Who is goat in tennis

Career-High Ranking Pts. Weeks at No. Weeks at Elo Top 5 Pts. Peak Elo Rating Pts. Achievements Pts. Big Wins Pts. H2H Pts. Records Pts. Best Seasons Pts. Greatest Rivalries Pts. Performance Pts. Statistics Pts. Why Open Era only? How it is calculated? Season capping Extrapolation caps estimated points in a single season to the maximum points someone earned in one season at a specific age.

Career capping Extrapolation caps estimated points for the whole career to the 10 times points earned in the Open Era. All the evidence points to the fact that Federer is the best to ever hold a racket. Federer leads the pack with 16 grand slams, followed by Sampras at 14, Roy Emerson at 12, Borg and Laver at Nadal is behind with While some may contend that Federer competed in a weak era, this is untrue.

Federer was such a strong player that he made others look weak, when they were actually part of one of the best generations of tennis players to date. Federer also has been to 23 straight semifinals at grand slams, and 23 finals at grand slams. Not only that, Federer has been to a record 29 straight quarterfinals at grand slams. Pete Sampras holds the record here, but Federer is close behind with weeks occupying the top spot, compared to weeks for Sampras.

Meanwhile, Nadal has held the top spot for about 2 years, or weeks. However, Federer does hold the record for most consecutive weeks, with weeks. Sampras leads the pack in most year end no. Nadal has only had two years in which he ended the year at no. Question: How do you comment on the fact that Djokovic has a better score H2H vs. Nadal and vs. And Fed has a negative score vs. Few grand slams to Djokovic and few more wins vs.

Fed and Nadal so the score can be even better , and for me, he is the goat with no doubt. Answer: The head to head between the three players is very close. You have to take into consideration the playing surface and also their age. Federer is the oldest by almost five years, so obviously you would expect Nadal and Djokovic to have an advantage, especially at this point in their careers.

Likewise, Nadal excels on clay so he would have a distinct advantage when playing on this surface. If you take their entire body of work into account, I think most ratings will have Federer as the greatest of all-time. Question: If Federer is the greatest men's tennis player, why was he never able to beat Nadal on the clay?

Answer: Clay is just one surface, if you take that out of the picture the advantage goes to Federer. Consider also that Nadal is five years younger than Federer.

Answer: I think without a doubt that Rafael Nadal is the best player to ever play on clay. Certainly his 11 French Open titles should be enough to make this perfectly clear. Question: What do you think about the masters series complete by Novak? Answer: Following completion of the U.

Completing the Masters Slam is quite a feat, and Novak certainly seems to be back in top form. Question: After Novak's win at Wimbledon , do you think he deserves to be at number three? Answer: Novak is certainly making a case to be considered among the top three all-time players. What makes moving up for him difficult is that Rod Laver, who many people have never seen play, was really a great player and one of the few from that era that I think would give today's greats a run for their money.

For the time being, I will leave Novak in the number five position and wait to see how he fares at the US Open. Certainly, a win at the US Open could convince me to at least to move him into the number four slot. Question: If Nadal has beaten Federer more than the reverse, how can you justify Federer as the best player? One on one results must be the deciding factor if most other criteria are close.

Answer: For starters Nadal is four years younger than Federer so age does play a role. Also, although Nadal leads in head-to-head matches , 13 of those wins came on clay where Nadal is very much at home and is the best on that surface.

If you take clay court matches out of the mix, Federer has the advantage of in head-to-head matches. At the moment I see Roger as the greatest of all-time. Answer: If Djokovic stays healthy and continues to play the way he is capable of playing I think he will exceed Nadal's GS titles and will eventually find himself as Number 2 all-time.

Answer: I think the edge would go to Roger Federer. I say this because as good as Rafa is, most of his Grand Slam titles came on the clay of Roland Garros. Looking at their head to head matches Rafa holds a edge, but 13 of those victories came on clay. Federer holds the advantage on hard courts and grass. How fortunate for us that we get to see two of the greatest players of all-time play. Enjoy it while it lasts. Answer: Seven Grand Slam titles but he never made it past the quarterfinals of Wimbledon.

I think he falls somewhere in the top 15 or so. His career faded way too early for me to consider him top Granted he has two Olympic Gold Medals, but his results, while good, do not place him in my top ten all-time.

Answer: I have actually been considering including Rosewall in this top 10 list recently. I only saw him play at the end of his career, but after reviewing his record, I do think it would be appropriate to include him. Look for an updated list in the next few weeks that will include Ken Rosewall. Question: Why isn't Borris Becker on the list of greatest men's tennis players? Answer: I think Boris Becker is a top 15 player based on his career.

He had six Grand Slam titles and three semi-final appearances in the French Open, which was certainly not his preferred surface. Question: Is Federer facing difficulties with younger tennis players such as Anderson? Answer: At Wimbledon Roger Federer let a two set lead over Kevin Anderson get away from him and wound up losing in five sets in the quarter-finals.

Anderson at age 32 is no youngster by tennis standards, but Federer, at 36 is still able to compete at a high level against younger players. Question: How would you rate Lleyton Hewitt?

Any chance in the top 20 or 25 tennis players of all time? Top 25, perhaps. Top 30, most definitely. I loved watching Hewitt play. He achieved some great results at a young age at a time when the level of competition was quite high. Question: Don't you feel Boris Becker deserves to be in the top three of male tennis players? Answer: No, I do not feel that Boris Becker should be in the top three all-time. I think Becker, who certainly was a great player is more of a top 15 player all-time.

Question: Why are Grand Slams given such importance when determining the greatest men's tennis players of all time? Grand Slam success, given its five-set nature, demonstrates how good your physical conditioning is, not how good a tennis player you are.

Answer: I suppose it's because Grand Slams are the events that draw all of the top players, which makes them the most competitive tournaments. I do think that the five-set match is a fair determination of who is better in a head to head match, and certainly, a player's level of physical conditioning is an important part of how good a player they are.

If you take the player's physical conditioning out of the equation then what do they play? Best of three sets? How about just a single set and the winner moves on? Physical conditioning is just one part of the equation along with all of the other things that make a player great; speed, agility, mental toughness, shot selection, strategy, etc. Answer: Andy Murray has some work to do before he can be considered in the top 10 all-time.

Question: Why is Boris Becker not in the list of the top 10 greatest men's tennis players? Answer: Boris Becker was a great tennis player. He had a great career, but with just 6 Grand Slam titles, 49 ATP titles, and only 12 weeks ranked number 1 in the world, I think he is more a top all-time player than a top Question: Do you feel the fact that playing surfaces are more similar than they used to be e.

Answer: I think the best players will rise to the top no matter the surface. Certainly some players excel on specific surfaces such as Nadal on clay and Federer on faster surfaces, but these players can compete on any surface.

I do think that Federer and Nadal are the cream of the crop, although it is difficult to compare players of different generations and playing styles.

I think Roger and Rafael are racking up more slams because they are playing longer and are able to maintain a high level of play despite aging. Question: Roger or Rafa will probably go down as the greatest male tennis players of all time. Certainly the current generation of players including Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic along with perhaps Murray and Wawrinka at times would be one.

Certainly a formidable collection of greats. And perhaps my favorite era, at least to watch, would be Connors, McEnroe, and Borg along with a few years later Wilander and then Lendl although he was really mid to late s. Tough call. The s really was a great time for tennis. As the years go by sometimes we tend to overlook or forget just how good the level of competition was. I think the number of players capable of winning a Grand Slam title was probably never better than the s.

How many depends on how long they play and how healthy they stay. With Nadal's dominance at the French Open, I can see him winning multiple more titles there. If he plays long enough he could approach 25 Grand Slam titles although that might be a reach. Question: I would like to know how many people are employed around a single tennis player. I have read somewhere that top players have over 60 people on their team? If this is true, then, can we compare era in tennis?

Lower ranked players simply cannot pay for a large entourage and therefore may have a team of just a few. The highest ranked players who earn the most can afford to have multiple coaches, fitness experts, cooks, etc. A team of 60 sounds high to me, but certainly, the top players are surrounded by a large contingent. Obviously, the technology of tennis racquets and the fitness level of players today is much more advanced than it was 50 years ago.

This certainly is a big reason why it is so difficult to compare players of different generations. Question: Don't you think there are some older players we don't talk much about like Arthur Ashe or even older, Rene Lacoste? Answer: Absolutely. I was a big Arthur Ashe fan during his career, and I think he is definitely not talked about as much as he should be. There were a lot of great players who have come and gone, many who definitely deserve to be remembered and talked about.

Question: At the top three positions for men's tennis players, what do you think the list will look like in five years? Answer: Five years from now I think the top three will still be Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic, but I think the order will be different from what we have today. Presumably, Federer will be retired by then, possibly also Nadal, but we will have to wait and see. Should be some great tennis in the years ahead. Answer: Pete Sampras officially retired on August 25, at the age of 32, although his last match was at the US Open, which he won.

Some players are capable of playing well into their thirties and despite still playing at a high level he had slowed a bit and decided to call it a career. Good for him for ending his career on a high note with a Grand Slam title. Question: Shouldn't Poncho Gonzalez be included in a list of the ten greatest men's tennis players of all time? Answer: I debated whether to include Rosewall or Gonzalez in the top ten and certainly, a case can be made to include both.

Head to head Gonzalez had the advantage, but he was older and more experienced when Rosewall first started making a name for himself. Both had long careers, well over titles, and were ranked number 1 in the world for many years. Perhaps at some point, I will re-evaluate? Answer: No, Roger Federer is just being more selective with the tournaments that he enters. He has decided to skip the French Open to prepare for Wimbledon. Answer: Len Hoad had a great tennis career.

Were it not for the back problems that plagued him during a good part of his playing days he could have produced even better results. That said, he did win 4 Grand Slams as an amateur player in addition to the Pro Tournament of Champions. I would place Lew Hoad in the 15 to 20 range all-time. Question: Do you believe Alexander Zverev will be on this list by the end of his career?

He has shown that he is capable of beating anyone including Federer and Djokovic. Question: What do you think, if Novak gets the same number of Grand Slams as Federer, should we consider him the best of all time? Answer: When their careers are over I think Novak will have the most Grand Slams and will be considered the great of all-time. Just my opinion and speculation, but I think that's how it will end up when their playing days are over. Answer: Boris Becker was a great tennis player, just not top With 6 Grand Slam titles, 49 career titles, and a number 1 ranking for only twelve weeks it's hard to place him in the top Top 15, most definitely.

Question: Probably not in the top 10 but I'd be interested to know where you would place Guillermo Vilas? It was before my time, but it sounds like he could match it with Connors and the like.

Answer: Vilas was a great player. I had the pleasure of watching him play many times and he could certainly compete with anyone. I would probably place him in the top 20, maybe even top Answer: I think John Newcombe is very close to the top 10 of all time. Certainly, he is in the top 12 or 13 at worst, and some might even include him in the top Seven Grand Slam singles titles plus an amazing seventeen Grand Slam doubles titles are pretty impressive.

Answer: Marcelo Rios was a very good player, just nowhere near the top 10 all-time. He was briefly ranked number 1 in the world in , but he failed to win a Grand Slam championship and has only 18 career titles to his resume. His best Grand Slam result was reaching the finals of the Australian Open, which he lost to Petr Korda in straight sets.

Answer: John McEnroe was a great tennis player. He won seven Grand Slam titles and was the number 1 ranked player in the world for weeks during his career. I was fortunate to have been able to watch McEnroe during his entire career, and he had some memorable matches against the other greats of his era including Jimmy Connors, Bjorn Borg, and Ivan Lendl.

Question: Why is your top 10 missing Pancho Gonzalez on the list? He was 1 in the world for 8 years. Answer: Roger Federer has won 20 Grand Slam singles titles as of the end of It is the greatest test of all, with best of 5 set matches.

May the best of those 3 players end up with the most Grand Slam singles titles. I am sure those 3 players will agree to it. The best professional tennis players take the Grand Slam singles titles the most seriously.

Year end number 1 or a great number of weeks at number 1 is nice for the top players, but they would happily trade it for an extra Grand Slam singles title. Of course, the other tournaments just prior to the Grand Slam tournaments are mainly just practice or preparation for the top players, should they choose to play them.

Many of these top players even choose to skip these tournaments prior to the Grand Slam tournaments as they prefer to rest or simply practice with their coach or practice partners.

With the exception of the Coronavirus, most top players build their tennis career around playing the Grand Slam tournaments and anything else they may achieve is simply a bonus, not the main priority for them.

The overlooked selection criteria for GOAT, if we are only comparing the tennis careers of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic, needs to be taken into account, as the great Rod Laver was in a completely different era as far as racquets, professionalism, technology, coaches and entourages were concerned:.

If the above points are not addressed, then you can only go by the number of Grand Slam singles titles won by each player after they have all stopped competing in Grand Slam singles tournaments because unfortunately injuries are part of the game and Federer has been the least injury prone of the 3 for their careers.

Poor Murray of late and Del Potro for most of his tennis career can attest to this misfortune. When you start GOAT debate But when you have three players around same time Big three then grand slam titles are good indicator who is better player.

In my opinion all three players failed to capture substantial GS title lead. So neither of big three can claim they were best even current era. Djokovic: most dominant at his peak while having toughest comeptition than Federer in , He loves to eat grass lol. Djokovic wins, because he is more versatile. Nobody have to agree with my opinion. Even Ivan Lendl. I just present my opinion which is a bit different to GS dogma.

If you want you can laugh at my ideas. I typed that it is not real because underestimates Nadal. In practice it is almost impossible to stay at No 1 without any current GS title. My simplified statistics is also suitable for anticipation of the future. Of course future is unnown, but I can try to draw some conclusion. My simplified statistics show that in my opinion:. Difference in GS between them could be a matter of luck or injury.

No of weeks couldn't. I will send here my simplified statistics after each GS tournament with comments. You don't have to reply. For me, the only statistic that will matter in the end who ends up winning the most Grand Slam singles titles out of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic after all 3 players have retired.

Write any load of nonsense you want, hhfan. That will make the happiest person in the world. Most tennis fans will remember and will remember in the years to come who won the most Grand Slam singles titles, not who finished the year end number 1, not who won the Master Series Events, not who won the Davis Cup, and so on.

HHfan, you cannot be serious! The question is who will end up winning the equal or greatest number of Grand Slam singles titles in the shortest timeframe. Complete nonsense HHfan. Really, that is the most laughable, ridiculous and most absurd suggestion I have ever heard in my life when you typed 52 weeks at number 1 equates to 4 Grand Slam singles titles.

In my mind, that equates to no Grand Slam singles titles! Really, you are living in a fantasy world. Back to the Tennis History lecture theatre for you. Winning an equal number of the most Grand Slam singles titles in a shorter time frame is the best statistic. Congratulations Mickey Donev. Both you and Ivan Lendl make the most sense and the best suggestions. Mickey Donev makes a brilliant point, which I have been dwelling on for years, is about winning the Grand Slam singles titles in a shorter time frame.

The fact that Nadal has won only 1 less Grand Slam singles title than Federer in 20 less Grand Slam singles tournaments is a magnificent achievement by Nadal. Well said, Mickey. That particular statistic says a lot.

Hhfan, your statistical data are purely based on assumption. They are unproven in a Tennis environment. There is no such thing as a GOAT. You cannot compare different eras, no matter what statistical data you wish to use. I strongly believe you can only go by who ends up with the most Grand Slam singles titles after all 3 have retired. I shall keep repeating that over and over again. Ivan Lendl and I only want to deal with the reality of facts of who ends up winning the most Grand Slam singles titles.

It would not matter to me if you or anyone else in this article were in reality, the best experts in statistical analysis in the world. Everyone in this article is entitled to their own opinion.

Regardless of what you write and I understand this is an article about fantasy GOAT rankings, I still only care about who will end up with the reality of the most Grand Slam singles titles, after all 3 of Federer, Djokovic and Nadal have retired. It would not matter to me if you or anyone else were the lecturer trying to explain your theory to me in different ways for a whole semester or more.

Ivan Lendl and I are only interested in who ends with the most Grand Slam singles titles. I am not saying you or your anyone else are wrong, I am simply saying I want to see who wins the most Grand Slam singles titles.

GOAT is not even in my vocabulary. When you take under consideration GS titles only - player A wins. For me GS statistics is oversimplified. The 9th is Agassi with weeks. From the statistical point of view 1 year 52 weeks at No 1 is a very similar achevement to 4 Grand Slams!!! Of course from the attention of the crowd or commercial matters perspective GS titles are much much more important than ATP rank.

Also players care much more about GS. Nadal is underestimated here. That's why I think Nole has a slightly more chances specially if he develop his attack game near the net like "late" RF did. There are lot of parameters that were not taken into consideration.

GS equals points, Masters , Tour Finals is etc.