Time to crown Novak the GOAT?

[tented]

Watching and playing tennis for almost five decades, the equipment, the style of play, the training regimens of the players - so many things have changed. Greatest of their era (in my opinion), is the only way to spell Gote. Is this one of the greatest eras in tennis? It would be hard to argue otherwise, but there are still chapters to be written before it closes out.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Watching and playing tennis for almost five decades, the equipment, the style of play, the training regimens of the players - so many things have changed. Greatest of their era (in my opinion), is the only way to spell Gote. Is this one of the greatest eras in tennis? It would be hard to argue otherwise, but there are still chapters to be written before it closes out.

OK, but do you agree that Fedalovic belong to the same era and so one cannot escape the GOAT argument even by deflecting to GOTE.

 

[britbox]

Djokovic is the GOAT. Statistically. Federer is the GOAT stylistically. Not sure where Rafa fits in...Clay GOAT, perhaps.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Djokovic is the GOAT. Statistically. Federer is the GOAT stylistically. Not sure where Rafa fits in...Clay GOAT, perhaps.

Right on money on the first two items.

I am willing to give even a better recognition to Rafa. Apart from being Clay Goat, I anoint him as the single surface GOAT as his performance on that surface is better than any other player's performance on any single surface [ say Fed on Grass or Novak on AO Turf]. But, Rafa does not come anywhere near general purpose GOAT from any aspect (like you mentioned stat, style etc).

 

[nehmeth]

OK, but do you agree that Fedalovic belong to the same era and so one cannot escape the GOAT argument even by deflecting to GOTE.

Who is deflecting GSM? I’m not. I just don’t think GOAT is the correct term. Greatest of ALL time, means into the future as well. Greatest that has played to this point in time (which is what you’re really saying)?? I don’t know what that spells. GOTE is something I’ve proposed for over 20+ years. Djoker and Rafa were barely in Fed’s prime years, so I’m not really a proponent of the Fedalovic era. Djodal? Nadovic? Yes.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Who is deflecting GSM? I’m not. I don’t think GOAT is the correct term. Greatest of ALL time, means into the future as well. Greatest that has played to this point in time (which is what you’re really saying). I don’t know what that spells. GOTE is something I’ve proposed for over 20+ years. Djoker and Rafa were barely in Fed’s prime years, so I’m not really a proponent of the Fedalovic era. Djodal? Nadovic? Yes.

I like this. Fed is from a different era being 5+ years older than Nadovic. As such Fed is a GOTE.

In the Nadovic era clearly Novak is the GOTE (the styles not too much different, very clear statistical difference).

So, the conclusion is that Fed and Novak are GOTEs whereas Rafa is NOT a GOTE.

If someone is not a GOTE, then they clearly cannot be a GOAT, even if the concept is meaningful.

So, one thing we can clearly conclude is that Ralph is NOT a GOAT by any means.

 

[nehmeth]

I like this. Fed is from a different era being 5+ years older than Nadovic. As such Fed is a GOTE.

In the Nadovic era clearly Novak is the GOTE (the styles not too much different, very clear statistical difference).

So, the conclusion is that Fed and Novak are GOTEs whereas Rafa is NOT a GOTE.

If someone is not a GOTE, then they clearly cannot be a GOAT, even if the concept is meaningful.

So, one thing we can clearly conclude is that Ralph is NOT a GOAT by any means.

You made my day with this post. Your logic is perfect. Well done GSM.

 

[Moxie]

Djokovic is the GOAT. Statistically. Federer is the GOAT stylistically. Not sure where Rafa fits in...Clay GOAT, perhaps.

Clay GOAT, perhaps? That seems a bit bitter. Also, you seem to be considering the race over. I can see why it might seem that way for a Federer fan, and why you want to invent a new category: "Stylistic GOAT." But Rafa and Novak are not finished winning Majors, IMO, so we can yet wait on a pronouncement, as @nehmeth said above.

 

[Moxie]

Djoker and Rafa were barely in Fed’s prime years, so I’m not really a proponent of the Fedalovic era. Djodal? Nadovic? Yes.

I'm rather surprised at this from you. Are you suggesting that Roger was already a fading prom queen when Nadal was coming up, playing him rather a lot and beating him rather a lot, from say, 05-08 or so? Because that's a long throw to still winning a Major in 2018. I'll give you that Djokovic, after an early Major win, did get rather a later start and didn't much fuss Roger until you could call him past-prime. But you seem to have written off the Federer-Nadal rivalry that was and is considered one of the greatest in tennis and in sport. I think you're rewriting history. And back then, you were a Nadal fan. I'm a little confused by this.

 

[nehmeth]

Past prime does not equal fading prom queen. Many of the best players have won majors past their prime. Roger’s peak was from 2004-2007. A nascent Nadal was hitting his prime as Roger’s was ending. After 2009, the year end #1 was either Nadal or Djokovic, with Murray making a blip in 16. You should not confuse longevity with prime years. Fedalovic has longevity in the sport, that does not mean they were in their prime at the same time.

 

[Moxie]

Past prime does not equal fading prom queen. Many of the best players have won majors past their prime. Roger’s peak was from 2004-2007. A nascent Nadal was hitting his prime as Roger’s was ending. After 2009, the year end #1 was either Nadal or Djokovic, with Murray making a blip in 16. You should not confuse longevity with prime years. Fedalovic has longevity in the sport, that does not mean they were in their prime at the same time.

Peak and Prime are not the same things, though, are they? That's why you don't like my phrase "fading prom queen." Because you mean "peak," not "prime." Do you seriously believe, that, while Roger's "peak" may have been over in 2007, that he wasn't still in prime tennis years, at 26 and for a couple of continuing years? He won 2 Majors at 27. It's a sloping down, not a precipitous drop. And even at "peak," Rafa won 3 Majors against him, and actually Djokovic won one. While you can say their "peaks" didn't all coincide, I think more of their "prime" years over-lapped than you are giving credence to. Certainly Nadal with Federer.

 

[tented]

Federer is the GOAT stylistically.

I beg to differ:

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Grand Slams: Roger 20, Rafa 20, Novak 19
Weeks at #1: Novak 323, Roger 310, Rafa 209
Titles: Roger 103, Rafa 88, Novak 84
Year-end #1s: Novak 6, Roger 5, Rafa 5
Tour Finals: Roger 6, Novak 5, Rafa 0
Masters: Rafa 36, Novak 36, Roger 28
Records against the other two: Novak 57-51, Rafa 52-46, Roger 39-51

Olympics: Rafa gold, Roger silver, Novak bronze

In the Fedalovic era the Olympics is huge and has been compared by them to the slams. Stop ignoring it although I'm sure if Novak wins it this year his fans will all of a sudden start using it in their stats.

 

[Moxie]

Olympics: Rafa gold, Roger silver, Novak bronze

In the Fedalovic era the Olympics is huge and has been compared by them to the slams. Stop ignoring it although I'm sure if Novak wins it this year his fans will all of a sudden start using it in their stats.

Pay attention. Novak no longer needs the bonus points, I'm sure he feels. I'll be curious to see if he goes. But at least one Federer fan is pushing for Roger to go to Tokyo. Maybe in the absence of Majors left to win, they're looking for the bonus points for Roger.

 

[Front242]

Olympics: Rafa gold, Roger silver, Novak bronze

In the Fedalovic era the Olympics is huge and has been compared by them to the slams. Stop ignoring it although I'm sure if Novak wins it this year his fans will all of a sudden start using it in their stats.

No matter how many times people tell you the claim in the first line of your post is bs you still keep posting it. For the last time, the above is BS. No one compared it to the slams except you.

 

[Front242]

Give Federer 21 slams or 20 + a shiny Olympic gold medal or same for Nadal. Pretty sure you'd agree they'd both prefer 21 slams! Case closed.

 

[El Dude]

No matter how many times people tell you the claim in the first line of your post is bs you still keep posting it. For the last time, the above is BS. No one compared it to the slams except you.

Wait, you're saying that Rosset and Massu don't deserve to be called Slam winners?! how dare you.

Notice that a certain poster never talks about the WTF.

 

[El Dude]

Give Federer 21 slams or 20 + a shiny Olympic gold medal or same for Nadal. Pretty sure you'd agree they'd both prefer 21 slams! Case closed.

I wonder if Rafa would prefer a WTF at this point over #21. I bet, at the least, he'd hesitate and have to think about it.

 

[Fiero425]

I wonder if Rafa would prefer a WTF at this point over #21. I bet, at the least, he'd hesitate and have to think about it.

Years down the line, that lit'l nugget will come out in Rafa's autobiography, "I'd give up a couple or 3 FO's to have an extra AO and 2 YEC's!"

 

[Front242]

I wonder if Rafa would prefer a WTF at this point over #21. I bet, at the least, he'd hesitate and have to think about it.

You never know what might happen in sports, eg Djokovic might get run over by a steamroller tomorrow or an anvil might fall on his head Tom and Jerry style so 21 slams would make Nadal 2 clear of Djokovic and 1 ahead of Federer. All jokes aside though, I'd say if they all were at 20 (let's face it, they more than likely will be pretty soon) it'd definitely warrant more thought.