After winning FO this year Djokovic would be the GOAT

First topic message reminder :

Agree?

JuliusHMarx wrote:The point I was tryig to make with my link is that winning a large % of return games does not automatically equate to being the best returner of serve.
Otherwise the stats in that link would show that Rafa is a better returner of serve than Djoko, which I don't believe is the case.

Judging a return of serve thus becomes somewhat more subjective. In the past it has generally been recognised that Connors and Agassi have had the best returns of serve. Djoko (pre-2011) and Hewitt are others that spring to mind as nearing that level. Djoko 2011 onwards is more or less up there with Connors and Agassi, and I'm sure will be aiming to stay at that level.

Federer overall is just a notch down from that and is particulary good, possibly as good as the others, at negating the big servers.

Can't dispute anyting in that post except that you should not underestimate the quality of the first return that comes back in relation to who wins the point. On the AtP tour despite all the grumblings about slow conditions, the vast majority of the time the guy who gets the advantage on the first serve or the first return usually wins the point. Here is another way to look at it if you don't hit back a good return the other guy will most likely run around forehand and command the point from there. So who wins returns games is not exactly down to how good that first return is struck but there is a very strong correlation. With the caveat that ofcourse guys who play half their season on clay will have better return numbers than the top guys who play at all the big tournaments regardless of surface.

spuranik wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:spuranik I am not saying Federer is not a great returner because he is but he simply is not THE best. Probably in the world's top five but not THE best as some have claimed.

fair enough Craig. I won't claim he is the best. But he does produce a good number of breaking opportunities and takes some of them.

But surely not "all serve monkey" as some claim...

Socal, both you and Craig were making those inflammatory statements about 'Fed fanatics' and putting words into peoples' mouths before Spuranik even joined the conversation, and prior to that no-one had stated that Fed is the best returner on tour. Finally, Spuranik himseld wrote the above - does it sound like he's claiming that fed is the best returner on tour? And even if he or anyone else did, so what? The vast majority of Fed fans will concede that he is not the best returner on tour.

Wrong emancipator, I didn't put any words anyone's mouth. You claim Fed is a great returner and I don't, a very good one not great. Before that Spuranik over emphasized Fed's returning and i disputed that specific point. Tenez also claimed that Roger was a more aggressive returner than Novak and on his day one of the two best in the world, I disputed that point. MFC started to argue with me on the return points I made so I argued back. I am not a crazy guy posting to myself, if you look back over this conversation you will see several people dispute the obvious concept that Novak Djokovic is a clearly better returner than Roger Federer and over selling Roger's returning.

That is it, if you say that Roger is a very good returner, I will say fine. But if you say he is on his day one of the 2 best, or that he is more aggressive on return than Novak, or that their is relative parity between the two I will dispute it all day till the cows come home. Or if you say he is a great returner, no not great, very good at the ATP level.

nothing wrong with a good argument socal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

I still maintain that in his prime Federer was the best returner in the world, but I definitely agree that Novak's current level of returning (and indeed Murray's) is a step up from that.

Oh M4C, stop being such a fed fanatic!

Ok MFC, you have a right to your opinion. Emancipator, not all fed fans are fed extremists. Most of them on this site aren't. But I think everyone has a pretty good idea of who the fed extremists are. The ones who must denigrate other players the modern game and try to wittle away at the accomplishments of Fed's rivals.

Roger in his prime was a much better returner on Grass where his chip backhand played extremely well and a much better returner, possibly best in the world at blunting the huge server who didn't move very well. If he was so great MFC in returning why was it that his returning was basically his waterloo at both 08 wimbledon and nearly in 07 wimbeldon? His style of returning is not a good tactic against Nadal and that is why he has such a big problem converting break points against Nadal and breaking him, where Djokovic doesn't. Novak is a better all around returner now then Fed ever has been, so I guess we can agree on that MFC.

We all know who the best is,

noleisthebest wrote:We all know who the best is,

Baaaaby, baaaby, daaaarlin' you're the best....

James Bond, right?

socal1976 wrote:Ok MFC, you have a right to your opinion. Emancipator, not all fed fans are fed extremists. Most of them on this site aren't. But I think everyone has a pretty good idea of who the fed extremists are. The ones who must denigrate other players the modern game and try to wittle away at the accomplishments of Fed's rivals.

Roger in his prime was a much better returner on Grass where his chip backhand played extremely well and a much better returner, possibly best in the world at blunting the huge server who didn't move very well. If he was so great MFC in returning why was it that his returning was basically his waterloo at both 08 wimbledon and nearly in 07 wimbeldon? His style of returning is not a good tactic against Nadal and that is why he has such a big problem converting break points against Nadal and breaking him, where Djokovic doesn't. Novak is a better all around returner now then Fed ever has been, so I guess we can agree on that MFC.

1) I said "in his prime" which was most certainly not in 08.
2) You earlier accused people of focussing purely on Roddick as an example of how good a returner Federer is, aren't you a bit guilty of doing the same but with Nadal?
3) I would agree with you about the all-round return game. Federer has never been a particularly aggressive returner, but I think we'll have to agree to disagree about the following statement: "in his prime Federer was the best returner in the game".

Yes, like I said don't think I can change your opinion. In his prime 04-07 he still didn't do a good job of breaking Roger. Maybe as bad or worse an example of Roger blowing break points against Rafa comes 05 Rome final. Fed was at his best then, had matches points on Rafa in a 5 set clay match. Maybe the best match they have ever played. Lightyears ahead of AO 09.

I agree, I am fixating a bit on Nadal because Nadal is the best example to show the difference between Fed's success against one type of server vis a vis another type of server. The bunt back and angled chip return style is very effective a guy who has big serve and clay feet. Nadal just whip around his backhand, turns the shot into a forehand and picks off the shorter softer chip with an angled forehand that forces Fed into the tramlines, point over. How many times have we seen that from supposedly the greatest returner of his day?

Like I said we will have to agree to disagree in regards to the great vs. very good distinctions.

I would throw something else into the hat though, which is that until last year no one did well at breaking the Nadal serve. He used to play the BPs so well. Last year, partly because of Djokovic, he seemed to lose confidence in his ability to get himself out of holes. I'm pretty sure that when you look at Federer's returning stats against other lefties (those who should be able to exploit this apparent weakness) they stack up pretty well.

Not a lefty v. righty issue at all. Nadal serves fed 90 percent backhands precisely because fed chips everything passively off that side on the return. On the forehand fed will crank returns more often. The aspect of Nadal's game that allows him to make use of this pattern is his effective ability to turn the shot into a forehand with his feet. And secondly with the incredible angled spin he generates run fed of the tramlines with that first forehand off the chipped return. Its the speed and quality forehand that allows Nadal to make use of that pattern, not the fact that he is a lefty.

Socal its all premature speculation, Djokovic will find out why winning 4 in a row is that difficult when the FO comes up, I repeat if Djokovic could win it he will go on to win so many this year as well as next year and next after unless injury strikes his progress.

This topic will completely come to a halt when Djoko is stopped by some outsider let alone the top3.

FO uses a smaller type of babolat ball which Novak doesn't handle too well, it's no coincidence that he hasn't reached a final of this GS.

I must say that all this hysteria comes on the back of a year when Djokovic lost more matches, to more players, than previous "great" years (I'm thinking mainly of Federer '05 and McEnroe '84, the two greatest years I've ever witnessed).

Given 2011 wasn't even the greatest ever year for any player (didn't make 4 Slam finals) I fail to see what criteria could make a short term burst of results propel anyone into GOAT discussions.
Absolutley brilliant year and a half for sure, and terriffic player for certain. The rest just seem hyperbole.

I think throwing Djokovic into GOAT debates just now is very premature. However, if he can maintain this dominance for another two or three years (a big ask) then he will be in the mix. But not for now.

I agree way premature to have GOAT discussions. In sports it is very hard to predict the future especially the long term future and it would take a couple more years of dominance. My big disucssion here was about the effect completing a grandslam would have on his legacy, if by some strange legacy he was able to pull it off. I mean he may end up 15 slams or with the 5 he has got. I prefaced my posts by stating this was all speculation and hypotheticals.

socal1976 wrote:I agree way premature to have GOAT discussions. In sports it is very hard to predict the future especially the long term future and it would take a couple more years of dominance. My big disucssion here was about the effect completing a grandslam would have on his legacy, if by some strange legacy he was able to pull it off. I mean he may end up 15 slams or with the 5 he has got. I prefaced my posts by stating this was all speculation and hypotheticals.

Finally some sense prevails lets wait and watch how Nole shapes up, its intereting times ahead, Rafa came to stop Fed, Novak came to stop Rafa, may be its Murray to stop Nole

No chance! 6 Majors doesn't carry it in terms of GOAT.

Great accomplishment indeed, amazing it would be, but until it's backed by more Major singles titles, just an isolated achievement, albeit a "great" one.

Would put him in my Top 12, but not GOAT.

Still he has plenty of time to continue moving up "that" list...and I am sure he's many more titles to win, a few Majors along that route as well.

yloponom68 wrote:No chance! 6 Majors doesn't carry it in terms of GOAT.

Great accomplishment indeed, amazing it would be, but until it's backed by more Major singles titles, just an isolated achievement, albeit a "great" one.

Would put him in my Top 12, but not GOAT.

Still he has plenty of time to continue moving up "that" list...and I am sure he's many more titles to win, a few Majors along that route as well.

who have got here today

Six in a row would give Nole the GOAST (Greatest over a short time) title rather than GOAT. Mind you, if he's good enough and fit enough to win six in a row, he might achieve a final GS total that would push him into GOAT territory.

Nole will win all 4 slams this year.

jersey wrote:Nole will win all 4 slams this year.

we got the message on all threads by now I think....btw, you're not a poster formerly known as Simple Analyst, are you?

I doubt it...SA would say Nadal is going to wing the 4 this year....

Disagree. SA likes to stir fans of anyone into warring each other.

I dont think so Jersey is SA, coz SA is a wum but had tennis knowledge, in contrast Jersey is not a WUM but lacks tennis knowledge, common thing is both have no clue what they talking about.