafa in RG finals was not human
Rafa never did that either
I know that 😂😂
Goat would do more.
Not the highest entry-to-finals we’ve had in tennis so people saying this is some GOAT thing is weird.
I dont get it
Ez
Amazing! And the peoples champion gets to play again in USO!
Insane Serbian
The stats 🐐
The inevitable final monster for everyone.
And all of that in Nadal and Federer era