Who's the greatest men's tennis player of all-time?

So who is it?

  • Total voters
    196
  • Poll closed .
Oh and one more thing.



bye-blow-kiss.gif
 
Sweater of AV said:
I have bad news for you dumbass. I agree it's not hard math to do, so why don't you do it.

Nadal won 14/16 on clay, 9/20 on hard, and 1/4 on grass. You want four on clay, eight on hard, and four on grass? Well, here you go.

4*(14/16) + 8*(9/20) + 4*(1/4) = 3.5 + 3.6 + 1 = 8.1.

Nadal wins 8.1 out of the 16. Keep in mind that's a gross misrepresentation considering grass is only one month of the season.

Nadal > Federer.

Enjoy.

<36>
Click to expand...


Can't resist the insults eh?

The math you are doing isn't fully the point, but actually is indicative of something..

The point is in grand slams, they met a disproportionate of times on clay. 6 out of 14. Mathematically fair would be 3.5 times, not 6. You will also notice their head to heads as a whole are disproportionately played on clay as compared to how often players play on clay as a whole.

It's not that Federer was nowhere to be found to have a proportionate amount of matches on grass and hard courts, it was Nadal who was MIA. Also why Federer was number one in the world for so much longer than Nadal.

Weeks as no. 1: Novax #1 and counting, Federer #2, and Nadal a distant distant 6.
 
Could be either Djokovic or Nadal. I think regardless of who gets the record it's going to be close. Djokovic might be Affirmed and Nadal might be Alydar here where ones considered better but it's acknowledged how close they were and they are kind of talked about as a pair.

In Nadals defense against the people who say hes too one dimensional he's won more non French majors than Sampras won non Wimbledon majors. There used to be clay players who won the French Open who had no chance at any other major. And while Nadal wasn't nearly as good on the other surfaces he was capable of beating anyone. He also played a really intense style. I remember my teacher who was a big tennis fan telling me he expected Nadal to start slowing down by 2010.

I think Federer is a clear distant third(or fourth I might have Borg higher). Thing is of the three he's the only one who was considered the clear best for years so I think people have a bias towards him. There was a time Federer in his late 20s would have been considered old and Djokovic and Nadals success against him(when they were the best 3) would have had an asterisk but Nadal and Djokovics longevity really changed that in my opinion.

Also I haven't watched tennis in years but there are only a few Grass tournaments. Besides Wimbledon and the tuneups I don't think there's other grass tournaments the best play in. Wimbledon might be the most prestigious major but grass is the least prestigious surface because most tournaments aren't on it.
 
ferrisjso said:
Could be either Djokovic or Nadal. I think regardless of who gets the record it's going to be close. Djokovic might be Affirmed and Nadal might be Alydar here where ones considered better but it's acknowledged how close they were and they are kind of talked about as a pair.

In Nadals defense against the people who say hes too one dimensional he's won more non French majors than Sampras won non Wimbledon majors. There used to be clay players who won the French Open who had no chance at any other major. And while Nadal wasn't nearly as good on the other surfaces he was capable of beating anyone. He also played a really intense style. I remember my teacher who was a big tennis fan telling me he expected Nadal to start slowing down by 2010.

I think Federer is a clear distant third(or fourth I might have Borg higher). Thing is of the three he's the only one who was considered the clear best for years so I think people have a bias towards him. There was a time Federer in his late 20s would have been considered old and Djokovic and Nadals success against him(when they were the best 3) would have had an asterisk but Nadal and Djokovics longevity really changed that in my opinion.

Also I haven't watched tennis in years but there are only a few Grass tournaments. Besides Wimbledon and the tuneups I don't think there's other grass tournaments the best play in. Wimbledon might be the most prestigious major but grass is the least prestigious surface because most tournaments aren't on it.
Click to expand...

Grass is hard to maintain, but it's behavior is very hard-court-ish. There isn't really much of guys good on grass who aren't good on hardcourts or grass court specialists.

Clay basically benefits people that are fast. Like Michael fricken Chang who suck on hardcourts and grass.

Anyhow, there's no real conceivable argument for Nadal over Novax at this point. Majors may be more/less a wash, but titles in other tournaments - Masters, and week number one is a major bridge too far to credibly have Nadal over Djokovic. It's 374 (and counting) to 209 for Christ's sake. Nadal would have to have a large advantage in other metrics like majors to make up for that and he certainly does not.

Tsipitas said it right the other day, Novax is the greatest to pick up a racket for sure.
 
Argument is officially over now. Djokovic with 23 Slams. Back to #1 in the World again just to extend his lead at time spent at #1 to an even more ridiculous number (77 more weeks than #2 Federer and 178 more than Nadal lol). Now #3 in singles titles all time. And the odds on favorite to win his 5th Wimbledon in a row. If not for COVID probably has another 2 GS.
 
It's done.

Djokovic
Nadal
Federer

Amazing what Novak has done. Huge respect to all three.
 
Sweater of AV said:
It's done.

Djokovic
Nadal
Federer

Amazing what Novak has done. Huge respect to all three.
Click to expand...
Novak would probably have 25 Grand Slams if not for the stupid Vaccine Mandates Deported from Australia 2022 and not allowed to enter the US open that year either. He's going to be the Wimbledon Favorite this year and only Another Stupid Vaccine Ban would prevent him from the Calendar year Slam.

Roger and Nadal are worthy but Novak has outlast them both and beat them enough times as well
 
heavyarms21 said:
Novak would probably have 25 Grand Slams if not for the stupid Vaccine Mandates Deported from Australia 2022 and not allowed to enter the US open that year either. He's going to be the Wimbledon Favorite this year and only Another Stupid Vaccine Ban would prevent him from the Calendar year Slam.

Roger and Nadal are worthy but Novak has outlast them both and beat them enough times as well
Click to expand...

You're trying to argue with someone who has Novak at #1. Also, I don't deal in hypotheticals. I've never been a big fan of Novak and the vaccine stuff was unfortunate, regardless of what your stance on it is. Thankfully, he put an end to the debate.
 
Sweater of AV said:
You're trying to argue with someone who has Novak at #1. Also, I don't deal in hypotheticals. I've never been a big fan of Novak and the vaccine stuff was unfortunate, regardless of what your stance on it is. Thankfully, he put an end to the debate.
Click to expand...

No I'm just stating his greatness is even greater despite those stupid factors.
 
Unknown Pleasures said:
Grass is hard to maintain, but it's behavior is very hard-court-ish. There isn't really much of guys good on grass who aren't good on hardcourts or grass court specialists.

Clay basically benefits people that are fast. Like Michael fricken Chang who suck on hardcourts and grass.

Anyhow, there's no real conceivable argument for Nadal over Novax at this point. Majors may be more/less a wash, but titles in other tournaments - Masters, and week number one is a major bridge too far to credibly have Nadal over Djokovic. It's 374 (and counting) to 209 for Christ's sake. Nadal would have to have a large advantage in other metrics like majors to make up for that and he certainly does not.

Tsipitas said it right the other day, Novax is the greatest to pick up a racket for sure.
Click to expand...

Michael Chang who made finals at Us and Aus (as well as many QF+ runs)?

Michael Chang who won 20 odd high level hard court tournaments?

Yeah, he sucked on hard courts.
 
heavyarms21 said:
No I'm just stating his greatness is even greater despite those stupid factors.
Click to expand...

I'm just thankful I witnessed all three careers. A part of me wishes there was a debate on how to rank them but it's very clear.

Also, even though the thread was made a couple of years ago, the poll results are still hilarious. I bet if you made a new thread and poll, Federer would somehow still get the majority of votes.
 
Sweater of AV said:
I'm just thankful I witnessed all three careers. A part of me wishes there was a debate on how to rank them but it's very clear.

Also, even though the thread was made a couple of years ago, the poll results are still hilarious. I bet if you made a new thread and poll, Federer would somehow still get the majority of votes.
Click to expand...
He gets a sympathy vote
 
Unknown Pleasures said:
Can't resist the insults eh?

The math you are doing isn't fully the point, but actually is indicative of something..

The point is in grand slams, they met a disproportionate of times on clay. 6 out of 14. Mathematically fair would be 3.5 times, not 6. You will also notice their head to heads as a whole are disproportionately played on clay as compared to how often players play on clay as a whole.

It's not that Federer was nowhere to be found to have a proportionate amount of matches on grass and hard courts, it was Nadal who was MIA. Also why Federer was number one in the world for so much longer than Nadal.

Weeks as no. 1: Novax #1 and counting, Federer #2, and Nadal a distant distant 6.
Click to expand...

1. Most tennis players need several years to develop before they start winning. Federer entered the ATP in 1999 but didn't win his first Grand Slam till 2003 (5th year). He then dominated and went on a tear till 2009 (his prime). Nadal started in 2003 and he won his first Roland Garros in his 3rd year (2005 ~ way early compared to most professional tennis players) but was still developing his game. He developed his game drastically and by 2008 he become more more well rounded (winning the French and Wimbledon). 2009 was the last year Federer won 2 grand slams in a calendar year. What I am trying to say is that Federer dominated in his prime without a true rival. They shared 2 prime yerars and then once Djokovic reach his prime Federer was more less a distant 3rd behind those two year in and year out.

2. matchups? I posted this back in 2022 (June 10):

Nadal vs Federer (All matches: 40, Nadal, 24–16):
In Grand Slam matches:
  • Grand Slam matches: Nadal, 10–4
    • Australian Open: Nadal, 3–1
    • French Open: Nadal, 6–0
    • Wimbledon: Federer, 3–1
So yeah Nadal practically PWNs Federer in clay court. But in hard court it's barely in Federer's favor and in grand slams Nadal actually owns Federer (3-1) on hard court. They've actually never met in the US Open. Sure Federer beats Nadal 3-1 in Wimbledon but Nadal actually won the Wimbledon (against Federer!). It doesn't matter how disproportionately they've played on clay court. Nadal has done excellently on the other surfaces when it comes to H2H vs Federer. Nadal has beaten Federer on his favorite surface (grass) in a Grand Slam (final no less). Federer has NEVER beaten Nadal on his favorite surface in a Grand Slam.. Not even close...
 
Last edited:
I voted for Becker, but that was a couple years ago. I might have Novak now
 
Djokovic or Bjorn Borg. Bjorn Borg still is ahead in a lot of key metrics. Lost only 1 GS SF. That's pretty nuts. Pre Open era there's that guy who survived the Titanic and almost got his legs cut off. That's pretty nuts too.

But yeah among the big 3 it's Djokovic. Signed sealed and delivered. There's a possibility Nadal could win the French next year but Djokovic can still conceivably reach 30 GSs. It's over. Nadal needed to win this French Open and pray Djokovic suddenly got washed. That didn't happen.
 
I was holding off, and calling the Big 3 all equals, but I think this seals it. Most slams, with lowest number in any individual slam being 3, and owns the heads-up against the other two.

In Nadal’s defense, he probably had the toughest strength of schedule in tennis history, and has still been able to produce 22 slams(an absurd number, in and of itself). Hope he can go out with a win at FO next year, and ride off into the sunset as the best ever on clay, by a mile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,238,673
Messages
55,579,084
Members
174,829
Latest member
dbdbxb

Share this page

Back
Top