Hard court king Djokovic or federer?

[britbox]

@Haelfix nailed it (as usual - wish you'd post more, as you always can be trusted to bring a non-vitriolic, nuanced, and balanced perspective...and yeah, I am trying to butter you up ;-).

I posted this elsewhere at some point, but I think in terms of all-time order, for top three you have:

FAST HARDS: Federer, Sampras, Djokovic
SLOW HARDS: Djokovic, Federer, Nadal/Agassi/Lendl
CLAY: Nadal, Borg, Vilas/Lendl/Djokovic (Roger might be next)
GRASS: Federer, Sampras, Connors/Borg/McEnroe/Becker

(Waiting for someone to tell me I'm an idiot...3....2....1.....)

You might want to factor in Wilander and Kuerten on clay.

 

[Andy22]

Hmm...not so sure about that.

Novak: 1 Slam, 3 runner's up, 4 SF, 3 QF; 8 clay Masters, 13 titles overall; 188-47 (80%) clay record overall
Guga: 3 Slams, 2 QF; 4 clay Masters, 14 titles overall; 189-80 (70%) clay record overall

They played a similar numbers of clay matches, but Novak won 10% more of them despite playing alongside the King of Clay. Guga has 3 French Opens to Novak's 1, but I think we know the reason why.

Now maybe Guga has the edge on record overall, but I think Novak was the better clay player.

Not really at the at the end of day 3 FO titles to 1 is just to big a difference man. Regardless of who they played

 

[El Dude]

Vilas above Roger? Equals Lendl? Stop wasting time, you need to work a lot harder to avoid nonsense.

Are you aware, Ricardo, that Vilas won 48 clay titles, second most after Rafa? OK, Muster is third with 40, Orantes 31, Borg 30, then Lendl 28....Kuerten is all the way down the list with 14, Novak 13, Roger 11...

So don't do a Federberg and fling shit without looking deeper into the numbers...I know a lot of those 48 titles were small, but +20 over Lendl and more than 4x Roger isn't insignificant.

Even if we look at Roland Garros alone:

Vilas: 1 W, 3 Finals, 5 QF
Lendl: 3 W, 2 F, 2 QF
Federer: 1 W, 4 Finals, 2 SF, 4 QF

Vilas is weakest, but he isn't way behind Roger.

What about win%:

Vilas: 80%
Lendl: 81%
Federer: 76%

All things tolled, I'd give the edge to Lendl because of his 3 Wins at RG, but I'm going to have to give the edge to Vilas over Roger as far as career accomplishments are concerned. oger has a slight edge in RG, but Vilas the better win % and more than 4x the clay titles. This isn't to say that Vilas was a better player on clay than Roger was - that's a harder call to make, considering their careers were separated by 20+ years. But Vilas did accomplish more, and at the least I don't think it is silly to put the in the same grouping. So maybe I'd revise, and say: that Nadal, Borg, and Lendl are 1-3, and then Vilas/Wilander/Kuerten/Federer/Djokovic in some order.

 

[Federberg]

^So I fling shit and don't look into the numbers?

@Moxie I don't want to hear any more crap from you defending this guy... If you disagree with me, disagree with me which is just as it should be..

 

[El Dude]

Haha, relax Federberg. It is all in good fun.

 

[Federberg]

Haha, relax Federberg. It is all in good fun.

I'm perfectly relaxed, but please stop this mate, I respected your first comment more. Be a man and own what you say.

 

[El Dude]

Haha, ok - I'll be a man like you and fling shit!

 

[Moxie]

@Moxie I don't want to hear any more crap from you defending this guy... If you disagree with me, disagree with me which is just as it should be..

@Federberg I haven't even commented on this thread. It will have escaped your notice, but I only defend El Dude on threads he starts that you jump straight in to diss him on. He didn't start this thread. Pay better attention, and don't give me a hard time just because...

 

[Moxie]

OK you are right there I said it Now federer is better on hard courts.but djokovic career is not over so we see that happens in the next seasons

Welcome, Nadalgoat2! I'm going to caution you on presuming about people's resumes v. what is actually true, or makes a reasonable projection. You're a Nadal fan, like me. Some fans objected to the fact that Nadal beat Novak at the USO in 2013, based on the notion that he had a better HC resume, saying that it's a match that Nadal "shouldn't" have won, on paper. (Even though he did have a better HC resume that year.) By the same token, I think it's wrong to project Djokovic forward as to his HC prowess, over his actual accomplishments, v. Roger. So far, it is what it is, and, while it's close, Roger leads and I don't think you get to project what will happen in the future and call it a done deal. You may be right in the end, but that's not where it stands, now. And, let's face it, Djokovic is a bit of an unknown at the moment. And Federer doesn't seem done.

 

[isabelle]

Nole seems to be a little be better but both players are very close

 

[DarthFed]

The Fed haters are saying it's close for some reason. Hmmm. Extra 3 majors isn't really close. Roger is clearly the greatest on hard courts and grass. If you break down the hard courts then yes Nole is the best on slow hards and Fed the best on fast hards but Roger has been better overall.

 

[Ricardo]

Are you aware, Ricardo, that Vilas won 48 clay titles, second most after Rafa? OK, Muster is third with 40, Orantes 31, Borg 30, then Lendl 28....Kuerten is all the way down the list with 14, Novak 13, Roger 11...

So don't do a Federberg and fling shit without looking deeper into the numbers...I know a lot of those 48 titles were small, but +20 over Lendl and more than 4x Roger isn't insignificant.

Even if we look at Roland Garros alone:

Vilas: 1 W, 3 Finals, 5 QF
Lendl: 3 W, 2 F, 2 QF
Federer: 1 W, 4 Finals, 2 SF, 4 QF

Vilas is weakest, but he isn't way behind Roger.

What about win%:

Vilas: 80%
Lendl: 81%
Federer: 76%

All things tolled, I'd give the edge to Lendl because of his 3 Wins at RG, but I'm going to have to give the edge to Vilas over Roger as far as career accomplishments are concerned. oger has a slight edge in RG, but Vilas the better win % and more than 4x the clay titles. This isn't to say that Vilas was a better player on clay than Roger was - that's a harder call to make, considering their careers were separated by 20+ years. But Vilas did accomplish more, and at the least I don't think it is silly to put the in the same grouping. So maybe I'd revise, and say: that Nadal, Borg, and Lendl are 1-3, and then Vilas/Wilander/Kuerten/Federer/Djokovic in some order.

Stupid post as usual, I suppose you are just thick and shallow. Tell us where he won those so called clay titles? Would majority of those events be some small draw where top players didn’t bother to go? Only you are stupid enough to say number of titles is a factor here.....geez 48 titles even Borg didn’t come close. Real greats wouldn’t stoop so low as to play so many events where the other top players don’t go. Look at the Borgs, Lendls, federers and Djokers, they go and play where it matters.

Tell you what, a reasonably good player might end up with several small titles but chance Is he wouldn’t even sniff a big one.....it’s just that many times more difficult. You spend so much time doing numbers but still don’t know a thing about the game ...

 

[Moxie]

Stupid post as usual, I suppose you are just thick and shallow. Tell us where he won those so called clay titles? Would majority of those events be some small draw where top players didn’t bother to go? Only you are stupid enough to say number of titles is a factor here.....geez 48 titles even Borg didn’t come close. Real greats wouldn’t stoop so low as to play so many events where the other top players don’t go. Look at the Borgs, Lendls, federers and Djokers, they go and play where it matters.

Tell you what, a reasonably good player might end up with several small titles but chance Is he wouldn’t even sniff a big one.....it’s just that many times more difficult. You spend so much time doing numbers but still don’t know a thing about the game ...

This is where comparing even players in the Open Era is difficult. There was the time before they fixed the Master Series, and player played random and different tournaments. Don't kid yourself about Borg, in that group. He played a lot of weird tournaments. And Vilas won a lot on clay because there were a lot more tournaments played on clay, then. It wasn't that hard for him to prefer them. And it was easier for him to avoid Borg and others, because they weren't required to play the same tournaments. It's wasn't that structured. Consider this: Borg and McEnroe only played each other 14 times. Compare that to Federer-Djokovic (45), Federer-Nadal (38.) The requirements have completely changed.

 

[monfed]

Fed is the HC GOAT.

 

[Andy22]

Fed is the HC GOAT.

For now but will stay that way if Djokovic gets on a roll.

 

[monfed]

For now but will stay that way if Djokovic gets on a roll.

If fakervic and fraud are tied at 11 HC slams and faker's spread is 8 AOs and 3 USOs and fraud's spread is 6 AO 5 USO, which will you select?

 

[Andy22]

If fakervic and fraud are tied at 11 HC slams and faker's spread is 8 AOs and 3 USOs and fraud's spread is 6 AO 5 USO, which will you select?

Federer of course, but next years AO could change things.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

If fakervic and fraud are tied at 11 HC slams and faker's spread is 8 AOs and 3 USOs and fraud's spread is 6 AO 5 USO, which will you select?

Actually, going forward, Novak is more likely to succeed at USO than at AO as Orange is the new Black.

 

[Moxie]

If fakervic and fraud are tied at 11 HC slams and faker's spread is 8 AOs and 3 USOs and fraud's spread is 6 AO 5 USO, which will you select?

Federer is now "fraud" to you?

 

[monfed]

Federer is now "fraud" to you?

I'm sick and tired of Fraud blowing clear and easy opportunities. GOATs dont do that.

Federer you say? No, 'fed up' is more like it.