If Nole Matches, or even Surpasses Rog, but does not win the French...

[Luxilon Borg]

If Novak equals or even surpasses Roger on slam titles, but does not win the French, how will
this factor in to your calculation on historical standings.

Personally, for me, a Career Slam is the single most impressive achievement in a players career

To date, only SEVEN players have done this in history:

* Player won two career Grand Slams

Fred Perry (age 26) – 1935 French Open
Don Budge (23) – 1938 French Open
Rod Laver* (24) – 1962 US Open
Roy Emerson* (27) – 1964 Wimbledon
Andre Agassi (29) – 1999 French Open
Roger Federer (27) – 2009 French Open
Rafeal Nadal (24) – 2010 US Open

The fact that we had two players who both won Career Slams (Rog, Rafa) in the same three year span boggles my mind. It took 30 years for Agassi to do it after Laver.

There are a slew of great players who have not won one particular slam:

French Open:
Becker, Sampras, Edberg, Connors, McEnroe, etc

Wimbledon:
Rosewall, Vilas, Wilander, Lendl, Courier etc

US Open:
Borg, Courier

Australian Open:
McEnroe, Borg, Edberg, etc

 

[El Dude]

Hmm...its a tricky one. On one hand I don't put the same weight on the career Slam as you do, or at least we really need to look at the total context of a career, on the other we're talking about GOAT candidacy and it does seem to be an important part of a GOAT's resume.

That said, we really have to look at the total context. If Novak wins 17 Slams and piles up 35+ Masters, 6+ WTFs, 6+ year-end #1s, etc, but doesn't win the French Open, it will be hard to not give him the crown.

Every great players resume is different, and there's no one player that has it all - except for, perhaps, Rod Laver.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Hmm...its a tricky one. On one hand I don't put the same weight on the career Slam as you do, or at least we really need to look at the total context of a career, on the other we're talking about GOAT candidacy and it does seem to be an important part of a GOAT's resume.

That said, we really have to look at the total context. If Novak wins 17 Slams and piles up 35+ Masters, 6+ WTFs, 6+ year-end #1s, etc, but doesn't win the French Open, it will be hard to not give him the crown.

Every great players resume is different, and there's no one player that has it all - except for, perhaps, Rod Laver.

Yes, Laver won Grand Slam, and already accomplished a career slam in 1962, but was not allowed to compete again until 1968.

To put another spin on it, it can be said that Laver won the Grand Slam twice when three of the slams were played on the same surface.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Edberg should have had it too...I still have nightmares about that FO final...I wake up sweating and screaming " Damn you Chang!"

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Edberg should have had it too...I still have nightmares about that FO final...I wake up sweating and screaming " Damn you Chang!"

+1.....

And how do u think Mac feels?

Up twp sets and 3-0...

 

[El Dude]

Yes, Laver won Grand Slam, and already accomplished a career slam in 1962, but was not allowed to compete again until 1968.

To put another spin on it, it can be said that Laver won the Grand Slam twice when three of the slams were played on the same surface.

And don't forget that even though Laver didn't play in amateur Slams, he played in pro Slams - winning eight of them in four years, from 1964-67, including all three in 1967. The Pro Slams weren't as deep as Open Era Slams, but the quality of players was greater than the amateur Slams. I kind of see them as equivalent to World Tour Finals today: you had the 16 top pro players playing four rounds.

 

[nehmeth]

Hmm...its a tricky one. On one hand I don't put the same weight on the career Slam as you do, or at least we really need to look at the total context of a career, on the other we're talking about GOAT candidacy and it does seem to be an important part of a GOAT's resume.

That said, we really have to look at the total context. If Novak wins 17 Slams and piles up 35+ Masters, 6+ WTFs, 6+ year-end #1s, etc, but doesn't win the French Open, it will be hard to not give him the crown.

Every great players resume is different, and there's no one player that has it all - except for, perhaps, Rod Laver.

Luxilon Borg is being a turd for making a fan even think about Nole not winning the French. :ras:



Djoker's had a stellar career on clay. In his early days, he had epic battles that he would lose to Nadal, but no one that I can remember played tougher against the Bull on clay. Then in 2011, he began to win, except when they'd meet at RG. Last year was against the Nadal shadow puppet, so even though it counts ...

If he never wins RG? I'd have to look at everything else and then decide. There is the fact that the only way Roger won the French was by not playing Nadal. Otherwise he'd be without a career GS as well.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Hmm...its a tricky one. On one hand I don't put the same weight on the career Slam as you do, or at least we really need to look at the total context of a career, on the other we're talking about GOAT candidacy and it does seem to be an important part of a GOAT's resume.

That said, we really have to look at the total context. If Novak wins 17 Slams and piles up 35+ Masters, 6+ WTFs, 6+ year-end #1s, etc, but doesn't win the French Open, it will be hard to not give him the crown.

Every great players resume is different, and there's no one player that has it all - except for, perhaps, Rod Laver.

Luxilon Borg is being a turd for making a fan even think about Nole not winning the French. :ras:



Djoker's had a stellar career on clay. In his early days, he had epic battles that he would lose to Nadal, but no one that I can remember played tougher against the Bull on clay. Then in 2011, he began to win, except when they'd meet at RG. Last year was against the Nadal shadow puppet, so even though it counts ...

If he never wins RG? I'd have to look at everything else and then decide. There is the fact that the only way Roger won the French was by not playing Nadal. Otherwise he'd be without a career GS as well.

I've been called worse!!:snicker

Yes, he has a stellar record on clay in two out of three, no doubt. I honestly think he had his very best opportunity TO DATE to win it last year. That is not to say the opportunity, given his frightening form right now, has not come again.

For the record. the SECOND best player of the past 12 years on clay is clearly Roger Federer.

 

[El Dude]

Luxilon Borg is being a turd for making a fan even think about Nole not winning the French. :ras:



Djoker's had a stellar career on clay. In his early days, he had epic battles that he would lose to Nadal, but no one that I can remember played tougher against the Bull on clay. Then in 2011, he began to win, except when they'd meet at RG. Last year was against the Nadal shadow puppet, so even though it counts ...

If he never wins RG? I'd have to look at everything else and then decide. There is the fact that the only way Roger won the French was by not playing Nadal. Otherwise he'd be without a career GS as well.

Haha, I hear you - I'd be very surprised if Novak doesn't win Roland Garros, probably this year.

As for you last paragraph there, we could also reverse it: If it hadn't been for Nadal--the best clay-courter in tennis history--Roger would have probably accomplished two or three Grand Slams. If you think about it, Rafa is the only thing between Roger being the undisputed GOAT with 20+ Slams and "merely" one of the strongest GOAT candidates.

 

[nehmeth]

Thank you for reminding me of one of the reasons I really liked Nadal!

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Luxilon Borg is being a turd for making a fan even think about Nole not winning the French. :ras:



Djoker's had a stellar career on clay. In his early days, he had epic battles that he would lose to Nadal, but no one that I can remember played tougher against the Bull on clay. Then in 2011, he began to win, except when they'd meet at RG. Last year was against the Nadal shadow puppet, so even though it counts ...

If he never wins RG? I'd have to look at everything else and then decide. There is the fact that the only way Roger won the French was by not playing Nadal. Otherwise he'd be without a career GS as well.

Haha, I hear you - I'd be very surprised if Novak doesn't win Roland Garros, probably this year.

As for you last paragraph there, we could also reverse it: If it hadn't been for Nadal--the best clay-courter in tennis history--Roger would have probably accomplished two or three Grand Slams. If you think about it, Rafa is the only thing between Roger being the undisputed GOAT with 20+ Slams and "merely" one of the strongest GOAT candidates.

if not for Nadal, Roger could have, and WOULD have equaled Borg's 6 RG titles.

 

[nehmeth]

Could have, would have.... that is never guaranteed and you know that. :nono

I would see him winning three, maybe four...

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Could have, would have.... that is never guaranteed and you know that. :nono

I would see him winning three, maybe four...

As it stands, he has one more than Nole. :snicker

 

[nehmeth]

Could have, would have.... that is never guaranteed and you know that. :nono

I would see him winning three, maybe four...

As it stands, he has one more than Nole. :snicker

:dodgy: Yes sir, that is correct.

(I just stepped right into that one, didn't I... damn it.)

 

[El Dude]

As of now. Don't worry, nehmeth, Novak will win at least one - although probably no more than two.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Could have, would have.... that is never guaranteed and you know that. :nono

I would see him winning three, maybe four...

As it stands, he has one more than Nole. :snicker

:dodgy: Yes sir, that is correct.

(I just stepped right into that one, didn't I... damn it.)

:shy::blush::blush:

 

[Busted]

Unless Nole has something in his eye again - it's gonna be kinda hard for him to lose the French unless someone else pulls the upset the way Stan did last year. But, let's say he doesn't win it - some people considered Sampras the GOAT but he didn't win the French either. But...I'm going to say no because Roger holds so many other records that Nole's never going to be able to surpass. The way Roger, Sampas, Laver (with his 2 Grand Slams), Nadal and Djokovic are starting to get bunched together, at some point they're going to have to stop measuring GOAT by Slam wins and look at the entire career. If Nole's still playing at Roger's level when he's 34 and racking up great career stats - THEN that's an entirely different discussion.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Unless Nole has something in his eye again - it's gonna be kinda hard for him to lose the French unless someone else pulls the upset the way Stan did last year. But, let's say he doesn't win it - some people considered Sampras the GOAT but he didn't win the French either. But...I'm going to say no because Roger holds so many other records that Nole's never going to be able to surpass. The way Roger, Sampas, Laver (with his 2 Grand Slams), Nadal and Djokovic are starting to get bunched together, at some point they're going to have to stop measuring GOAT by Slam wins and look at the entire career. If Nole's still playing at Roger's level when he's 34 and racking up great career stats - THEN that's an entirely different discussion.

Well written post.

I will only add that we said he could not possibly lose at the French in 2011, 2013, and again last year...so.....

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Unless Nole has something in his eye again - it's gonna be kinda hard for him to lose the French unless someone else pulls the upset the way Stan did last year. But, let's say he doesn't win it - some people considered Sampras the GOAT but he didn't win the French either. But...I'm going to say no because Roger holds so many other records that Nole's never going to be able to surpass. The way Roger, Sampas, Laver (with his 2 Grand Slams), Nadal and Djokovic are starting to get bunched together, at some point they're going to have to stop measuring GOAT by Slam wins and look at the entire career. If Nole's still playing at Roger's level when he's 34 and racking up great career stats - THEN that's an entirely different discussion.

That was because at that time no one achieved Carrer Grand Slam since Laver (not even talking about calendar here), until Agassi did it later. If one or two players have achieved career grand slam
around that time, Pete probably would not have been considered GOAT even at that time.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Unless Nole has something in his eye again - it's gonna be kinda hard for him to lose the French unless someone else pulls the upset the way Stan did last year. But, let's say he doesn't win it - some people considered Sampras the GOAT but he didn't win the French either. But...I'm going to say no because Roger holds so many other records that Nole's never going to be able to surpass. The way Roger, Sampas, Laver (with his 2 Grand Slams), Nadal and Djokovic are starting to get bunched together, at some point they're going to have to stop measuring GOAT by Slam wins and look at the entire career. If Nole's still playing at Roger's level when he's 34 and racking up great career stats - THEN that's an entirely different discussion.

That was because at that time no one achieved Carrer Grand Slam since Laver (not even talking about calendar here), until Agassi did it later. If one or two players have achieved career grand slam
around that time, Pete probably would not have been considered GOAT even at that time.

Good point.