If Novak wins FO with this draw he should be anointed the Goat

Yes, I know many will say its Fed, many will say it is Rafa or Laver or Borg, or possibly Sampras. But if Djokovic takes on this murder's row of a draw that mostly likely will require him to beat, Del Potro, Gasquet, Berdych, Federer or ferrer, and then probably the all time clay king in the final; then in my mind he is the goat. Sure he would only have 3 grandslams, but its quality that counts not quantity. And against this competition and if he is able to unseat the all time king of clay on his domain extending his win streak to the longest in open era history, then he is greater than Roger and Rafa.

What is up with De bakker in the first round, that to me is a scare match as de bakker has huge weapons. Can't remember a second seed having this tough of an opening round match in a grandslam. Why isn't he playing a qualifier like the rest of the top seeds? Could this be french payback for the Davis Cup?

Nole doesn't need to be goat, he is the best .

I'm really so revved up for this French Open.....managed to snap out of 3 months of Dvorak, so it's the Beatles now....I don't dare think they're sending me some cosmic Wimbledon signals ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44YitKiVZ8E&feature=related

I know Nitb, I don't much like Goat conversations but I have felt left out over the years as a Novak fan when the Nadalites and Federians would have their endless feuds. I felt like I wanted to get into the mix.

What is up with his draw Nitb, so very french of the french. I am surprised they didn't find away to produce a cloned version of a 22 year old borg and then give him a wildcard into Novak's side of the draw. Novak will remember this come Davis Cup time.

I think that is a bit much to start making claims to GOAT. It will be an intriguing FO for sure.

The french are protecting Rafa with this draw, this has to either be payback for the Davis Cup or Uncle Toni's legendary draw fixing voodoo. De bakker is tougher than any player Andy Murray would face till the third round. Then Del Potro, then probably Gasquet, Berdych, either Fed or Ferrer and then probably Rafa.

This single grandslam will be a bigger accomplishment than any slams held by Roger or Rafa. The only thing left for the french was to find a time machine and bring back a 20 something Borg, Vilas, Jim Courier, and Sergi brugera and put them all in Novak's draw.

I think notable grand slam success's from Federer with tough draws include:

2009 FO

Alberto Martin
Jose Acasuso
Paul-Henri Mathieu
Tommy Haas
Gael Monfils
Juan Martin Del Potro
Robin Soderling

Australian Open 2007

Bjorn Phau
Jonas Bjorkman
Mikhail Youzhny
Novak Djokovic
Tommy Robredo
Andy Roddick
Fernando Gonzalez

Both slams had difficult draws. Again it is difficult to make comparisons.

Come on Legendkillar the combined grandslam titles of Novaks opposition if he was to win the FO would most likely have 26 grandslam championships between them. Andy Roddick and tommy robredo, are you serious. And Fed's 2009 FO had no Rafa, and no Novak. If this draw plays out to form and Novak wins it, it will have been the most difficult draw of any grandslam championship since Edberg went through Pete and Lendl to win the US Open.

Come on Legendkillar the combined grandslam titles of Novaks opposition if he was to win the FO would most likely have 26 grandslam championships between them. Andy Roddick and tommy robredo, are you serious.
------------------------
But that's irrelevant. Djoko wasn;t winning slams when Federer and Nadal were.

You could say Fed beat Roddick in AO07, the same Roddick that beat Sampras in his career. Youzhny beat Nadal a few times and so on....so that makes Fed beat the guys who beat multiple slams!

Yes Djoko has a tough draw but compared to the best players that will be around in 2 years time, they might all look a bit chubby.

socal1976 wrote:What is up with De bakker in the first round, that to me is a scare match as de bakker has huge weapons. Can't remember a second seed having this tough of an opening round match in a grandslam.

You're joking right? De Bakker has won 3 matches this year..

And de Bakker hasn't quite delivered this season. So that is a pretty easy first round to me...to start with. Then injured Delpo, shaky Gasquet (in front of his own crowd) and that makes the draw much easier.

We have seen in teh past some tough draws from Nadal, clearing up as it went along and turning them into strolls in the park...in fact his last 3 slams Nadal won were rdiciculously easy.

socal Del Potro beat Nadal and Federer on route to winning the US Open. Does that mean he is GOAT?

Again Tenez, De Bakker is a tougher opponent than any opponent Murray would have to play until the third round. Legendkillar, Del Potro beat Nadal and Federer, but he didn't beat Nadal on clay. If, if Novak manages to get through this murderous draw it will be more impressive than any of the grandslam draws I have seen Fed or Nadal get through. And Tenez as usual you miss the point of my argument completely. I am not making an argument based on Novak beating the goats therefore he is the goat.

If (and with this mother of all draws its a big if) Novak wins seven more matches and unseats the king of clay, while tying the ATP all time consecutive wins record in my mind he would be the greatest of all time. Even Goat Roger has never managed to beat Nadal in a five setter on clay. And neither fed nor Rafa have ever had as tough a route in terms of talent they have had to defeat to win a slam.

As for De bakker he is clearly a tougher opponent than either of opponents Nadal, Murray, or Fed have to face. And he is just the appetizer in this murderous draw that will most likely require Novak to get by a resurgent local hero and world class talent like Gasquet. And 4 players that have been to grandslam finals and 3 who have won grandslams, not to mention 2 goat candidates.

In two weeks time either Novak will be the undisputed GOAT or the french will have succeeded in their dastardly plans to gain vengence for their Davis Cup humiliation.

I will disagree on those last 2 posts. Respectfully.

As for De bakker he is clearly a tougher opponent than either of opponents Nadal, Murray, or Fed have to face.
--------------

Of course!

Credit for Novak by battling through the most dangerous of any first round opponent that the top seeds would have to face. He is crushing De bakker it looks like he will not succumb easily to the Gallic conspiracy aligned against him. Novak is stronger than the dastardly designs of Guy Forget, Uncle Toni, and freemasons who are doing all in their power to keep him from capturing the french open.

Federer against Lopez will be tougher. Lopez is a proven opponent.

Lopez, on clay I don't know maybe I actually concede that lopez is tougher than De bakker, but stop fixiating on De bakker look at the murder's row. You got US open champion Juan martin Del forehando. Then you have to play a frenchmen in paris who is playing his best tennis in years and has all the talent in the world in Gazza. After that Berdych who is a handful when he is in the mood and should qualify for London this year. Then after the appetizer you have Goat candidate Roger Federer (although I think there is a good chance Roger goes out early we will see how that plays out). Then you have the all time greatest player in the history of clay, most likely.

Yes Djokovic has a tough draw with Del Potro in 3rd round. But Berdych I don't think will be awaiting Djokovic. This French Open is just that, Open. I think laying any claims need to made when the above path occurs.

Of course we will have to see how this plays out but getting a grandslam champion in round 3 and two goat candidates at the end of the tournament is brutal. I smell something fishy here. Guy Forget has been cooking the books with the draw. Still smarting from his November humiliation in Belgrade. Never fear novak if he plays up to form will have the answer.

Socal, your statements in this thread are so over the top, it's hard for me to believe you're serious. I smell something fishy too, you want us to bite don't you?

socal1976 wrote:Again Tenez, De Bakker is a tougher opponent than any opponent Murray would have to play until the third round. Legendkillar, Del Potro beat Nadal and Federer, but he didn't beat Nadal on clay.

Are you trolling brah? If Novak beats Del P he wouldn't have beaten him on harcourts, if he beats Federer he wouldn't have beaten him on grass. So going by your terminology Novak has a very, very easy draw actually apart from Nadal on clay.

You caught me out i am awesome. I missed the old partisan 606 goat debates got a bit nostalgic and thought I would have a go at some wummery myself. What gave me away was it the reference of the Uncle toni, Guy forget, and freemason conspiracy against Novak?

That being said it is a brutal draw for Novak and it would be amazing for him to win this could be a legacy building fortnight for him with the streak and the #1 on the line.

By the way Iamawesome, Murray really doesn't have much of a draw till the third round, he really did get a cakewalk all hyperbole aside.

socal1976 wrote:By the way Iamawesome, Murray really doesn't have much of a draw till the third round, he really did get a cakewalk all hyperbole aside.

Yeah I know, I'm gonna love it though when he fails in the third round.

I don't know, Iamawesome Murray looks like he has figured things out, I think he is going to be real dangerous regardless of the surface for the rest of the year. I actually think he has a good chance of making the big breakthrough at wimbeldon. With Novak, Nadal, and roger nobody would even see him coming.

socal1976 wrote:I don't know, Iamawesome Murray looks like he has figured things out, I think he is going to be real dangerous regardless of the surface for the rest of the year. I actually think he has a good chance of making the big breakthrough at wimbeldon. With Novak, Nadal, and roger nobody would even see him coming.

Djokovic won't be close to winning Wimbledon

socal1976 wrote:I don't know, Iamawesome Murray looks like he has figured things out, I think he is going to be real dangerous regardless of the surface for the rest of the year. I actually think he has a good chance of making the big breakthrough at wimbeldon. With Novak, Nadal, and roger nobody would even see him coming.

I agree Murray has a good chance to go far in this after his showing against Rafa & Novak in recent matches.

The one thing that might stop him would be a "banana skin" like Berdych or Cilic came across, who on their day play out of their skin.

Both Berdych and Cilic came across a "banana skin"....

Well if Novak wins this French Open, he will certainly be a contender for the most consistent player this year. However, I am not sure about putting him in the same category as Rafa and Roger just yet. He needs to match their consistency and high level of play over a longer period of time to be in the conversation. However, having said that, he has been very consistent, going back even to 2008. Looking at his results, he has made the quarterfinal or better in the slams he has entered, with 2nd and 3rd round exits at the 2008 Wimbledon and 2009 French Open tournaments, representing the only exceptions. However, it is a shame that Roger's and Rafa's brilliant results have largely overshadowed this extraordinary run. Thus, this underscores my point that he will have to get Roger and Rafa-like numbers to be part of the conversation.

Take nothing away from Novak though, it is great to see him playing to his full potential and hitting his peak. It's a much needed shot in the arm for the sport and forces the rest of the men's field to increase their level of play.

sonic_boom10 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I don't know, Iamawesome Murray looks like he has figured things out, I think he is going to be real dangerous regardless of the surface for the rest of the year. I actually think he has a good chance of making the big breakthrough at wimbeldon. With Novak, Nadal, and roger nobody would even see him coming.

Djokovic won't be close to winning Wimbledon

Hurray, Sonicboom has predicted that Novak has no chance of winning wimbeldon. Based on the strength of Sonic's recent predictions then most likely Novak will win wimbeldon. Novak can't win against Rafa on clay, then it became Novak can't win against Rafa at Rome at sea level, we know how those two predictions went. And please read my post, I stated that Novak would be a contender for wimbeldon I didn't say he was going to win. I stated that Rafa, Roger, Novak, and Andy would be the leading contenders; what exactly do you dispute with my point. The man has reached two wimbeldon semis with virtually no serve, now that he has regained his service edge and improved his volleys why wouldn't he be a legitimate contender to the wimbeldon crown. But as a Novak fan please keep up your predictions so far you have a 100 percent record for predicting the exact opposite of what will happen. Never fear though I am sure if you continue to predict Novak will lose each and every week then eventually you will be right because well everyone loses eventually.

Kemet, exactlyto the point, can't say that I disagree with anything that you have posted. I was being a little tongue and cheek with my Nole will be goat if he wins the french. However if he does go unbeaten for another fortnight it certainly will be a legacy building event of epic proportions. First he will attain his first non-hardcourt slam proving he is a worldclass all court player. Secondly, he would most likely have to beat the greatest clay courter of all time in a five set final. He has never beaten Rafa Nadal in a five setter and if he accomplishes this it would take their rivalry to the next level. Additionally, if he were to win this granslam he would tie for the longest win streak in the history of the open era, this would be a great honor in itself. So if he can continue on this track for just two more weeks it will really define his place in the hierarchy of tennis greats. Not to mention that he would have the #1 ranking for the first time in his career. And by winning the title he would not only get the #1 ranking but at that point have a nearly inassailable lead in the points race for the year end #1 ranking. I guess what I am trying to say is that the next two weeks if he can continue to win will truely vault his stature to another level. If he does lose he will still have an excellent chance of winning the year end #1 and will still be a threat at all the other slams. But imagine if he could continue the streak for another fortnight what it would mean.

Can I play this wumming game too socal?

Looking at it objectively, De Bakker hasn't won a game all year, hardly a threat. Del Potro is coming back from injury, and after two matches will surely lack the stamina necessary to beat Djokovic. Gasquet has no stamina, by the fourth round he'll be cooked and won't be able to live with Djokovic. Berdych is a mug and has already lost, and you were saying on another thread that you'd rather Djokovic faced Federer than Murray in the semis. As for Nadal, that's not much of an argument is it, I mean it's like "n°1 and n°2 seeds scheduled to meet in the final shocker".

There you go, cakewalk really

Good show Mad for Chelsea. I see that you are an unbeliever in the unholy trinity of Guy Forget, Uncle toni, and the freemasons that have banded together to keep Novak away from his rightful french open crown. I would rather have Fed than Murray in the semis, Roger gives up a few more errors in his aggressive game. But any time you have to play Nadal in a final on clay over five sets it can never be deemed a cakewalk. And Del Po looked pretty good in terms of movement against Dr. Ivo. One never knows with Richard he could play exceptionally well and when he does on a clay court he can pose a risk to anyone, especially playing in his native france.

Enough with the goat stuff. The Djoker is there, the reigning as an all rounder.... and possibly the year end number one too for this year at least, but consistency is the key. How many years does he have in him to keep up this ranking?? if he maintains number one for more than three years he can join the list of "goats" but with a minimum of 9 slams IMO and 16 masters , IMO!

No-one is going to be GOAT with 9 slams...unless that player wins the GS slam in the process and dies by accident just after it's 9th.

Tenez wrote:No-one is going to be GOAT with 9 slams...unless that player wins the GS slam in the process and dies by accident just after it's 9th.

I agree , but 9 could be the minimum to even get consideration for the list, Nole is still far from this! Just a thought, how many players in the last decade or even 20 years have gotten more than 9 GS???
Its crazy that beating Roger or Rafa consecutively is consideration for goat status!

I feel the focus on GS ithough biased as a criteria is ok, YE number 1, the masters, davies and olympics should also count!

BTW MM15, welcome to 606v2. Coming from 606? what was your pseudo there?

BTW, Olympics is far from being a top requirements for GOAT...in my view. We will need many more of them before they make an impact. Thus far it leaves all the other GOATS like Borg, Laver, Sampras with a disadvantage. We are struggling to bring the AO back to full status (it is but again willl need a bit more years), so the OG has a way to go in my view.

MM15, I was doing a little wumming trying to instigate, I don't think with 3 grandslams novak would be considered the goat. However I do agree with your point that you can not simply look at a player's grandslam totals and say that just because he won the most grandslams that so and so is the greatest ever. Roy Emerson won the most grandslams prior to Pete Sampras and held that record for many many years no one considered him the goat. In fact, the first person to really make winning the most grandslam titles the be all and end all was Pete Sampras. Up until the mid 80s the great players didn't even participate in Australia, at least not most of them. Yes number of grandslams is hugely important probably the biggest determinative statistic but that in it of itself doesn't in my mind bestow goathood on anyone. Other factors like head to head competition against other great players, other tournaments won, olympics, davis cups, weeks at #1 and number of year end #1s also matter in the determination.

Tenez wrote:BTW MM15, welcome to 606v2. Coming from 606? what was your pseudo there?

BTW, Olympics is far from being a top requirements for GOAT...in my view. We will need many more of them before they make an impact. Thus far it leaves all the other GOATS like Borg, Laver, Sampras with a disadvantage. We are struggling to bring the AO back to full status (it is but again willl need a bit more years), so the OG has a way to go in my view.

I was mm15 there too (a Mclaren Mercedes fan; F1), not a very regular poster. I tried to avoid WUMS, though, got into some fights! I must admit I enjoyed the biased impartials and jewels a tard too much...to be honest always a laugh!!

yeah the olympics is not very regular, but you must admit it adds an extra something , could be the icing on the cake, the cream, or optional extra. This is the Crème de la crème achievement for most other individual sports!

socal1976 wrote:MM15, I was doing a little wumming trying to instigate, I don't think with 3 grandslams novak would be considered the goat. However I do agree with your point that you can not simply look at a player's grandslam totals and say that just because he won the most grandslams that so and so is the greatest ever. Roy Emerson won the most grandslams prior to Pete Sampras and held that record for many many years no one considered him the goat. In fact, the first person to really make winning the most grandslam titles the be all and end all was Pete Sampras. Up until the mid 80s the great players didn't even participate in Australia, at least not most of them. Yes number of grandslams is hugely important probably the biggest determinative statistic but that in it of itself doesn't in my mind bestow goathood on anyone. Other factors like head to head competition against other great players, other tournaments won, olympics, davis cups, weeks at #1 and number of year end #1s also matter in the determination.

A bit of wumming is fine social1976 there is some bias for fans and it ok in my book

yeah "Goathood" (i like your term) should be not slam-linked only. For instance I would rate an all rounder (good record on multiple surfaces with some slams) higher than a GS winner with the same number of slams but on one surface! Head to head is a good indicator though, bearing in mind that there is always an achilies heel somewhere! Unfortumnately the world only remembers winners, and no matter how good your game or record is, it wont count if your slams dont add up!!

socal1976 wrote:Yes, I know many will say its Fed, many will say it is Rafa or Laver or Borg, or possibly Sampras. But if Djokovic takes on this murder's row of a draw that mostly likely will require him to beat, Del Potro, Gasquet, Berdych, Federer or ferrer, and then probably the all time clay king in the final; then in my mind he is the goat. Sure he would only have 3 grandslams, but its quality that counts not quantity. And against this competition and if he is able to unseat the all time king of clay on his domain extending his win streak to the longest in open era history, then he is greater than Roger and Rafa.

This is deliberate hyperbole, right? I mean, it's a tough draw but you want to annount the guy the superior of Borg, McEnroe, Sampras, Lendl, Connors, Federer because he wins one event against a tough draw?

I want some smileys in there so I know you're joking.

EDIT: Read the thread now so relieved to see you haven't taken leave of your senses. Any way, mighty BerdBrain is out so that scuppered the theory anyway.

Bogbrush, I was hoping to ruffle both federistas and the Nadalians and get a heated goat debate along partisan lines like the ones we had almost every other day on the old 606. Not that I care for that stuff in the extreme, but I got a bit nostalgic. I wanted someone (ah Tenez) to throw out some "no talented moonballer" or someone else to come out with a couple of shanky comments.

Still if Novak can keep the streak alive for just 7 more matches it would certainly be a huge legacy building step in his career. He would have a record that not even Rafa and Roger could boast, most consecutive wins on the ATP tour in the open era, the #1 ranking, and his first non-hardcourt grandslam.

Socal - If you want me to get involved, you'd better be a bit more subtle.

I knew I went to far with the Gallic conspiracy and the freemasons. I'll work on it, I had bogbrush going for awhile though.

How is this one, every tournament Novak wins is worth 20 tournaments in the weak era that Shanky dominated in. So Novak has 40 slams to Roger's 16 slams. Thiemo De bakker, a lion of the golden age would have won 10 slams if he had been playing between 2003-2007.

The question really is: Can you post without wumming?

Let's see!

socal1976 wrote:

sonic_boom10 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I don't know, Iamawesome Murray looks like he has figured things out, I think he is going to be real dangerous regardless of the surface for the rest of the year. I actually think he has a good chance of making the big breakthrough at wimbeldon. With Novak, Nadal, and roger nobody would even see him coming.

Djokovic won't be close to winning Wimbledon

Hurray, Sonicboom has predicted that Novak has no chance of winning wimbeldon. Based on the strength of Sonic's recent predictions then most likely Novak will win wimbeldon. Novak can't win against Rafa on clay, then it became Novak can't win against Rafa at Rome at sea level, we know how those two predictions went. And please read my post, I stated that Novak would be a contender for wimbeldon I didn't say he was going to win. I stated that Rafa, Roger, Novak, and Andy would be the leading contenders; what exactly do you dispute with my point. The man has reached two wimbeldon semis with virtually no serve, now that he has regained his service edge and improved his volleys why wouldn't he be a legitimate contender to the wimbeldon crown. But as a Novak fan please keep up your predictions so far you have a 100 percent record for predicting the exact opposite of what will happen. Never fear though I am sure if you continue to predict Novak will lose each and every week then eventually you will be right because well everyone loses eventually.

Anyone who S&V will destroy Djokovic on grass.

Please, Tenez you are the king of wumming. I on the other hand am the complete epitome of objectivity and reason.

Sonic Boom, considering that about 3 guys on tour play S and V tennis then I guess Novak should be safe. But good job on the predictions, so far you are Novak's lucky charm every time you predict his downfall he wins the tournament, as a Novak fan I would practically pay you to keep predicting his downfall although I am no sucker why pay someone for something they are willing to do for free.