The Goat Debate

[ponchi101]

Some of the stats for the big three.

Record	Federer	Nadal	Djokovic
Slams & %	20/81 (24.7%)	22/64 (34%)	24/73 (32.9%)
YE #1	5	5	8
MS1000	28	36	40
Weeks #1	310	209	428
Total Tournaments	103	92	98
H2H	16-24/23-27	24-16/29-30	27-23/30-29
YE Championships	6	0	7
Slams (W/L/%)	20/11/.65	22/8/.73	24/13/.65
% Tournaments	103/367 (28%)	92/297 (31%)	98/298 (33%)
% Won @ Slams	369/60 (86%)	310/41 (88%)	371/50 (88%)

Misc.
Federer has the record for consecutive weeks at #1, with 237 (male or female)
Nadal holds the record for most titles at one single slam (14). He won at least one single tournament for 19 straight years.
Djokovic has won every slam at least three times, Nadal have won every Slam at least twice.
Djokovic has won every MS1000 at least three times, except Monte Carlo. He has 12 slams after the age of 30. He has reached the Semis or best of all MS1000's at least 7 times each.
Djokovic has reached the QF's of a slam 56 times.
Nadal and Djokovic have won a slam at least ten times, with only Margaret Court also having done that (11 Australian Opens).
The three of them have won over 1,000 matches on tour.

And on and on and on. The sole records of relevance these men do not hold, combined, are TOTAL TOURNAMENTS (109, Jimmy Connors) and consecutive years as #1 (6, Sampras)

[Liamvalid]

When the likes of Jankovic and Safina got more weeks at number 1 than Venus, it is a stat that I have since stopped caring about. At first glance I’d put Djokovic as the best of the 3 thanks to winning all masters twice and the Nole Slam. But the argument is, does the “greatest” equate to the most successful

[atlpam]

Federer will always be GOAT to me, but that is more subjective and includes intangibles. Nadal is the GOAT on clay without a doubt. Hard for me to classify Djokovic as I have very conflicting perspectives. Laver is always in the "we'll never know" camp since we cannot compare records.

[the Moz]

Federer will always be the GOAT for me too. But for the history books, The Big 3 make a strong case for a GOAT Trio. They possess phenomenal CVs and they bring their own distinct elements or achievements to the debate. They also for the most part played their careers together. All three became better players and were more successful methinks.

[ponchi101]

If Rafa nor Nole come around, Federer would have retired already, with 25 slams and having lost interest in the sport after burying two generations of players without as much as a speck of blood on his white Wimbledon jacket. The three drove each other to get better and better.
Whoever voted other, please, don't tease us that way! Who? Sampras? Borg? Emerson? Lucho Horna?

[dave g]

If Rafa nor Nole come around, Federer would have retired already, with 25 slams and having lost interest in the sport after burying two generations of players without as much as a speck of blood on his white Wimbledon jacket. The three drove each other to get better and better.
Whoever voted other, please, don't tease us that way! Who? Sampras? Borg? Emerson? Lucho Horna?

My general interpretation of how people pick their metrics to decide who is the GOAT is to pick their GOAT and find which metric makes that player the GOAT. I consider this approach to be self-delusional. So I went with a metric and let the records fall where they may. I decide that the best metric is the number of Grand Slam singles titles.

Therefore, the GOAT currently is Serena Williams.
When the current Big Three ATP players retire, the GOAT will probably be Novak Djokovic.
When all the currently active players retire, the GOAT might be Naomi Osaka.

[the Moz]

If Rafa nor Nole come around, Federer would have retired already, with 25 slams and having lost interest in the sport after burying two generations of players without as much as a speck of blood on his white Wimbledon jacket. The three drove each other to get better and better.
Whoever voted other, please, don't tease us that way! Who? Sampras? Borg? Emerson? Lucho Horna?

I'm changing my vote. Post #4 says why

[ponchi101]

...

My general interpretation of how people pick their metrics to decide who is the GOAT is to pick their GOAT and find which metric makes that player the GOAT. I consider this approach to be self-delusional. So I went with a metric and let the records fall where they may. I decide that the best metric is the number of Grand Slam singles titles.

Therefore, the GOAT currently is Serena Williams.
When the current Big Three ATP players retire, the GOAT will probably be Novak Djokovic.
When all the currently active players retire, the GOAT might be Naomi Osaka.

That makes Emerson better than Laver and Borg

[Woody]

I agree with Dave g. Each of the 3 has a convincing argument for being GOAT and a convincing argument against. I no longer think there is an objective GOAT. Federer is the most skilled (which again is a subjective term, but you probably know what I mean), Nadal is the greatest clay courter, and most consistently intense player ever (gives 100% mentally and physically on every single point/shot), Djokovic I guess is the most... complete(?) player ever - no weaknesses.

[ti-amie]

I don't believe there can be an overall "GOAT" in tennis because each generation brings different mental attitudes and skill sets. I voted but it's subjective as has been said.

[Deuce]

I came here to vote for the only logical person - Shlomo Glickstein -, and am shocked - utterly stunned - that he was omitted from the list.

You people simply don't know your tennis.

[Woody]

I came here to vote for the only logical person - Shlomo Glickstein -, and am shocked - utterly stunned - that he was omitted from the list.

You people simply don't know your tennis.

I just assumed that's who "Other" was referring to.

[meganfernandez]

It's probably doing to be Nadal, although I'll never be totally confident that it's not Federer when I factor in some intangibles.

Overall, though, it's Serena for me, adjusting for nature's disparity.

[ponchi101]

Tangential to this.
Novak passed Roger in weeks at #1, for men. Next in line is Serena at 319, which seems certain as he is holding those Wimbledon points and his gap with #2, be it Nadal or Medvedev, is very large. Then it would be Navratilova at 332, which seems doable. But the lead is Graf, at 377. Will he get there?

[meganfernandez]

Tangential to this.
Novak passed Roger in weeks at #1, for men. Next in line is Serena at 319, which seems certain as he is holding those Wimbledon points and his gap with #2, be it Nadal or Medvedev, is very large. Then it would be Navratilova at 332, which seems doable. But the lead is Graf, at 377. Will he get there?

Wow, that's a good question, but yes he can do another solid year-plus, even if it's not consecutive. I'm sure he knows about that record and is motivated.