Greatest Men’s Tennis Player of this Era (poll)

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Which player will be remembered as the greatest men’s tennis player of this era (and possibly of all-time)? You can look at age and predict the rest of their careers, so it isn’t really a “if they all retired right now” question.

Grand Slams
Roger Federer (37) - 20 Grand Slams
Rafael Nadal (33) - 18 Grand Slams
Novak Djokovic (32) - 15 Grand Slams

It’s obvious Nadal is the best clay surface player who will ever live, but the question isn’t looking for a divided answer about who is the best on which surface. Question is who is the best overall player of the era, all things considered. And though Nadal’s Roland Garros success certainly is huge, if you take away any of their highest Grand Slam event totals, it makes a size-able difference for all of them.

Grand Slams minus best tournament
Federer (minus 8 Wimbledons) - 12 Grand Slams
Djokovic (minus 7 Aussie Opens) - 8 Grand Slams
Nadal (minus 12 French Opens) - 6 Grand Slams

Head to Head
Nadal 24, Federer 15 (Nadal 10-3 in Grand Slams, Nadal 4-3 non-clay Grand Slams)
Djokovic 25, Federer 22 (Djokovic 9-6 in Grand Slams)
Djokovic 28, Nadal 26 (Nadal 9-6 in Grand Slams, Djokovic 5-3 non-clay Grand Slams)

*Important to note that Federer has played a lot of these matches post-prime, whereas Nadal and Djokovic were in theirs, though Federer also built up a big lead when Djokovic was developing.

 

[BTTA]

Federer, because he brought so much aesthetic to how he played. He was the Gale Sayers of tennis.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Federer, because he brought so much aesthetic to how he played. He was the Gale Sayers of tennis.

If he ends up trailing in Grand Slams, does that matter to posterity? Just playing devils advocate.

 

[italian pat patriot]

Swiss one...

 

[BobDigital]

It's very interesting how the grand slam titles have worked out.

The top 3 players as far as titles are all players currently playing right now. The 4th is Pete Sampras who won 14 titles 1990-2002

I wonder why it is that the 4 (or 3 depending on where you cut off) most accomplished players as far wins have been recent players. It isn't like a 4th major tournament was added recently. It's been the same 4 major line up for over 100 years.

On to your question on who is the best of all time.

Nadal? I don't think so. 12 of his 18 titles are from the french open (on clay). Outside of that particular format he hasn't dominated enough. While he clearly the best clay player of all time I think he over specialized on that surface. The best player of all time needs to be able to get it done on a typical court and Nadal hasn't shown that.

So it comes down to Federer or Djokovic.

I would give the nod to Ferderer. He was rarely the same after 2008 when he got injured. So while Djokovic manage to pile up victories against him and Nadal on non-clay surfaces he usually only faced Federer out of his prime and injured and Nadal who when not on clay is a tiny bit of a paper tiger (compared to his reputation as one of the GOATs on a general surface).

 

[SBLIII]

Federer really needs to win this years Wimbledon to hold on. The other 2 are breathing on his neck.

 

[farn]

All three are fantastic.

Going Federer. Ray though.... love that he killed a few guys.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Federer as he has won Grand Slams on all surfaces.

 

[morristc89]

Federer as he has won Grand Slams on all surfaces.

As has Nadal and Djokovic

 

[Joker]

Ilie Nastase

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Clearly this is a minority opinion (poll results), but I think Djokovic will be regarded as the greatest. He has won all of his tournaments with Nadal and Federer in play (remember, Federer won already dominating for years when Nadal emerged.). Djokovic is also a great clay player who has has the unfortunate fate of having Nadal to stop him from winning a lot of titles at Roland Garros. And I think Djokovic still has a lot of good tennis left in him. I don’t know if Nadal is really a good bet of winning a grand slam outside of the French Open anymore, whereas Djokovic will have four prime chances each year for awhile, and he’s likely to outlast the other two and have the field to himself. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if he finishes with more than 20, and maybe closer to 25.

Agree that aesthetically Federer will always be the perfect tennis player though...and so likable and easy to root for.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

It's very interesting how the grand slam titles have worked out.

The top 3 players as far as titles are all players currently playing right now. The 4th is Pete Sampras who won 14 titles 1990-2002

I wonder why it is that the 4 (or 3 depending on where you cut off) most accomplished players as far wins have been recent players. It isn't like a 4th major tournament was added recently. It's been the same 4 major line up for over 100 years.

On to your question on who is the best of all time.

Nadal? I don't think so. 12 of his 18 titles are from the french open (on clay). Outside of that particular format he hasn't dominated enough. While he clearly the best clay player of all time I think he over specialized on that surface. The best player of all time needs to be able to get it done on a typical court and Nadal hasn't shown that.

So it comes down to Federer or Djokovic.

I would give the nod to Ferderer. He was rarely the same after 2008 when he got injured. So while Djokovic manage to pile up victories against him and Nadal on non-clay surfaces he usually only faced Federer out of his prime and injured and Nadal who when not on clay is a tiny bit of a paper tiger (compared to his reputation as one of the GOATs on a general surface).

You could argue that Nadal’s greatness off-clay is underrated for the same reason Fedjoker’s greatness on-clay is underrated. Federer and Djokovic lost so many times at the French Open because of the Death Star that is Nadal. On the other hand, Nadal is 6-8 in grass/hard surfaces in the Finals, the losses largely due to to playing historically dominant players in Federer and Djokovic. In other words, Federer and Djokovic probably win 2-3 additional clay titles without Nadal. Nadal probably wins 5-6 more non-clay titles without those two. He made it to 14 finals off clay...on a hard/grass court he is amazing as well.

Grand Slam Finals Appearances
Federer - 30
Nadal - 26
Djokovic - 24

 

[RobertWeathers]

As has Nadal and Djokovic

I went from memory. You are correct.

I'd still pick Federer in his prime over those two

 

[IcyPatriot]

I hate f'n tennis ... but those 3 guys are all great ... don't see 1 greater than the others.

 

[varjao]

My man Federer

 

[Boomer B]

Hmm.

Nadal great on clay
Federer maybe best ever
Djokovic a bit over looked
Ray Lewis killed a guy, maybe 2, and got away with it


Gotta go Ray Lewis here

 

[upstater1]

Many years ago, I worked for the top sports agency in the world, and though they were agents for Michael Jordan, tennis was their bread & butter. While the Grand Slam events are legit in terms of players competing to the best of their abilities, so many of the other events were as corrupt as they come. Shocking how often the players and agents arranged thrown matches.

You still hear some of it today, as with commentaries about Nick Kyrgios making it obvious when he's throwing matches. A true professional throws matches without the fans being much the wiser.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

ive only watched womens tennis

 

[BobDigital]

ive only watched womens tennis

Women's tennis tends to be more fun and I like the format. More volleys and shorter matches. I prefer that. Personally I would like male tennis more if they changed the rackets to take some zip off the ball and went to 3 sets.

Another issue tennis has is a great point is still only one point (15/10 points in tennis terms). You don't get extra points for making an amazing between the legs shot . : P

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Women's tennis tends to be more fun and also i like the format. More volleys and shorter matches. I prefer that. Personally I would like male tennis more if they changed the rackets to take some zip off the ball and went to 3 sets, but 5 is a lot of sets with very few truly tense moments or jaw dropping plays.

Another issue tennis have is a great point is still only one. You don't get extra for making an amazing between the legs shot to get the point. : P

Dude...what??