What does Djokovic need to surpass Fed on hard courts?

Was just pondering on big 4 comparisons. Fed and Novak are currently quite evenly matched on hard courts:

Fed:

Slams - 9
Finals - 3
Masters - 18
WTF - 6

Djoko:

Slams - 8
Finals - 4
Masters - 21
WTF - 5

Federer with a narrow lead in slams and at the WTF. Djokovic with three more Masters titles. Would a win at the US Open put Novak ahead?

In slams I am not sure you can lump the US Open with the Australian Open because of Djokovic's disproportionate success between the two events.  It is said that the US Open is faster and the ball flight less predictable (due to windier conditions) than at the Australian Open.

Federer:
US Open: Five wins Two runner ups.
Aus Open: Four wins One runner up.

Djokovic:
US Open: Two wins.  Four runner ups.
Aus Open: Six wins.

Personally I think is more prestige in winning USO...but yes its close and I'm sure Djokovic will only add to this in the next 2-3 years.

Personally, I think if Novak wins one more US open it kind of makes his over abundance of AOs less and less relative. The guy has been to six finals there and simply ran into the best Nadal I have ever seen at USO 2010 and really 2013 and peak fed in 2007, as well as the loss to another all time great Murray in a tight 5 set windstorm. I think if Novak wins another USO he is clearly the more accomplished hardcourt player. But even if he doesn't, I think winning another 2 more AOs so that he has more slams will also do the trick. He is getting pretty close. Interestingly, Fed could be considered the GOAT but not be the GOAT on any single surface. Pete has as legitimate a claim in my opinion for Grass court GOAT I think in his peak he would probably beat anyone, Nadal is clearly the clay goat, and Djokovic most likely will finish as the most accomplished player on hardcourt and the hardcourt GOAT.

Interesting point socal re: Fed not actually "owning" any one surface but them all overall.
I tend to also agree on who the surface GOATs may be.
Lendl was also one heck of a hardcourt player...he got to every USO final from 1982 to 1989...some achievement.

However...when it comes to GOAT...well we cant ignore Serena - 12 hardcourt slams!
She may likely go on to be the undoubted GOAT tennis player period.

Anyway, sorry that's a bit of a curve ball...its just when people use the term GOAT then why not extend it to all of tennis.

Serena is a great player and Seles may have been a better player, but I reckon Sampras, Federer, Djokovic ... etc would beat them mano a womano to take the GOAT title from them. That said - it is fair to say they have a "shout" at being a GOAT.

;-)

Arguably, if you amalgamate men and women, the top 5 Open era greats would all be women (Williams, Graf, Court, Evert and Navratilova). It therefore looks like it's a little easier to get greater dominance in the ladies game. For that reason, it makes sense to split the two tours in any "greatest" debate.

lydian wrote:Interesting point socal re: Fed not actually "owning" any one surface but them all overall.
I tend to also agree on who the surface GOATs may be.
Lendl was also one heck of a hardcourt player...he got to every USO final from 1982 to 1989...some achievement.

However...when it comes to GOAT...well we cant ignore Serena - 12 hardcourt slams!
She may likely go on to be the undoubted GOAT tennis player period.

Anyway, sorry that's a bit of a curve ball...its just when people use the term GOAT then why not extend it to all of tennis.

Yeah, don't care about the WTA, and loathe them, don't care what their records are.

But it is interesting that Fed to some extent isn't really the clear cut best ever on any particular surface.

socal1976 wrote:

lydian wrote:Interesting point socal re: Fed not actually "owning" any one surface but them all overall.
I tend to also agree on who the surface GOATs may be.
Lendl was also one heck of a hardcourt player...he got to every USO final from 1982 to 1989...some achievement.

However...when it comes to GOAT...well we cant ignore Serena - 12 hardcourt slams!
She may likely go on to be the undoubted GOAT tennis player period.

Anyway, sorry that's a bit of a curve ball...its just when people use the term GOAT then why not extend it to all of tennis.

Yeah, don't care about the WTA, and loathe them, don't care what their records are.

But it is interesting that Fed to some extent isn't really the clear cut best ever on any particular surface.

I'd argue Federer is the clear cut best ever on the type of grass surface that has existed most of his career, exists currently and is played on for the forseeable future. Sampras would not have been as successful as Fed in the conditions Wimbledon has played in since his heyday. and Fed did beat Sampras at his own game of serve and volley the one time they matched up :-)

It's a tough call over all as Fed's resume is greater than Sampras' on grass IMO- but I can see where some see the way Sampras dominated during his time on the grass--- problem is- the surface plays different now- so it might be that you just have to look at the overall results, and Fed edges him there IMO

Then there is the whole fast hard court vs slow hard court question. I'd say Fed still owns the fast court GOAT, even now he is all Djokovic can handle on a Dubai or Cincinatti. Djokovic is the man on the medium and slower courts IMO.

oh, and I think Fed is indoor goat.... :-)...

damn Federer is good on a lot of surfaces!

Djoko is the indoor goat now! Well at least on slower indoor HCs.

Belovedluckyboy wrote:Djoko is the indoor goat now! Well at least on slower indoor HCs.

Djoko is the current best indoor player in the world, but I don't think he has passed Federer as a carreer indoor goat. Approaching it, but not there yet, and Sampras ranks up there too. Fed is still at least 2nd best in the world indoors at age 35 ( or was last we saw) ... lets see if Djoko can sustain that type of longevity and results.

TRuffin wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

lydian wrote:Interesting point socal re: Fed not actually "owning" any one surface but them all overall.
I tend to also agree on who the surface GOATs may be.
Lendl was also one heck of a hardcourt player...he got to every USO final from 1982 to 1989...some achievement.

However...when it comes to GOAT...well we cant ignore Serena - 12 hardcourt slams!
She may likely go on to be the undoubted GOAT tennis player period.

Anyway, sorry that's a bit of a curve ball...its just when people use the term GOAT then why not extend it to all of tennis.

Yeah, don't care about the WTA, and loathe them, don't care what their records are.

But it is interesting that Fed to some extent isn't really the clear cut best ever on any particular surface.

I'd argue Federer is the clear cut best ever on the type of grass surface that has existed most of his career, exists currently and is played on for the forseeable future.  Sampras would not have been as successful as Fed in the conditions Wimbledon has played in since his heyday.   and Fed did beat Sampras at his own game of serve and volley the one time they matched up :-)

It's a tough call over all as Fed's resume is greater than Sampras' on grass IMO-  but I can see where some see the way Sampras dominated during his time on the grass--- problem is- the surface plays different now- so it might be that you just have to look at the overall results, and Fed edges him there IMO

Then there is the whole fast hard court vs slow hard court question.  I'd say Fed still owns the fast court GOAT, even now he is all Djokovic can handle on a Dubai or Cincinatti.  Djokovic is the man on the medium and slower courts IMO.  

oh, and I think Fed is indoor goat....  :-)...  

damn Federer is good on a lot of surfaces!

I think if they played 5 matches on old grass, and 5 matches on new grass; I would favor Pete 6 to 4 if we are talking peak to peak. I mean we saw how an average volleyer by Pete's standard could get to the finals even on new grass in Raonic. Pete would force roger to pass all day with the backhand and pressurize Roger. Roger of course has good hands and a good serve as well, but in those two areas that are really more important on grass I feel Pete was a little better and little more explosive. The older pros were killers when taking the ball out of the air, Fed is great to, but Pete was the best I have ever seen if you threw the ball in the air you better hit the perfect lob or he would jump from inside the baseline take like one giant power step leap and take the ball like 12 feet in the air and tomahawk jam the overhead. Never seen anything like that guys overhead, he wouldn't attack the ball he would beat it like Santino Corrleone beat his brother law in the Godfather.

TRuffin wrote:

Belovedluckyboy wrote:Djoko is the indoor goat now! Well at least on slower indoor HCs.

Djoko is the current best indoor player in the world, but I don't think he has passed Federer as a carreer indoor goat.    Approaching it, but not there yet,  and Sampras ranks up there too.     Fed is still at least 2nd best in the world indoors at age 35 ( or was last we saw) ... lets see if Djoko can sustain that type of longevity and results.

To be honest he already has had longevity I mean he has cleaned up on all the indoor major events since 2011. The signature event being the year end masters and I think he either is already tied with Fed's mark or just one away. He is in the conversation for both indoor and outdoor hardcourt GOAT. But I mean Novak already has had superior longevity when comparing to most other all time greats.

Djokovic is most definitely a very very special physical specimen.  The most elastically strong and elastically resilient tennis player there has ever been.  That is his special power.  Nadal's special power was the super-spin he put on the ball and his will to win.  Federer didn't really have a special power - just good at everything with versatility.  Perhaps his special power was an ability to beat the big servers - but it was difficult to tell how he did it. All three had excellent ability to read the opponents game - but "reading an opponents game" is a difficult quantity to quantify - and so one cannot really call it a "special power".  Special powers are usually reserved to physical things one can clearly identify through observation.

I think Lydian referred to Pete Sampras ability to hit the ball always on the sweet spot of the racket (using the racket technology available to him). I think older rackets had smaller sweet spots and much of the "hidden talent" of past players was that ability to see the ball and position the racket such that they were always / nearly always hitting the sweet spot. For Pete Sampras it transferred into a formidable serve and forehand ground shots.

Nore Staat wrote:I think Lydian referred to Pete Sampras ability to hit the ball always on the sweet spot of the racket (using the racket technology available to him).  I think older rackets had smaller sweet spots and much of the "hidden talent" of past players was that ability to see the ball and position the racket such that they were always / nearly always hitting the sweet spot.  For Pete Sampras it transferred into a formidable serve and forehand ground shots.

I tend to think that if you gave Pete modern strings and racquets he would be even more explosive just like all players have been. For a player who really was the same size as Federer almost to the inch and pound, Pete was just naturally more powerful and explosive. I think this would have given him an edge if the two met in their prime at their peaks. For me he is still the grass court GOAT.

Talking about 'good at everything' versatility, I thought Djoko is being regarded as the most complete player so certainly he has that 'good at everything' versatility too. He's also very good on any surface, having more clay Masters, indoor Masters than Fed. Its only on grass that he's still lagging behind Fed.

socal1976 wrote:

TRuffin wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

lydian wrote:Interesting point socal re: Fed not actually "owning" any one surface but them all overall.
I tend to also agree on who the surface GOATs may be.
Lendl was also one heck of a hardcourt player...he got to every USO final from 1982 to 1989...some achievement.

However...when it comes to GOAT...well we cant ignore Serena - 12 hardcourt slams!
She may likely go on to be the undoubted GOAT tennis player period.

Anyway, sorry that's a bit of a curve ball...its just when people use the term GOAT then why not extend it to all of tennis.

Yeah, don't care about the WTA, and loathe them, don't care what their records are.

But it is interesting that Fed to some extent isn't really the clear cut best ever on any particular surface.

I'd argue Federer is the clear cut best ever on the type of grass surface that has existed most of his career, exists currently and is played on for the forseeable future.  Sampras would not have been as successful as Fed in the conditions Wimbledon has played in since his heyday.   and Fed did beat Sampras at his own game of serve and volley the one time they matched up :-)

It's a tough call over all as Fed's resume is greater than Sampras' on grass IMO-  but I can see where some see the way Sampras dominated during his time on the grass--- problem is- the surface plays different now- so it might be that you just have to look at the overall results, and Fed edges him there IMO

Then there is the whole fast hard court vs slow hard court question.  I'd say Fed still owns the fast court GOAT, even now he is all Djokovic can handle on a Dubai or Cincinatti.  Djokovic is the man on the medium and slower courts IMO.  

oh, and I think Fed is indoor goat....  :-)...  

damn Federer is good on a lot of surfaces!

I think if they played 5 matches on old grass, and 5 matches on new grass; I would favor Pete 6 to 4 if we are talking peak to peak. I mean we saw how an average volleyer by Pete's standard could get to the finals even on new grass in Raonic. Pete would force roger to pass all day with the backhand and pressurize Roger. Roger of course has good hands and a good serve as well, but in those two areas that are really more important on grass I feel Pete was a little better and little more explosive. The older pros were killers when taking the ball out of the air, Fed is great to, but Pete was the best I have ever seen if you threw the ball in the air you better hit the perfect lob or he would jump from inside the baseline take like one giant power step leap and take the ball like 12 feet in the air and tomahawk jam the overhead. Never seen anything like that guys overhead, he wouldn't attack the ball he would beat it like Santino Corrleone beat his brother law in the Godfather.

Yes, when talking about hypotheticals of the top tier goats it's always going to be close, based on opinion, bias, favorite,etc. your 6-4 could easily turn into 5-5 or 6-4 for Federer- just based on how someone felt on a given day. I would agree we wouldn't see a 7-3,8-2 scenario. Just like Borg v nadal- it's always going to be razor thin.

We did see a not peak Federer beat Defending 4 time in a row champion Sampras on the old grass though, and really won it with better passing and serve/volley- so there is some evidence a prime Federer would have known how to do it. I think the new grass would require Pete to baseline more and a prime Federer would have had upper hand.

I don't think a raoinic beating goffin/query, and a hobbled 35 year old Federer in 5 sets really is an indicator of much in terms of the new grass and what a volleyer could do.

socal1976 wrote:

TRuffin wrote:

Belovedluckyboy wrote:Djoko is the indoor goat now! Well at least on slower indoor HCs.

Djoko is the current best indoor player in the world, but I don't think he has passed Federer as a carreer indoor goat.    Approaching it, but not there yet,  and Sampras ranks up there too.     Fed is still at least 2nd best in the world indoors at age 35 ( or was last we saw) ... lets see if Djoko can sustain that type of longevity and results.

To be honest he already has had longevity I mean he has cleaned up on all the indoor major events since 2011. The signature event being the year end masters and I think he either is already tied with Fed's mark or just one away. He is in the conversation for both indoor and outdoor hardcourt GOAT. But I mean Novak already has had superior longevity when comparing to most other all time greats.

Since 2012- fed still owned indoor in 2011. djokovix may tie Feds wtf record this year, but it's just not about the wins. As jack Nicklaus said- he felt his record of second place finishes was just as an important barometer of his place in history and he always combined the runner ups with his wins when thinking of his achievements. Because it meant he was "right there, consistently close to the win year after year". It can't be dismissed that not withstanding the fact that djokovic has far and away been the best indoor player for many years and approaching the same dominant period fed had- that fed being able to still be 2nd best after all this time is a feat in itself and a tiebreaker. Combined with his period of dominance- it gives him the edge.

Of course, djokovic may very all continue to dominate it for several more years and then there is no arguement.

TRuffin wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

TRuffin wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

lydian wrote:Interesting point socal re: Fed not actually "owning" any one surface but them all overall.
I tend to also agree on who the surface GOATs may be.
Lendl was also one heck of a hardcourt player...he got to every USO final from 1982 to 1989...some achievement.

However...when it comes to GOAT...well we cant ignore Serena - 12 hardcourt slams!
She may likely go on to be the undoubted GOAT tennis player period.

Anyway, sorry that's a bit of a curve ball...its just when people use the term GOAT then why not extend it to all of tennis.

Yeah, don't care about the WTA, and loathe them, don't care what their records are.

But it is interesting that Fed to some extent isn't really the clear cut best ever on any particular surface.

I'd argue Federer is the clear cut best ever on the type of grass surface that has existed most of his career, exists currently and is played on for the forseeable future.  Sampras would not have been as successful as Fed in the conditions Wimbledon has played in since his heyday.   and Fed did beat Sampras at his own game of serve and volley the one time they matched up :-)

It's a tough call over all as Fed's resume is greater than Sampras' on grass IMO-  but I can see where some see the way Sampras dominated during his time on the grass--- problem is- the surface plays different now- so it might be that you just have to look at the overall results, and Fed edges him there IMO

Then there is the whole fast hard court vs slow hard court question.  I'd say Fed still owns the fast court GOAT, even now he is all Djokovic can handle on a Dubai or Cincinatti.  Djokovic is the man on the medium and slower courts IMO.  

oh, and I think Fed is indoor goat....  :-)...  

damn Federer is good on a lot of surfaces!

I think if they played 5 matches on old grass, and 5 matches on new grass; I would favor Pete 6 to 4 if we are talking peak to peak. I mean we saw how an average volleyer by Pete's standard could get to the finals even on new grass in Raonic. Pete would force roger to pass all day with the backhand and pressurize Roger. Roger of course has good hands and a good serve as well, but in those two areas that are really more important on grass I feel Pete was a little better and little more explosive. The older pros were killers when taking the ball out of the air, Fed is great to, but Pete was the best I have ever seen if you threw the ball in the air you better hit the perfect lob or he would jump from inside the baseline take like one giant power step leap and take the ball like 12 feet in the air and tomahawk jam the overhead. Never seen anything like that guys overhead, he wouldn't attack the ball he would beat it like Santino Corrleone beat his brother law in the Godfather.

Yes, when talking about hypotheticals of the top tier goats it's always going to be close, based on opinion, bias, favorite,etc.   your 6-4 could easily turn into 5-5 or 6-4 for Federer- just based on how someone felt on a given day.  I would agree we wouldn't see a 7-3,8-2 scenario.   Just like Borg v nadal- it's always going to be razor thin.

We did see a not peak Federer beat Defending 4 time in a row champion Sampras on the old grass though, and really won it with better passing and serve/volley- so there is some evidence a prime Federer would have known how to do it.  I think the new grass would require Pete to baseline more and a prime Federer would have had upper hand.

I don't think a raoinic beating  goffin/query, and a hobbled 35 year old Federer in 5 sets really is an indicator of much in terms of the new grass and what a volleyer could do.

Yes well everyone has to trust their instincts when giving an opinion. I will say that judging by my general level of knowledge of the game, not to come off as arrogant but I have played, watched, and followed the game for over 30 years in varying degrees; that I feel based on the fact that Pete was just that hair more naturally explosive that on a surface that favors that kind of play I would favor Pete. I am amazed by one extent by how much easy power and spin Pete could generate on his shots, not that Fed can't, but I feel that Fed was better defensively and movement wise to Pete; but I would take Pete in a serving contest.

Another thing, and again this is observational and my own instincts and subjective, I never claimed that it wasn't; Pete is more clutch than Roger. Roger doesn't have a good 5 set record, Roger as great as he is has choked in a lot of big matches. Novak has as well. I think the most underrated quality of Pete is that he won so many big matches in such close sets and matches so much of the time. I mean he won all those consecutive Wimby's at a time when these matches were decided by a handful of points in these razor tight sets against the big servers of his day. And somehow the guy who always won the crap shoot for the most part was Sampras. One of the most underrated clutch performers I have ever seen in any sport.

My instincts Pete takes it 6-4, as Roger chokes in the 5th set of the decider.

TRuffin wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

TRuffin wrote:

Belovedluckyboy wrote:Djoko is the indoor goat now! Well at least on slower indoor HCs.

Djoko is the current best indoor player in the world, but I don't think he has passed Federer as a carreer indoor goat.    Approaching it, but not there yet,  and Sampras ranks up there too.     Fed is still at least 2nd best in the world indoors at age 35 ( or was last we saw) ... lets see if Djoko can sustain that type of longevity and results.

To be honest he already has had longevity I mean he has cleaned up on all the indoor major events since 2011. The signature event being the year end masters and I think he either is already tied with Fed's mark or just one away. He is in the conversation for both indoor and outdoor hardcourt GOAT. But I mean Novak already has had superior longevity when comparing to most other all time greats.

Since 2012- fed still owned indoor in 2011.   djokovix may tie Feds wtf record this year, but it's just not about the wins.  As jack Nicklaus said- he felt his record of second place finishes was just as an important barometer of his place in history and he always combined the runner ups with his wins when thinking of his achievements. Because it meant he was "right there, consistently close to the win year after year". It can't be dismissed that not withstanding the fact that djokovic has far and away been the best indoor player for many years and approaching the same dominant period fed had-  that fed being able to still be 2nd best after all this time is a feat in itself and a tiebreaker. Combined with his period of dominance- it gives him the edge.

Of course, djokovic may very all continue to dominate it for several more years and then there is no arguement.

Like I said you can't really ding Novak for longevity or consistency of results. He has been there and for quite a long time. So to me it comes down a great deal to who has most the WTFs and other big events on the surface. There is no slam to measure the indoor CV if you will, therefore we look at the other big events like WTF, Paris, Shanghai. Novak dominates China like no man since Kublai Khan. So if he surpasses the mark in year end titles and dominates the other masters at an unprecedented clip then he is the most accomplished indoor player ever and everything else is way too subjective.

For me they are pretty close already but I would still have Fed a little ahead. He still has one extra slam, plus slams are in my mind still not entirely equal - for example I say it is better to have five Ws and zero AOs than vice versa - and AO is still the weakest link on the slam circuit.

If Nole were to win two more slams (even if both were AOs) he would inch ahead of Fed for me.

With one slam they would be very very close. If it is just one more slam and no extra WTFs etc, I would still probably have Fed ahead, but if it is one slam + one WTF, then maybe Nole? Anyway, it would be super close either way.

socal1976 wrote:Personally, I think if Novak wins one more US open it kind of makes his over abundance of AOs less and less relative. The guy has been to six finals there and simply ran into the best Nadal I have ever seen at USO 2010 and really 2013 and peak fed in 2007, as well as the loss to another all time great Murray in a tight 5 set windstorm. I think if Novak wins another USO he is clearly the more accomplished hardcourt player. But even if he doesn't, I think winning another 2 more AOs so that he has more slams will also do the trick. He is getting pretty close. Interestingly, Fed could be considered the GOAT but not be the GOAT on any single surface. Pete has as legitimate a claim in my opinion for Grass court GOAT I think in his peak he would probably beat anyone, Nadal is clearly the clay goat, and Djokovic most likely will finish as the most accomplished player on hardcourt and the hardcourt GOAT.

All time great? Jesus Christ!

Agree with the rest of the post. Another win at the USO would put Novak on par with Federer. If he adds another WTF and AO to it, then he'd be clearly ahead IMO. Plus a Cincinnati title would help too but not pivotal IMO.

ShankyCricket wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Personally, I think if Novak wins one more US open it kind of makes his over abundance of AOs less and less relative. The guy has been to six finals there and simply ran into the best Nadal I have ever seen at USO 2010 and really 2013 and peak fed in 2007, as well as the loss to another all time great Murray in a tight 5 set windstorm. I think if Novak wins another USO he is clearly the more accomplished hardcourt player. But even if he doesn't, I think winning another 2 more AOs so that he has more slams will also do the trick. He is getting pretty close. Interestingly, Fed could be considered the GOAT but not be the GOAT on any single surface. Pete has as legitimate a claim in my opinion for Grass court GOAT I think in his peak he would probably beat anyone, Nadal is clearly the clay goat, and Djokovic most likely will finish as the most accomplished player on hardcourt and the hardcourt GOAT.

All time great? Jesus Christ!

Agree with the rest of the post. Another win at the USO would put Novak on par with Federer. If he adds another WTF and AO to it, then he'd be clearly ahead IMO. Plus a Cincinnati title would help too but not pivotal IMO.

Can you name another player with double digit master's and double digit slam finals and is a multislam winner that isn't considered an all time great? If Murray had the good fortune of being born within 12 months of fat Dave and Marat "I don't train" Safin as opposed to Djokovic and Nadal he would have 6-10 slams by now. His win perc., number of tourneys won, number of master's won, number of slam finals are all indicative of a player with many more slams. Its not his fault he was born in the heart of the golden generation.