He may not cover the court with the grace of Roger Federer, compete with the doggedness of Rafael Nadal, or hold the uncompromising humility of Rod Laver, but Novak Djokovic’s French Open victory on the weekend has made him the greatest tennis player of all time.
Djokovic’s maiden French Open victory has seen his Grand Slam match-winning streak extend to 28, and he’s become the third man in tennis history to hold all four Grand Slam titles at the same time – the first man to do so since Laver in 1969.
He’s the eighth player, and only the fourth in the Open Era (1968 onwards), to have won every Grand Slam at least once.
He holds the single largest rankings lead in tennis history, sitting at 16,950 points, as opposed to second-ranked Murray’s 8915 and Federer’s 6655.
Murray and Federer could combine their rankings points and still fall short of Djokovic. To put this lead into perspective, Djokovic would likely remain at the top of the rankings even if he lost in the first round at Wimbledon and the US Open and Andy Murray won both.
It is a dominance of the field we have never seen before, and may never see again.
The Greatest versus The Greatest
Federer is one of, if not the first to be raised in the GOAT (Greatest of All Time) debate. Compare Djokovic’s best with Federer’s, seen in Federer’s barnstorming 2006 season, and Djokovic looks to be superior.
2006 Federer finished with a 92-5 record, including 12 titles. Djokovic finished 2015 at 82-6, with 11 titles, and a record six Masters 1000 titles (the next best tournaments after Grand Slam), compared to Federer’s four Masters 1000 titles and two finals.
Both won the Australian Open, Wimbledon, and the US Open in those years. So far, it seems pretty even, and Federer may possibly have the edge.
However, Djokovic’s record against the top ten is incredible when stacked against the Federer of 2006. While Federer went 19-4 in 2006 against the top ten, Djokovic went a remarkable 31-5. Djokovic had to play 41 per cent of his matches against the top ten, while Federer only had to face them 24 per cent of the time.
Going further and looking at these records from a top 20 perspective, Djokovic had to face its members 52 per cent of the time, compared to Federer’s 35 per cent. Lastly, Djokovic had a 16-4 record against the top five while Federer went 8-4.
To be fair, you can only beat who’s in front of you, but Djokovic’s encounters with the top 20 suggest his was a much more level playing field than Federer’s.
If you’re still not convinced of Djokovic’s credentials outweighing those of Federer, consider the following.
Djokovic sits at 44-3 this year, with the Australian and French Open titles under his belt, something Federer did not have at this stage in 2006. Given his absolute dominance of the tour at the moment, it’s entirely within the realm of possibility he could win Gold at the Rio Olympics this year, along with the Wimbledon and US Open titles he is tasked with defending.
Should he do so, he would attain a Golden Slam, which is to win all four majors and a gold medal in the same year. Steffi Graf on the women’s side, back in 1988, is the only player to ever achieve the feat.
The best of the best
What makes Djokovic’s dominance all the more extraordinary is that he’s had to do it during the ‘Golden Age’ of tennis, with the ‘Big Three’ of Federer, Nadal, and Murray (or more recently Stan Wawrinka) leaders of that pack.
Against such formidable opposition, Djokovic has what no other player can claim: a winning record over all four of those players, besting Federer (23-22), Nadal (26-23), Murray (24-10) and Wawrinka (19-4).
Sure, many will contend Djokovic is now beating versions of Federer and Nadal that are past their prime, but the same can be said of Federer and Nadal when they constantly beat Djokovic while he played third fiddle in the rankings to the two of them. The final result shows who the outright winner is.
Where Laver had to only play on grass and clay, Djokovic had to achieve his success on those two and hardcourts as well, and had arguably the greatest grass-courter of all time in Federer, and the greatest clay-courter of all time in Nadal, constantly standing in his way.
No crowd, no worries
From a support standpoint, I’ve never been one to look too much into it as a measuring stick for greatness, but it warrants mention here, given how stark the differences are between Djokovic and the rest of those competing for the title of GOAT.
Laver was and is revered, arguably now more than ever. Nadal captures the hearts of many, who support him and feed off his animalistic passion for the contest. Roger Federer, well… he’s in a league of his own. There has arguably never been someone in world sports more revered than Federer.
In 2011, Djokovic’s breakout year, Roger Federer finished a global study as the second most respected, admired, and trusted individual in the world, behind only Nelson Mandela. Yep, that popular.
In contrast to all three of the above, particularly Federer, Djokovic has seldom played in front of a crowd even remotely on his side. There was, for a time, a genuine hatred for the man, and though it has gradually died down, there is still a palpable disliking for the Serb. Many have taken exception to his antics.
Key among them is his mother’s comment “The King is dead” in reference to Federer, and his early tendency to bounce the ball an extraordinary amount of times before a serve.
His shirt-tearing celebration after coming out on top in a mammoth 2012 Australian Open final against Nadal was criticised and his impressions of other players irked some viewers, and even some of the players.
Despite his efforts on and off court (in 2012 he won the Arthur Ashe Humanitarian of the Year award for his role as a UNICEF ambassador), Djokovic remains despised by many on the tennis tour.
Perhaps timing is his worst enemy. Serving as the gatecrasher of the dominance of the two most beloved tennis players of all time, Djokovic was effectively on the back foot from the start.
Still, when 99 per cent of the matches you play are in front of sold out crowds rooting for your failure, it makes your success all the more notable. Tennis has and always will be a solitary sport, but when you can draw on the roar of thousands in the crowd and the support of millions watching around the globe, it makes on-court burdens easier to bear.
That Djokoivc has succeeded with not only a lack of said support, but a notable desire for him to fail, leaves his triumphs that little bit more remarkable.
(For reference, take the 2011 US Open semi-final against Federer, where the cheers for Djokovic’s errors were like war cries when compared to the reception he got for hitting one of the greatest returns in recent memory… on match point no less.)
Aesthetically, Djokovic will always fall short of his competitors. He doesn’t have the finesse of Federer, who hits every shot as if it could be frozen in time and splashed across an oil painting canvass.
He doesn’t have the atomic forehand of Nadal, which has more spin than a political speech writer, or the sweat that drips unrelentingly from Nadal’s brow, each drop a testament to the unmatched ferocity with which he approaches every point.
He doesn’t have the sledgehammer-like left arm of Rod Laver.
Instead, his is a game that is beautiful because of what it doesn’t have, rather than what it does. Quite simply, Novak Djokovic has no weakness. Where his serve was once paltry, it’s now as reliable as any on tour. Where his forehand was once sporadic, it’s now as powerful and precise as there is. Where his backhand slice was once a mule of a shot, it now stands up against the best.
Djokovic’s brilliance is more subtle. It appears in flashes every now and again, be it through the impossibly smooth slide across a hardcourt, or the strike of a backhand down the line with the precision of a sniper.
For the most part, the joy in watching him comes from his systematic breakdown of every opponent he faces, finding angles and shots that no other player has ever had a right to.
It’s this sort of strength that doesn’t stand out as much as a Federer, Nadal, or Laver, and for that reason he has not been rated as highly as them, but it shouldn’t make his game or success any less formidable.
Novak Djokovic will never be the crowd favourite everywhere he goes, his crowd favouritism in Sunday’s final against Andy Murray perhaps a rare one-off for him.
Still, no amount of jeers for Djokovic, or admiration for the feats of Federer, Nadal and Laver, can change the fact that Djokovic has, with his French Open victory on Sunday, become the greatest tennis player this world has ever seen.
And with the final piece of the puzzle finally acquired, and the Olympics and the final two grand slams of the year ahead, there’s every chance he’ll bolster his now unmatched legacy.
Spectre08
Roar Rookie
Hilarious reading this now considering djokovic is only 3 behind federer with a great chance to win the us open..has won all master 1000 events twice..will finish his career with the most weeks spent as world no 1..much better win% than federer and is the only player to have won all 14 Elite titles..Djokovic is the GOAT. ..
JM
Guest
"Lies, damned lies and statistics." And now, two years later ... Fewer Slam wins by far than either Nadal or Federer, having fallen three farther back against both. No Olympic gold. Inability to maintain his level over time. The Djoker's greatness cannot be denied. He's top seven all-time definitely, and top five probably (though one could reasonably rank him behind Borg and Sampras) ... but he was never the GOAT, and he never will be.
Luci saten
Guest
Wawrinka is not the part of the big four.He won only 12 titles and is very inconsistent.He is not a title contendor.Federer won all of his worthless slams with no rivals except nadal whom he couldnt beat.Federer is a joke
H2H
Guest
Head-to-head between Djokovic and the other two GOAT contenders is misleading to say the least. Djokovic had his first matches with them in 2006; from then on, both opponents of his had at most three years at their peak: Federer in 2006-2008, Nadal in 2008, 2010 and 2013. However, Djokovic has been (almost) constantly peaking from 2011, so he played for 3 years in his opponents' peaks (which did overlap, too), while they played for 5 years in Djokovic's peak. Regarding this, it's no wonder he has a (slight) H2H advantage over both of them, but it certainly doesn't mean that he's better than either considering their full careers. Nadal's H2H versus Federer is quite different, though: he has a huge advantage over him, he has cleaned his clock on clay and beaten him on hard courts, and their careers coincided pretty much, so Nadal definitely has got Federer's number over their career so far. (Of course, H2H is just one kind of stat. In many others, Federer comes out better.)
Bruce
Guest
Sorry, but you got it completely wrong. Djokovic is playing in a much weaker era than Federer did. It's irrelevant how many top 10 or 20 players you play if all of them are pathetic compared to the top. Moreover, Federer had Nadal constantly challenging him and stopping him on many occasion. Djokovic has no one and he still trails Federer in slams at the same age. So really there is no comparison, Djokovic will always be play second or third fiddle to the true GOAT, Roger Federer.
steve
Guest
Enough for now......
northerner
Guest
I guess I have an issue with the sheer concept of a "GOAT." How do you compare a tennis player in 2016 to one who played half a century ago? How do you compare a Barry Bonds or Mark McGwire to a Babe Ruth or Lou Gehrig or even a Roger Maris? Statistics only tell you so much. There are plenty of ice hockey players who have better stats than Rocket Richard, but I doubt anyone would argue that he wasn't the best of his or just about any other era. The stats are there, sure, and we can argue about them till the cows come home. But for me, the Joker is the best player in the world now. Period. You simply can't compare his accomplishments with someone like Laver, who played in a different era, under different conditions, against different opponents. It's like trying to argue that a 2016 Lexus is a better car than a 1936 Cord. Of course it is, but the Cord will be remembered after the Lexus is long forgotten. One is a legend, the other isn't. Djokovich will be right up there in the pantheon of greats, and that should be enough.
Johnno
Guest
Get off his back, he doesn't have to enter controversiall chats if he doesn't want to it's not his problem. Get over it. And he Djkovic has been very vocal about equalization of tennis wages, so the mid range players get more cash. Where as Federer has been stone cold silent on the issue of better tennis wages for mid-range players, and been criticised.
delbeato
Roar Guru
At least one player has accused him of doping. No I wouldn't go that far. Yes, I've watched too much cycling. And I've learned some things from that. They don't apply just to cyclists, either.
Lancey5times
Guest
"don’t do much to dispel casual suspicion of his performances " So you do suspect him of doping? (Maybe you've spent a little too much time watching cycling.....)
Rory
Guest
Too early to say that. I don't think it's about stats alone but in GS's Fed has played in 27 finals to Novak's 20. also more (slightly) semi finals and QF's. Novak will have to dominate the next 2 years. He may be able to - when Fed was 29 he had Nadal at his prime and Djokovic starting to hit his to contend with. 2 of the greatest at their best. He got run down and wasn't able to add much to his tally. Djokovic doesn't have that calibre of opposition coming through - his main threats are his age or older and on the decline. He seems to be in immaculate condition with no physical weakness. My opinion is his greatest strength is his side to side baseline coverage/defence/counterattack and I kind of wonder whether his ankles and knees will start feeling the slides on those hard courts, but he seems immune.
John H
Guest
You might be a Guru but your point is insubstantial. Or perhaps youintend to compliment Fed with his criticism of Sharapova today. Either way, it's aside of the discussion here.
delbeato
Roar Guru
No. I said his comments to date on doping in tennis are disappointing, unhelpful, don't do much to dispel casual suspicion of his performances and generally unbecoming of someone who may aspire to be acknowledged as the GOAT. He can fix that easily. For whatever reason, he has failed to do so. The reason is unclear, there are a few possibilities. I wouldn't be declaring him the GOAT just yet.
Lancey5times
Guest
But he hasn't tested positive. It sounds like you are of the belief that he either A) is doping because he is pretty handy at tennis or B) is guilty until retiring and dying innocent. That doesn't seem fair and I'm not sure what Novak needs to do to sway you. And what would one logically say?
Lancey5times
Guest
I don't understand, Doesn't the term GOAT refer to best player ever when measured against others? If so, there is always a GOAT. It's just that over time the goalposts (or GOATPOSTS, this made me chuckle to myself a little) move. The only time there can be no GOAT is if there is nothing to be the greatest at. I'm the GOAT at brushing my particular set of chompers as I'm the only person who has done this other than mum (and she was rubbish), while I can't, nor can any others, claim to be the best at eating a bus stop through a bendy straw as no-one has ever done it. I hope this makes more sense than what you posted. I think it does and that's saying something
delbeato
Roar Guru
Yes, but not very far. Lance Armstrong didn't test positive (well he did once). The tests are easily beaten. Everyone knows that. Which is why Djokovic's statement that no positive tests was proof of no doping was received so poorly. It's not what someone who was playing clean and was keen to ensure his competitors were held to account would logically say.
delbeato
Roar Guru
Drug testing in tennis is a bit of a joke. A lot of players are starting to speak out now - they are unhappy with being beaten by dopers. And if you even think that maybe isn't happening I've got a rude shock for you. Actually we have proof now with Sharapova. Djokovic on the other hand has responded only with "No positive tests, no doping". Not impressive.
Fekadu
Guest
With regard to GOAT. The true GOAT hasn't been born so far in this era: the true GOAT is one who has completed the followings, that haven't been done all in once by any athlete so far in the history of tennis. 1. win each 4 Grand Slam title at least twice: (Djokovic & Federer 1 more GS at FO, whereas, Nadal 1 more at AO) all the three greatest athletes have equal chance completing this. 2. Win each 9 master 1000 tournaments at least once: (Djokovic left only at WESTERN & SOUTHERN OPEN 1000 master tournament, Federer left MONTE-CARLO ROLEX MASTERS and INTERNAZIONALI BNL D'ITALIA, and Nadal left at MIAMI OPEN PRESENTED BY ITAU and SHANGHAI ROLEX MASTERS) Djokovic more to approach to fulfil this than Federer & Nadal 3. Win BARCLAYS ATP WORLD TOUR FINALS and year end No. at least three times ( Both Novak & Federer have already done but not Nadal of corse he has completed the year end No. 1 At 3 times. but not won the trophy so far). Novak & Federer are advantage over Nadal 4. Above 90% positive H2H among with the top 10 players on the selected five years during his active period including H2H each each other ( Novak and Nadal are benefitted with this over Federer) 5. Win each 4 grand slams in a raw in different Callander year (Novak completed but not Federer & Nadal) 6. Win each the 4 GS in the same Callander year (it hasn't been done by any of them so far. However, Novak is more approaching to the truth due to the fact that he had the first two GS, AO & FO) 7. Olympic medalist: only Nadal has won a single tournament gold medial in Olympic. I, Therefore to close by saying that Novak is more advantage to become a GOAT due to the fact that he is the youngest, more compliant and consistent at the moment than Federer &Nadal. Moreover, Djokovic as the "most complete player ever" and the "most perfect player of this time". Djokovic is an all court- player with emphasis on aggressive baseline play. His groundstrokes from both wings are consistent, deep, and penetrating. His backhand is widely regarded as one of the best in today's game. His best shot is his backhand down the line, Djokovic to be the greatest returner of serve in the history of the men's game.
Lancey5times
Guest
Would you say that not testing positive at any stage in his career goes someway towards raising him above suspicion?
Daniel
Guest
Excellent article, fun and easy to read. Only thing missing is you've forgotten to include Novak's 5 World tour finals and how hard it is to actually win, that Nadal the player that he is and has never won it. Well done on the article