The weak era argument for Djokovic doesn't make sense. He came along when Federer was dropping only a handful of matches every year to Nadal on clay. Then he faced absolute prime Nadal for most of his career since they're only a year apart. Look at the season Nadal would have had in 2011 if he didn't lose those 6 finals to Djokovic. Indian Wells. Miami. Madrid. Rome. Wimbledon. US Open.

Federer turned back the clock in 2015 under Edberg and half his losses were to Djokovic in finals. Indian Wells. Rome. Wimbledon. US Open. ATP Finals. Would have been the clear No. 1 if he'd closed the deal.

Novak since 2011 has dominated the other two.How could you anoint Nadal "GOAT" when he hasn't beaten Djokovic off clay in 10 years?That's embarrassing. Even Federer in his twilight years after 2015 peeled off 6-1 vs. Nadal with his only loss coming at the French. Would have been 7-1 if Nadal didn't duck him at Indian Wells in 2019.

Djokovic is the best player of the last 12 years. Federer is the most naturally gifted of the three making tennis look easy but there's no one tougher than Novak and unlike the other two he's faced crowds that see him as the third wheel. Watch that Wimbledon 2019 final again. Won every tiebreak. Guy is a warrior.

There is no doubt Fed is the most graceful player ever. I think that was his biggest problem though-he would never fight in the trenches & win ugly like Novak, Nadal & Murray that is why he got left behind them in the 2010's. I can remember when he lost to Berdych at Wimbledon & you could see he had just given up trying to come back.

Good point. Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray had no issue with winning ugly when required.

Nadal was content moonballing Federer's backhand into producing errors.

In 2017 Federer finally showed up with a backhand that rendered that tactic useless and Nadal had no idea what to do after 13 years of employing the same boring tactic. Roger won 6 of their last 7 matches. If only he made the switch to a larger frame earlier.

Id agree. To add on to that, I just rewatched a bit of highlights from that Berdych match. What stood out to me is that fed choked at the worst possible moments, especially during that last game. This was his another big problem of this. That’s the difference between him and Djokovic. I genuinely can’t remember the last time when Djokovic would make a crucial error that cost him the set/match.

Matter of fact, it’s the opposite with Djokovic. The more crucial the point/game/situation is, the better he plays. I’ve noticed a similar pattern where when it comes to masters events, he might lose and not play his best, but when it comes to the main stage, he goes into full robot mode.

Lol delusional Federer fan. As bad as the Nadal stans.

There is literally no objective argument to be made for Federer/Nadal being better than Novak. He dominates in every area, what everyone thought was the Nadal/Federer era ended up being the Djokovic era. His career is one of the all time greats in ANY sport. He might be the GOAT sportsman when you think about how he went up against the #2 and #3 all time tennis greats and came out on top OVER BOTH without the support the other 2 had. Mentally, he can't be broken and has been tested more than the other 2.

Federer is 5 years older than Djoko and they're 27-23 against each other. Do you really think if they were the same age Djoko would still be 27-23 ahead?

But at the beginning of Djoko's career, Fed being older was an advantage because he was in his prime and Djoko was not.

Of course we can argue whose peak was higher all day if we wanted but there is no denying Djoko gets GOAT status now (& I like him the least of the 3).

That's such a subjective argument anyways lol. Holds no basis in reality. Tennis isn't figure-skating.

This is a good point. I still remember those days when Djoko and Murray were the clear numbers 3 and 4 and Fed/Nadal were just clearly on top. We'll never know how it would've played out if they were the same age.

I always think GOAT debates are subjective and I personally feel Federer was the better player during his peak and he was also my favourite player, but if you want to look at it purely from a statistical merits based argument I don't really think you can argue against Djoko.

It's one of those stats that fanboys use to make their hero look better (I'm not saying that's what you're doing here btw, from what I've seen you're a fairly objective person) but when you take a closer look that 27-23 is pretty misleading if you count what matters - the biggest tournaments.

In finals, Djokovic is 13-6. At the grand slams, they've met 17 times altogether and Novak leads 11-6. Pretty conclusive who's better.

You can mention the age but from 2010 onwards Novak's dominance starts to become clear and Federer was still pretty much dominating anyone who wasn't called Nadal but Novak, who still wasn't in his prime was now beating him in big games and he was only in his early twenties. By the time he beats Federer at Wimbledon it's pretty much a wrap and I don't think Federer ever beats him in a big game again. He's the only player to beat Federer at every major slam too btw.

The guy is just the GOAT. Federer and Nadal fans will try and spin it as much as they can but his dominance and the records he holds are so great it's kinda laughable anyone would try to argue against it.

Yeah, by the numbers, there is no argument. Djokovic is the GOAT. Period. The only argument for Fed is the eye test, that he was the best while watching him at his most dominant peak vs Novak's peak, but that is subjective (I don't really agree, either, so while Fed was my "favorite" of the three, Novak is clearly the GOAT IMO). The only argument for Nadal at this point is that clay is somehow more important that every other surface, which is dumb. He's clearly the best clay court specialist in tennis history, but he'll have to settle for being 3rd best overall of all-time.

Nah fam, Fed is still the GOAT. Like others said, Fed is 6 years older than Nole. We even saw once Fed exited his prime in the early 2010s that he was more than capable of beating peak Djokovic in 2011 and 2015. In fact, I believe it wasn't until like 2016 when Nole finally gained the edge in the H2H. Fed, in his peak/prime, was undoubtedly better on grass and fast hardcourt. Arguably clay too as judged from the French Open in 2011. It's why Fed STILL has the record for most titles at both Wimbledon and the USO.

Another reason Nole gained the edge in all these stats over the last few years is because we've been in the WEAKEST era of all time. He literally won slams beating Ruud, Kyrgios, and Berretini. Lmao

Also, from a pure stroke perspective, Fed has a superior:
-Forehand
-Serve
-Volley
-Dropshot
-Slice
-Overhead

While Nole literally only has his backhand. Fed is better for sure

You won't win 23 slams with only a backhand. How many has Gasquet won?

2011 his backhand, return of serve, movement, and defense was elite. He's since turned his forehand and serve into reliable weapons under Ivanisevic.

No he's never going to make tennis look as effortless as Federer but he's kept his body in similar shape at the same age and mentally he stands alone.

Tuga, you'll enjoy this. Smug little Aussie couldn't wipe the smile off his face at Novak being denied entry. A year later Novak humiliated him. "Because I wanted to." Popped up in recommended videos. Great to revisit this wonderful moment in Australian tennis.

Fed won slams against Philippoussis, Baghdatis, Soderling, Gonzalez.

2003-2007 (when Fed won 12 of his slams) was weaker than today IMO.

Having a more diverse offensive arsenal doesn't make anyone better if their opponent can defend and counter all those shots with a more simple game.

What a bunch of nonsense lmao.

Djokovic is 4-1 in Grand Slam finals vs. Federer. Federer's only win came in 2007 when Djokovic was 20 years old and playing in his literal first GS Final ever.

Djokovic beat him three times in 2014/2015 when Federer was still only 33 and in his prime. So if Federer allegedly had a superior forehand, serve, volley, etc, etc then why is his record against him ****?

The point about Djokovic beating easy opponents recently is comical. You should take a look at who some of Federer's Grand Slam wins came against:

Baghdatis - 4 career titles, highest ranking of #8
Philippoussis - 11 career titles, highest ranking of #8
Fernando Gonzalez - 11 career titles, highest ranking of #5

You can go on with Robin Soderling as well. Or 35 year old Agassi lmao.

The majority of Federer's wins came from 2003 to 2007 when his main competition was Andy Roddick and a 20 year old Nadal. He was still only 2-2 against 20 year old Nadal.

There is literally zero case for Federer anymore. Just stop.

There's a pretty fair argument to make that Federer is the more technically gifted and talented player. I think even a lot of Djoko fans could agree with that. Tennis however, requires a lot more aspects to make a successful player. Djokovic is obvious physically stronger and has better endurance. On top of that I think he might be the mentally strongest player of all time.

I wonder how long he can stay on top. I wouldn't be surprised to see him win 3-4 more slams.

There's only one thing in GOAT debates that really bothers me, and that's people talking down on other candidates in the discussion. Obviously Nadal, Federer and Djokovic are all legends. As tennis fans we've really been spoiled the last 20 years.

djokovic leads federer 11-6 in slams.

fed had match points in 3 of those loses.

its the finest margins that separate them

except that this isnt a subjective argument. this is objectively based on numbers. novak has won the most grand slam titles, the most masters 1000 titles and he has had the most weeks spent at world no.1 out of any player ever.

i say this as a diehard federer guy, and federer was and always will be my favourite player of all time. i also say this as someone who has not once ever supported djokovic in any match he has ever played. ive always rooted for his opponents.

Yea I know. I agree with you, but I disagree when you say that Federer is the most elegant player of all time. That's a purely subjective argument.

Ohhh yeah of course thats subjective. I make that argument based entirely on my opinion, because he was my favourite player, and a ton of other federer fans would make the same argument.

The new times in cycling are getting closer and closer to peak 90s doping records. We’ve had 36 year Nadal
And Joker physically destroying the youngsters. Zero doubt they are being protected like Usain Bolt and Armstrong were.

Played a set against a former D3 tennis player and got wrecked. His forehands were bouncing above my chest at 90 mph. Insane spin and pace, couldn't do chit. Reminded me why I should NEVER take tennis seriously. Rec player for life.

D3 has a ridiculously large range of abilities. The top D3 guys are 5.0-5.5 by USTA NTRP standards (~12 UTR), but there are ex-D3 players who are NTRP 3.5, too (4-5 UTR range). I'm 4.0 rated (UTR 6.5), which means, like you, I have no prayer in hell against guys who are or were ranked D3 players, but there are plenty of guys who played D3 who I can beat pretty easily, too.

Don't think that's true. 7 matches per grand slam and there weren't even 10 Wimbledons/AUS opens he participated in during that timeframe. Unless with the "In Australia" they're somehow including a different tournament held in Australia lmao.

That's right, he added 8 wins at the ATP Cup and 5 in Adelaide.

Last time Novak lost at Wimbledon was in 2017, Australia 2018. Just GOAT things.

Cheeky of them to phrase it like that and include the non grand slam performances in Australia too. Still very impressive stuff. Do you think anyone even has a chance to challenge him this Wimbledon?

I think there's a handful of guys that can cause the upset but it's Novak's to lose for sure. Quite simply, if he's at his best no one is beating him no matter how good they play.

Casper plz

Tsitsipas Murray should be a nice one today.

This tourney has been an absolute chitshow though.