nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

French Open 2023

yerwanthere123

Play has already started, so probably best to get the thread underway!

Women's side should be a three way tussle between Swiatek, Sabalenka and Rybakina, but maybe Krejcikova can't get in the mix here again? She is a former champion. As always though, you just never know with the WTA.

Nadal being out makes the men's side significantly more open. Should be between Djokovic, Alcaraz, Medvedev and Rune, with perhaps Rublev, Tsitsipas and Ruud the alternative contenders.

Should be an interesting fortnight!

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

whiterebel

They allow Nadal to get away with murder with the serve clock as well. You can see how late they are to start the clock.

josip

Well that was a very enjoyable afternoon. 🙂

Musicrules

Djokovic is the undisputed goat now. Nadal looks finished so he could add a few more. Minimum 25 with the possibility of more depending on how his body holds up.

MisterAnarchy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120702500#Comment_120702500

Just because he has more Grand Slams doesnt make him the GOAT.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120702518#Comment_120702518

It's the only unbiased measure really. The only mitigating factor would be if someone retired young. But no one who retired early is in the picture for GOAT. What measure would you use?

Royale with Cheese

He has the most slams, he'll likely extend that lead considerably by the time he retires, he has a winning H2H record against his two biggest rivals. I love Roger Federer but there's not a logical argument you can make against Djokovic being the GOAT anymore.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120702603#Comment_120702603

At least 3 slams on all surfaces. He's shown he's an all rounder and as you say, his record against his main rivals is excellent. I think the argument is done.

Buddy Bubs

He's not my favourite but I think djokovic is the best in history. We can all add our own stats for the argument though. Only a casual fan but I really enjoyed watching the Federer nadal djokovic era and indeed the era just before their dominance with the Americans like roddick, sampras, agassi but I don't think I'll be an avid watcher in the future.

There just isn't the star power any more with the next generation.

Jack Daw

Djokovic now has the most grand slams, 3 of each grand slam, more ATP Finals wins, more ATP masters wins, more weeks at number 1 , Davis Cup win and a better head to head record against his 2 main rivals.

All he's missing is an Olympic gold medal.

Hard to make an argument against him being the greatest now and I'd imagine he'll probably get past 25 majors by the time he is done and probably pass Federer for number of overall tournaments won aswell by the time he's retired aswell.

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120702518#Comment_120702518

He's the GOAT by almost every measure. If he wins enough Slams he might even catch Jimmy Connors on the title count. 🙂 Another 20 will do it I think. Even those who dislike him accept he's the GOAT.

MisterAnarchy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120702941#Comment_120702941

He has had a number of advantages that skew his slam count in my opinion.

1/ Homogenisation and slowing of court surfaces

2/ String and racket technology

3/ Slowing of the tennis ball

All of the above have handed the advantage to base line returners and away from attacking players.

At least 3 slams on all surfaces. He's shown he's an all rounder and as you say, his record against his main rivals is excellent. I think the argument is done

There isnt that much difference in the court speeds for the last 15 years.

When Agassi completed the Grand Slam in 99, he was the first to do it on 3 different surfaces, there was a huge difference in the court speeds then and before.

I dont think you can compare across the eras due to all these factors.

Djokivic like so many of the other greats has a great temperament and desire to win.

Federer technically a better player especially on a faster surface but his temperament isn't as good.

I had to laugh at this complete drivel from the Eurosport gang, I wonder what drugs they are on.

Eurosport's Tim Henman, Mats Wilander and Barbara Schett have reflected on the fact that they believe Novak Djokovic is now, remarkably, "better than ever" at the age of 36 after he defeated Casper Ruud in straight sets in the final of the French Open.

"So many facets of his game are better," Henman said. "He is hitting the ball harder, he doesn’t make unforced errors, he is moving better than ever.

I think he is definitely playing better than he has ever played in his life, which is scary at the age of 36.

The oldest ever winner of the French Open at 36 is hitting the ball harder than ever and moving better than ever, lol

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120703042#Comment_120703042

His main rivals for the title of GOAT all had the same things you mention there. Very flimsy excuses. Djokovic is the GOAT, not liking him doesn't change that. By any measure he is the greatest. That's already, by the time he's finished he'll be way out of sight.

MisterAnarchy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120703129#Comment_120703129

Slower courts did not suit Federer, Nadal yes but not Federer.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120703163#Comment_120703163

Why not? Sounds like a very flimsy excuse. Djokovic has won at least 3 slams on all surfaces, no excuses, he just got it done.

josip

I love this time of year on Boards after a Djokovic victory when the copium is in full flow. Unfortunately there aren't any prizes awarded for aesthetics, so greatness is measured by wins/titles/weeks at number 1.

10 years ago, Federer supporters were quite happy to quote GS titles/weeks at number one/titles on a variety of surfaces as evidence of his greatness. However, now that they have been surpassed, in part by Nadal and completely by Djokovic, many are still in denial, falling back on the intangible aesthetics/technique justification or using the "courts/racquet technology didn't suit him" excuses. Reminds me of Larry Gogan :)

https://twitter.com/tomas5ky/status/1214484543815782400?lang=en

I'd still prefer to watch highlights of Federer on Youtube doing Federer stuff over any other player (apart from maybe Kyrgios). But there comes a time when you have to accept that the mantle has been passed.

forumdedum

Still recall that Wimbledon final Federer gifted to Novak when he was playing him off the park. Truly a sad day. Numbers yes but for me no one will ever touch Federer. Pure artistry. Djoko bores me to tears, Sampras did too

Girly Gal

Djokovic will clearly go down as the greatest ever, the stats whatever way you look at it tell the story. He has shown a remarkable level of consistency since around 2010, he has gone on to become the mentally strongest player probably of all time. He found a way to overcome both Federer and Nadal when very few thought he would. He has been fortunate that the following generation proved to be a very poor generation, even with Federer and Nadal clearly in decline they were still his main threats at the slams until their bodies broke down. As it stands he could easily add another 4 or 5 as outside of Alcaraz, there really isn't much else out there, injury and age are probably his biggest threats right now.

Personally I'd prefer watching Federer's attacking style of play over Djokovic grinding players into submission, Djokovic is also a wonderfully gifted player, but, it's his ability to grind out the results and his mental strength at key times, that sets him apart. As long as he stays fit, it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that he gets close to 30 slams, something I wouldn't have thought possible a few years ago. That number would likely be higher when you consider he has also missed a few slams due to Covid/disqualification, quite remarkable really!

MisterAnarchy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120703207#Comment_120703207

What do you mean why not ?

Federers style of play was more aggressive, initially built on serve and volley.

Faster courts suit that style of play, why do you think there are no serve volleyers in the game anymore ?

Why are there no clay court specialists like in previous eras ?

The courts have been slowed down and the racquet technology, notably string technology has made tennis a baseliners game.

There are almost no fast courts on the tour anymore, they are nearly all medium to slow.

Djokovic is the best returner of serve in history and would do well in any era but he wouldnt have as many Wimbledons on faster courts.

He only has 3 US Opens where the courts have been slowed down the least.

Nadal has 14 French Open titles because the surface suits his style.

Djokovic would still have alot of Grand Slam titles if the surfaces remained the same as they were.

Its like in the golf game with technology, it gives the long hitters a massive advantage over the shorter hitters, and whay they are looking at changing the ball to reduce the distance it goes.

The clubs could be rolled back tech wise too.

Jack Daw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120704556#Comment_120704556

Federer should have adjusted better to the changes, he refused to change the size of his racquet head for years when if he'd been more sensible he could have used a bigger racquet head and helped his game.He'll also look back and think he took too long to get his first major win, Djokovic and Nadal won their first majors by the time they were 20 , Federer probably missed out on majors in the early part of the 2000's which were won by some average enough players .

He's also by far the weakest mentally of the 3 of them and that has cost him big time over the years .

Girly Gal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120704696#Comment_120704696

Would agree with that assessment, Federer is probably the most gifted player ever, but, this masked his mental fragility. I don't think Federer was mentally that strong at all, no better mentally than the average player, just that he was so good he didn't need to be, but, against Djokovic and particularly against Nadal it would show. At one point early in the Nadal v Federer rivalry, I don't think Federer actually believed he could beat Nadal, especially on clay, but this even spread to his favoured surfaces and even when playing well he'd find a way to lose to Nadal, it was obvious Nadal had gotten inside his head, Djokovic too got inside his head, but, not to the same extent as Nadal in the late noughties. Losing the Wimbledon final in 2019 is probably the best example of Federer's mental fragility, Federer was clearly better on the day, but, failed on most of the big points throughout the match, Djokovic was clinical in the few big points that came his way, which decided the match in his favour. Also Federer's resistance to changing his racket probably cost him a couple of slams too.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120704556#Comment_120704556

A player depending on serve and volley would be a very limited player. You're doing a disservice to Federer. He was an amazing, skillful player. Great to watch. He's third on the list of the GOATs though. That's the reality. Djokovic is the undisputed GOAT.

whiterebel

Fed's fragility or the plan by both ND and RN to target his backhand. Never let up from the first match to last until Fed learned to take it a lot earlier

TomSweeney

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120702518#Comment_120702518

Yeah it does.

Most Grand Slams.

Better H2H v Nadal and Federer

Most Masters 1000

Most WTF finals (Nadal has 0 v Djokovic 6)

Most weeks as no. 1.

He is the GOAT, and if it weren't for the covidians he could have 26 slams right now.

It's not a debate anymore, Novak Djokovic is the greatest player to have ever played the game.

TomSweeney

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120703408#Comment_120703408

Sweet sweet match.

whiterebel

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120716177#Comment_120716177

Laver with 11 slams won and 20 that he couldn't compete, and Ken Rosewall with 8 won and 44 that he didn't play would probably disagree. I wonder how ND would fare with 69 sq in racquets strung with gut? Football and tennis is now gone the Sky way - records, records, records. How many QF appearances....really? Who cares? When I watched Borg at Wimbledon, it wasn't really talked about how many slams he had won, it was more about the 5 in row. 6 FOs wasn't regarded with the same awe as his Wimbledon record. He only ever played once in Australia as a junior. His ability to adapt to the two most different surfaces was amazing. All talk of records only seemed to start when Sampras was getting to the end.

Seeing as the surfaces, equipment and everything else is different, the argument about the GOAT is waste of time. Bit like Pele v Messi v Ronaldo.

forumdedum

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120716181#Comment_120716181

Best player lost that day. No doubt about it. Djokovic was a defensive bore. I have not watched a Tennis match since. I'm missing nothing. Younger players are not as good and never will be. So many bottlers. There's just no competition. Not saying much for a sport where much older players were dominating

walshb

Just on Fed’s fragility. He could be rock solid against Nadal and Nole, and then very flimsy against them.

Just look to Aus final 2017. In my view Fed’s greatest ever match victory.. serious display of mental resiliency.

but for real mental grit/resiliency you have to say that Nole and Rafa are greater than Fed

Greatest all around talent is Fed, without doubt. Tennis maestro. Across all sports he could actually be the greatest talent/maestro ever.

forumdedum

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120720620#Comment_120720620

In a word, grit. Djokovic used to be interesting to watch, became more defensive and for me unwatchable. Nadal a real talent though I believe he practically damaged his body trying to match Federer. Federer was a tennis maestro indeed. Djokovic is such an unlikeable person. Aside from that Fed the most impressive for me. Sad that he didn't end up with the most slams. Then again Borg or McEnroe didn't either . . .

walshb

Personally FED for me as GOAT. Awful lot more than just slam counts.

The three of them have awesome stats and records. They also all gave real career longevity. There’s not much between all three when you slice and dice all the stats.

two things for me for Fed: his skills snd tennis talents definitely number 1, and his consistent brilliance and always being at or near slams for 15-16 years is what edges him for m

finally: all on their absolute best over 10 matches across all surfaces? They all beat each other and it’s very close. Maybe Nole just about winning more.

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120721633#Comment_120721633

"There’s not much between all three when you slice and dice all the stats."

15% more slams than Federer, 25% more weeks and counting at No. 1.

That's not 'not much', that's daylight. I agree that Federer had the nicer style.