Who is the true goat in Tennis ?

Remove this Banner Ad

Kram

I'll brik u
May 2, 2007
65,356
82,312
WA
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Chicago Bears, de Boer, Arsenal
lol. Well, you go back in time ten years and tell everybody that they shouldn’t use it.
You are a highly intelligent man that's been on here for 15 years and you are still bothering with Gunnar's argument clinic?
 

Sweet Jesus

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 20, 2014
24,331
20,237
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
lol. Well, you go back in time ten years and tell everybody that they shouldn’t use it.
That's not an argument.

I've explained to you why "Big Four" is/was a misnomer. And your response is what? "Nah people said it". Like that makes any case about whether it makes sense or not?

You claim there was a Big Four in 2009, three years before Murray won a major. What a load of rubbish. I guess there's a Big Four now as well, including Dominic Thiem? He's made 3 major finals, which is more than Murray had managed by 2009. Big Four with Thiem! Right?

You should go back in time and not respond in the first place if you're going to say stupid sh*t.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Underarm

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 13, 2011
9,464
11,579
AFL Club
Richmond
That's not an argument.

I've explained to you why "Big Four" is/was a misnomer. And your response is what? "Nah people said it". Like that makes any case about whether it makes sense or not?

You claim there was a Big Four in 2009, three years before Murray won a major. What a load of rubbish. I guess there's a Big Four now as well, including Dominic Thiem? He's made 3 major finals, which is more than Murray had managed by 2009. Big Four with Thiem! Right?

You should go back in time and not respond in the first place if you're going to say stupid sh*t.
From 2008-2013 the Big 4 occupied the top 4 ranking spots. They won 47/54 masters 1000 tournaments (Murray won 9 of them)

In 2015/16 they won 17/18 Masters 1000, Murray won 5.

Murray has never been as durable as the other 3, but he is so far ahead of every other Males tennis player over that period.
 

Sweet Jesus

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 20, 2014
24,331
20,237
Hong Kong
AFL Club
West Coast
From 2008-2013 the Big 4 occupied the top 4 ranking spots. They won 47/54 masters 1000 tournaments (Murray won 9 of them)

In 2015/16 they won 17/18 Masters 1000, Murray won 5.

Murray has never been as durable as the other 3, but he is so far ahead of every other Males tennis player over that period.
So far ahead? He and Wawrinka both won 3 majors.

There's less distance between them than there is between Murray and the Big Three.

You go all the way back to 2008 to talk about Big Four? Murray didn't win a major until 2012! How can a Big Three, Four or Five include someone who hasn't won a major?
 

Burton89onegoal

Team Captain
Jan 1, 2019
468
1,065
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Rod Laver won the Grand Slam twice in his career. 1962 and 1969.

Everyone else since is in his shadow.

Enuff said!
Laver is before my time, but my dad's view on him is that hes over-rated because he won many Grand Slam tournaments due to lack of quality opposition caused by commencement of the split between pro and amateur circuits.
 

Caesar

Ex-Huckleberry
Mar 3, 2005
27,103
12,852
Tombstone, AZ
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Laver is before my time, but my dad's view on him is that hes over-rated because he won many Grand Slam tournaments due to lack of quality opposition caused by commencement of the split between pro and amateur circuits.
I suspect your dad is getting Rod Laver and Roy Emerson confused.
 
Last edited:

boncer34

Formerly "Dos23"
Jul 11, 2005
51,577
57,710
Baghdad
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Melbourne Storm
Laver is before my time, but my dad's view on him is that hes over-rated because he won many Grand Slam tournaments due to lack of quality opposition caused by commencement of the split between pro and amateur circuits.
Your Dad is wrong. He won 11 grand slams. 6 in the amateur era and then 5 (including his 2nd Grand Slam) in the open era.

He also won 8 pro slams.
 

cricketnut14

All Australian
Jan 13, 2015
903
434
AFL Club
Sydney
this is a great argument and not as clear cut like cricket eg. bradman.

fed, nadal and joker all have genuine claims and all could have won more slams if they weren't playing in the same era.

laver, emerson and sampras and the like are all there abouts as well.

had one of them played in a seperate era and collect say 30 slams would they be considered the greatest?

the head to head with fed, nadal & joker are again only another indicator as they fed played them while being older.
 

boncer34

Formerly "Dos23"
Jul 11, 2005
51,577
57,710
Baghdad
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Melbourne Storm
this is a great argument and not as clear cut like cricket eg. bradman.

fed, nadal and joker all have genuine claims and all could have won more slams if they weren't playing in the same era.

laver, emerson and sampras and the like are all there abouts as well.

had one of them played in a seperate era and collect say 30 slams would they be considered the greatest?

the head to head with fed, nadal & joker are again only another indicator as they fed played them while being older.
When Novak won his first title Fed was in his peak.

It's not exactly like they're 23 playing some 38 year old.
 

Herne Hill Hammer

Premium Platinum
Jun 22, 2008
22,612
18,584
Cowes
AFL Club
Geelong
Jury is still out on the absolute best, chances are Novak and Rafa will overtake Federer.

I haven’t seen any better than the current top 3 and that’s going back till about 1990
If I had to pay money to watch someone play tennis it would be prime John Patrick McEnroe who as far as I can find, still holds the record for the best win - loss record in a season. He might have carried on like a flog at times but he could make that ball talk, the guy was a freak. I include watching him play doubles with Fleming too.
 

Blue1980

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 9, 2011
14,479
16,787
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
If I had to pay money to watch someone play tennis it would be prime John Patrick McEnroe who as far as I can find, still holds the record for the best win - loss record in a season. He might have carried on like a flog at times but he could make that ball talk, the guy was a freak. I include watching him play doubles with Fleming too.
What sets the current 3 apart is the longevity
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

HahnPremium

Premiership Player
Jun 19, 2008
3,213
7,407
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Im old school. As in havent kept abreast of the current crop. Like Thiem etc. Well acquainted with Joker, nadal and fed.
But borg.
Right up there in the convo methinks. Retired at age 27.
5 wimbledons consecutively.
Great rivalry with connors then mac.
For a time, there was a prevailing thought that barely anyone could beat him. Had that aura.
Obviously had personal demons which caused retirement and his subsequent struggles.
Came on early like a true prodigy.
Sometimes feel he is lost in discussions such as this.
 

thetank

Club Legend
Aug 1, 2009
1,424
1,096
AFL Club
Melbourne
Rod Laver is the goat.

Has the titles (including most singles titles at 200), the dominance across a long span (2 calendar slams, separated by 7 years). Undoubtedly more majors would have been won between 1963-67 when he was Pro. And, was also playing doubles and mixed doubles at a high level.
 

eaglespremiers

BigFooty Forger
Jun 24, 2009
19,466
11,923
In your dreams
AFL Club
West Coast
Tomorrow night's game seems pretty pertinent to this debate.
Either Nadal matches Federer in total Grand Slams or Djokovic moves one closer, while at the same time being the only one of the three to win all four grand slams at least twice. And he would be beating the king of clay to do it.
 

FreoRicci

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 22, 2011
17,499
16,241
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Liverpool FC, Washington Wizards
Tomorrow night's game seems pretty pertinent to this debate.
Either Nadal matches Federer in total Grand Slams or Djokovic moves one closer, while at the same time being the only one of the three to win all four grand slams at least twice. And he would be beating the king of clay to do it.
Nadal equal GOAT.
It’s without a doubt Novak, Nadal and Federer are greatest trio in history. Professional sports is cruel, harsh yet all three just dominance year after year for last 10+ years. Unmatched.
Nadal will surpass Federer then Novak. Nadal, Novak then Federer all time by end of careers.
 

Caesar

Ex-Huckleberry
Mar 3, 2005
27,103
12,852
Tombstone, AZ
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Rod Laver is the goat.

Has the titles (including most singles titles at 200), the dominance across a long span (2 calendar slams, separated by 7 years). Undoubtedly more majors would have been won between 1963-67 when he was Pro. And, was also playing doubles and mixed doubles at a high level.
Laver could also have won a lot more majors in the Open Era if he had been bothered.

In 1969 he completely blitzed the tour - not only winning the Grand Slam but accruing 18 titles in a season (still a record).

After proving he could do it, he pretty much ignored Grand Slams for the rest of his career. Still played them here and there, but focused his energy on the big money tournaments and exhibitions. Didn’t win another major title.

Counting Slam titles just wasn’t a thing until Sampras came along. Once he’d won the Grand Slam, Laver had reached the top of the mountain. That was it.

Ironically the only player who really challenged Laver was Pancho Gonzales - and he only ever won a solitary 2 US Opens. It was a very different era.
 

juss

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 23, 2009
24,919
32,420
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
New York Jets
For me it's Federer, but if someone argued Nadal or Djokovic by career's end, then I wouldn't have an issue. I think it will be between those 3 when they all retire.
 

Remove this Banner Ad