Quote:
Originally Posted by Inglewood Jack
this is where the comment section just got a big dose of fan anger. some people think he should be as high as #3, ahead of Laver, because of how he dominated the Rafa and Fed H2H during his peak. I'd be willing to listen to the argument that at his absolute best, he produced the most unbeatable tennis in the history of the sport. but if you look at it more as a marathon than a sprint, then it gets murky.
I think I'd still put him right around equal with Pete, and above if he manages to add at least one more slam. it will be interesting to do this list again in 10 years once all these guys are done (though there's no guarantee 47 year old Roger won't still be out there showing up to exactly one tournament per year and winning it)
|
The one thing you can say about Novak is that he beat the greatest clay court player ever at the French Open and he beat the greatest grass court player ever in the Wimbledon finals. However, he did miss a great opportunity to have more majors losing to Murray twice in the finals and Wawa twice in the finals. His 12-9 Grand Slam finals record isn't amazing as well especially when compared to say Sampas (14-4).
Plus the first couple years of his career he would always quite matches and players on tour hated him, Roddick tried to fight him once lol. But out of everyone else for the past decade he was really the only one who rose up and took on the King and the GOAT and won his fair share of matches. So as much as I hated Rafa losing to him, I always recognized he was one of the greatest.
It's crazy to think that the big 3 will end up most likely with +50 Grand Slam titles combined.
Full disclosure Troutman I'm only mad about Davis Cup of Tennis being indoor hard because this greatly reduces Spain's chances at another title.