The Tennis G.O.A.T. Debate is settled? - Jon to ANDY RODDICK on NOVAK DJOKOVIC & the G.O.A.T. debate
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 02. 2024
- Andy Roddick and Jon Wertheim discuss the G.O.A.T. debate and Novak Djokovic.
Full Episode: • Roddick talks with sup...
Watch and listen to new episodes of Served with Andy Roddick every Tuesday during & check us out on Instagram, Twitter and TikTok for all the best moments from the show. - Sport
The fact that roddick chose novak over roger rafa by keeping feelings aside is worth 🙌👌 despite the history roddick had with novak 😂 is really worth appreciation 👏👏👏
Bravo roddick
roddick does this because it makes him look better since now he can say he has a winning record OVER THE GOAT!
This podcast should be at least 50% Roddick nerding out. Brilliant insight
Awesome take Andy, I think this is the most in-depth I've heard anyone talk about playing against Djokovic, and I feel you could go on forever. As someone mentioned in the comment section, I would throw in 'insane ability to produce consistent depth regardless of the type of ball you're throwing at him' as his second biggest superpower.
Andy, you said Djokovic’s greatest weapon is his ability to change direction. How important is his constant depth? From what I’ve seen, his ability to get the ball deep, consistently a foot away from the baseline, even in the most compromised positions must be the most infuriating thing to play against. It’s like you hit the ball hard, get a quality shot, have him doing a full split on the backhand side, but instead of being able to move forwards, the ball comes right back at your feet anyways.
I feel like that must take a toll on the opponent, right? Especially in a tiebreak where you just want easy shots, easy putaways, and instead your 135 mph serves come back at your feet.
100%
Everything you said is what makes it the greatest game plan of all time.
Rafa and Roger were freaks of nature and otherworldly shot makers but ultimately Novak had the mental advantage along with the all time game plan to beat them enough to reign supreme.
Federer is my favourite because he put the ball on his racket, which is a far riskier strategy. He choked in some big matches for sure, but he was a handful of points away from being the goat playing in the era with three of the most consistent percentage players of all time (Nadal, Djokovic and Murray) through pure skill and shot making.
Also, in terms of prime overlap I think Federer post prime had to deal with more prime Djokovic than pre prime Djokovic had to deal with prime Federer.
The timing of things has undoubtedly had an impact and while I do say that Djokovic is the best of all time, there's still arguments for the others.
When sinner took his first gs that’s how I felt about his game too. Even in compromised position he smacks the ball back.
His biggest weapon was his ability to not get tired!!
Great explanation by Andy Roddick. It's such great pleasure to have him back as a commentator who can actually demystify and give us a ground zero look of these shot mechanics, analysis and what they do to the players. As a recreational player, even I can understand what he says!
Well put Andy. Novak's qualities are more subtle and none of his shots really stand out at first glance. But in the end, tennis is mostly about percentages.
Must be very demoralizing for other players to go into a match (esp a 5 setter) with Novak knowing that he will probably neutralize a large percentage of their best shots but they likely don't have the defensive prowess to return the favour to him. So you'll probably have to hit several outstanding shots to win a point against him, but if you drop anything short, he will pounce and kill you in a second! No wonder most players don't really have the belief that they can hang with him and his consistency thru a long match.
Asides from his consistently deep groundstrokes and changing directions, Novak also has this uncanny ability to get his frustrations out of the way and reset mentally. You'll never see him play a poor game after smashing a racket or arguing with an umpire. Simply put the man never beats himself and you always have to take the racket out of his hands to win which is not an easy thing to do.
Novak is JOHN WICK of Tennis. The legendary DJOKO WICK. Mainstream nedia and corporate sponsors of roger rafa did everything to belittle this guy but the LEGEND stood above them all against all odds.
If he was from a western world, we would have already heard one of the greatest stories ever told about one of the greatest resilient sports rather human of recorded if not all time.
No doubt at all
@@user-wd7ue1wd6rYes, there is doubt.
Absolute and obvious truth🫡
"Novak is the John Wick of tennis!" Good one. 🤣
Rafa is the Batman of tennis. Batman beats Wick.
Also.. Djokovic's flexibility.. "gumby" Superpower.. more flexible than any other player..
That's true. I heard him say that he stretches 4 hours a day. He can do the splits. Stunning. A grown man at 37 years old doing the splits.
Brilliant nerd out. Damn. I was feeling panicky and smothered on the court just listening to this while eating my deep dish slice.
I agree with you about the goat talk but why would you go there by saying do I think he should of been vaccinated and you say yes come on brother novak choice was the correct choice for his well being for his health doctor verified especially 4 years later you should know your research might be a inconvenient truth to you
Yes!
One thing Roddick failed to mention is his mental toughness, Novak just doesn’t give up, multiple grandslam and masters matches where he has come back from facing match points. Doesn’t let anything perturb him not even a loud partisan crowd who is against you
he said it 😅😅 listen carrfully
Nadal doesn’t give up either.
@@Philognosis1 Nadal is the best fighter he always fights till the last point
Roger and Novak give up way more easily then Rafa like i saw in 1000 matches
Novak is not giving up vs tougher opponents in important matches that is where his mentality shines 2012 AO 2019 Wim Shanghai final vs Delpo
2021 RG finals
2020 AO finals
2012 Us open Final
2012 AO SFs and so on
When Novak want like 2013 SF RG vs Nadal
he can be equal to Rafas fighting spirit
The difference is that Nadal is Always on Fighting Spirit in every match
Roger is more smart he knows when to push himself and when to let the opponent take fast games that is why Novak and Roger have better body overall till old age while Rafi is crushed
@@Philognosis1 yeah we should have seen how many Grandslams he would have won without crowd support 🤫
@@extremeadithya Probably the same.
It's amazing to me that people still think they've got reason to criticize Novak's vaccination decision. Crazy.
lost all credibility when he said that
God bless Gill Gross for alerting me to this podcast.
Andy’s rapid fire brain, articulacy, effortless wit & his passion for & insight into tennis are simply *awesome*.
Andy that monologue towards the end describing Novak was amazing.
As a HUGE tennis fan since the late 1980s Novak's greatest strength to me is his ability to absorb whatever shot comes at him be it huge serves, deep grounstrokes breaking short angles, defy touch on dropshots just positively absorb it all and never break down, the man just cannot be broken down, then when he goes on the attack he can hit through the court better than anyone I've seen deep into the court and crack straight down the line shots on both backhand and forehand splitting his opponents game wide open example an in form Nadal Australia 2019 Novak made Rafa look kind of ordinary granted its Novaks best surface and Rafa's worst when Novak is locked in seeing it and feeling it his athleticism just leaves the guys lost (with the exception of Nadal at the French, there Nadal is just the best of all time 14 slams to Djokovic 3)
Thank andy Roddick sir ❤ and Jon sir ❤
Novak Djokovic ❤
The fact that you are apologizing whole time for doing that article and choosing him as a GOAT speaks how much you don't like him and how hard was for you to acknowledge his greatness. Just listen to yourselves. This is ridiculous!
It's kind of a giveaway too when the sports writer takes a controversial issue like jab mandates and just glibly declares that anyone in disagreement with the establishment narrative is wrong. If you're even a little open-minded, no matter which way you lean, that cannot help but elicit a laugh. It's like they know they need to appease their overlords to stay employed, and they know their overlords aren't capable of handling even the slightest challenge to their zealotry.
@@RichardABradley-ze9qn It's really only liberals and the media that care about the jab or hold it against him.
Actually that's the best part of the discussion. I think most people don't WANT Djokovic to be the GOAT because he is boring to watch. (I'd rather watch Wawrinka, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Rublev or even Diego Schwartzmann.) So they are being honest about that part of it. Perhaps the writer took on this project because, subconsciously, he secretly admires Djokovic for not being a conformist worm on the most important public policy issue of the last 50 years.
I was amazed how knowledgeable Roddick proved to be! Yes, he was a professional player but he could obviously understand the game and it`s finesse even better than he could play it. He`d make a great coach!
When Djokovic wasn't close there was only one goat pretty much and a potential Challenger in Rafa. Now when Djokovic is the goat it's a debate?? Heck no, Djokovic is the goat!!
Of course NOVAK DJOKOVIC GOAT position sealed 420 40 24 #7 what people need more??😂
More Andy Roddick Nerd Outs please :)
Oh I love your new podcast, Andy! I’m already hooked.
Keep up the good work! I had the same thought, that for Novak also country of origin played a role. Azarenka made that notion at some point too. Loved your nuanced discussion. Coming from a Roger-Fan here… ;)
Thanks so much for the support!
100% agree with Andy’s point. “What Novak does well doesn’t immediately jump out to the untrained tennis eye” …that’s so true
Finnaly some objectivity from Andy... You may don't like, but DJOKOVIC IS THE GOAT!
Keep going. I love your debates.
Andy.. Novak is not 6'4" more like 2..
Let’s go with 6’3 😂
Very Interesting,, Great to give the Goat the respect he deserves.
I think one numbers-based argument both for and against Novak is how fine the margins are against Federer in two of the main categories. 27-23 head-to-head and 24-20 in the Slam count look clear on paper. If I gave you two players at 27-23, you would never believe that the weaker (Federer) actually won more of the points, games and sets between them. But that is the truth. And if just 3 of the many thousand points they played had gone differently - one each in the US Open 2010 and 2011 and Wimby 2019 - then, all else being equal, we'd be looking at a 26-24 head-to-head for Federer and a Slam count of 22-21 for Djokovic at this point. That's how little there is in it.
Part of the explanation is that Djokovic is a better player from match point up than Federer (just 4 losses vs 24). But that still leaves unexplained why it happened three times. Djokovic didn't save match point and win three times against anyone else and Federer didn't squander match point and lose three times against anyone else either. Even after you factor in that these two met more often than pretty much any other pair, that is a freak stat. Rerun the world from June 2010 and I'd bet you that 9 out of 10 times this doesn't happen. Yes, tennis success is counted in matches and tournaments, but can you come up with another pair of players where the guy leading by points, games and sets has four wins less? I can't.
That said, Djokovic runs away with it in the Masters and the weeks at number one - despite the obstacles he gave himself by refusing vaccination. It's hard to argue with that.
What you can say in Federer's favour is that he arguably had a rougher time of it because he's older. Yes, that cuts both ways, but the period where they were both active and his greater age was a bonus (pre-2010) was shorter than the period where it was a drawback (post-2010). I think the reason is that both of them rose quickly but declined slowly. More to the point: Novak rose more quickly than Federer declined, so there were only about 5 years where Federer had the chance to improve in their head-to-head but about 13 where Novak did. If Novak had come first, that dynamic would have been reversed.
I'm a Rafa fan - and his decisions during COVID are what made thim the actual GOAT. There are arguements you can make about tennis numbers and stats - there are zero arguements that this dude is firm in his convictions and didnt cave to the bullshit when most others did.
😂😂😂😂
Right... like him showing up to Australia less than 10 days after he tested positive for covid which was not allowed. Great take buddy...🤡
@@JoeV03 ... and before there was a vaccine.
I moved toward Novak after his sound decision to reject the Covid bullshit.
@@JoeV03 I bet you're still wearing a mask.🤣
Screw the EUA clot shot, c'mon man.
Andy, congrats on the podcast, LOVE IT! Thanks for the wonderful conversation with Mr. Wertheim. I totally agree, if people would place biasses aside and just focus on the resume in front of them, Novak is the GOAT hands down.
What an amazing podcast! I have thoroughly enjoyed all the episodes, but this one hits me particularly hard because of how well you have made the case for Novak as the GOAT. I have been and always will be a huge Roger fan, but after 2023 when Novak won 3 of the 4 major finals he played, he left zero room for the mental gymnastics to argue for Roger or Rafa. You both zeroed in on the things that have made Novak a bit less admired by casual fans, and you also nail it when you talk about how nuanced his super powers are.
Bravo to Andy and team for finding and filling a significant void for tennis fans. Brilliant work.
Can I suggest a theme for discussion? I’d love to hear a professional insider breakdown of how players have to adapt to various court surfaces. As an observer it’s would be helpful to understand the conditions that players deal with on various surfaces.
Djokovic is simply a tennis machine. A tennis genius ...that's basically what people cannot detect, Cannot understand. He simply does not need to go for all these glamorous shots to defeat you. That's rarely what he does when he's redlining, or goofing around and that's 001% of the time. He is just that Superior
Dude, you really wish he got vaxxed? Have you been living under a rock the last 2 years? Someone who was willing to give up everything for his beliefs (which turned out to be 100% true) should have caved into societal and government pressure? Would you say the same thing about Ali refusing to go to Vietnam?
Loser
Ha, so true
One word... sweden
@@mccaboy you mean the country with higher death rates than those countries surrounding it? Bless your heart sweetie.
@@pedropelaez a lot of over reporting n attribution to covid causes . Dig deeper into excess deaths. Warrants a discussion in which health authorities aren't keen on.
Love Novak so much. Just an incredible champion.
One match I'll never forget though, was the 2009 Wimbledon final between Andy and Roger. Even though I loved Roger, I really wanted Andy to win as it would have been cool to see someone different haha
Tell you what, though, that still ranks as one of the most spellbinding tennis matches I've ever seen and you really got the sense that this fella (Andy) through his heart and soul into it against one of the greatest players of all time and came ever so close to knocking him off.
Love the metaphor with resumes 👌🏻
The BIGGEST difference between Novak and Roger was Novak had balls of steel. In some of the tightest matches Novak just went for it and performed at a god-like level. Roger seemed to do the opposite in so many tight matches especially many critical 5 setters. Love Roger still and consider my personal GOAT but no one can take that away from Novak right now.
Novak is a players’ player. His style is something that can be learned to a certain extent. Also, he’s a cerebral player.
Fedal fans left the chat
I agree with most of the things in this claim, except for the county of origins part. Seems like a very American way to look at it, speaking as a European.
Djokovic is mostly disliked in England and west Europe in general.
Its just propaganda....
Americans dont know much about European countries. In US Open crowd is generally OK, comparing with Wimbledon and R Garros.
Good point.
How do Spain and Switzerland stack up with Serbia to Europeans?
When I was a junior I would spend soooo many hours trying to emulate Roddicks serve hahahah loved watching your games 🎉
Djokovic is the most dominant player of all time. The most entertaining player to watch was without a doubt Fed, and the Fed vs Nadal matchups were the greatest matches of all time. Djokovic just doesn’t feel as magical to watch.
Could anyone tell me what a Bunny Kick serve is?
It's when a bunny drop kicks a serve over the net. Very difficult to return.
Djoker plays hot potatoes (lol) with his fans in 2 AMAZING drama-filled matches. The Muss-Cer duals were hypertension magnets for viewers like MOI! AirDjoker was flying in both 5th sets. Picking Nole over Ruud. Carlos over Stef. Sasha over Dimi. Yannik over Dimmi. Knee is soooo different from soft tissue injuries so NOT SURE how much of a strain-issue for the Djoker. He will play - how well & how long - tough to say. Thanx Jon & Andy! Cheers, Milan p.s. GOATs. Roger = Flowing Graceful Michelangelo Masterpiece to watch. Rafa = Powerful Firey Roden sculpture domination. Novak = Creating Athletic Chess Mental Giant w/amazing Akido abilities.
Please show a minimum of respect for someone who almost made the slam years last year with 24 GS ! It is shame to have this debat again.
Great to see a tennis podcast of this quality. Also great to see Novak get the recognition he deserves. Wertheim is a true weirdo hung up on trying to force people to get vaccinated.
Several people in my immediate environment have died from the vaccine. That man is paid to spout dangerous nonsense. It turned out that the elite doctors who advised Djokovic not to get vaccinated were right.
When it's all said and done, Novak will have all the records and by far be the most accomplished tennis player ever. I still believe Federer was the more talented player and played the game more exquisitely. Novak benefited greatly from numerous injuries to Nadal, Andy Murray and Del Potro during his reign at #1.
Love this conversation, but Laver, Borg, and Pete should be considered in this conversation too.
You have conversation for top 40 greatest players all time. They all made a mark in tennis. They were all very good. Well Andy Roddick is there as well somewhere in the list. As well as players until 1973. So it could be only two lists of greatest players from 1920- 1968 and from 1968 until today. Tennis did start from 1877, but became only more real in 1920. They started to play more matches. Before that this was in the family. Two brothers competing one playing preround if he wins, plays against brother waiting in final round with no match played. Soo only 3 players in the event. Only 2 matches. As well in Laver time slams were played with 3 or 4 rounds to finals in the 50s into 60s. Laver was a great player. As well as Bill Tilden who started in 1920s first man with 10 majors. 6 consecutive us opens. Still longest winning streak. One season zero losses. In 2 years he had like 98-1 win loss. Finished career at 52 years of age. Fred Perry, Don Budge, Pancho Gonzales, Jack Kramer, Ken Rosewall, Roy Emerson. Just a list of some most known.They all respected Bill Tilden who was a pioneer and first great champion from 1920 who was dominant. Winning alot of matches way over 40 years of age into 50 ...I think he is still to this date the oldest tennis player who ended career at 52. He was the same heights as Djokovic 188cm. There were alot tall players backthen. Laver was one of shortest 173cm. This history before 1968 is very interesting. They played best of 5 sets normal results. Two players competed against each other in one season over 20 times. Different format of diferent events of tournaments. As is seen it was very skilled tennis played until 1968. The difference only with wooden racket and little bit slower pace. Less competition, but every decade from 1920s had incresed competion with more players involved. IT cant be compared to modern tennis, but had all the skills . Only one handed backhand men and women was played all the way into 70s. Today mostly 2 handed backhand.
They are....but the overwhelming unparalleled stats stand as #1. We can argue hypothetical matchups but it's pointless.
How good is Roddick at explaining the nuances of playing against different players? He is the best in the business! This explanation of Djokovic's is seriously the best I've heard.
I have never seen anybody explaining it so brilliant and what makes Novak great in tennis, besides the numbers. Starting to love Andy as a youtuber more and more as much as I loved him on court.
this is now my favourite podcast....
Is it possible that at the beginning of 2024, in addition to all the studies and data that have been published in the meantime about covid and mrna vaccines, someone will criticize Djokovic for his pro choice attitude!?!
Thank you Andy. This is the best & most intelligent conversation on this topic.
As long as I wished it was Roger or Rafa as a younger guy, as a grown adult who's watched since the Edberg/Becker/Cash era and on, it's so obviously Novak. If I had to select a player to play for the lives of my entire family - a random game on any surface, any opponent from any era - it's Djokovic 100% of the time
It doesn't matter any explanation . For me Roger is the GOAT as the majority
Yes, Djokovic is the GOAT. However, I will caveat that Djokovic was the biggest beneficiary of the homogenization of surfaces in tennis, where he could basically play the same style of tennis on clay, grass, and hardcourt. Roger tailored his game to fit grass and hard courts, and Rafa tailored his game toward clay. I'm not taking anything away from Djokovic, but you have to look at the evolution of the modern game and the context of the era that Djokovic played in.
There is clearly an argument for each of the big 3. Why? Because context of numbers matters. Roger was the first player to try to win EVERY tournament (Before then? Players only tried their hardest at slams). Rafa had to compete with him at this level for six straight years - 2005-2010). Novak was a distant #3 and was able to not expend physical or mental energy that he could use in his later years when the competition was bereft of major competitors. Ask Steve Kerr - winning and maintaining a championship pedigree has a cost, and one could argue this hurt Roger and Rafa later...and allowed Novak the chance to bank on greater reserves later. Roger was the most dominant - he didn't just win. He KILLED people in his prime - without coaching violations or injury timeouts. Rafa, of the big 3, faced and OVERCAME the toughest competition because he had to face and overcome peak Roger AND peak Novak. Novak, in my mind, has a strong argument because of the numbers but also because of the "x factors" like clutch ability (down match point, etc.). In the end, Novak has a strong case, but the others do as well.
Also Roger had to deal with the game changing so much with the string technology and court speeds being vastly different than when he started.
Do you know that the pic of tennis was between 2008 and 2016? That's when rafa, federer, novak, murray, del potro, wawrinka, tsonga.. all were at their peak. And novak dominated from 2011-2016. The weak era was 2003-2008, dominated by federer and he won 13 grand slams in that period. So you are wrong, novak's titles were much more harder than federer, and take this stat:
-The player who faced nadal the most is djokovic (60 times)
-The player who faced federer the most is djokovic (50 times)
- The player who faced murray the most is also djokovic.
@@waelzhani7537 How can you say he dominated 2011-2016? Rafa was #1 in 2013. In 2014, he only won one slam. 2015 was a great year. 2016? Andy Murray was #1. 2011? Full credit. However, Roger's era was far from weak: Safin, Davydenko, Kuerten, Nalbandian, Roddick, Hewitt, Moya, Ferrero...all very strong and arguably better than everyone other than Medvedev and Alcaraz. Safin, Kuerten, Hewitt, Roddick, Ferrero...all Hall of Famers. And you're missing the point: fighting for the top spot and playing all the big finals for SIX STRAIGHT YEARS extracts a huge toll. If Novak played at his peak during those same years, it could be easily argued he would not have as many slams now because of the mental and physical toll from those years.
lol 2003-2008, with Roddick and Saffin positive H2H against Novax? Nadal winning Majors from 2005? was the era weak, or was Novax not good enough in the "weak" era? you can't have it both ways! 16 year gap in champion level talent from Novax to Alcaraz, the real weak era was 2018-2023 - part time player Kyrgios made the finals of Wimbledon FFS.@@waelzhani7537
Pending polling the entire tour across generations for confirmation, I don't mind conceding such a random suggestion that maybe Roger was the 1st to try to win "every tournament"... that he entered (obviously he didn't enter them all, and he's dropped out of some without injury to save himself for favorites during peak GOAT race years) or maybe even "that are worth 1000 pts or more" but he didn't even come close to succeeding in the latter even once. Whereas, Novak is one Monte Carlo trophy away from completing his 3rd sweep.
I'm a Roger fan and we don't wanna talk about it, but consider the 40-15 match, where Roger was one point away from winning Wimbledon against Novak on his serve, twice. Watch in that game where Roger served for the match how Novak manages to neutralize Roger's amazing attacking game on his best surface, grass. Yes, Roger could have won it if he got that one serve in that went in the net, with Novak going the other way, and by not rushing the net on the other point. But for everything else, Novak clinically got the ball back exactly where it needed to be, neutralizing Roger's control over the point, daring him to go for the higher risk shots. This to me is a good example of what Andy was talking about here.
You cannot compare players from different eras as the conditions have changed: namely, racket/string technology, courts, training, traveling, etc...All you can do is compare players against those from the same time period.
Amazing information! Keep bringing the nerd thing to us!
Contrary to Wertheim's conformist opinion, Novak's refusal to get the Vaxx is one of the things that makes him great.
exactly...the media and current analysts will never go against current opinions and trends for fear being called a bigot and losing their jobs
@@guyrestivo It's worse than that. Wertheim could just keep his mouth shut like Roddick. He chooses to inflict his opinions on the rest of us.
Yes, if it's just maths - he is the greatest. But life is never just maths. Players who make you fall in love with the game matter. One name rarely mentioned because of all the maths is Pete Sampras - another game changer of his time.
Would like to hear Roddick's in-depth takes on the strengths / weaknesses of other players -- e.g. Safin, Hewitt. E.g. the superhuman players that, apart from Roddick himself, account for Roger's best years being the hard era compared with for example, our recent epidemic of slouches like Medvedev, Zverev, Alcaraz, Sinner... 😉
Hard era? You mean 2004-2007? When Roger beat Safin to win his second grand slam title Safin was ranked #86. The Russian was a playboy and a headcase, sometimes he would peak like Stan Wawrinka and disappear again. By 2004 Hewitt already had destroyed hips had a last good run at the end of 2004 and beginning of 2005 but never won another slam after 2003.
@ivanjoldic826 he's obviously being sarcastic. Please re.read
@@johnjackman7946 Yes and I just elaborated, lol.
@ivanjoldic826 well the key takeaway is that you're on the right side of history...live well my friend
That was great as a squash player its just nice to hear an actual analysis
The only player that played so clinically close to Novak was Lendl. Novak is the Tom Brady of tennis... just keeps coming, to his last breath.
Brady plays 17 matches a year where half of the game he is a spectator djokovic plays 75 matches a year 677 touchdowns carrerr novak 1100 wins Brady 286 matches won including playoffs novak 96 tournament victorys every tournament was won 95% because of him alone bradys teammates won him games 35% of time Brady doesn't play defence novak is the greatest defender of all time as far as metal both are greats except tennis has more pressure moment trought out matches novak played in the goat era Brady played in a good era final conclusion you cant compare the 2 brady is half the force half the athlete he would even admit that
Please don't compare a NFL player with a tennis player. Tennis is global sports while American football only played in 2 countries (USA & Canada). The talent pool in tennis is 10 times bigger than NFL.
Bro.. Djokovic is great.. U really need to say that his game works on slow courts (current Wimbledon grass included). When the courts got fast or when federer was in the mood(like in semis 2011 french open), fed whooped novaks ass whatever novak tried.
The classic Federer fanboy salty court speed excuse
They have been slowing grass and hard courts since 1993. The French Open clay court stayed pretty much the same.
The most dramatic changes happened 2003 (Wimbledon) - 2004 (US Open).
The general public were either unaware of it or in denial while Federer was dominating (since Federer is a such a special player).
When Nadal, Djokovic and Murray were in force, people started to question the surface speeds.
The fact that Novak is the only player to win all the ATP 1000s (and he did it twice), over many surfaces, many different composites of court, different bounce levels and many variants of speed further proves his GOAT status and proves the court speed excuse re Federer is salty nonsense. Novak also has the record at the Year end Finals. Last year's court in Italy was named as the fastest court, which Novak mastered.
Why is it always on Roger's terms? He's benefitted from certain advancements over previous generations.
Roger Vs Novak:
He has never won against Novak at a Wimbledon final
He has not won all Slams twice. Novak has won them all 3 times.
He has never beaten Rafa at the French Open. Novak has beaten him twice.
He has only 7 Slam finals wins vs Big 4. Novak has 14.
He hadn't beaten Novak at a Major final in
15 years.
He has won only 12 of the big titles. Novak
has won all 14.
He has only beaten Rafa 2 times on clay.
Novak has beaten Rafa 8 times
He has a losing record to Novak in finals 6-14 He has a losing record against Novak in YEC.
0-3.
He has a losing record against Novak in Major finals 1-4.
Since 2011 (Roger was 30 and 6 years younger than Novak is now), when his disease was treated, he wins H2H v Roger 22-10 (Up until Roger retired).
Novak's H2H v Roger from 2011 to Roger reaching 35 (younger than Novak now) is 18-9 in Novak's favour. Federer couldn't deal with proper competition.
He could not touch Fed or Nadal in their prime. + Nadal won the Olympics. What we talking about here..?
That is a terrible backhanded compliment from roddick with that yoko comparison .
It’s true though. Novak will always be less popular because he was the 3rd wheel to the established rivalry that everyone loved.
what about the guest's step-dad analogy?? I think that was apt
@@Morlich209I would say the majority, not everyone.
The debate was settled about 5 years ago, the people from the west are still clutching at straws. Roger and rafa are a distant 2nd and 3rd. Deal with it.
If numbers don't lie, then Serena isn't the best (which you both said she was), but Margaret Court is (Court also has almost 100 more titles than Serena). However, people say Court isn't the best because some of her slams are not in the Open Era, and her eleven slams came against weaker competition. It can't be numbers when we want and exceptions due to competition, circumstances, etc. when we want. Of course the level of competition matters, as does dominance, and the unmeasured greatness you see with your own eyes. I still feel Djokovic probably is the best, but Serena's numbers just don't add up. She was amazing, and maybe the best we've ever seen for a tournament or match, but she never had a single year anywhere near some of the years Court, Navratilova, and Graf had, nor did she play the best in her era day in, day out. She won SEVEN slams with her sister as her competitor. Venus famously said she didn't care the outcome of her matches with Serena. Henin, Clijsters, Hingis, some of her best competitors (but not of the Graf/Navratilova level), all retired young and played her under fifteen times. IMAGINE how many titles Djokovic, Federer, or Nadal would have if the two of them didn't exist (They've played each other all fifty-some times!)? So competition matters, and knowing the ins and outs of each year does too. And never short change players from past generations. We will be doing that in thirty years to Federer and Nadal and maybe even Djokovic.
Graf's achievements (all reached by 29!) are simply incomparable. 23 slams, remarkable competition, 100 titles, longest #1, fewest finals lost, best slam win percentage, winning record or tied record w/ all rivals, the Golden Slam, and three slams a year at least in 88, 89, 93, 95, 96. ALL BY 29!
Don't forget Seles
well said..Courts wins numbers..stats and %s are amazing and dwarf Serenas..not even close
Well Steffi has 22 slams not 23 as you have mentioned. Frankly it's tough to compare players from different generation but if I had to choose the GOAT in women's tennis then it has to be Steffi over Martina. Steffi ticked all the boxes - consistency, versatility, peak (she has highest peak in Elo rating), maintaining domination at a longer period of time. The only area she is behind is longevity but she turned pro at the age of 13 & retired at the age of 30, so that 17 years career. She played more matches than Serena & retired ranked #3 in WTA ranking. BTW I agree with your assessment for Serena. She lacks consistency outside of slam. She lacks week in & week out domination of Court, Graf, Evert & Navratilova. She only won 73 WTA titles despite playing longer than anybody. She didn't hold the record for most slams, neither she had most weeks at no 1, most year end no 1, golden slam or calendar slam, longest winning streak, most dominate single season etc.
Comparing the amateur era to the professional era is pointless. Comparing men’s to women’s tennis is equally as pointless.
Amateur female GOAT is Court.
Amateur male GOAT is Laver
Pro female GOAT is Graf/Williams
Pro male GOAT is Djokovic
History may gradually sort of phase out Serena due to the doping questions.
That is some of the best breakdown analysis on the GOAT debate that I've ever heard. Looking simply at the numbers, the conversation is over - you can't argue that. The thing that gets me is this: we don't always just look at the numbers. Ali wasn't the greatest because of numbers and you could argue that Woods, Jordan or Pele weren't the greatest because of numbers also - it was something else. And it is that something else that'll keep the conversation going imho.
But if you want to know who was the most successful tennis player of all time is; that is Novak...
I think part of the issue with the GOAT debate is that it was Federer unanimously at first, then Nadal started to climb into the debate (Novak famously called him the GOAT at Miami 2011 back when Nadal probably had half of Federer’s slams), then Nadal and Djokovic were practically neck and neck by the numbers, then Djokovic overtook Nadal and both seemingly passed Federer.
It’s an interesting one because over the span of 15 years the debate has changed gears immensely. In 2010 no one even thought Djokovic would come close to challenging for the title; he was basically being compared to Murray while Fed and Rafa were on another level.
Also Roger had to deal with the game changing so much with the string technology and court speeds being vastly different than when he started.
Novak only had 2 slams as at Miami 2011, so they were not neck and neck by the numbers. Novak just beat Nadal at Indian Wells & Miami so he probably said to drum up his (Novak's) own achievements. Fed still has an arguably better resume than Nadal so he hasn't surpassed Fed yet.
@@chinuakatchy1252I said “then Nadal and Djokovic were practically neck and neck” referring to long after 2011. That didn’t really happen till about 2019, really.
Djokovic and Federer famously had some beef back in 2006-2011 or so; I’d bet Djokovic just said that to slight Federer.
Djokovic. GOAT. End of story. Agree. Thanks guys.
FEDAL left the chat
Not end of story though. From an artistry standpoint Federer is the GOAT. Also I believe Federer was more dominant on more surfaces no?
@@michaelchurchill1048 federer 40-15😂😂 .. huge mental weakness vs NOVAK in multiple occasions during grand slam finals... no my friend federer is number 3 overall position
@@trumpameri1638what’s 40-15 mean? Is that Novak’s head to head with Federer?
@@Kwame1957 no no this is NOVAK DJOKOVIC masterpiece clutch performance in most important grand slam moments U.S. open semifinals 2010 , 2011 and probably best match ever Wimbledon 2019 finals... 3x 40-15 federer match points and PREDATOR never fails
Andy Roddick, you are really good commentator, very insightful and articulate ways to explain things from a Pro perspective. Tennis players really appreciate it!
GOATdal played half a career with advantage on 1/3 of the season on slow surface… Weakvak played a full career with advantage 2/3 of the season on fast surface . It’s clear GOATdal is greater.
You still alive 😂
Federer is my favorite player of all time. That will never change. But I do have to concede Djoko is probably the greatest ever.
Thank you, Andy. After hearing you talk about Novak's game, I can finally confirm that I'm an absolute tennis freak.
I think calling someone the greatest of all time is a misnomer. Without question you can name a player who was number one the longest or won the most of this or that or have the highest statistic in whatever. However I'm not in favor of making such a broad generalization about a specific person in a specific sport. I'm satisfied to have watched some of the greats of the game and I honestly have no need to bestow an eternal title on any of them.
How nice and smart Roddick explains things, how Novak does things, even if you’re no professional, but you know game of tennis 🎾👏👏👏
And Novak did it in the Rafa and Roger Era...
I want more nerding out on this podcast. Andy Roddick is so much smarter than he gets credit for and that's what I listen to this podcast to get.
Yoko wasn’t a better musician then the Beatles. Novak is better than Federer and Nadal. Bad analogy
Federer is the GOAT - game changer, winning pedigree and numbers, and multiple wins against everyone else younger than him in the 2010s during his own legacy era.
Novak can have more of the stats, but so does Lebron and hes still second fiddle. Novak benefitted greatly from his rivals' injuries, older age, and a 60% hard court tour. And todays little kid, instagram-era players arent measuring up.
I think a lot of times people are arguing different things in GOAT debates. Some people argue best player in their prime and some argue greatest career. Novak has the greatest career, but greatest in their prime is hard to say.
If the stats argument is used to elevate Novak to GOAT, then there's an incredibly strong argument for Serena being ranked third behind Steffi and Martina as the GOAT. Consider this comparison of stats, where the only win for Serena is having ONE grand slam title more than Serena.
Year-End #1 Steffi (8), Martina (7), Serena (5)
Weeks at #1 Steffi (377), Martina (332), Serena (319)
Grand Slams Serena (23), Steffi (22), Martina (18)
Total titles: Martina (167), Steffi (107), Serena (73)
Seasons won 10+ titles: Martina 7 (16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 11), Steffi 5 (14, 11, 11, 10, 10), Serena 1 (11)
Winning at least 1 title in consecutive years: Martina (21), Steffi (18), Steffi (14), Serena (11)
Win Percentage: Steffi 88.69 (902 wins), Martina 86.81 (1442 wins), Serena 84.91 (855 wins)
Top 10 longest match win streaks: Martina #1 (74 matches), Graf #2 (66), Martina #3 (58), Martina #6 (54), Graf #7 (46), Graf #8 (45), Martina #10 (41)
If key stats tell the story, it's hardly reasonable to consider Serena the GOAT due to 1 extra grand slam. By rights, the fairest #1 based on stats would be a battle between Martina and Steffi, and yet, many in today's tennis world identify Serena as the GOAT. I'm not arguing that she is or isn't the GOAT, I'm arguing that volume of success is not the only factor in who is truly the GOAT.
Jon's argument has some flaws. I read Martina Navratilova once address the men's GOAT argument this way, and I am paraphrasing because I can't find the exact quote: Novak is the "winningest" men's player in history, but Roger was the most talented.
Which begs the question of how you define GOAT. Is it the guy who won most? Is it the guy whose stats are second or third all-time, but whose peak play was better than the sport has ever seen? Roger set some incredible records during his peak that can't be touched by Novak, including a streak of 10 consecutive grand slam finals and another streak of 8 consecutive grand slam finals. He won 5 consecutive Wimbledons and 5 consecutive US Opens, including four consecutive years when he won both. Roger has the best two-year record of all time 173-9 (95%). The point here is that Roger's peak period cannot be matched. Novak wins for sustained peak over the course of a career, and rightly deserves to be considered the "winningest" player, but the greatest to every step foot on a court belongs to Roger.
Many will argue that Federer has a losing record over Novak, and the numbers support this, but Novak's advantage is a mere 27-23. Dig a little deeper and you see that Roger built up a 13-6 record against Novak in Roger's prime from 2006-2010 before Novak reached his peak. Once Novak began to peak, he evened the score, and then in their last 5 matches, when Roger was older than Novak is today, went 5-1 to create the 4 match lead margin he enjoys today. While some would say they are from the same era, they are not. They had different peak eras. Roger came first and created the insane standard that lifted Rafa and Novak's games. Roger's talent allowed him to create that standard without a frontrunner to chase. Look for highlights reals from Roger's peak period. No one can touch him.
Again, how to define the GOAT: if it's the winningest player, it's Novak, if it's the most talented, it's likely Roger.
Not that I'm truly arguing that Roger is the GOAT. I'm simply saying that the assertion that it's case closed, Novak is the GOAT, then you have to say case closed, either Steffi or Martina is the GOAT, not Serena. And, I'm saying that there's more than one way to define the GOAT. It's simply not the black-and-white argument that anyone who claims Novak is the GOAT is making.
P.S. No disrespect for leaving Chris Evert out of the discussion. She's got some insane career stats herself, but overall she's not as strong as Steffi or Martina.
GOAT is subjective, but Djokovic is the best player overall. Whether Fed has the best peak or not is debatable, but he did have the most dominant prime.
To me, the "just look at the numbers" argument for Novak is overly simplistic and silly. One thing that is rarely (if ever) mentioned in the tennis G.O.A.T. debate is that most of the majors and masters tournaments are played on hard courts. Imagine if the arrangement were otherwise. If most majors and masters were on clay, Rafa would obviously have more accolades than Novak and Roger. If most were on grass, Roger would definitely have more accolades than Rafa, and probably more than Novak (the gap between Roger and Novak on grass is narrower). Novak's best surface is the hard court, and that has benefited him in this debate and skewed the career numbers in his favor. The fact that Rafa's career numbers are so close to Novak's despite having the majority of tournaments played on Novak's best surface tips in favor of him being the overall G.O.A.T. Nonetheless, I think it's most fair to say that Novak is the hard court G.O.A.T., Rafa is the clay court G.O.A.T., and Roger is the grass court G.O.A.T.
Agree 1000%
That Jim Courier part is deep. Djokovic can addapt and find Wholes in any player.
The only problem with only using numbers is it’s hard to compare generation to generation who didn’t play the same tournaments every year nor pre-open era tennis were allowed to play the slams in their prime. Prior to the 90s not all top players played in the Aussie open every year. Rod Laver won two grand slam years,, a feat never repeated on the men’s side, but wasn’t allowed to play majors for many years in his prime. This debate just seems like it’s for headlines
I can watch Roddik analize the game for hours. the best analisys ever. I would love for him to give an analysis of the big three's game all day long
Maths also doesn't lie about endorsements as Federer was the first Tennis player to truly transcend his sport and become a global icon. He earned $90m a year off the court - 3 x what Rafa or Djokovic earned. He transformed the popularity of the game globally. No one has played tennis like Federer. When he stopped, my first thought was 'Aslan has fallen'. Everything else is numbers on a bit of paper.
hi,are You the commentator,who said during Marozsan-Alcaraz match:This is scandelous.what a dropshut?
Wait. Was he wrong about his decisions during COVID? Looking back on everything we know now maybe he was right? Felt like Jon went out of his way to point out Novack disagreed with the vaccine mandate and was wrong for doing so.
Sorry... not the best I ever seen... the most consistent I ever seen... which makes him the best player in titles won...the best I ever seen is Roger Federer...
I wish, Roddick had not listened to Gilbert, he would have won a few more titles. Now, 1. We the tennis public is pretty biased and ridiculously simple minded, cannot handle complexity. 2. Djokovic has been good on an doff the court, he was offered a British citizenship, he stayed loyal to Serbia. Says a lot about his character. Also, he was not bombing his neighbors, he was hiding in basements. 3. I think Federer's kryptonite was Nadal getting into his head. 4. Djokovic at 6-2 and Murray at 6-3 didn't have to worry about Nadal's over the shoulder topspin, also, you are absolutely right about Djokovic being able to change directions.
That “nerd out” is precisely what’s missing from tennis commentary.
Andy's interpretation is very valid, but there's a few other things to consider here.
If I go 21 - 11 in head to head against my 2 main rivals in slams, then I'm sorry but I'm better than them. What they do against other players (that I'm also better than) would be somewhat irrelevant.
The sport has largely become about endurance in modern times. It's very possible that the inferior player could simply go on for longer and gain the numbers, not so much based on game but just mere longevity, which I believe has partly happened regarding Djokovic.
However I will say that Djokovic played a consistently higher level of tennis over a longer period of time than anyone, which would be good enough to crown him GOAT for a lot of people.
You are competing against the entire field not just 2 players. Most of the slam matches were on Clay so let's not conveniently ignore that. Fitness & Longevity is also part of sports. Most GOAT tier players in sports also tend to have incredible longevity. Novak is on par with Roger & Rafa skill-wise which is why the H2H vs both is very close.
However, Novak's mentality, fitness & longevity is where he trumps them and that's what makes him slightly better. In sports even being just 1% better than your opponent can lead to a large difference in resumes which is what we are seeing with Novak. Roger will always be my favourite but Novak is just slightly better than him. Nadal has no case for GOAT tbh because his resume is not as well rounded as the other two. There's no excuse to not have won the ATP finals at least once in your career. It's not like the Olympics that's played every 4 years.
If I win 0 sets in over 10 years vs another player on hardcourts, to the point it becomes obvious I'd drop out rather than face him anywhere but on clay, agreed, I'm definitely better.
@@chinuakatchy1252Quite a few of them weren't on clay though. The convenient thing to do would be to start leaving surfaces, time periods etc out instead of viewing it as it is. The most important matches will always be against each other though. They are the ones that everyone will be the most interested in. Agreed on his mentality, fitness and longevity being better though. These are important aspects of the game. Important enough to crown someone GOAT though? That's debateable.
Regarding the ATP finals - quite important and a nice thing to have but not all that relevant to GOAT. Slam acheivements are the most important, not just the number of them, but the matches themseleves, how you did against the top players and your main rivals etc.
Gs h2h is the only thing that goes in Nadal's favour. Novak and Nadal is 1-1 in Wimbledon. Should we say that they are equally good in Wimbledon?
There are an overwhelming amounts of facts that goes in Novak's favour.
@@Killerboss-bg8fi To ignore surfaces is ... ignorant. Djokovic has won the most trophies, made the most finals, semi finals, quarterfinals. His win percentage against top 10 is also the highest. Whatever makes you happy though.
The fact that he did not get vaccinated is considered a negative??
Aaron Rodgers taking some collateral damage