The Goat Debate

[mick1303]

Uhm... 10 years ago, the top players in the world were Novak, Roger, Rafa and Murray. The top 10 was rounded by people like Ferrer, Berdych and Tsonga.
Hard to say he is wrong when you look at that list.

Ferrer was #3, Berdych was #7. I would not say this is "rounding up". They had Gasquet at #9, which Tony and you conveniently did not mention.

[ponchi101]

Well, I did not look up the exact rankings at that time.
But the simple fact that the top 4 were at the time ranked in the top 10 makes Tony's point. Of course, by that same logic, the tour HAS NEVER been stronger than in that era. You had four players that would end up with a total 69 Slams. That has never happened before.

[skatingfan]

Top in 2013 had 45 quarterfinals, 42 semifinals, 26 finals, 39 Grand Slam titles through the end of 2013. Weakest link was Gasquet who'd only made 2 semifinals. 8 of the those players had made at least one Grand Slam final in their career to that point, and the other player who hadn't was Wawrinka.

The current top ten have 36 quarterfinals, 25 semifinals, 22 finals, 27 Grand Slam titles - of that Djokovic accounts for 10, 11, 12, and 24 of those respectively. Weakest links now are Rune, and Fritz who have only made 3, and 2 quarters respectively. 6 of the current top ten have made at least one Grand Slam final - in addition to Rune, and Fritz, Rublev, and Sinner have yet to make a final.

Now the current top 10 is a lot younger than the top ten in 2013 so these comparisons are a little unfair, and maybe in ten years the current crop will look better, but I kind of doubt it.

[3mlm]

Top in 2013 had 45 quarterfinals, 42 semifinals, 26 finals, 39 Grand Slam titles through the end of 2013. Weakest link was Gasquet who'd only made 2 semifinals. 8 of the those players had made at least one Grand Slam final in their career to that point, and the other player who hadn't was Wawrinka.

The current top ten have 36 quarterfinals, 25 semifinals, 22 finals, 27 Grand Slam titles - of that Djokovic accounts for 10, 11, 12, and 24 of those respectively. Weakest links now are Rune, and Fritz who have only made 3, and 2 quarters respectively. 6 of the current top ten have made at least one Grand Slam final - in addition to Rune, and Fritz, Rublev, and Sinner have yet to make a final.

Now the current top 10 is a lot younger than the top ten in 2013 so these comparisons are a little unfair, and maybe in ten years the current crop will look better, but I kind of doubt it.

Every top ten from 2013 (maybe even before that) to March of this year when Nadal dropped out of the top ten was stronger than the current top ten and will be until Djokovic drops out.

[mmmm8]

I guess my point was that Uncle Toni's comments made sense if you only consider Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray. Because the other top 6 players in 2013 weren't that strong (Wawrinka had not won a slam yet).

[ponchi101]

Take Novak out, because he is in both groups. Do the crop of Tiafoe, Fritz, Rublev, Rune, Stefanos, Daniil, Casper and Jannick inspire any awe? Carlitos yes, the rest are very good players yet to leave a deep impression.
And... saying "if you take Roger, Rafa, Novak and Andy out" is about the same as saying "if you take the engine out, a Ferrari is pretty much like any other car".

[mick1303]

Take Novak out, because he is in both groups. Do the crop of Tiafoe, Fritz, Rublev, Rune, Stefanos, Daniil, Casper and Jannick inspire any awe? Carlitos yes, the rest are very good players yet to leave a deep impression.
And... saying "if you take Roger, Rafa, Novak and Andy out" is about the same as saying "if you take the engine out, a Ferrari is pretty much like any other car".

You're falling to the same trap: Judging 2013 top 10 basing on their whole careers. 2013 was not a good year for Federer - he had injuries and finished a year at #6. Also why bring Tiafoe? He is #14 now. In 2013 Ferrer was #3. Are you having him as better player than Medvedev?

[ashkor87]

The only comparable era was probably the late 50s, Gonzales, Hoad, Kramer then later Rosewall, Laver, Fraser ...
Borg, Mcenroe, Connors in the late 70s, early 80s were an equally dominant triumvirate. 3 does appear to be the magic number though,!

[ponchi101]

Take Novak out, because he is in both groups. Do the crop of Tiafoe, Fritz, Rublev, Rune, Stefanos, Daniil, Casper and Jannick inspire any awe? Carlitos yes, the rest are very good players yet to leave a deep impression.
And... saying "if you take Roger, Rafa, Novak and Andy out" is about the same as saying "if you take the engine out, a Ferrari is pretty much like any other car".

You're falling to the same trap: Judging 2013 top 10 basing on their whole careers. 2013 was not a good year for Federer - he had injuries and finished a year at #6. Also why bring Tiafoe? He is #14 now. In 2013 Ferrer was #3. Are you having him as better player than Medvedev?

Then we are looking at this thing in different ways. Do the 2013 crop, after their careers have almost all ended, are way better than what we have now? That is different than: at the time in 2013, were they better than what we have now?
I still say yes. But the questions are not the same.

[skatingfan]

Then we are looking at this thing in different ways. Do the 2013 crop, after their careers have almost all ended, are way better than what we have now? That is different than: at the time in 2013, were they better than what we have now?
I still say yes. But the questions are not the same.

Just for the record David Ferrer in 2013 was in the midst a run of 10 straight Grand Slam quarters or better including the 2013 French Open Final.

[mick1303]

Then we are looking at this thing in different ways. Do the 2013 crop, after their careers have almost all ended, are way better than what we have now? That is different than: at the time in 2013, were they better than what we have now?
I still say yes. But the questions are not the same.

Just for the record David Ferrer in 2013 was in the midst a run of 10 straight Grand Slam quarters or better including the 2013 French Open Final.

Tony Nadal for some mysterious reason matched Medevedev against Nadal in his rant, which in my view invalidates his point. Or rather makes his argument dishonest. Nadal was #1 in 2013. Medvedev is #3 in 2023 and shall be compared to Ferrer, not to Nadal. Let's compare apples to apples. Davis Ferrer won just one TMS for his whole career. And was in one Slam final. Medvedev, who's career is far from over has 6 TMS + 1 YEC + 1 Slam (and 4 more runner-up finishes). We are excluding Djokovic and this puts Nadal against Alcaraz. Of course, we can't compare achievements, but we already can safely say that Alcaraz is a generational talent and nobody in the history of tennis would have easy time with him. My point is - the overall comparison of 2013 vs 2023 is far from clear.

[ponchi101]

My point being that: NO OTHER GENERATION can compare to the 2013 class because the top 3 players of the time will end their careers with a minimum of 66 Slams. That is:
Sampras + Borg + Lend + Agassi + Connors + McEnroe + Wilander + Guga.
The 2013 class is not comparable with any other era. Everything else pales in comparison.

[mick1303]

My point being that: NO OTHER GENERATION can compare to the 2013 class because the top 3 players of the time will end their careers with a minimum of 66 Slams. That is:
Sampras + Borg + Lend + Agassi + Connors + McEnroe + Wilander + Guga.
The 2013 class is not comparable with any other era. Everything else pales in comparison.

We're looking at this issue in a different way. Of course, if you combine the achievements of 2013 top 10 vs any other era top 10, then the trio of Djokovic, Federer and Nadal wins. But if you'll put that top 10 in a match against other top 10, this is where it gets far from clear. Because there are 7 other players in top 10.

[ponchi101]

Sure. As you said, want to compare Medvedev Vs Ferrer? Go for it. Sinner Vs Berdych? Be my guest.
But if you take RRN out (I am tired of writing their names), who would you take out from the current crop? Certainly Carlos and Daniil (the only ones that hold slams), and who would be the third? Stefanos? (2 slams finals + YEC). Ruud (4 mayor finals)?

[mick1303]

I'm currently on year 1982 going backwards from present in filling the doubles ATP data. And I'm starting to feel that if we combine singles and doubles, then the greatest of them all will be none other than Johnny Mac. Already I have 17(!!!) instances when he won the same tournament both in doubles and in singles. The next after him has less than twice less - Emilio Sanchez with 8 such wins. Only Emilio won only small tournaments (equivalents of 250s), while Mac has 5 slams and 2 YEC to his credit.

For comparisons: Djokovic never done this, Nadal done it once (Monte Carlo 2008), Federer done it twice (Vienna 2003, Halle 2005). Obviously Laver done it plenty of times, but I don't have a data, and even when I fill up all the available Open Era draws, it will still be only part of his legacy.