GOAT of Tennis

Opening Thoughts

If you follow tennis or just sports in general, you would’ve definitely heard of either one of Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, or Novak Djokovic. Together they are the “Big 3” of tennis, they’ve accomplished unparalleled records that will likely last longer than you and I, and as of writing on 7th June 2021, they’re still not done winning yet.

The majority of tennis fans support 1 of the 3 players mentioned, and looking at the fan distribution, Roger and Rafa definitely have an edge on Novak. But why? In this essay, I will briefly discuss each of them, the psychology behind their respective fan following, and I will share my views on the whole GOAT debate. I’m a long-time supporter of Rafa, but I promise I will try to be as unbiased as I can.

As this is a niche topic, just a disclaimer that there will be technical terms and information that is more relatable to a tennis fan, but fret not, there will be something for everybody. Let’s start by having a general overview of how the “Big 3” are perceived by fellow players, fans, and the media. Let’s start with the most iconic figure in tennis, Roger Federer.

Roger Federer: The Swiss Maestro

Roger was the first of the Big 3 to break into the top of the tennis world, known for his elegance on the court, Roger plays a fast-paced offensive style that focuses on approaching the net frequently to finish the point. It’s not a big surprise that Roger is the best all-court player that the world has ever seen, the reason being that he came into tennis during the transition of playing style.

Before Roger, there was Pete Sampras who has 14 grand slams to his name, Pete was one of the best serve-and-volley players to ever play the game, he was also Roger’s idol growing up. Back in the ’90s, tennis was played much faster, due to the court surfaces used, which resulted in faster courts, benefitting players with harder serves, the increase in ball pace makes it harder for returners to put the ball back in play, and even if they do, it won’t be a competitive return.

But around the turn of the century, tennis started changing. New racquet frame technologies, the increasing use of polyester strings, and changes in court surface material meant that tennis matches transitioned from a high pace game to a high spin game, effectively taking away the advantage of service-dominant players, and instead promoting a baseline-dominant rally game.

Tennis matches became longer, and baseliners started winning more tournaments than serve-and-volleyers.

Roger was part of this transition, he was born in an era where serve-and-volley is the norm, and adapted to an era where baseline tennis is the norm. Hence, the greatest all-court player was created. Sure he doesn’t have the biggest serve but he has a better baseline game than all the serve-and-volleyers, allowing him to outlast them on the slower courts of modern tennis. Likewise, he doesn’t have the most consistent baseline game, but he easily has the best net game in today’s tennis scene, his touch and feel on the tennis ball is unparalleled on the tour right now, except for maybe Nick Kyrgios. He hardly ever misses a volley and executes his drop shots perfectly.

Because of his all-court prowess, he was unstoppable from late 2003 to 2008, where he won 3 Australian Open, and 5 consecutive wins at Wimbledon and US Open, quickly bringing his total slam count to 13, just 1 shy of the record set by his idol Pete Sampras. During this time, the only slam he could not win was the French Open, not because he was bad on clay, he was easily the second-best clay-court player during this time, but he was unlucky that the best clay-court player during the time was also the greatest clay courter ever, Rafael Nadal.

Rafael Nadal: The Raging Bull

During Roger’s dominance on the ATP tour, it seemed like there was only one player who could stop him, and that was Rafa Nadal. While Roger was the greatest all-court player, he had a minor weakness when it comes to his baseline groundstrokes, and that is his backhand. Roger uses a one-handed backhand, which was the preferred choice in the previous generations, but it started dying out along with the server-and-volleyers, as baseline tennis emphasizes consistency and control, which meant that a two-handed backhand was encouraged. As a one-handed backhand requires better technical skills and timing to execute, it has a smaller sweet spot to hit, and therefore a smaller margin for error. It also makes it especially hard to handle high top-spinning balls. And that’s where Rafa comes in.

Roger and Rafa both dictate their game with their forehand, as their forehands are arguably the 2 best forehands tennis has ever seen, but in very different ways. Roger hits it with pace and great accuracy while Rafa hits it with more topspin than anyone in the game. Also, one thing to note is that, unlike Roger and Novak, he is a leftie, meaning he hits his forehands with his left hand. This is a great asset as most players on tour are right-handed, hence his heavy topspin forehand goes directly into the opponent’s backhand, which is usually the weaker wing.

As a result, Rafa was the only player Roger couldn’t quite solve at the time, as Rafa’s topspin forehand is especially effective against Roger’s one-handed backhand. You might think, well that also meant that Roger’s forehand also hit directly towards Rafa’s backhand in a cross-court exchange. Well, that is true, but Rafa simply had a relatively more consistent backhand for that exchange, meaning Rafa’s forehand neutralizes Roger’s game a lot more than the reverse, giving Rafa the advantage in most of their matches.

Early in Rafa’s career, he was known for 2 things, the Roger slayer and a talented clay-court specialist, as he won the French Open on his first attempt, and went on to win 3 more consecutively. Rafa being good on clay is hardly a surprise to the tour, as Spain has historically produced tons of great clay-courters, but Rafa was almost built to play on clay. The characteristics of clay-court tennis are in perfect resonance with Rafa’s playstyle and the values he stands for. So for me to describe Rafa Nadal, we have to look at the core features of clay-court tennis.

In general, clay courts are the slowest of all court surfaces, rallies are longer and therefore matches are longer. This is why the French Open is usually considered the toughest grand slam to win as you have to win 7 consecutive best-of-5 sets matches on the most physically-taxing surface in tennis. As the rallies are longer, clay court tennis also has a huge emphasis on the importance of point construction, or as I like to call it, the “chess” side of a tennis match, this is the tactical side of tennis, where instead of just blindly returning the ball back to your opponent, you’re carefully selecting your shots to give you the marginal advantage that would end the point in your favor, either by forcing a forced error from your opponent or constructing a point well to give you a clear opening to strike a winner.

Tennis has a unique rule of not allowing any communications between player and coach during a match. While this is a relatively controversial rule and a hotly debated one in recent times, it does have its charm. As it essentially means that when the player steps onto the court, he or she is alone, no matter what problem or tactical difficulties they may face during the match, they can only depend on themselves.

Personally, I am a huge fan of this odd rule, I think it resembles the reality of life very well. We often have to depend on ourselves to solve the issues we face in life, and that’s one of the many reasons why tennis is such a captivating sport to me. As a professional tennis player, not only do you have to perfect your forehand or backhand techniques and physical conditioning, but you also have to learn the tactics of the game and learn how to solve problems on your own, especially during an official match, where emotions and nerves are running high; which is why most experts agree that at the top of the tennis world, it’s not about the shots that you have, every player in the top 100 has world-class shots, the difference lies in the mental strength of the player, as a tennis match is usually decided by a few key points.

Hence, clay court is the ultimate test of the player’s physical strength, mental strength, movement, shot selection, and problem-solving skills on the court. And appropriately, this is where Rafa excels the most. Rafa is viewed by peers and fans as an incredibly humble and hardworking athlete, who plays every point as if his life is on the line. He chases down points that most people would give up on, his passion for the game allows him to be resilient in tough situations. Some may argue that Novak is more clinical in critical situations, like tiebreakers, break-points, or just performance in the deciding set (3rd or 5th), but it’s undisputed that no player can match the intensity Rafa brings to the court, the commitment he brings to every point he plays, which is why his French Open triumphs (13 and counting) is no coincidence because that’s the kind of mentality clay-court tennis demands.

However, early in his career Rafa suffered from being a “one-trick pony” by winning most of his matches on clay, and struggling to make an impact on hard court and grass courts, but he adapted, and from the 2008 season onwards, he was a title contender at any tournament he plays in, which also ended Roger’s dominant 5 years run as the world number 1. At one point, it seemed like Rafa was going to have a similar run as Roger did from 2003–2008, as he is now capable of winning on all surfaces, and has a matchup advantage against his closest rival Roger. Then, almost like it was scripted, the drama intensified; Novak Djokovic emerged.

Novak Djokovic: The Machine

Before the emergence of Novak Djokovic, let’s roll back a few years. While Roger does have 5 years on Rafa, Rafa is only a year older than Novak, basically, they are from the same generation. Novak wasn’t a young unknown star that rises to the top of the tennis world, he came into the scene around the same time as Rafa. He was already a good player, but he never truly fulfilled his potential until 2011.

Before 2011, he was a solid player but often suffered from mid-match troubles and retirements, and as a result, couldn’t quite compete against Roger and Rafa. As he often takes extended medical timeouts or even accused of tanking a match, other top players like Andy Roddick questioned his mentality and professionalism. He didn’t have the best start in terms of his public relations, both in the player’s locker room and among the tennis fans.

But some time around 2010, Novak consulted his dietitian and that was the career-saving move for him. It turns out he has a rare gluten allergy, which explained his fatigue and his countless medical timeouts on the court. Though he was always one of the better players on tour since he joined and even won the Australian Open in 2008, he wasn’t fulfilling his potential as a tennis player until he made the decision to cut gluten and dairy products from his diet. And immediately after the diet change, Novak Djokovic broke into the top of the tennis world in 2011.

Just like how Rafa was the one person Roger struggles with, in 2011 Novak was the one person Rafa struggles with, and funnily enough, Novak’s game doesn’t match up as well against Roger. It’s almost like a rock-paper-scissors situation, which is interesting, to say the least.

Just like his extremely strict diet, his game is equally as strict. He is a defensive baseliner who plays low-risk high-percentage tennis, he does so by hugging the baseline, which is the safest recovery position and aims to outlast the opponent by choosing the predictable, low risk but effective shots, almost as if he’s a machine that’s programmed to play a certain way. This playing style is undoubtedly effective and requires a high level of discipline, but it can come across as “boring”.

Unlike his 2 closest rivals, he doesn’t have a devastating forehand that gets the fans off their seats. Though he has the most effective two-handed backhand in tennis, his game lacks an entertaining factor to it. However, that two-handed backhand is also why his game matches up especially well against Rafa. In this matchup, Rafa no longer has the usual advantage he gets when playing other right-handers, as Rafa’s best shot plays right into Novak’s best shot, and unlike Roger, Novak is well-equipped to handle Rafa’s topspin by taking the ball early and denying the rhythm that Rafa craves. This allows him to neutralize Rafa’s forehand, which is the fundamental basis of Rafa’s game plan.

Over the years, the ATP tour also introduced more and more hardcourt tournaments at the expense of clay and grass courts, as the court maintenance is simply more economical; this also allows the tour to further slow down the court surfaces. Among the Big 3, Novak was the biggest beneficiary of the changes. This is because there are few differences between hard, clay, and grass courts, all the courts start to converge towards homogeneity [Reference]. This meant that there was hardly any difference playing in different tournaments, discouraging any clay-court specialist or grass-court specialist that you would often see back in the days.

As Novak’s game focuses on repeatability, he makes sure he has maximal control and discipline over his shots, and it bodes well for him that there is little variance from the external factors, like the court’s pace and bounce. It’s no coincidence that Novak plays his best tennis on hard courts, as the natural surfaces like clay and grass do not promise the certainty that hardcourt offers. This consistency made him the player to beat at every non-clay tournament from 2011–2016, a run almost as dominant as the one Roger had from 2003–2008.

The GOAT Debate

Whenever the Big 3 is brought up, there will be debates on who of the 3 is the greatest of all time (GOAT). This debate divided fans into 3 camps, where each fan base has their own biased but legitimate arguments to this conversation. The most common GOAT determinants are:

1. Grand Slam Victories
2. Weeks at Number 1
3. Head-to-head records
4. Career Winning Percentage
5. Masters 1000 Victories

And the list goes on… This essay is not about determining who is the greatest of all time, you could easily make a good case for either one of them, and you could also easily discredit the other’s accomplishments. I think this conversation is pointless, simply because there are much more factors at play here than the few key metrics stated above, that fans like to use as the most important factor.

For example, the number of grand slams won is the holy grail of this debate, it also makes things very simple, whoever wins the most Grand Slam is the GOAT. But on the other side of the fence, you would have fans arguing that it shouldn’t be decided by just 4 tournaments, so they believe that number of weeks at number 1 is the better metric, as it requires consistency week-in week-out to maintain the ranking points.

Then you would have fans arguing that it’s hardly fair as you could make a good case that both Roger and Novak benefitted from a “weak era”, where Roger had an “easy” run before Rafa and Novak came onto the scene, or Novak benefitted similarly from 2014–2016 when he only had to face an often-injured Rafa and an “on-decline” Roger, who’s in his 30’s and 6 years older than Novak, who’s in his prime time.

So they suggested an equally unfair comparison, the head-to-head records between the 3. Rafa and Novak fans would claim that Roger could not be the GOAT if he has a losing record against both of them. Again, this is ridiculous because tennis is more than just the respective matchups. As discussed above, Rafa had a tactical advantage over Roger and Novak had a tactical advantage over Rafa, but does that mean one playstyle is better than the other? Of course not, because they have contrasting styles that are equally effective against the rest of the tour, and that matters more, for example, as of 6th June 2021, Roger played 1519 matches, but only a combined 90 matches were played against Rafa or Novak, that’s less than 6% of his matches.

The What If’s

Then there are all the “What If’s”. Here are some of the interesting ones:

1. What if Novak changed his diet sooner and had a couple more prime years?
2. What if Rafa was injured less often and missed fewer grand slam tournaments?
3. What if Del Potro gets injured less often, maybe he would disrupt the whole GOAT debate?
4. What if Rod Laver didn’t miss the 20 grand slams played from 1963 to 1967?
5. What if Bjorn Borg didn’t retire at 26?
6. What if Rod Laver and Bjorn Borg played in this era?
7. What if the Big 3 played with a wooden racquet as Rod Laver did?

“If doesn’t exist in sport. That’s the real thing. If, if, if — never comes.”— Rafael Nadal

The if’s we ask draws us to a fantasy land where things somehow could be different, but the fact is that they can’t. This is why the GOAT debate is flawed by nature, there is no comparison over who is the greatest because there are simply too many factors. It is impossible to compare between generations as the culture is different, sports science has improved, racquet technologies have improved, players’ career lifespan has increased, there are more artificial surfaces and increasingly so.

Court Surface Distribution (1968–2020)

A good example is looking at the evolution of court surfaces over the years, hard courts becoming more popular at the expense of grass and clay, for economical reasons. How can we compare players when there are so many variables at play? Let’s imagine, what if Nadal had played in the ’70s where most tournaments were played on clay? Most people would bet good money that he would be the most dominant player in that era, but I would say no, not really. Having more clay courts simply means having more clay-court specialists as they will be more incentivized to play well on clay, so Rafa may have more challenges. Back in the ’70s, polyester strings weren’t used, so Rafa would likely not have played his forehand the way he would today.

So you can see why the GOAT debate is a pointless argument because if you can’t compare across generations, how can you define who is the greatest of all time?

Recency Bias

Another big problem with sports discussion is that we are thinking with a huge recency bias. When Sampras got his 14th Grand Slam, everyone thought no one could surpass Sampras’ record, but Federer did it almost immediately. We just had the so-called “Golden Era” of tennis, where we got to watch Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray on the men’s tour, Serena Williams and Venus Williams on the women’s tour, the Bryan Brothers on the men’s doubles tour, we even have Shingo Kunieda, the best wheelchair player tennis has seen.

And if you’re a sports fan in general, this statement extends beyond just tennis. In this same era, we saw Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, Stephen Curry, Christiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi, Tiger Woods, Usain Bolt, Tom Brady, Michael Phelps, Lewis Hamilton, Valentino Rossi, Marc Marquez, Lin Dan, Lee Chong Wei, and the list goes on for sports I’m not familiar with.

Is this a mere coincidence? Is this a once-in-a-lifetime phenomenon? How are all of them just so happen to play in the same era? It could very well be a “golden era” in sports, but probabilities tell us that, no, this is most likely not a one-off phenomenon. We are witnessing all the legends at the same time, most likely because of the technological advancements and breakthroughs we have in the past few decades, this consists of better materials for equipment, better diet plans, and fitness routines, and most importantly better analytics, which optimized the training, recovery, techniques, tactics, and basically everything quantifiable.

“These days you see players traveling with a coach, a physio or fitness coach, and some even have their own traveling nutritionist or chef, that certainly wasn’t the case when Agassi and I started out. In those days, your nutritionist was whoever had the phone number for the nearest Pizza Hut.” — Gil Reyes

Everything in sports is data-driven now, but you could make a case that this is only the start of the revolution. As long as there is still room for optimization, we can say with certainty that the best generation is yet to arrive. So no, the chances are we’ll see another generation that will surpass this generation, and they may be here much sooner than we expect.

The “Irreplaceable” Factors

There will be a better serve, a better forehand, a better backhand. What is irreplaceable is the impact that the players bring to the sport, the values, and principles that are inherited by the next generation of players to come. I think numbers and records are overrated; experts, analysts, and fans want to believe that this is the most important thing in sports, but it’s far from it. On the other hand, 2 factors are often overlooked in the GOAT discussion, and they are entertainment value and sportsmanship/professionalism.

Entertainment Value

Fundamentally speaking, sports is nothing but a form of entertainment, serving the fans watching from the stadium, at home, or on Youtube. This means that in order for you to create value in the world of sports, you better have a way to entertain your fans. This is especially important for sports because it has a ripple effect, your entertainment value is how much you promote the sports, in terms of broadcasting viewership and inspiration to the next generation.

This is why Roger has such a stronghold over the GOAT title, even if he loses the grand slam record to both Rafa and Novak. Roger made tennis what it is, he’s more than just a tennis player, he is tennis, he’s the greatest ambassador the sport has ever seen. Without him, tennis wouldn’t be as big as it is today, Rafa and Novak probably would have 40% fewer fans than they have now, and I probably wouldn’t be writing this essay right now.

Roger’s game just has so much flair and elegance to it, and he does it so effortlessly, he inspires the kid watching to want to hit that one-handed backhand as swiftly as he does. He has a huge variety of shots, unlike most players today, in any given point, he could play serve-and-volley, he could mix up the shots with slices, chips-and-charges the net, he could finish the point with an inside-out forehand, a half-volley or hits an inch-perfect drop shot. Along with his fast-paced offensive style, he generally puts on a great show for the fans.

As a fan, don’t you think that entertainment value is important? If you were to buy a ticket to watch a match, surely you want to have a good time? This is where I think tennis is making a big mistake by allowing court homogeneity described previously, tennis could be so much more exciting with a more even distribution of hard courts, clay courts, and grass courts, then it would incentivize the players to play with more variety like Roger does, rather than sticking to the baseline strategy just because it gives them a better chance of securing the win in today’s tour.

In comparison, Rafa and Novak’s game styles are not as charming. While Roger looks like he plays every point effortlessly, Rafa looks like he’s almost suffering from playing each point, from his grunts on every shot to his fist-pumping celebration after a point as if he had won the trophy. Rafa is a symbol of hard work and passion, nobody plays each point with as much intensity as he does. He’s an aggressive baseliner, which is also an offensive style, but not as fast-paced as Roger. Rafa is the master of point construction, he mainly uses his topspin forehand to create depth on his shots due to the high bounce, pushing the opponent back, keeping them at a defensive position, then finishes a short ball with a forehand winner. Rafa also plays a very entertaining style, especially if you like to watch tactical rallies.

Last but not least we have Novak, the defensive baseliner who sticks to the baseline and focuses mainly on lateral movement, with the sole aim of returning one more ball than the opponent, which technically is what tennis or any racquet sport is about. He doesn’t take unnecessary risk to strike a highlight-worthy winner, he dedicates his game to the strategy of returning one more ball. Novak does this extremely well, especially with his solid groundstrokes, footwork, and athleticism, no one moves on a hard court better than he does, probably one of the few players who could effectively “slide” on a hard court by stretching his legs.

From an entertainment point of view, he’s definitely not as appreciated as Roger and Rafa, but someone who would make the tennis instructor/coach really proud. It’s not easy to be as disciplined as Novak, just look at someone like Nick Kyrgios or Gael Monfils, where being entertaining and having fun on the court simply values more than winning the match. For that reason, I think someone who plays tennis on a competitive level would appreciate Novak more than the average crowd would.

Sportsmanship/Professionalism

Some people criticize tennis as being an elitist sport, and yes with the roots being a country club sport, it’s hardly surprising that other people see it that way. However, the good thing about being an elitist sport is the values it stands for, it demands the highest of sportsmanship and professionalism. Because of this, I believe that for all sports, but especially tennis, sportsmanship should be a big factor to consider before crowning someone as the greatest of all time.

A player could win 30 grand slams, but if he’s extremely vulgar and ill-natured, personally I don’t think he is qualified to be the greatest, simply because he does not stand for what tennis represents, and that would only be a liability to the sport’s image. Besides, do you really want your kids to look up to someone like that? Winning is important as an athlete, but as an influential figure and a role model for the present and future fans, being a good person is more important.

Now don’t get me wrong, Roger, Rafa, and Novak are all incredible sportsmen and they elevated the standard of professionalism in tennis like no one ever did before. But among the 3 of them, one of them stands out, and that’s Rafael Nadal.

“If you don’t lose, you cannot enjoy the victories. So I have to accept both things.” — Rafael Nadal

Roger and Novak hold many hard-court records that Rafa will never surpass, likewise, Roger and Novak have no business trying to get close to his clay-court records, but the one record Rafa holds that speaks volume of the values he represents is the fact that he has never smashed a racquet in his career. Some people may argue that displaying emotions on the court is part of the entertainment, and brings a dramatic angle to the match, but I feel that it’s not a good showing and leaves a bad taste for the fans. It’s fair that you really want to win the match, it’s fair that you felt emotional and frustrated when you hit yet another unforced error, but it’s not fair to use the racquet as an outlet for frustration.

Rafa was trained by his uncle Toni, and when he was 6 years old Toni told him: “You throw one racket and I’m no longer your coach. There are millions of kids in the world who would love a racket and don’t have one”. And Rafa lived by that lesson ever since, considering how many racquets the average player smashes, it’s a testament to the emotional and mental self-control Rafa has during a tense match.

Sportsmanship is more than just about being fair and ethical, it’s also about respecting not just your opponent, but respecting the audience, your equipment, the sports venue, and most importantly respecting yourself. I have never come across an athlete that showcases this ultimate form of sportsmanship better than Rafa.

He respects his opponent, the audience, and the tournament by giving his best effort in every single point he plays. Even in disappointing moments, he contains his frustration with respect to his opponents, his equipment, and the worldwide audience that’s watching him. Like any of the top players, he is incredibly driven to win the match, but he also understands that in the grand scheme of things, it’s still just a tennis match. And all of this is summarized in a brilliant quote by Nadal, which is also the reason I wanted to write this essay in the first place.

“I would like to be remembered as a good person more than a champion” — Rafael Nadal

And here is the extended version [Reference]:

“I always say that I would like to be remembered as a good person, much more than a champion or anything else. Because, in the end, the victories, the titles, are moments of happiness, euphoria, adrenaline, success, but all that is temporary and I have always been very clear about that. The success and interest that you generate in people, in companies, is something temporary. That interest is for what I do, not for what I am.

The important thing is that the people who know you have a positive opinion of you, the image that is transferred to the world can be manufactured. I believe that all of us who are popular, who appear on television, to say the least, must be very responsible, because there are many people you can influence, for better and for worse and, therefore, we must take care of our behavior, our words.

I try to act naturally, you cannot be a marketing product, if you are, at some point, something negative comes up that destroys that disguise. I would not be able to behave on the court as I behave if my attitude were pre-fabricated, if it were a studied pose, at some point, it would be discovered that I am not like that. I try, I insist, to be natural. I don’t pretend to like everyone. What’s more, I think that’s impossible. I try to be correct with everyone, educated and, above all, thank life for the positive and good things that happen to me.” — Rafael Nadal

As ironic as it sounds, to be a good sportsman is to give your best when competing but realizing there is much more to life than to win a match. And no one understands this better than Rafa Nadal. His attitude towards sports and life is remarkable and that’s what makes him so likable and worthy of a role model.

Just to reiterate, Roger and Novak are both great sportsmen as well, extremely hardworking and dedicated to tennis, and always a gracious loser when defeated, but they do lose their cool from time to time. During the early stages of his career, Roger often loses his cool and has smashed his share of racquets, but since then he has grown and addressed this issue. However, as of writing, Novak in his 30s still smashes his racquet quite frequently as a way to let out his frustration. This is a small detail that matters to me personally, it may not be such a big deal for other fans, but it is a display of the character. It’s easy to say all the right words and do all the right things when you’re in a comfortable position, but it’s hard to control your emotions when you’re in a difficult, stressful position.

“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.” — Martin Luther King Jr.

Back to the Big 3

Let’s go back to the main conversation. My belief is that the GOAT debate is flawed and unnecessary, and that if we were to compare, we should factor in entertainment value and sportsmanship as well. The truth is like many things in life, we don’t need to pick a side, we should instead learn the best from each one of them.

Roger is the ultimate ambassador of what makes tennis great, he’s cool, elegant, and possesses a wide range of playstyle that makes tennis the exciting sport that it is. Rafa represents the warrior of tennis, showcasing his passion, hard work, and commitment to the game. Novak demonstrates the highest level of discipline you can see in tennis, from his diet plan to his game plan.

With that being said, let’s have a look at the fan-perceived qualities. Roger and Rafa are generally a fan-favorite no matter which city they are playing in, Novak is usually the fan-favorite as well, but for some reason, he doesn’t quite get the same love Roger and Rafa receives, why is that? His fans usually explains this phenomenon by claiming one of the following:

1. Novak is the “third wheel” and disrupted the love story between Roger and Rafa
2. Novak is from Serbia, and he’s unfairly treated by the media and the fans due to discrimination

I think they are both inaccurate, and they are similar in the way that both statements are essentially blaming tennis culture, racism, and the media for his perceived unfavorability. It’s an excuse of saying “Novak didn’t do anything wrong, it’s the tennis fans being unfair”.

The Enigma Of Novak’s Relative Unfavorability

Just to be clear, he is not hated by the tennis community or anything, he is just not as loved as Federer and Nadal, considering his accomplishments in the sport. Let’s start by debunking the 2 most-used explanations.

For point 1, Novak wasn’t even the first player who threatened to take the throne away from Roger and Rafa. That player was Juan Martin Del Potro, he seemed like the man who was going to be the next big thing in tennis, especially after defeating both Rafa and Roger to win the US Open. Nobody disliked Delpo, he was and still is a fan favorite.

For point 2, it’s often implied that due to tennis’ elitist nature, the community can be prejudiced towards certain countries, which includes Serbia. Sure there will be fans who act this way, but I believe that the majority of fans don’t dislike a player solely based on nationality. I won’t name-drop here, but there are many disliked players who come from US or Western European countries. Likewise, there are many players adored by the community who come from a developing country, even from the Balkan region.

The simple truth is that some personalities are just more likable than others, and simply winning doesn’t guarantee that. The problem arises when his team and fans expect fan support just because he plays well and is a contender for the grand slam record. Whenever there are expectations, there will be disappointments and/or resentments. This consequently created toxicity between their respective fanbases.

From an average tennis follower’s perspective, there are some obvious clues as to why he’s not as well-liked. First of all, his past impressions likely stayed with the fans, before he fixed the diet-induced physical issues he’s often accused of tanking matches or giving up in the middle of the match. Though his past behavior was eventually somewhat justified by his gluten allergy, it left a huge stain on his public image, and we all know how crucial (and sometimes cruel) first impressions are.

Secondly, his family and team don’t really do him any favors, I won’t go into details of the many many comments made by his dad over the years, and in recent years his coach Goran Ivanisevic decided to be part of that toxicity too. Their comments put Novak in a very bad light and his whole camp comes off as arrogant and vengeful in some ways. Sure, Novak could very well be a nice person and just has a bad PR team, but that’s the thing, these are hardly news, and all the negativity is still associated with him and as a public figure it’s his job to clean it up. Another note on off-court publicity is Novak’s constant reminder of how much he wants to break certain records. It’s great to have ambition and he clearly has the drive for it, but it can come off as arrogant and obsessive.

Lastly, his on-court behaviors can be questionable at times, it’s one of those things where you have very divided opinions from the fans, some love it some hate it. The racquet breaking, fierce shouting, shirt ripping, and grass-eating are some of the things he does. Some call it passion, some call it disrespectful, who’s to say what’s right or wrong.

Of course, I don’t know Novak personally, but these are some of the controversial things which may repel fans away, and I think it’s unfair to blame this on Roger or Rafa, or some inherent bias that tennis has against Serbians. I think he is a great champion and actually possesses a lot of great qualities that anyone can learn from, but I don’t think he makes a great role model, simply because he often attracts people who support him for the wrong reasons.

Closing Thoughts

The Big 3 rivalries are perhaps the greatest storyline in tennis history so far, 3 great champions with contrasting playing styles, pushing each other to the limit time and time again. They are now at the twilight of their career, though they have already secured their legacy in the sport, the final question remains among fans: “Who is the greatest of all time?”. It would be easy and diplomatic, and factual to say they are all the greatest, in their very own ways, but that wouldn’t satisfy anyone, so here’s my take on the debate, a summary of everything included in the essay.

As described above, you can find flaws in every metric you use as a benchmark for the debate, and thereby effectively deem any such discussion inconclusive in the end. However, there’s a silver lining, which is that we have all but confirmed that their “records” are way too close and simply incomparable, unless one of them can go ahead and widen the gap significantly in the next few years, fans should stop focusing on these metrics, as it doesn’t lead you to a conclusive outcome. Therefore, what we can do is to take this factor as a tie for all 3 players, and focus on some other overlooked factors that can give us better insight into the GOAT discussion, and in my opinion, that’s entertainment value and sportsmanship.

If we take these 2 factors into account, my opinion is that Roger should be the GOAT, simply because of the tremendous impact he brought to tennis. His style and entertainment value skyrocketed tennis broadcast revenues and captivated millions of fans worldwide. Without Roger, the majority of Rafa and Novak fans wouldn’t even be exposed to tennis in the first place, he has simply transcended from a tennis player to a tennis icon, and that’s why he is the GOAT, and deservedly so. Tennis is Roger Federer.

While Roger is the single most influential player in tennis history, for me he doesn’t actually make the best role model among the Big 3. Just to reiterate, they are all extremely good role models that we can learn a lot from but Rafael Nadal simply outclasses them in this regard. This has to do with the values the players are representative of, Roger is a symbol of talent, grace, and elegance; Rafa represents humility, hard work, and passion; Novak represents discipline and resilience. This is the general perception of the 3 legends, does that mean Roger and Novak are not hard-working? Of course not, they are all extremely hardworking to get to where they are. The representation simply shows us the qualities that their fans are drawn to, and while this is highly subjective, I believe people should strive to be more like Rafa, the world needs more people who embrace hard work than admiration for talent.

In short, Roger Federer shows us how magical tennis can be, but Rafael Nadal shows us that they aren’t any more special than you and me, that any one of us can achieve greatness with the same philosophy. Rafa is the GOAT tennis deserves, but Roger is the GOAT tennis needs.