The Tennis G.O.A.T. Debate is settled? - Jon to ANDY RODDICK on NOVAK DJOKOVIC & the G.O.A.T. debate 

The fact that roddick chose novak over roger rafa by keeping feelings aside is worth 🙌👌 despite the history roddick had with novak 😂 is really worth appreciation 👏👏👏 Bravo roddick

This podcast should be at least 50% Roddick nerding out. Brilliant insight

Awesome take Andy, I think this is the most in-depth I've heard anyone talk about playing against Djokovic, and I feel you could go on forever. As someone mentioned in the comment section, I would throw in 'insane ability to produce consistent depth regardless of the type of ball you're throwing at him' as his second biggest superpower.

Andy, you said Djokovic’s greatest weapon is his ability to change direction. How important is his constant depth? From what I’ve seen, his ability to get the ball deep, consistently a foot away from the baseline, even in the most compromised positions must be the most infuriating thing to play against. It’s like you hit the ball hard, get a quality shot, have him doing a full split on the backhand side, but instead of being able to move forwards, the ball comes right back at your feet anyways. I feel like that must take a toll on the opponent, right? Especially in a tiebreak where you just want easy shots, easy putaways, and instead your 135 mph serves come back at your feet.

Great explanation by Andy Roddick. It's such great pleasure to have him back as a commentator who can actually demystify and give us a ground zero look of these shot mechanics, analysis and what they do to the players. As a recreational player, even I can understand what he says!

Well put Andy. Novak's qualities are more subtle and none of his shots really stand out at first glance. But in the end, tennis is mostly about percentages.

Brilliant nerd out. Damn. I was feeling panicky and smothered on the court just listening to this while eating my deep dish slice.

Must be very demoralizing for other players to go into a match (esp a 5 setter) with Novak knowing that he will probably neutralize a large percentage of their best shots but they likely don't have the defensive prowess to return the favour to him. So you'll probably have to hit several outstanding shots to win a point against him, but if you drop anything short, he will pounce and kill you in a second! No wonder most players don't really have the belief that they can hang with him and his consistency thru a long match.

Novak is JOHN WICK of Tennis. The legendary DJOKO WICK. Mainstream nedia and corporate sponsors of roger rafa did everything to belittle this guy but the LEGEND stood above them all against all odds. If he was from a western world, we would have already heard one of the greatest stories ever told about one of the greatest resilient sports rather human of recorded if not all time.

I agree with you about the goat talk but why would you go there by saying do I think he should of been vaccinated and you say yes come on brother novak choice was the correct choice for his well being for his health doctor verified especially 4 years later you should know your research might be a inconvenient truth to you

Asides from his consistently deep groundstrokes and changing directions, Novak also has this uncanny ability to get his frustrations out of the way and reset mentally. You'll never see him play a poor game after smashing a racket or arguing with an umpire. Simply put the man never beats himself and you always have to take the racket out of his hands to win which is not an easy thing to do.

Also.. Djokovic's flexibility.. "gumby" Superpower.. more flexible than any other player..

One thing Roddick failed to mention is his mental toughness, Novak just doesn’t give up, multiple grandslam and masters matches where he has come back from facing match points. Doesn’t let anything perturb him not even a loud partisan crowd who is against you

God bless Gill Gross for alerting me to this podcast. Andy’s rapid fire brain, articulacy, effortless wit & his passion for & insight into tennis are simply *awesome*.

Andy that monologue towards the end describing Novak was amazing.

More Andy Roddick Nerd Outs please :)

Oh I love your new podcast, Andy! I’m already hooked. Keep up the good work! I had the same thought, that for Novak also country of origin played a role. Azarenka made that notion at some point too. Loved your nuanced discussion. Coming from a Roger-Fan here… ;)

It's amazing to me that people still think they've got reason to criticize Novak's vaccination decision. Crazy.

I was amazed how knowledgeable Roddick proved to be! Yes, he was a professional player but he could obviously understand the game and it`s finesse even better than he could play it. He`d make a great coach!

As a HUGE tennis fan since the late 1980s Novak's greatest strength to me is his ability to absorb whatever shot comes at him be it huge serves, deep grounstrokes breaking short angles, defy touch on dropshots just positively absorb it all and never break down, the man just cannot be broken down, then when he goes on the attack he can hit through the court better than anyone I've seen deep into the court and crack straight down the line shots on both backhand and forehand splitting his opponents game wide open example an in form Nadal Australia 2019 Novak made Rafa look kind of ordinary granted its Novaks best surface and Rafa's worst when Novak is locked in seeing it and feeling it his athleticism just leaves the guys lost (with the exception of Nadal at the French, there Nadal is just the best of all time 14 slams to Djokovic 3)

Thank andy Roddick sir ❤ and Jon sir ❤ Novak Djokovic ❤

Finnaly some objectivity from Andy... You may don't like, but DJOKOVIC IS THE GOAT!

I think one numbers-based argument both for and against Novak is how fine the margins are against Federer in two of the main categories. 27-23 head-to-head and 24-20 in the Slam count look clear on paper. If I gave you two players at 27-23, you would never believe that the weaker (Federer) actually won more of the points, games and sets between them. But that is the truth. And if just 3 of the many thousand points they played had gone differently - one each in the US Open 2010 and 2011 and Wimby 2019 - then, all else being equal, we'd be looking at a 26-24 head-to-head for Federer and a Slam count of 22-21 for Djokovic at this point. That's how little there is in it. Part of the explanation is that Djokovic is a better player from match point up than Federer (just 4 losses vs 24). But that still leaves unexplained why it happened three times. Djokovic didn't save match point and win three times against anyone else and Federer didn't squander match point and lose three times against anyone else either. Even after you factor in that these two met more often than pretty much any other pair, that is a freak stat. Rerun the world from June 2010 and I'd bet you that 9 out of 10 times this doesn't happen. Yes, tennis success is counted in matches and tournaments, but can you come up with another pair of players where the guy leading by points, games and sets has four wins less? I can't. That said, Djokovic runs away with it in the Masters and the weeks at number one - despite the obstacles he gave himself by refusing vaccination. It's hard to argue with that. What you can say in Federer's favour is that he arguably had a rougher time of it because he's older. Yes, that cuts both ways, but the period where they were both active and his greater age was a bonus (pre-2010) was shorter than the period where it was a drawback (post-2010). I think the reason is that both of them rose quickly but declined slowly. More to the point: Novak rose more quickly than Federer declined, so there were only about 5 years where Federer had the chance to improve in their head-to-head but about 13 where Novak did. If Novak had come first, that dynamic would have been reversed.

The fact that you are apologizing whole time for doing that article and choosing him as a GOAT speaks how much you don't like him and how hard was for you to acknowledge his greatness. Just listen to yourselves. This is ridiculous!

When Djokovic wasn't close there was only one goat pretty much and a potential Challenger in Rafa. Now when Djokovic is the goat it's a debate?? Heck no, Djokovic is the goat!!

Very Interesting,, Great to give the Goat the respect he deserves.

Andy.. Novak is not 6'4" more like 2..

How good is Roddick at explaining the nuances of playing against different players? He is the best in the business! This explanation of Djokovic's is seriously the best I've heard.

I'm a Rafa fan - and his decisions during COVID are what made thim the actual GOAT. There are arguements you can make about tennis numbers and stats - there are zero arguements that this dude is firm in his convictions and didnt cave to the bullshit when most others did.

Djokovic is simply a tennis machine. A tennis genius ...that's basically what people cannot detect, Cannot understand. He simply does not need to go for all these glamorous shots to defeat you. That's rarely what he does when he's redlining, or goofing around and that's 001% of the time. He is just that Superior

Keep going. I love your debates.

The BIGGEST difference between Novak and Roger was Novak had balls of steel. In some of the tightest matches Novak just went for it and performed at a god-like level. Roger seemed to do the opposite in so many tight matches especially many critical 5 setters. Love Roger still and consider my personal GOAT but no one can take that away from Novak right now.

I have never seen anybody explaining it so brilliant and what makes Novak great in tennis, besides the numbers. Starting to love Andy as a youtuber more and more as much as I loved him on court.

Love Novak so much. Just an incredible champion. One match I'll never forget though, was the 2009 Wimbledon final between Andy and Roger. Even though I loved Roger, I really wanted Andy to win as it would have been cool to see someone different haha Tell you what, though, that still ranks as one of the most spellbinding tennis matches I've ever seen and you really got the sense that this fella (Andy) through his heart and soul into it against one of the greatest players of all time and came ever so close to knocking him off.

Djokovic is the most dominant player of all time. The most entertaining player to watch was without a doubt Fed, and the Fed vs Nadal matchups were the greatest matches of all time. Djokovic just doesn’t feel as magical to watch.

I'm a Roger fan and we don't wanna talk about it, but consider the 40-15 match, where Roger was one point away from winning Wimbledon against Novak on his serve, twice. Watch in that game where Roger served for the match how Novak manages to neutralize Roger's amazing attacking game on his best surface, grass. Yes, Roger could have won it if he got that one serve in that went in the net, with Novak going the other way, and by not rushing the net on the other point. But for everything else, Novak clinically got the ball back exactly where it needed to be, neutralizing Roger's control over the point, daring him to go for the higher risk shots. This to me is a good example of what Andy was talking about here.

Andy, congrats on the podcast, LOVE IT! Thanks for the wonderful conversation with Mr. Wertheim. I totally agree, if people would place biasses aside and just focus on the resume in front of them, Novak is the GOAT hands down.

When it's all said and done, Novak will have all the records and by far be the most accomplished tennis player ever. I still believe Federer was the more talented player and played the game more exquisitely. Novak benefited greatly from numerous injuries to Nadal, Andy Murray and Del Potro during his reign at #1.

Yes, Djokovic is the GOAT. However, I will caveat that Djokovic was the biggest beneficiary of the homogenization of surfaces in tennis, where he could basically play the same style of tennis on clay, grass, and hardcourt. Roger tailored his game to fit grass and hard courts, and Rafa tailored his game toward clay. I'm not taking anything away from Djokovic, but you have to look at the evolution of the modern game and the context of the era that Djokovic played in.

I agree with most of the things in this claim, except for the county of origins part. Seems like a very American way to look at it, speaking as a European.

What an amazing podcast! I have thoroughly enjoyed all the episodes, but this one hits me particularly hard because of how well you have made the case for Novak as the GOAT. I have been and always will be a huge Roger fan, but after 2023 when Novak won 3 of the 4 major finals he played, he left zero room for the mental gymnastics to argue for Roger or Rafa. You both zeroed in on the things that have made Novak a bit less admired by casual fans, and you also nail it when you talk about how nuanced his super powers are. Bravo to Andy and team for finding and filling a significant void for tennis fans. Brilliant work.

It doesn't matter any explanation . For me Roger is the GOAT as the majority

Love this conversation, but Laver, Borg, and Pete should be considered in this conversation too.

Great to see a tennis podcast of this quality. Also great to see Novak get the recognition he deserves. Wertheim is a true weirdo hung up on trying to force people to get vaccinated.

Can I suggest a theme for discussion? I’d love to hear a professional insider breakdown of how players have to adapt to various court surfaces. As an observer it’s would be helpful to understand the conditions that players deal with on various surfaces.

Novak is a players’ player. His style is something that can be learned to a certain extent. Also, he’s a cerebral player.

I think part of the issue with the GOAT debate is that it was Federer unanimously at first, then Nadal started to climb into the debate (Novak famously called him the GOAT at Miami 2011 back when Nadal probably had half of Federer’s slams), then Nadal and Djokovic were practically neck and neck by the numbers, then Djokovic overtook Nadal and both seemingly passed Federer. It’s an interesting one because over the span of 15 years the debate has changed gears immensely. In 2010 no one even thought Djokovic would come close to challenging for the title; he was basically being compared to Murray while Fed and Rafa were on another level.

As long as I wished it was Roger or Rafa as a younger guy, as a grown adult who's watched since the Edberg/Becker/Cash era and on, it's so obviously Novak. If I had to select a player to play for the lives of my entire family - a random game on any surface, any opponent from any era - it's Djokovic 100% of the time

Could anyone tell me what a Bunny Kick serve is?

Djoker plays hot potatoes (lol) with his fans in 2 AMAZING drama-filled matches. The Muss-Cer duals were hypertension magnets for viewers like MOI! AirDjoker was flying in both 5th sets. Picking Nole over Ruud. Carlos over Stef. Sasha over Dimi. Yannik over Dimmi. Knee is soooo different from soft tissue injuries so NOT SURE how much of a strain-issue for the Djoker. He will play - how well & how long - tough to say. Thanx Jon & Andy! Cheers, Milan p.s. GOATs. Roger = Flowing Graceful Michelangelo Masterpiece to watch. Rafa = Powerful Firey Roden sculpture domination. Novak = Creating Athletic Chess Mental Giant w/amazing Akido abilities.

Screw the EUA clot shot, c'mon man.

Thank you, Andy. After hearing you talk about Novak's game, I can finally confirm that I'm an absolute tennis freak.

Is it possible that at the beginning of 2024, in addition to all the studies and data that have been published in the meantime about covid and mrna vaccines, someone will criticize Djokovic for his pro choice attitude!?!

When I was a junior I would spend soooo many hours trying to emulate Roddicks serve hahahah loved watching your games 🎉

Thank you Andy. This is the best & most intelligent conversation on this topic.

100% agree with Andy’s point. “What Novak does well doesn’t immediately jump out to the untrained tennis eye” …that’s so true

Love the metaphor with resumes 👌🏻

The only player that played so clinically close to Novak was Lendl. Novak is the Tom Brady of tennis... just keeps coming, to his last breath.

Yes, if it's just maths - he is the greatest. But life is never just maths. Players who make you fall in love with the game matter. One name rarely mentioned because of all the maths is Pete Sampras - another game changer of his time.

Andy Roddick, you are really good commentator, very insightful and articulate ways to explain things from a Pro perspective. Tennis players really appreciate it!

You cannot compare players from different eras as the conditions have changed: namely, racket/string technology, courts, training, traveling, etc...All you can do is compare players against those from the same time period.

Bro.. Djokovic is great.. U really need to say that his game works on slow courts (current Wimbledon grass included). When the courts got fast or when federer was in the mood(like in semis 2011 french open), fed whooped novaks ass whatever novak tried.

Would like to hear Roddick's in-depth takes on the strengths / weaknesses of other players -- e.g. Safin, Hewitt. E.g. the superhuman players that, apart from Roddick himself, account for Roger's best years being the hard era compared with for example, our recent epidemic of slouches like Medvedev, Zverev, Alcaraz, Sinner... 😉

Federer is my favorite player of all time. That will never change. But I do have to concede Djoko is probably the greatest ever.

That is some of the best breakdown analysis on the GOAT debate that I've ever heard. Looking simply at the numbers, the conversation is over - you can't argue that. The thing that gets me is this: we don't always just look at the numbers. Ali wasn't the greatest because of numbers and you could argue that Woods, Jordan or Pele weren't the greatest because of numbers also - it was something else. And it is that something else that'll keep the conversation going imho. But if you want to know who was the most successful tennis player of all time is; that is Novak...

Please show a minimum of respect for someone who almost made the slam years last year with 24 GS ! It is shame to have this debat again.

Dude, you really wish he got vaxxed? Have you been living under a rock the last 2 years? Someone who was willing to give up everything for his beliefs (which turned out to be 100% true) should have caved into societal and government pressure? Would you say the same thing about Ali refusing to go to Vietnam?

I want more nerding out on this podcast. Andy Roddick is so much smarter than he gets credit for and that's what I listen to this podcast to get.

There is clearly an argument for each of the big 3. Why? Because context of numbers matters. Roger was the first player to try to win EVERY tournament (Before then? Players only tried their hardest at slams). Rafa had to compete with him at this level for six straight years - 2005-2010). Novak was a distant #3 and was able to not expend physical or mental energy that he could use in his later years when the competition was bereft of major competitors. Ask Steve Kerr - winning and maintaining a championship pedigree has a cost, and one could argue this hurt Roger and Rafa later...and allowed Novak the chance to bank on greater reserves later. Roger was the most dominant - he didn't just win. He KILLED people in his prime - without coaching violations or injury timeouts. Rafa, of the big 3, faced and OVERCAME the toughest competition because he had to face and overcome peak Roger AND peak Novak. Novak, in my mind, has a strong argument because of the numbers but also because of the "x factors" like clutch ability (down match point, etc.). In the end, Novak has a strong case, but the others do as well.

I think a lot of times people are arguing different things in GOAT debates. Some people argue best player in their prime and some argue greatest career. Novak has the greatest career, but greatest in their prime is hard to say.

If numbers don't lie, then Serena isn't the best (which you both said she was), but Margaret Court is (Court also has almost 100 more titles than Serena). However, people say Court isn't the best because some of her slams are not in the Open Era, and her eleven slams came against weaker competition. It can't be numbers when we want and exceptions due to competition, circumstances, etc. when we want. Of course the level of competition matters, as does dominance, and the unmeasured greatness you see with your own eyes. I still feel Djokovic probably is the best, but Serena's numbers just don't add up. She was amazing, and maybe the best we've ever seen for a tournament or match, but she never had a single year anywhere near some of the years Court, Navratilova, and Graf had, nor did she play the best in her era day in, day out. She won SEVEN slams with her sister as her competitor. Venus famously said she didn't care the outcome of her matches with Serena. Henin, Clijsters, Hingis, some of her best competitors (but not of the Graf/Navratilova level), all retired young and played her under fifteen times. IMAGINE how many titles Djokovic, Federer, or Nadal would have if the two of them didn't exist (They've played each other all fifty-some times!)? So competition matters, and knowing the ins and outs of each year does too. And never short change players from past generations. We will be doing that in thirty years to Federer and Nadal and maybe even Djokovic. Graf's achievements (all reached by 29!) are simply incomparable. 23 slams, remarkable competition, 100 titles, longest #1, fewest finals lost, best slam win percentage, winning record or tied record w/ all rivals, the Golden Slam, and three slams a year at least in 88, 89, 93, 95, 96. ALL BY 29!

That is a terrible backhanded compliment from roddick with that yoko comparison .

That was great as a squash player its just nice to hear an actual analysis

He could not touch Fed or Nadal in their prime. + Nadal won the Olympics. What we talking about here..?

I wish, Roddick had not listened to Gilbert, he would have won a few more titles. Now, 1. We the tennis public is pretty biased and ridiculously simple minded, cannot handle complexity. 2. Djokovic has been good on an doff the court, he was offered a British citizenship, he stayed loyal to Serbia. Says a lot about his character. Also, he was not bombing his neighbors, he was hiding in basements. 3. I think Federer's kryptonite was Nadal getting into his head. 4. Djokovic at 6-2 and Murray at 6-3 didn't have to worry about Nadal's over the shoulder topspin, also, you are absolutely right about Djokovic being able to change directions.

GOATdal played half a career with advantage on 1/3 of the season on slow surface… Weakvak played a full career with advantage 2/3 of the season on fast surface . It’s clear GOATdal is greater.

How nice and smart Roddick explains things, how Novak does things, even if you’re no professional, but you know game of tennis 🎾👏👏👏

Amazing information! Keep bringing the nerd thing to us!

And Novak did it in the Rafa and Roger Era...

If the stats argument is used to elevate Novak to GOAT, then there's an incredibly strong argument for Serena being ranked third behind Steffi and Martina as the GOAT. Consider this comparison of stats, where the only win for Serena is having ONE grand slam title more than Serena. Year-End #1 Steffi (8), Martina (7), Serena (5) Weeks at #1 Steffi (377), Martina (332), Serena (319) Grand Slams Serena (23), Steffi (22), Martina (18) Total titles: Martina (167), Steffi (107), Serena (73) Seasons won 10+ titles: Martina 7 (16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 11), Steffi 5 (14, 11, 11, 10, 10), Serena 1 (11) Winning at least 1 title in consecutive years: Martina (21), Steffi (18), Steffi (14), Serena (11) Win Percentage: Steffi 88.69 (902 wins), Martina 86.81 (1442 wins), Serena 84.91 (855 wins) Top 10 longest match win streaks: Martina #1 (74 matches), Graf #2 (66), Martina #3 (58), Martina #6 (54), Graf #7 (46), Graf #8 (45), Martina #10 (41) If key stats tell the story, it's hardly reasonable to consider Serena the GOAT due to 1 extra grand slam. By rights, the fairest #1 based on stats would be a battle between Martina and Steffi, and yet, many in today's tennis world identify Serena as the GOAT. I'm not arguing that she is or isn't the GOAT, I'm arguing that volume of success is not the only factor in who is truly the GOAT. Jon's argument has some flaws. I read Martina Navratilova once address the men's GOAT argument this way, and I am paraphrasing because I can't find the exact quote: Novak is the "winningest" men's player in history, but Roger was the most talented. Which begs the question of how you define GOAT. Is it the guy who won most? Is it the guy whose stats are second or third all-time, but whose peak play was better than the sport has ever seen? Roger set some incredible records during his peak that can't be touched by Novak, including a streak of 10 consecutive grand slam finals and another streak of 8 consecutive grand slam finals. He won 5 consecutive Wimbledons and 5 consecutive US Opens, including four consecutive years when he won both. Roger has the best two-year record of all time 173-9 (95%). The point here is that Roger's peak period cannot be matched. Novak wins for sustained peak over the course of a career, and rightly deserves to be considered the "winningest" player, but the greatest to every step foot on a court belongs to Roger. Many will argue that Federer has a losing record over Novak, and the numbers support this, but Novak's advantage is a mere 27-23. Dig a little deeper and you see that Roger built up a 13-6 record against Novak in Roger's prime from 2006-2010 before Novak reached his peak. Once Novak began to peak, he evened the score, and then in their last 5 matches, when Roger was older than Novak is today, went 5-1 to create the 4 match lead margin he enjoys today. While some would say they are from the same era, they are not. They had different peak eras. Roger came first and created the insane standard that lifted Rafa and Novak's games. Roger's talent allowed him to create that standard without a frontrunner to chase. Look for highlights reals from Roger's peak period. No one can touch him. Again, how to define the GOAT: if it's the winningest player, it's Novak, if it's the most talented, it's likely Roger. Not that I'm truly arguing that Roger is the GOAT. I'm simply saying that the assertion that it's case closed, Novak is the GOAT, then you have to say case closed, either Steffi or Martina is the GOAT, not Serena. And, I'm saying that there's more than one way to define the GOAT. It's simply not the black-and-white argument that anyone who claims Novak is the GOAT is making. P.S. No disrespect for leaving Chris Evert out of the discussion. She's got some insane career stats herself, but overall she's not as strong as Steffi or Martina.

That Jim Courier part is deep. Djokovic can addapt and find Wholes in any player.

There is no GOAT, it depends on eras. Nadal is the GOAT on Clay, Sampras is the GOAT on fast courts, Borg is probably the best with Wooden racket. Beyond that so much is dependent on matchups. Djokovic is the best in the current era of homogenized tennis

Federer is the GOAT - game changer, winning pedigree and numbers, and multiple wins against everyone else younger than him in the 2010s during his own legacy era. Novak can have more of the stats, but so does Lebron and hes still second fiddle. Novak benefitted greatly from his rivals' injuries, older age, and a 60% hard court tour. And todays little kid, instagram-era players arent measuring up.

I don't know why you all are all numbers and no emotions. It's a game of passion after all. It's not just a question of how many numbers you achieved but also of how you achieved it. Roger goes into a game with pressure from everyone in the crowd expecting him to win. Novak feeds off negative energy from the crowd. The one time everyone wanted him to win was in the US Open 2021. He couldn't control his emotions when the crowd was on his side wanting him to win and said post-match that he was overwhelmed. This is the kind of pressure Roger dealt in every game. Roger is more than goat! He is inspirational.

I can watch Roddik analize the game for hours. the best analisys ever. I would love for him to give an analysis of the big three's game all day long

Fedal fans left the chat

this is now my favourite podcast....

That “nerd out” is precisely what’s missing from tennis commentary.

The only problem with only using numbers is it’s hard to compare generation to generation who didn’t play the same tournaments every year nor pre-open era tennis were allowed to play the slams in their prime. Prior to the 90s not all top players played in the Aussie open every year. Rod Laver won two grand slam years,, a feat never repeated on the men’s side, but wasn’t allowed to play majors for many years in his prime. This debate just seems like it’s for headlines

Contrary to Wertheim's conformist opinion, Novak's refusal to get the Vaxx is one of the things that makes him great.

I think calling someone the greatest of all time is a misnomer. Without question you can name a player who was number one the longest or won the most of this or that or have the highest statistic in whatever. However I'm not in favor of making such a broad generalization about a specific person in a specific sport. I'm satisfied to have watched some of the greats of the game and I honestly have no need to bestow an eternal title on any of them.

Yoko wasn’t a better musician then the Beatles. Novak is better than Federer and Nadal. Bad analogy

Love this. To me, this is the best way to really get someone to admit who the GOAT is. Let's say the fate of the Earth, or even more, the life of your child ... is on the line and decided by one tennis match ... who would you send in their prime? Would you send prime Nadal to save your child's life? Or would you send prime Roger to save their life? Or would you send prime Djoker? The answer to this question is the GOAT.

Djokovic. GOAT. End of story. Agree. Thanks guys.

I think the (or my) issue is: Novak is the personification of the current state of the game, and many of us don't like it (the game, I like Novak). The slowing down of tennis and the grinding nature of the current game is an endurance test for not only the players but the fans. A straight sets win shouldn't take 4 hours. Not to mention the lack of variety in the sport. The French was slow, Wimbledon fast and low, Australian medium fast, US Open fast, indoor really fast. You got different styles and favorites at each tournament. Yes, I understand Wimbledon did get dull: serve, return, point, but there should be a middle ground. Go back to 80-90's speed Wimbledon, Rafa is not winning it, for better or worst. If they didn't slow down all surfaces, Roger is still the best that ever played.

Andy's interpretation is very valid, but there's a few other things to consider here. If I go 21 - 11 in head to head against my 2 main rivals in slams, then I'm sorry but I'm better than them. What they do against other players (that I'm also better than) would be somewhat irrelevant. The sport has largely become about endurance in modern times. It's very possible that the inferior player could simply go on for longer and gain the numbers, not so much based on game but just mere longevity, which I believe has partly happened regarding Djokovic. However I will say that Djokovic played a consistently higher level of tennis over a longer period of time than anyone, which would be good enough to crown him GOAT for a lot of people.

hi,are You the commentator,who said during Marozsan-Alcaraz match:This is scandelous.what a dropshut?

Sorry... not the best I ever seen... the most consistent I ever seen... which makes him the best player in titles won...the best I ever seen is Roger Federer...

So strange how it became acceptable to criticize people based on their medical history. Whether or not Novak got a medical procedure is none of our business. Otherwise great points.

He's like Brady and historic Pats run......he adjusts and beats you at your weakness in the moment....mind, fatigue, overconfidence. So many weapons and overcomes crowds that boo him. The GOAT