Tennis !

[Blue Sky]

We move onto Sydney in January for him to become GOAT.

To win the most slams doesn't make GOAT , Rod Laver did the 1962 Grand Slam , turned pro and couldn't compete for 6 years , then the sport went pro and he did the 1969 Grand Slam . Not saying he was GOAT but how many slams would he have won .

 

[davek]

Makes sense. Enormous amount of pent up emotion. The guy's been carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders since Wimbledon. IIRC he was the first to even get a crack at it since Laver.

Laughing would be smarter, but it was obviously just too much. He did well just to get past Zverev, who is staring down the barrel of suspension and was a man on a mission as a result.

I don't know that he'll add three next year, but he will remain extraordinarily difficult to beat in his Melbourne office and should remain just as tough an out everywhere else. Nadal might step up in Paris, Federer could at Wimbledon, and Medvedev could become dangerous everywhere.

Federer isn't going to win another Wimbledon. He wont add another slam to what he has now. Nadal on clay in Paris will be a force if anywhere near fit. But his opportunities are dwindling. Medvedev has his breakthrough, but I question his intensity.

Until the end of his career Djokovic will have another, say, 12 slams to aim for. I honestly cant see how he'd not pick up another 2 or 3 at least....he's won 7 of the last 14 slam titles. New challengers are coming through, but outside of Thiem, Medvedev and Zverev they aren't coming the=rough in great numbers.

 

[davek]

To win the most slams doesn't make GOAT , Rod Laver did the 1962 Grand Slam , turned pro and couldn't compete for 6 years , then the sport went pro and he did the 1969 Grand Slam . Not saying he was GOAT but how many slams would he have won .

Yes, but we have to have some metric to use. We could use others like calander GS wins or time spent as No.1 in the world rankings or even tournamnt wins all told. But it makes more sense than any other way that we add GS wins up, and I think that's the metric settled on in the game itself.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Stopped himself.

We move onto Sydney in January for him to become GOAT.

Even if he wins the most slams he won't be the GOAT, he is a freak of nature that was able to remain pretty much injury free in his later years without the normal drop off. If you compare records when they were in their prime Nadal and Federer had the edge over him. He simply outlasted them.

 

[PaddyJames]

I think he has to be up there that's not even under question. I don't particularly like Djokovic but he managed to win a shed load of slams when Federer and Nadal were still at their best.

For me the best ever right now is still Federer but if Novak adds another 3/4 then it has to be him. I can't see Federer winning another if I'm honest.

 

[Blue Sky]

This GOAT thing is impossible to decide , different eras , ages , equipment , surfaces , venues , hard to believe Borg couldn't win the US . i'm a big Federer fan but push come to to shove and would say the best player and the most naturally gifted was John McEnroe .

 

[navidson]

 

[davek]

Even if he wins the most slams he won't be the GOAT, he is a freak of nature that was able to remain pretty much injury free in his later years without the normal drop off. If you compare records when they were in their prime Nadal and Federer had the edge over him. He simply outlasted them.

That's a ridiculous assertion. There's 12 months between him and Nadal, and Djokovic has had his injuries and slumps along the way.

 

[Harryflashman]

The Williams brothers are finished, she'll get no competition from those lads.

More Language you’d definitely expect from someone who considers themselves of the left politically

 

[The binman chronicles]

That's a ridiculous assertion. There's 12 months between him and Nadal, and Djokovic has had his injuries and slumps along the way.

That's a ridiculous fact you mean.



Look at the number of wins for Djokovic coming after 29 which was previously thought about the time in which there is a massive drop off in performance.

Given like you have pointed out the age difference between him and Nadal is only a year why didn't the 'GOAT' in your opinion win more slams at what would have been his prime 25-28?

Overall Djokovic has had less injuries, married with a lack of younger players who were any good to challenge him. That one sustained spell where Djokovic was injured helped Federer and Nadal increase their stash late in their careers.

He was not as good as the others in around their prime years but he has maintained a level that the others could not. As I said, outlasted.

 

[PaddyJames]

I'd love to have seen peak Sampras and these 3 at their peaks in a Wimbledon tournament. He was a machine for a few years.

 

[Kev The Rat]

That's a ridiculous fact you mean.

View attachment 138890

Look at the number of wins for Djokovic coming after 29 which was previously thought about the time in which there is a massive drop off in performance.

Given like you have pointed out the age difference between him and Nadal is only a year why didn't the 'GOAT' in your opinion win more slams at what would have been his prime 25-28?

Overall Djokovic has had less injuries, married with a lack of younger players who were any good to challenge him. That one sustained spell where Djokovic was injured helped Federer and Nadal increase their stash late in their careers.

He was not as good as the others in around their prime years but he has maintained a level that the others could not. As I said, outlasted.

I do agree that Djokovic at his best, was not as good as either Federer or Nadal at their best.

 

[Billy Dean]

That's a ridiculous fact you mean.

View attachment 138890

Look at the number of wins for Djokovic coming after 29 which was previously thought about the time in which there is a massive drop off in performance.

Given like you have pointed out the age difference between him and Nadal is only a year why didn't the 'GOAT' in your opinion win more slams at what would have been his prime 25-28?

Overall Djokovic has had less injuries, married with a lack of younger players who were any good to challenge him. That one sustained spell where Djokovic was injured helped Federer and Nadal increase their stash late in their careers.

He was not as good as the others in around their prime years but he has maintained a level that the others could not. As I said, outlasted.

Federer is my personal GOAT. Absolute magic.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Federer is my personal GOAT. Absolute magic.

That's a good way of looking at it 'personal'. Tbh there are reasons for all 3 to be GOAT, even antivax lego head for hoovering up all the slams well into his 30s. Federer was no doubt the best to watch when he was on song. Nadal is mine just for at 22 beating 27 year old Fed at his favourite surface at Wimbledon in 08.

 

[davek]

That's a ridiculous fact you mean.

View attachment 138890

Look at the number of wins for Djokovic coming after 29 which was previously thought about the time in which there is a massive drop off in performance.

Given like you have pointed out the age difference between him and Nadal is only a year why didn't the 'GOAT' in your opinion win more slams at what would have been his prime 25-28?

Overall Djokovic has had less injuries, married with a lack of younger players who were any good to challenge him. That one sustained spell where Djokovic was injured helped Federer and Nadal increase their stash late in their careers.

He was not as good as the others in around their prime years but he has maintained a level that the others could not. As I said, outlasted.

All your chart underlines is that Djokovic has been more consistent in his career with less plateauing periods than Nadal and Federer. He doesn't dramatically "take off" after the others lose form.

Nadal