Has Djokovic got the X Factor?

Is Djokovic a really popular player?

Sure we have NITB and Socal here plus the anti-Feds and Anti-Nadals who rejoice at Djokovic's success. But what about the popularity of the player himself?

Has he got the loveable, wild, charismatic personality and/or game to attract the masses like Nadal and Federer did? Will he have the special treatment from tournament directors and media that his 2 main competitors had?

We could ask the same question if Murray were to become world number one.

Has Djoko got the X faxtor?

My answer is that he is trying...not sure he has it though.

Federer has been around for a long time, and so has Nadal; their rivalry, additionally fabricated for the commercial purposes of Nike, has attracted a lot of tennis fans around the world.
Give it another year of 2 or 3 slams for Nole and the tide will shift.
Masses are fickle, but die-hard fans will stick around and hurt or for many years after their player retires.
I know I will.

No he hasn't.

I agree that he is trying, but knowledgeable tennis fans have a long memory, and don't forget his childish, petulant outbursts of the past.

He has certain mannerisms, such as his chest thumping in the direction of his players box, which really make me want to throw things at him.

That said, he does have one redeeming feature that a lot of the top players don't share (apart from the great JMDP) and that's both an audible and visual acknowledgement when his opponent hits a great shot. That's a classy thing to do in the heat of battle.

Also, I agree about the "trying" bit; it must be the pressure from sponsors. If it was me, I'd just carry on chest-thumping, roaring, the lot; that is one of the reasons I love him: he's got fire and passion.

Has Djokovic got the X Factor?

Simon Cowell agrees.

We don't need to call it X factor, we can be specific;

Federer had going for him that he is an extrordinarily gifted player, a one-off who does ridiculous things with timing and talent. He shook the game up completely and broke all the records.

Nadal had the charisma and appeal to the *ahem* ladies, he had the wacky clothes, the tan and all that stuff.

Nole has a bad haircut, no special look or attire and he plays a terriffic but not particularly inspiring game. He's a nice enough guy and he plays a top game of tennis but this article asked about the X factor, and no. I do agree though that he is very sporting on the Court, which personally I put miles ahead of silly tee-shirts and pantomine trousers, but that's just me.

He should have it, I mean he comes across with more personality than the other 3 combined.

I think he has. I like his intelligence and his humour, and I agree Marcus that his acknowledgement of a great shot is very endearing.

He does have a slightly arrogant side, but that is no bad thing for a top sportsman. I'd like to see him tone down the chest thumping, but I don't really like neanderthal displays of testosterone and muscle from men and don't enjoy the Rafa pelvic thrust and knee and fist pump either.

I like the cool elegance arrogance of TMF but it's good to have 3 very contrasting figures for the popularity of the game, polarising views and each with their own fervent supporters - that is what tennis had with Borg/Connors/Mac and what we seem to be enjoying now.

I'd like to see some more Novak impressions - the ones of Fed, Agassi, Rafa, Roddick and Sharapova in locker room at US Open were very well observed and very funny.

Novak's great

Does anything else think Nole looks like 'Screech' from saved by the bell?

http://blogs.theage.com.au/lifestyle/trashtalk//archives/screech.jpg

Tenez wrote:... Has Djoko got the X faxtor? ...

It depends what "X" you are referring to.

noleisthebest wrote:I know I will.

And I know you will.

I have been Lendl's biggest fan and the crowd almost everywhere were very hostile to him, especially when facing McEnroe and Connors.

But Lendl is probably my favourite player of the past, so I know the feeling.

Luckily for you Djoko has a much more extravert personality and an excellent english but I fear that the crowd won't generally be behind him. whatever he does or says.

It's simply a charismatic and personality factor. It's like that and I don;t think it's related to his early history on the tour like Marcus suggests.

I think personality wise it is difficult for any player at the top to have an 'X-Factor' personality. Because of the intensity of the game nowadays, we don't get much glimpses of them. Roger and Rafa always seem gracious whenever they speak and Novak seems quite a nice guy.

Depends on what people want from a player 'personality' wise. Look far back as Nastase, Connors, McEnroe who had a natural exhuberance that they brought to the court. Though I never understood the the following with Agassi as he didn't show much, more of an image gimmick. Federer is quite image conscious, but not too extreme. More of someone who enjoys fashion.

Yes, I agree that on court, they are more or less all the same due to the need to concentrate. If anything Djoko is one of the most expressive.

But it's something else I was talking about. Borg was not expressive at all, on and off the court, yet he was one of the most popular player. People liked him as is.

Noisiness isn't particularly attractive, in fact Djokovic's most endearing feature is his preparedness even at key points to give credit to an opponents good shots. The chest pumping just looks stupid, imo.

Tenez, I also favoured Lendl, back when McEnroe was a royal pain and I didn't appreciate his talent as much as I did later on. Ivan's two Wimbledon losses are up there in my list of most annoying Wimbledon final disappointments.

I don't think that Djokovic's popularity will transcend the sport, in a way that Federer and, to a lesser extent, Nadal have. There is no guarantee that each and every #1 will have a global appeal so this isn't meant as a criticism. I remember a quote from Wilander when he said that Borg and Agassi had done more than anyone to make tennis popular, though this was before Federer was the behemoth he is today.

I agree with Tenez, it is something intangible that defines the sort of mass appeal we are talking about. It needs a combination of factors, timing amongst them and following Federer and Nadal would be tough for anyone. Matching their success on the court is in Djokovic's hands, but off the court is not.

It might have been savvy marketing, but I still found Agassi cool when I was younger. Also, although too young to have seen him, from the footage I have seen it is no surprise that Borg was popular. Tennis was ripe for a young hero at the time and he fitted the bill.

I personally like his personality. The men's tour is a bit to sanitized and polite for my liking and the Fedal love-in wears thin after a while appreciating their mutual respect.

It's the one thing I enjoy about the Wta. There's less camaraderie and a lot more needle when you have uncouth people like Hingis, drama queens like Serena and Jankovic and aloof ice queens like Sharapova and Kournikova before her.

The game needs more characters and less dour personalities like Rafa, Murray, Ferrer, Soderling etc.

No he doesn't have an X factor. He's a nice guy, funny and all that, till he wins a final, and ruins it all with chest pumping, fisting, nationalistic salutes and insignia and just becomes a small minded player.

bogbrush wrote:
Tenez, I also favoured Lendl, back when McEnroe was a royal pain and I didn't appreciate his talent as much as I did later on. Ivan's two Wimbledon losses are up there in my list of most annoying Wimbledon final disappointments.

It took me a while to forgive McEnroe for dethroning Borg. That's one reason I backed Lendl too, besides of course McEnroe's unpleasant character. If I had started to watch tennis in 2005, I'd probably have supported Nadal as he is essentially the Borg of now, though I did like Borg's mysterious charisma which I certainly don;t see in Nadal.

With the years, I became a fan of "talent" as this is a special quality that is most tested in tough situations. It makes for most interesting matches...imo.

Jahu wrote:No he doesn't have an X factor. He's a nice guy, funny and all that, till he wins a final, and ruins it all with chest pumping, fisting, nationalistic salutes and insignia and just becomes a small minded player.

I don't mind chest thumping. I mean come on, it is expression. Emotion is a highly motivational tool.

I remember when he played Stepanek at the US Open in 2007 and the first set was literally gladitorial stuff and Stepanek had the whole crowd on his side and when Djokovic took the first set and exploded into emotion, the momentum of the game and crowd switched.

NITB may remember that

I know what you mean Tenez about charisma being a mysterious thing and how Borg had it in bucketloads, bringing beatlemania like hysteria to Wimbledon despite his inscrutable countenance.

Nevertheless, I think Novak does have it, but the casual tennis fan hasn't necessarily caught onto it yet and it probably didn't come across very well at this year's W playing a strangely subdued Nadal - the tension between the players killed the atmosphere unlike a Connors/Mac tension which made the air crackle and fizz.

Yes he has a funny haircut - but that didn't dampen Connor's charisma one bit - he is a little afraid to show all of his extrovert personality I think atm because he has ruffled a few feathers in the past, but I think as he grows into his No 1 status he will enjoy and feed off the participation of the crowd and their affection for him will grow.

Funny haircut indeed.

I just don;t see it TP. In a way I wonder whether it would not be more beneficial for him if he developed a more negative image. A kind of a killer one, like boxers do sometimes. It did work for Lendl for instance. There were lots of people who liked this cold-blooded, dead eye, unfriendly killer image ponctuated by a deadly FH bullet-like sound which silenced the opponent and the crowd.

I was one who did not appreciate Llendl as I should have done - I guess at first because I loved Superbrat even though he was impossible, and Llendl was the very antithesis of MacEnroe - not even Ice and Fire, more Artic and Inferno! I read a wonderful interview with Llendl not so long ago which made me warm to him more. I suppose to me he looked robotic, and I preferred the sort of Machivellian talent of McEnroe. It's sad because if anyone deserved their success, it was definitely Llendl who was so dedicated and really revolutionised the way tennis players prepared for tournaments. His ascendancy seem to wave goodbye forever to the likes of Geraulitis (sorry can't remember how to spell Vitas' name!) with his flair and bad boy party ways, and Nastase who always looked like he had enjoyed lunch and other things a little too much - but then, along came Boris!!! It was inevitable, as with all sports, that as the Open Era became more competitve so training regimes would become more disciplined I guess.

I think Novak would be 'marketed' much better with Nike - a lot of how we react to players, in this media driven age, are subliminal messages from the sponsors, and perhaps he hasn't been done as well as others?

I could go on for hours talking about McEnroe and Lendl. I ended up liking them both.

This is a typical case of 2 talents expressed so differently. Lendl contrary to the rumour was not simply a hard worker. he actually was extremely talented. Whereas McEnroe had an obvious talent and cat like tennis, Lendl's talent was much localised in his arm and flip of the wrist. To challenge Borg at 21 on clay like he did was an amazing achievement, especially with a small wooden racquet. However he had to work very hard to allow his talent to last the distance. Especially after his 2 defeats in those USO finals v Connors.

The second best FH of teh open era after Federer in my view (relative to his time of course).

In the past I've only been a casual watcher of tennis. I followed the slams and that was about it. This year though, I have been consumed by tennis and that is largely down to Novak.

I like what I have seen of him as a person. I thought his victory speech at this year's AO was thoughtful and eloquent and particularly impressive for it not being in his first language. I've also been impressed by his appearances on various TV shows. He seems quick witted, intelligent and funny.

But it is his tennis this year that has really drawn me in. I know that many on this forum to not think much of his style. For me though, I've never played tennis, so the subtleties of the games and the fine tuning of the skills are largely lost on me. What I look for in tennis is the drama of the contest and I think Novak has delivered plenty this year. The unbeaten run. The record Masters titles in one year. The dominance over Nadal, even on clay. Breaking back as Andy Murray served for the match in Rome. Facing down two match points from Federer at USO. THAT return of serve at the USO. The fact that absolutely nobody saw this remarkable year coming.

If the X factor is the ability to transcend one's sport or attract people to your sport who might otherwise have not been that interested, then I think Novak has it.

"The fact that absolutely nobody saw this remarkable year coming."

Going slightly off theme, is 2012 gonna be a surprise year, too ? At the end of 07 it looked like Fed would rule the roost, but Rafa was dominant in 08. Fed "took" 09 when all expected Rafa to be the main man. Rafa's three-GS year in 10 was probably not anticipated and certainly Nole's domination this year was not foreseen. So 2012, anyone?

Wasn't so much a surprise for me. In Nov 2010 despite Nadal's domination in 2010 and Federer having teh better of Djoko that year...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A76690894

If anything I was too optimistic for Andy...or maybe just 9 months too early.

What tricked me into starting this thread was not watching Djoko play yesterday but a few rounds before versus Gulbis in Basel. The way Djoko was coping with his opponent's power and send bombs of his own. His confdence seems back again and if he can handle this kind of power, I can;t see who is going to stop him.

Taken from one of your posts late in the thread Tenez - very prescient indeed! I wish I had seen that thread last autumn - I put money on Andy to win the AO about a week before the tournament began and couldn't bring myself to swap bets even when I saw how well Novak was playing.

Very well observed indeed, and not just this extract

Tenez wrote:I could go on for hours talking about McEnroe and Lendl. I ended up liking them both.

This is a typical case of 2 talents expressed so differently. Lendl contrary to the rumour was not simply a hard worker. he actually was extremely talented. Whereas McEnroe had an obvious talent and cat like tennis, Lendl's talent was much localised in his arm and flip of the wrist. To challenge Borg at 21 on clay like he did was an amazing achievement, especially with a small wooden racquet. However he had to work very hard to allow his talent to last the distance. Especially after his 2 defeats in those USO finals v Connors.

The second best FH of teh open era after Federer in my view (relative to his time of course).

I remember settling down to watch the final of the USO v Connors and I am 99% certain he breezed through the first game for a break and I thought it would be easy but them Connors brought out all his madness and really intimidated Lendl.

Remember when he got the better of McEnroe and I think Budge advised McEnroe to approach down the middle to deny Ivan angles, and it worked a treat?

They had some great matches; the 1984 FO final probably being the pinnacle, though I'm sure for John that must go down as the biggest disaster of his career. There it was, a true slow French Open title going to an out and out serve volleyer and it was taken away when I'd imagine the bookies would have stopped taking bets if it happened today.

time please wrote:What tricked me into starting this thread was not watching Djoko play yesterday but a few rounds before versus Gulbis in Basel. The way Djoko was coping with his opponent's power and send bombs of his own. His confdence seems back again and if he can handle this kind of power, I can;t see who is going to stop him.

Taken from one of your posts late in the thread Tenez - very prescient indeed! I wish I had seen that thread last autumn - I put money on Andy to win the AO about a week before the tournament began and couldn't bring myself to swap bets even when I saw how well Novak was playing.

Very well observed indeed, and not just this extract

Cheers TP - Yes we can draw a lot just by observing players instead of going by the score lines.

I think the best thing Nole can do is remain being himself AT ALL COST....stuff all this marketing and PR rubbish...
I'm pretty sure that's his stance anyway, but he does small adjustments for sponsors, he won't compromise, though.
As for hair, I can't believe blokes here are commenting on it, I thought only women are "worried" about looks, and btw, I LOVE Nole's hair, just wish I could run my palm across that thick mop...saw Vajda do it to him all the time!

Anyway, Nole's got absolute tons of charisma, his presence on court is electric, and his aura is growing, like it or not!
People have very short memory and foget what Federer used to be/look like and at what stage in his career he started earning fan's love: when slams begin to pile on, same will happen with Nole.
Personally, it doesn't bother me at all whether all the planet loves him or not, it's a thing of immaturity to be obsessed with what others think of you and a sign of insecurity. Nole is the best. FULL STOP

bogbrush wrote:They had some great matches; the 1984 FO final probably being the pinnacle, though I'm sure for John that must go down as the biggest disaster of his career. There it was, a true slow French Open title going to an out and out serve volleyer and it was taken away when I'd imagine the bookies would have stopped taking bets if it happened today.

I loved that final. I was still on Lendl's side at that time. Lendl was so tense in those finals and coudl never deliver his best tennis. But once he realised he had lost, he unleashed an amazing FH return in that 3rd set, while a break down, which went past McEnroe and that made him believe he could win while it started to insert the doubt in Mc.

I wish I could see that point/moment again.

Has Nole got the X-factor?
I think he's got presence on court although not quite as charismatic as Rafa and Roger. He can be very funny and engaging in interviews but that's not necessarily the same as being charismatic. I dont particularly like the chest-thumping, etc, as its a little too self-absorbed for my liking but he's going to be feeling abit cocky given the year he's had. I do recognise he applauds his opponents too so he's abit of a complex mix. I also wonder whether his staunch patriotism is a positive or negative in the eyes of others...?

His hair is pretty cute NITB - but he does look a little like a smurf!!! In a good way, of course, and I liked smurfs anyway

I vividly remember the pony tailed, spotty Fed - he was a bit of an ugly duckling but he still had tremendous charm, vivacity then and intelligence - as Nole does.

I am a big fan of both

.

I think its fair to say any of the sports legends have strong personalities, they need it to sustain themselves at the top. Lets forget talent, power, skill, etc, for a moment...these guys need massive amounts of self-belief and focus to have got where they are. However, charisma is a different thing - for example compare Agassi to Sampras. And strong charisma can become quite intimidating on-court too.

Leads me to 4 questions:
1. Who is the most charismatic current player?
2. Who is the most charismatic player ever?
3. Who is the most intimidating current player?
4. Who is the most intimidating player ever?

My answers:
1. Luber/Baghdatis?
2. Agassi/Safin/Gerulaitis?
3. Nadal - due to the fact you know every match is going to be hard fought? Could apply to Nole also to be fair.
4. Connors?

lydian wrote:Has Nole got the X-factor?
I think he's got presence on court although not quite as charismatic as Rafa and Roger. He can be very funny and engaging in interviews but that's not necessarily the same as being charismatic. I dont particularly like the chest-thumping, etc, as its a little too self-absorbed for my liking but he's going to be feeling abit cocky given the year he's had. I do recognise he applauds his opponents too so he's abit of a complex mix. I also wonder whether his staunch patriotism is a positive or negative in the eyes of others...?

I think his 'staunch patriotism' is very understable because of the turbulence of his country's recent past. The eyes of the world rested with condemnation on the brutality of Mladic and his thugs, and it must be very hard for ordinary Serbians to carry the knowledge of how the rest of the world feels about the conflict, when there are victims on all sides - I am putting this very badly indeed, but I think sometimes he is expressing the joy of just coming through that period - Ljubicic has spoken movingly about his own experiences as a Croatian. In short, I think Novak is a wonderful ambassador for Serbia - he is intelligent, articulate, cosmopolitan and full of humour. I admire him a lot for turning down LTA funding when it must have been very tempting to accept.

I know what you mean Lydian because I am not a big fan of nationalism at all, which I suppose I see as slightly different from patriotism - I am proud of my country, but I also see myself as a citizen of the world due to the fact that one half of my family is from Europe and the other from USA so although I was born here, I am a bit of a mongrel!!

lydian wrote:Has Nole got the X-factor?
I think he's got presence on court although not quite as charismatic as Rafa and Roger. He can be very funny and engaging in interviews but that's not necessarily the same as being charismatic. I dont particularly like the chest-thumping, etc, as its a little too self-absorbed for my liking but he's going to be feeling abit cocky given the year he's had. I do recognise he applauds his opponents too so he's abit of a complex mix. I also wonder whether his staunch patriotism is a positive or negative in the eyes of others...?

I don't know about patriotism being negative, but pants picking non-stop definitely ain't charismatic...If you can put up with that, you can put up with anything, really....

lydian wrote:I think its fair to say any of the sports legends have strong personalities, they need it to sustain themselves at the top. Lets forget talent, power, skill, etc, for a moment...these guys need massive amounts of self-belief and focus to have got where they are. However, charisma is a different thing - for example compare Agassi to Sampras. And strong charisma can become quite intimidating on-court too.

Leads me to 4 questions:
1. Who is the most charismatic current player?
2. Who is the most charismatic player ever?
3. Who is the most intimidating current player?
4. Who is the most intimidating player ever?

My answers:
1. Luber/Baghdatis?
2. Agassi/Safin/Gerulaitis?
3. Nadal - due to the fact you know every match is going to be hard fought? Could apply to Nole also to be fair.
4. Connors?

For me:

1. Federer for the aura that accompanies him on court, Monfils, Tsonga,Novak and definitely Baggy (am I allowed 5??)
2. Connors - now I didn't expect to say that, but it was the first thing that popped into my head so I wrote it down. I didn't love him as much as some of the other players, but he held your attention and it was always entertaining with Jimbo on court!
3. Rafa (no explanation needed!)
4. Borg - nearly put Llendl but he had his fragile moments at the beginning and along the way - Ice Borg just looked impenetrable for a long time!

time please wrote:

lydian wrote:I think its fair to say any of the sports legends have strong personalities, they need it to sustain themselves at the top. Lets forget talent, power, skill, etc, for a moment...these guys need massive amounts of self-belief and focus to have got where they are. However, charisma is a different thing - for example compare Agassi to Sampras. And strong charisma can become quite intimidating on-court too.

Leads me to 4 questions:
1. Who is the most charismatic current player?
2. Who is the most charismatic player ever?
3. Who is the most intimidating current player?
4. Who is the most intimidating player ever?

My answers:
1. Luber/Baghdatis?
2. Agassi/Safin/Gerulaitis?
3. Nadal - due to the fact you know every match is going to be hard fought? Could apply to Nole also to be fair.
4. Connors?

For me:

1. Federer for the aura that accompanies him on court, Monfils, Tsonga,Novak and definitely Baggy (am I allowed 5??)
2. Connors - now I didn't expect to say that, but it was the first thing that popped into my head so I wrote it down. I didn't love him as much as some of the other players, but he held your attention and it was always entertaining with Jimbo on court!
3. Rafa (no explanation needed!)
4. Borg - nearly put Llendl but he had his fragile moments at the beginning and along the way - Ice Borg just looked impenetrable for a long time!

TP,
this is a truly genuine question,what do you mean by "Rafa (no explanation needed)"
I've been struggling to find out what the big deal is for years now and still hitting the same brick wall...

1. Most charismatic current player - Fed
2. most charismatic player ever? - Agassi/Suzanne Lenglen/Pancho Gonzalez
3. Who is the most intimidating current player - Gotta be Rafa
4. Who is the most intimidating player ever - Borg

No, I didn't see Lenglen play but from all accounts she brought dynamism and style to a prosaic, ladylike, demure women's game. Did see Pancho - bags of charisma.
Rafa - scowling, no interaction with his opponent except to glare at them, total concentration, never-say-die spirit on every point.
Borg was intimidating as it was like playing a (non-melting) iceberg. Read wot Mac says about that 5th set after Borg had missed all those Championship points in the Tiebreak Wimbledon final.

I am nationalist when it comes to supporting players and I am sure if I was cut open, I would bleed the colours of the Union Jack.

1. Most Charismatic Player Currently? I would have to go for Tipsarevic. I like his interviews and is a portrayal of his words. I would also go for Monfils.

2. Most Charismastic Player Ever? IIle Nastase. Even on the legends tour he brings a smile to the audience.

3. Most Intimidating Player Currently? Nadal. Surely if you saw his name opposite yours, you know your in for a fight. Makes any match feel like a 2 day marathon.

4. Most Intimidating Player Ever? Sampras. Knowing the serve you will face, pretty much messes with your head and plus the FH and BH to contend with. Just looking at his prescence on court during the 90's. You could sense most of the field felt beaten before a ball was struck!

I don't find Novak's game particularly enthralling, so nope, no 'X-factor' for me.

noleisthebest wrote:TP,
this is a truly genuine question,what do you mean by "Rafa (no explanation needed)"
I've been struggling to find out what the big deal is for years now and still hitting the same brick wall...

I think sirfredperry encapsulates perfectly what I feel NITB in the post below yours - can't really put it any better.

From a Fed fan's point of view, he has often looked like The Terminator - you think he is down, but he just keeps coming

He is just such a warrior, and his on court persona is quite intimidating with the glares across the net and the neanderthal posturing when he has reached the seemingly ungettable.

I agree that Novak has rather emasculated him atm, and I was surprised to see Rafa in so much trouble in the 4th at USO - to me the 3rd set when he surged forward with Nole struggling by the end with his back illustrated the whole brutal experience of watching Rafa play.

Some great answers there guys, great to see all the differing opinions and players brought forwards from yesterday lest we forget the footprints they have left on the game.

TP - very eloquently put about nationalism/patrioticism. Absolutely agree Nole will be strongly affected by the wars of the 90s when he was a young boy. We first saw this start with Goran and the croation flags wherever he went (actually, he's another highly charismatic guy in my book, similar to Safin), and now its been carried on by Luber (shame about Ancic) and Nole. You dont see it quite so strongly through Troicki but perhaps through Tipsy too (another interesting character for sure...must have the most tattoo's for a tennis player too!). All in all, I think it complements Nole's character to a degree (I do like to watch him play BTW) but my question was that it might make others feel he's too nationally self-absorbed but I dont believe myself thats the case.

Good call on the Sampras serve LK, especially on grass in the 90s it must have been very intimidating, after all had Krajicek not played the match of his life Sampras would have won 8 Wimb's on the bounce!

Indeed again TP, Nole won the USO match but its cost having dearly for 2-3 months afterwards hasnt it. That link Laverfab posted on the other thread of Nadal playing Fed at AO09 shows how hard he can be to beat...no other player can do what he does at times. And after a point like that it must dishearten opponents knowing they have to play 3-4 winners per point, point after point, to beat him.

Agree Borg was intimidating, and Lendl also too - a very underappreciated player in the Hall of Greats, as I often eulogized about on 606v1.

It's interesting to see that there are one of 2 fans here who got interested in the game BECAUSE of Djokovic. That was essentially the question of my OP. We tennis fans can always appreciate the new number one or at least understand what makes this number one successful and more so since we have been following number 1s since their younger age.

I am essentially interested in knowing how the media, sponsors and TDs will sell Djoko to the wider audience? It was not too difficult in 2011 cause he made history with his unbeaten record run. But what about if he is joined in tougher battles next year and is forced to share the prizes with more players?

actually I think I might revise my option to Sampras too if allowed??? I quite agree with Legend and Lydian that it must have so intimidating to face down the second serve, never mind the first.

The outcome was rarely in doubt.

Tenez wrote:
It's interesting to see that there are one of 2 fans here who got interested in the game BECAUSE of Djokovic. That was essentially the question of my OP. We tennis fans can always appreciate the new number one or at least understand what makes this number one successful and more so since we have been following number 1s since their younger age.

I am essentially interested in knowing how the media, sponsors and TDs will sell Djoko to the wider audience? It was not too difficult in 2011 cause he made history with his unbeaten record run. But what about if he is joined in tougher battles next year and is forced to share the prizes with more players?

You pose a very interesting question in the last para Tenez - it depends I think if we continue to see the new, mature Djokovic - the man, not the boy. If he reverts to the lost and despondent character on the court for much of early 2010 then he will be harder to sell. But I think he must have the belief now that whatever trials and tribulations he faces, that he can come through and I think we will see a very focused and fearsome competitor from now on. Before he must have been asking himself if 2008 wasn't going to be the highest point of his career, as we all wondered for a time. I think the crowd are ready for a challenger to Rafa and one that can stand up to him physically over 5 sets in a way that it is much more difficult for Fed to do in his 31st year.

Tenez wrote:It's interesting to see that there are one of 2 fans here who got interested in the game BECAUSE of Djokovic. That was essentially the question of my OP. We tennis fans can always appreciate the new number one or at least understand what makes this number one successful and more so since we have been following number 1s since their younger age.

I am essentially interested in knowing how the media, sponsors and TDs will sell Djoko to the wider audience? It was not too difficult in 2011 cause he made history with his unbeaten record run. But what about if he is joined in tougher battles next year and is forced to share the prizes with more players?

I don't think ATP will bother with the "oldies" (read 40+), the money is now in China, and Nole is very popular there. Easy

Despite not turning up this year?