I don’t think so at a major final. I think half has to do with him being a gigantic douche and the other half being the neutral that wants the dog to make it a match.
Yep - there’s going to be people who say Matteo didn’t step up, but when you have to hit a winner to win every single point, he’s nearly unbeatable.
No one in the world is even close to his level. If he does the load management thing well he’ll finish 5-7 clear of second place in men’s majors at a minimum. Could be ten plus if all the bounces go his way. Just a shame the state of second tier in men’s tennis.
On paper, I think he’s already the greatest ever. By the time he’s done, not sure it’ll be particularly close.
From a numbers standpoint it won’t be. It’s going to be isolated in different slices though. Rafa will always have the clay. Roger will always have a strong faction advocating for him. From my standpoint they are certainly top three, don’t really care about order. If anything I have more respect for someone like Andy Murray. Not in the sense that he belongs in the conversation but he was a level of great that really didn’t exist much while these three just slayed. Only other hopes in there were youngsters, the perpetually injured and the occasional lucky fellow who scooped up some shit when they were down and out. I don’t think we can even say definitively that there’s another Andy out there now. Also that’s certainly not going to happen with current Djokovic out there.
Interesting to see it laid out like this that Djokovic has spent basically his entire career multiple years in age behind the other two for the same number of titles.
IMO. If Djoker wins the US Open and wins the slam, no one will have a legitimate debate that Fed or Nadal are better than him. He’ll have a year Slam and already has career Grand Slam twice.
Yeah, I’m not much into that debate. That said I am alright with however anyone ranks them. They were all great, I just think the most interesting thing is lack of secondary competition during their runs. And I get it, you beat what’s in front of you, just the angle that makes it most interesting to me.
Which makes sense considering he had to break through with the other two as established greats. What's scary is how many he would have won without those two guys being a few years older than him.
Yeah - I think Willpépé is looking at it wrong. There’s been plenty of secondary competition. The difference is just that we have had the three best ever all at the same time completely dominating the sport.
I see where you got that but not trying to direct it that way. I agree with you just saying the angle that interests me most is that one.
Nothing against the surely fine folks in Bastad, but this Swedish clay after two weeks of Wimby just isn’t doing it.
I think the biggest knock on Djokovic is many around the sport believe he is doping. Not sure if it’s unfounded are not, but it’s certainly discussed and people in the sport think he may be
They pop people for doping in tennis. Even if he was and could get away with it, I personally wouldn’t care. His biggest knock is that he’s a gigantic fucking douchebag.
I think he is either doping or has some kind of mental illness that allows him to be a psychopath on the tennis courts. Dude seemingly never runs out of gas. My man pistol Pete would have taken care of him back in the day.
First round singles match involving a German player, though the opponent of the German player is the one triggering the investigation.
Players who played a German in the first round. If you cut down to players who lost and went more than 2 sets, it’s just Rinderknech, Griekspoor and Opelka.