Видео

He's both!!!

Naomi osaka is just too weak to handle tennis.

I've never thought much of the GOAT term, not in the 90s with Sampras, not in the 2000s with Federer, and not now with Djokovic. We will always have discussions about the GOAT because this term always leaves room for interpretation. Frustrated Novak fans (mostly from Eastern Europe) are opposed by Fedal fans (mostly from the West), and it will always be like this. Some declare the debate over with each additional Djokovic Grand Slam title, while others respond that the debate has nothing to do with titles in their view. An endless story. Djokovic - the most successful tennis player of all time Nadal - the most successful clay court player of all time Federer - the most popular player of all time (and thus still part of the GOAT discussion)

In almost any statistics Djokovic, Sinner and Alcaraz are at the top. 😅😅. Almost any category. Thats why its so hard to beat these guys😂

7:05 winning his first major 8 years ago? Is the script done with AI?

long time nole fan but Fed much much better - goat

sorry but goaterer was much better

Tiafoe also struggles reading serves. I’ve noticed this a while back. He loses a lot of points this way

❤❤❤❤

🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

It's crazy you can be this good at tennis and people still call you mid 🤣

No1e, forever and ever. Eat your hearts haters. 😂😢

Pete!!!

French Open 2024, he has a big chance

learned at lot, Monte Carlo is located in Switzerland...🙄

can you do Tommy Paul

can you do Tommy Paul please

at :55 that's her sister not her mother! :))

So depends on what you rate. Clearly, trashing some of the most talented players ever for clickbait is what this channel rates.

Pete didn’t have a continental grip, he had eastern forehand and semi western backhand grip 2:15

Decían que no los dejaba jugar. Se sentian menos ante este gigante de la perfección

Polarization happens when you have cheaters (gamesmanship) against legit sportsmen. I would put shelton in the latter camp, and I would also say that his shots are not penetrating enough.

Agree with him.

Haha, you are really going for some wild statistics. Michelsen being the youngest to win ONE (!) match at a Masters 1000 level since Fritz (!). Wow, what an achievement for the record books😂😂😂😂😂

Nope, you don't ask for a shirt straight after a loss. At least if you are serious about wanting to win ergo your job. But maybe that is what seperates Jiri from Cachin. And honestly, it makes me respect him much more after this comment.

No bro, Novak won his last 7-8 Gs against children with no GS wins.. so sorry !

bro, sorry you are biased...

to be the Greastest of all time its not only numbers that matter, this is what you dont understand.

Would anyone also consider Djokovic or Federer the best pickleball player? Comparing tennis in 1970s vs tennis in 2010s is like compare picket ball to tennis. To say Djokovic is better than Laver is like saying Djokovic is also better than X pickle ball player despite Djokovic never play a singe pickle ball match.

Probably one of Americas most prolific athletes I'm from the uk and can acknowledge how great she is

IMO luck does a lot. When sports unique players (like MJ, Pele, Maradona, Big3, Magnus Carlsen, etc) overlap their eras, the oldest is always in disadventage, as they set records in the years prior the irruption of the younger players and retire before, leaving an easier competition to the younger ones. For example, we all agree Cristiano Ronaldo and Messi are players that are at the top level in football history, but even thought Cristiano became the best player in the world in 2007~2008, he didn't join the bests of entire football history until he had to compete with Messi, as both pushed each other. I feel like in tennis it's quite the same. Federer dominated without competition and was an awesome generational player just starting to be considered a competitor to Sampras, setting a goal for Nadal and Djokovic that came a couple of years after. That also pushed Federer further and surpassed all of the goat debate before himself and made it to be only after him (no player prior to Federer could be considerer goat since he irrupted). So, what would have happened if all of the big 3 had the same age? We can't know, but just as a good season was 30 goals per season before CR/Messi and now even players that wouldn't be considered in the top 40 of history can score 40 per season; I feel like Roger also showed to the world that winning a lot of slams is possible, and so comes Djoko and Nadal. It's much easier to navigate when you have a destination. IMO Federer is the goat, but it's absolutely understable that a lot of people consider Nole for his numbers or Nadal for being in the middle of both. For me, the numbers difference in slams is not on a relevant scale between themselves (20,22 and 24) and I give more importance to highest w/l ratio and Federer has the 92/5 year wich is just insane. Someone else can give more importance to grand slams, and that's fair. What I want to say to conclude is that we will never certainly know wich is the best, and as it's subjective, wich is fine.

I think the mental side blocked Murray from turning a few more of those finals into GS wins. He was the least mentally stable of the big 4.

They are all the same. The difference is that they are from different periods based on technology, nutrition, and MONEY! I do not doubt that if Sampras had been born 1 decade later, he would have amazingly competed with Roger. The reality is that all the great players follow the same prototype. Borg, Vilas, Muster, and Nadal are wood from the same tree. Djokovic is just a more current version of Agassi, who was at the same time a more current version of Connors. Lacoste spoke wonders about Rosewall, who spoke wonders about McEnroe, who spoke wonders about Sampras, who spoke wonders about Federer. For those of us who saw Laver live, I can tell you that the top spin he generated from a continental grip was incredible. It is not comparable to tennis today, but he was a top spin power hitter from the forehand side. In other words, speed, power, professionalism, and longevity have changed, but what makes a great player has always remained the same.

The 80s probably the hardest time to play tennis. We talk about Federer, Nadal and Novak who all kept one another from winning titles. But the 80 even early 90s its was two Federers, two nadals and two novaks and then probably two Maury’s. A great time to be a tennis fan

Nadal in his prime was the all court beast. Early injuries prevented him from getting more GS and other ATP titles. Still 14 RG, 12 Godo, 11 Montecarlo, 10 Rome....most dominant player ever to exist. This record is simply unbreakable

Nadal is a coward. Actually all the players are. Novak is the greatest of all time. He is the greatest athlete of all time. And he is the greatest person of all time. An absolute legend who will go down in history until the end of time. No one can touch Novak in tennis period. He has no weakness and he's a literal genius.

Borg was underrated at the net.