Djokovic confirms existence of unspecified personal problems

Those that watch Djokovic and follow him closely like myself and murdoch have noted how he looks tense and sometimes distracted on the court this season. Subtle little changes in his demeanor and body language and a bit of lost confidence as a result of these issues. Compound this now with at least one game a match sometimes a set where he goes off the reservation with his forehand and misses a quick succession of highly makeable forehands. Still it isn't all glum, he leads the points race. Has been to 9 straight slam semis, has 2 master, a slam final, and grandslam title.

Now we get the firm official, albeit indirect confirmation that Novak is struggling with some unspecified personal problem. The prickly exchange in canada with a heckler in the haas match and the odd sort of resigned and distracted look he had throughout the del po match seems to be evidence of the issue.

Here is the quote:

Coming into the tournament, he had faced all kinds of questions about his recent lackluster form and rumored personal problems, which he did not deny when questioned. "I prefer not speaking about my personal problems. Everybody has one, so it's normal," he said.

So indirectly here does confirm I am having some issue and I don't want to talk about it. We know that his grandfather who he was extremely close to has died. Jelena still seems to be in the picture. Is she the source of possible problems? Usually personal problems with players involve women or family and now this will probably add fuel to the fire of speculation surrounding Novak.

On the tennis end of it he looked really good his last two matches against Tipsy and Gasquet and now has won the last two masters on the hardcourt which bodes well for his ability to retain the number 1 ranking.

God knows what the issues are, but they don't seem to be affecting his form. And I'm not just talking about Toronto.

People say he's out of touch because he didn't win Wimbledon or the Olympics, but the truth is he actually played pretty damn well at both. Nothing wrong with his semi final defeats to Federer or Murray, I thought he played really well in both. I didn't see the bronze medal match so can't comment on that.

He'll be number 1 by the time the WTF start.

There is much to what you say Danny, but I think Novak does have another gear that he has rarely touched for much of this year. The difference is that he is losing a lot of close sets to his rivals this year where he was winning those close sets against his big rivals last year. I still believe when he is fully fit and focused and plays cleanly with forehand behind the serve, which hasn't always done this year like he really can then he is too much for anyone to handle right now. This year it has been more lack of focus for me as more often than not at a few inopportune moments. I think barring injury he will still finish year end #1. People underestimate his ability on the indoors this is the first time in years he has had to play hard that time of the year to secure the #1 I think if he is fit people will see the best of him both in the remaining outdoor tourneys and the year end indoor season.

When it was raining during his semi-final with Tipsarevic they were showing his US Open final against Nadal from last year.

One thing is clear, he's not playing anywhere near that level at the moment. He was hitting the ball deep, with power so consistently.

However, he is still probably 'the man' at the moment.

Can't disagree guest, Novak hasn't had the same fluidity he had on the forehand from the middle of the court that he had in 2011, hell this year he hasn't shown the forehand he had in 2010 or 2009 either. it hasn't been horrible but he has been very sloppy with errors on neutral forehands or forehands when he is in the lead. While toronto doesn't change the landscape much he had to have win there after the olympics and all his turmoil of poor form. He is losing a lot of close sets to his biggest rivals and gifting breaks and games to players that should be in no position to contend. Still he has won the last two Masters titles on the hardcourt. If he can get Cincy where he has never won before he would definetly take a nice lead in the points race and would be the favorite to ride out momentum to the OPen.

Broken egg chamber?

Here's the full question and response:

Q. Your old coach, Jelena Gencic, after Wimbledon or the Olympics came out and said she felt like there were some personal problems that were affecting you. Could you speak about that?
NOVAK DJOKOVIC: No. I prefer not speaking about my personal problems. Everybody has one, so it's normal. You're going through ups and downs and through difficult stages in your life and something that is a challenge in life, and you need to overcome it and try to become even stronger after that.

What few rumours I've heard are that the problems relate to his parents in some way. But that is just internet rumour, it may be nonsense.

I hope it is not his parents. Nadal suffered through his parents' divorce, now Djokovic is suffering. Absolutely .

As he says, he has matured, perhaps this new maturity can help him fight and win against his demons.

Yes it is a strange way to sort of talk about the problem but not talk about the problem. This is ofcourse all speculation but often in families that all of sudden get rich and famous like the Djokovic's it brings certain pressures on that family that can create fissures. Novak as sort of the de facto head of the family financially and the oldest son probably feels some sort of responsibilty to help which he may not be able to do. This of course is all conjecture but at least we do have some confirmation that there is something.

Murdoch have you noticed a shift in his body language and his general on court demeanor the last couple of months, he hasn't looked right to me in that respects and would be interested in getting your thoughts on the topic.

socal1976 wrote:
Murdoch have you noticed a shift in his body language and his general on court demeanor the last couple of months, he hasn't looked right to me in that respects and would be interested in getting your thoughts on the topic.

I think he has regained some control since the clay season. He seemed like a man on the edge for that period!

The low point for me was Wimbledon v Fed. He looked like a beaten man there (I'm not just talking in tennis terms!). He looked emotionally exhausted there, like he just couldn't find what was needed to get up for a slam semi final.

I think since then, he has been on a slight upturn. I wonder if perhaps he has become harder though? I don't think the incident at about 6:30 on this video would have happened last year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ao9rmoa7Ee4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Clearly things are not quite right for him at the moment but I think he is slowly dealing with it.

Yes he did have that one blow up at the heckler in the Haas man. Yes his body language at wimbeldon was very strange, he seemed oddly subdued for a man playing in the wimbeldon semi. But I think he is doing the right thing and getting back into playing on his favorite surface and try to just let that stuff sort itself out. He definetly has not been as relaxed and as fun loving as usual either, you see less of the laughing and hamming up for the fans and cameras that he so often takes part in.

I disagree that he's looked out of sorts. He hasn't reached 2011 standards admittedly, but I don't think he or anyone else will ever have a sustained spell like that again.

The Federer match at Wimbledon he played pretty well for most of it. He could have gone ahead in the 3rd but didn't take his chances. Then he played a loose couple of games and that was that. But he was playing Federer on grass AND indoors. That is almost as tough as Rafa at RG.

In the Olympics, again he played well. Even better than Wimbkedon I'd say. The Murray match was a great level, but Murray just won most of the 7 or 8 big points. Nothing wrong with his performance levels.

I don't think he played that well at RG really, but the weight of history was on his shoulders there. Before and after though, I think he's played well. I think it's really unrealistic to expect 2011 form again. He was going through tournaments barely making an error. It was ridiculous!

I think there's nothing to worry about for Novak fans, I really don't. I don't think he likes New York quite as much as Melbourbe because it's a bit quicker, but he's still the favourite for me.

There is something in that Danny he very well could win New york this year. But i think he hasn't looked like he is having as much fun out on the court. This is of course a subjective type of analysis and i can't prove or disprove one way or the other. But usually Novak is a guy who gets really pumped up after exciting points, cheers his opponents and tries to get the crowd into it. I don't know if I have seen much of the fun loving Novak this year. Still he did win Toronto and hasn't had that bad a results this year either.

Winning so many matches on all surfaces last year has hindered him a bit this year. Happened to Federer after 2007 42 match streak then loses to Canas twice in succession, follows up in 2008 with those rubbish (for him) results.

Personal problems certainly affect players like Nadal and Djokovic more probably due to the fact that the only reason either player is even in tennis is because of the influence of their families to push them into tennis. The same was true for Agassi and McEnroe too. If the tranquility that they experienced as youngsters is disturbed, then their game is disturbed too. However, I'm not sure I'd ascribed Djokovic's lacklustre performance @ Wimbledon to an unspecified personal problem. Djokovic has beaten Federer twice this year and both wins were in straight sets, so it's not like Djokovic has completely lost his way. His loss to Nadal was @ the French Open, more or less Nadal's personal fiefdom as far as the slams go. The H2H between Djokovic and Federer goes like this over the years:

2012: 2-1
2011: 4-1
2010: 1-4
2009: 3-2
2008: 1-2
2007: 1-3
2006: 0-2

Only in 2011 has Djokovic dominated Federer and 2009 was close. In the early years ('06-08) Federer had the edge and then in 2009 Djokovic took a slight edge, only for Federer to regain the upper hand in 2010 with Djokovic replying in kind in 2011. However, until recently ('11-10), the rivalry has been evenly balance in the years prior ('08-09). At the moment, that's how things are looking with the H2H and it's not unusual for it to be like that.

Cinci isn't that significant for Djokovic, unless of course he wins, but if there was a place that Djokovic was going to lose, Cinci would as good as any of his other bad tournaments, he's lost in every final he's appeared in, not just to Federer but to Murray as well. The latter is also in Djokovic's side of the draw and so he can also potentially defeat him in the semis, increasing Fed's lead @ the No.1 spot and reducing Djokovic's chances as Y.E. No.1 (especially if Fed comes out with 1, 000 for winning Cinci, which is more than possible -he already has 4 titles here).

True lucius, Fed can get some points in the next two tournaments but he better bring it hard in the indoor season if he thinks he can hold off Novak. Novak has nothing to defend while Fed has everything to defend. My own feeling is that Fed needs a 1500 point lead at least going into the indoors to be able to stay #1. So in my mind the next 2 tournaments will determine whether Fed will be #1 he needs to do really well or hope Novak doesn't play great in the next 2 tournaments.

Good grief, everyone has problems, cry me a river.

I guess Nole only loses when he is "upset", just like another player who only loses when "injured".

reckoner wrote:Good grief, everyone has problems, cry me a river.

I guess Nole only loses when he is "upset", just like another player who only loses when "injured".

Reckoner, of course we are overanalyzing it and everyone does have some personal stuff going on. I am not saying this is why he is losing it may affect him or not. The guy hasn't exactly been stinking up the joint, but we are looking for crap to talk about before the open you codger.

Meh it's annoying.

Ok you win I am frightened by the redfaced version of yourself.

Ristic has been having an affair with Victor Troicki. I am sorry Novak, my deepest sympathies.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Ristic has been having an affair with Victor Troicki. I am sorry Novak, my deepest sympathies.

JM I know you are kidding and that you mean this as a joke, you got good timing and energy kid but you lack any real material. Keep working you can be a full fledged wum soon enough!

Ristic has been having an affair with Navratilova?

That was terrible moderation Julius but I forgive you. And I do NOT think you are a crap moderator, at least not for the moment anyway I am sure I will let you know in the future.

You're right, but when a joke pops into my head it has to come out somewhere - hence my user name.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Ristic has been having an affair with Navratilova?

Now that would be cause for a dip in form.

At least if it was Kirilenko or Ivanovic the mental image would be pleasant.

No harm, no foul, have at it. Contrary to popular opinion I am not opposed to good humor.

socal1976 wrote:True lucius, Fed can get some points in the next two tournaments but he better bring it hard in the indoor season if he thinks he can hold off Novak. Novak has nothing to defend while Fed has everything to defend. My own feeling is that Fed needs a 1500 point lead at least going into the indoors to be able to stay #1. So in my mind the next 2 tournaments will determine whether Fed will be #1 he needs to do really well or hope Novak doesn't play great in the next 2 tournaments.

I'd probably agree that Fed needs a decent sized lead to hold off Djokovic for the Y.E. No.1: winning Cinci would be significant and now Nadal has withdrawn from the USO, Fed has a real shot to get to the final with no Djokovic to stop him! Of course Murray may be drawn on Fed's side of the draw or he may not be but I'm sure you'll be far happier with a Djokovic vs Murray semi than another Djokovic vs Federer semi! Federer getting to the final gains 480 points over last year whereas winning Cinci against Djokovic in the final would give him an additional 820, so his lead would be around 1, 375 and that's without winning the USO. If Djokovic is really dealing with personal issues then there's a reasonable chance he'll lose to Murray in the semis @ the USO (if they're on the same side of the draw). That really would end Djokovic's chances of Y.E. No.1 because a loss of 1, 280 would be fatal especially if Fed becomes the one who wins the USO (in which case the net effect would be a Federer swing of over 2, 500 points @ No.1). If Fed wins Cinci and the USO (with Djoko losing in the semis), then it's worse, the lead becomes almost 4, 000 points.

Yes can't disagree the year end #1 should be settled by the time of the USO's conclusion. Djokovic has the ability to do well but he will need to play better than he did on the grass and clay, initials signs on that score so far is pretty good. It should be real dog fight. Novak really could use Murray being put into Rog's half, but I don't think that will happen frankly. So we are left with what should be the tiebreaker for the year end number 1. It is actually the first time in quite a while where we have had this hotly of a contested year end #1 race, it should make for some great drama.

I just see it that he won some very tight matches last year that this year he's lost.

No big mystery; last year he was slightly flattered by results, this year not. It just makes it look worse losing the #1 position to a player at the tail end of his career.

Does it make his loss worse that the only reason the player who took the number 1 from him has a snowball's chance of taking the number #1 because he tore his back out after the USO and had virtually no points for the last two months of the year? Yes more of BB's legendary logic. Wow how terrible a 31 year old Goat can out point Novak's 10 months in 12 months of play wow, good for you Rog! That is the only way that Novak who holds two slams right now as defending champion and finalist of the other would lose the #1 Roger. Good for Roger as usual his superior injury track record has allowed him to sweep the injury plagued number #1 ranking of 09 and and 2012. Good for Roger he still had to be the next best guy around and clean up the pieces and he did that admirably.

Gosh you sound rather childish socal. It's as if you haven't got over the fact that your idol lost to Federer @ Wimbledon. The way the ranking system works is fair, the only reason Fed has overtaken Djokovic is because:

a) He's won Wimbledon
b) Djokovic hasn't defended most his titles from last year successfully

Djokovic took part in both Basel, Paris & the WTF so for an injured player, why play any of these tournaments? He reached the semis @ Basel and the quarters @ Paris, so it's a complete fabrication that Djokovic somehow missed the last 2 months and therefore has 'missing' points which if he had, would somehow mean he's still No.1. The only result which was below par was the WTF but if you look @ Djokovic's actual record, in the previous 4 years before last year, 2/4 occasion he'd gone out in the RR stage so that result wasn't odd at all.

Djokovic is where he belongs: #2. He's won less, just 3/6 finals compared to Fed 5/7 and it's Fed's overall consistency that has led him to #1 and Djokovic's lack of it that's led to his slip. I said openly before Wimbledon that Fed only really deserves to be No.1 if he wins Wimbledon and I don't recall you disagreeing at the time (maybe the smug arrogant belief that you thought Djokovic had it in the bag) but now we got trite garbage coming from you that Federer is some fraud now he's clinched it because he has 1 slam and Djokovic 2. Well Fed only had 1 slam after losing Wimbledon in 2008 and held onto the #1 spot for another month: they don't give the #1 spot for the number of slams you win in a year, they give it for your overall results in the year. Fed's record over the last 12 months is better, simple enough. Now get over it.

Ok Lucius you are right, now will you just chill out. Fed deserves his number #1 that is fine who cares, and he did win wimbeldon and does deserve it. When did I say fed was a fraud? Now you are going to the tried and true card of taking my position and making it more extreme and then attacking it. Please find where I said Fed is a fraud as number 1?

Frankly, I am done talking to you on this thread when you learn to check your tone. Words like "smug", "arrogant", "garbage" would be what someone might call your last post if he was so inclined. We where having a polite conversation but it seems like you want to fight, I am disinclined honestly to do so.

socal1976 wrote:Ok Lucius you are right, now will you just chill out. Fed deserves his number #1 that is fine who cares, and he did win wimbeldon and does deserve it. When did I say fed was a fraud? Now you are going to the tried and true card of taking my position and making it more extreme and then attacking it. Please find where I said Fed is a fraud as number 1?

Frankly, I am done talking to you on this thread when you learn to check your tone. Words like "smug", "arrogant", "garbage" would be what someone might call your last post if he was so inclined. We where having a polite conversation but it seems like you want to fight, I am disinclined honestly to do so.

Socal, the overall narrative of your posts was that Fed's only way of getting to No.1 was because Djokovic hadn't had the chance to complete a full 12 months of tournaments, when in fact he had. It's not Fed's fault if Djokovic carried an injury through a month of it (a month which no tennis was played by him or the man who replaced him as No.1 as it happened). Hence why I said that it seemed as if you're saying Fed was a fraud, if that's not what you meant, fine.

As regarding the comments, it's a fair reflection of what your views were regarding Wimbledon. You didn't rate Federer at all, I, more in hope than expectation, thought that grass was the big unknown and could throw up something unexpected, as it did. I don't recall that from your posts at the time. Hence why I do regard that you came across as rather smug and arrogant in your position at the time. That doesn't mean I consider you that as a person though. I have no intention of a fight, but I certainly don't like the record being distorted. Anyone who read you're post prior to your last one might think that Djokovic never played another tennis match from the US Open till 2012 due to injury! Patently untrue. Hence why I've wanted you to acknowledge that as untrue and not the reason why Djokovic is no longer No.1. The reason is because Federer has played better, clearly not as well in the slams as Djokovic (hence why Djokovic currently holds 2 and Fed 1) but better in the Masters 1000 tournaments, WTF and other countable tournaments to displace Djokovic, although not by much: his lead has been less than 100 points for 3 of the 4 weeks since he reclaimed the No.1 spot. Given that each of them are over 11, 000 points, a lead of less than a 100 is virtually nothing but given it's so little, it's hard to see how Djokovic can reclaim it between now and mid October unless he wins Cincinnati and the USO and even then he may not get it. I think that just shows how well Federer has played post USO last year.

Lucius, you saw the man get carried off the court in tears at the Davis Cup semi? It is neither here nor there. I think I paid due respect to Fed before the final, I went out on limb and picked the guy who lost. It does not mean I ever said or felt Fed was not dangerous or could win. I properly picked him against Murray and in fact thought Fed would beat him straights. If I was so down pre-wimby on Fed why would I overestimate his margin of victory against Murray? i made an incorrect pick and stated my reasons for it, is that a crime or even equivalent to disregarding a player's credentials because you thought the other guy would win.

Wait a minute you are honestly Lucius argueing that my stating the obvious fact that Roger Federer over the last few years is harder slam match up than Murray is somehow disrespectful of Murray? How could being deemed the easier semi draw than Roger Federer, the GOAT be considered a slight by Andy murray or pretty much any other player on tour.

socal is complaining about luciusmanns "tone" on this thread after going into a rant to which luciusmann responded rationally and calmly.

Hilarious. I mean seriously very, very funny.

bogbrush wrote:socal is complaining about luciusmanns "tone" on this thread after going into a rant to which luciusmann responded rationally and calmly.

Hilarious. I mean seriously very, very funny.

socal1976 wrote:Wait a minute you are honestly Lucius argueing that my stating the obvious fact that Roger Federer over the last few years is harder slam match up than Murray is somehow disrespectful of Murray? How could being deemed the easier semi draw than Roger Federer, the GOAT be considered a slight by Andy murray or pretty much any other player on tour.

Until this year, Murray's record in the slams was better than Fed's (2011, Murray: F SF SF & SF vs SF F QF & SF) and many posters said (and I'm sure probably still feel) that Fed wasn't capable of beating younger players in 7 BO5 matches. The fact that Fed's record in 2011 was worse than Murray's underlined this view. Hence why I felt that you saying Murray was the easier proposition than Federer is unfair and a little bit disrespectful. Murray does appear as significant a threat to Djokovic as Federer recently. After all, Murray was very close to actually beating Djokovic in the Aussie Open this year and I'm sure that neither Federer or Djokovic would consider Murray as an easy option. Whether Fed is the GOAT or not doesn't really factor into things because whether Fed is or not, that is an accolade built up over his career and currently (as is true for most tennis players) Fed's age is not necessarily an advantage as youth is (which Andy just about has) which is why Murray can be considered as tough as an opponent as Federer. I feel Murray is being short changed by considering him as less of a threat in a semi than Federer.

Yes lucius but it is it really so controversial for me to think contrary to your opinion on this that Fed is still the guy between the two I wouldn't want to play in the semi. If you take your narrow view of my positions on Murray then a tortured argument in my mind could be made that this is a slight of murray. Except that maybe a dozen times on this site or more I have said that murray is going to be the biggest challenge to Novak in the 2 years. I picked Murray to beat Novak in the wimby semi. You see I think if you are objective and fair you would see that in no way have I disrespected Murray as a semi opponent by saying that while Murray is tough I still even today don't consider on a fast surface as dangerous to Novak as Roger is. I don't think any rational, unbiased listener would view this proposition as a slight of murray. Unless they wanted to bend over backwards to see it as such.

Caledonian and Banbro are the two biggest Murray fans ask them if they think I am fair to Murray, or legendkillar for that matter? I bend over backward to complement him and Nadal frankly. I don't do that with Fed because he gets enough of that from other people and I am just a bit tired of seeing him win, my own preference. Just recently I rated Murray as being better than the vast majority of the guys with 1 and 2 slams in the history of tennis. I mean does that sound like all do is disrespect other players and pump up Djokovic? Be fair here Lucius, I trust in your judgement because in the past despite the fact that we have had arguments you have been fair debater. I concede I don't rain sprinkles of sunshine on fed in terms of compliments and fawning but as a neutral I am more than generous with other players particularly Nadal and Murray.

I am sorry but both your points are mistaken and I think if you could come to admit it that you see it yourself. PS I shouldn't of called your post a lie it sounds like you made an honest mistake. But my biggest, biggest pet peev on this site is when people inaccurately portray my positions and then attack them. I consider this a dirty trick and as bad as an insult.

Luciusman, this is starting to sound like arguing for the sake of arguing.

There are only 3 options in this match up:
1) Federer is the harder match up
2) Murray is the harder match up
3) They are both of exactly the same difficulty.

Which do you think is correct?

And is option 1 that disrespectful a suggestion given that Fed is the higher ranked player, has won more titles in the last year and, with 16 slams (at the time), has greater pedigree in winning the big matches? It's hardly a wacky line of reasoning, is it?

HM Murdoch wrote:Luciusman, this is starting to sound like arguing for the sake of arguing.

There are only 3 options in this match up:
1) Federer is the harder match up
2) Murray is the harder match up
3) They are both of exactly the same difficulty.

Which do you think is correct?

And is option 1 that disrespectful a suggestion given that Fed is the higher ranked player, has won more titles in the last year and, with 16 slams (at the time), has greater pedigree in winning the big matches? It's hardly a wacky line of reasoning, is it?

Exactly Murdoch, I think many people would make the same conclusion that between Murray and Fed that even today Fed is the tougher matchup for Djokovic. Not saying that murray can't beat Novak and isn't one of the best in the world. Is it a slight of Roger's greatness to say that Nadal would much rather player Federer in a semi than Djoko? Is it a slight of Djoko to say that Murray would prefer to play Novak than Nadal? Of course it isn't and I have not in anyway slighted Murray. I think Lucius is upset at my cupcake draw comments and free career achievement silver medal upgrade comments and maybe that his tainted his judgement on this last couple of posts.

I think that from the perspective of a Djokovic fan (as you are) than there is certainly more fear of Federer (proven track record of beating Djokovic in slams) than of Murray (no track record [not much of one] of beating Djokovic in slams), where I disagree is that I don't think there is a significant difference. However, just because there's more of a fear of Federer doesn't mean that Murray is less of a harder match up, they probably present difficulties in different ways to Djokovic. It does appear disrespectful in the context in which you raise it i.e. Djokovic gets hard done by because he usually has got Federer in the past and not Murray. Maybe you don't intend to slight Murray but it does inadvertently, I accept that you may not be intending to do so though.

I didn't say it was controversial to say Murray is the easier proposition but I'm not sure I fully agree. I was on holiday in Spain when Murray won gold @ the Olympics and when I found out, I was surprised but also strangely happy (a weird sensation) because I support Team GB but also because I thought it was a done deal that Fed would beat Murray but he didn't. Hence why I've re-evaluated my view that Murray is somehow an easier prospect. I wasn't as surprised when Djokovic was beaten by Murray but Federer too (in back to back matches)? You are fair minded much of the time socal, although some of your posts have been a bit OTT lately especially the one about how Fed has somehow got to No.1 because Djokovic was injured (way back last September)!!! I mean that is just too amusing!

socal1976 wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:Luciusman, this is starting to sound like arguing for the sake of arguing.

There are only 3 options in this match up:
1) Federer is the harder match up
2) Murray is the harder match up
3) They are both of exactly the same difficulty.

Which do you think is correct?

And is option 1 that disrespectful a suggestion given that Fed is the higher ranked player, has won more titles in the last year and, with 16 slams (at the time), has greater pedigree in winning the big matches? It's hardly a wacky line of reasoning, is it?

Exactly Murdoch, I think many people would make the same conclusion that between Murray and Fed that even today Fed is the tougher matchup for Djokovic. Not saying that murray can't beat Novak and isn't one of the best in the world. Is it a slight of Roger's greatness to say that Nadal would much rather player Federer in a semi than Djoko? Is it a slight of Djoko to say that Murray would prefer to play Novak than Nadal? Of course it isn't and I have not in anyway slighted Murray. I think Lucius is upset at my cupcake draw comments and free career achievement silver medal upgrade comments and maybe that his tainted his judgement on this last couple of posts.

I'm not upset at all although I am bemused by the cupcake comments (rather than upset) but actually was more curious about the line you were putting out that Djokovic somehow should be No.1 and that Fed has only got there because the former was injured. Said injury occurred way back last September and during that month he took off, Federer didn't player any tournaments either, so Federer gained no benefit from Djokovic's injury. Djokovic gained fewer points in the last third of last season but injury didn't prevent him from playing thus he has no 'missing' points which has led to him losing the No.1 slot. Also, if Djokovic was seriously injured, why did he play Basel, Paris & the WTF? He has already secured Y.E. No.1 so if he was injured or not 100%, why risk aggravating a recent injury (when he didn't need to)? Perhaps because he wasn't? Post USO, Djokovic record has been 3 tournament titles, whereas Fed's has been 8, it seems that while Djokovic just about pulled off winning the Aussie Open earlier this year, his level hasn't been the same as much of last year. Injury is not a factor you made it out to be. That is what I take issue with.

Speaking as a Djoko fan, I was very wary of Andy's form at Wimbledon. I felt that, had Novak beaten Fed, Andy would probably have taken him down in the final. And if Fed hadn't picked Andy's pocket in the last game of the 2nd set, I think Andy would have gone on to win.

Andy is a big threat for USO but I wonder if his form has peaked either a couple of weeks late (for Wimbledon) or a few weeks early (for USO)?

It's perhaps not fair to judge him too harshly if he is carrying an injury but Toronto and Cincy haven't been what he would have wanted in the build up to USO.

Maybe it's time socal decided whether to insult people or be polite. At the moment he seems to do the former, then when pulled up for it, jump to the latter for fear of censure.

It makes for barmy reading, that's for sure.

Fair enough Lucius, it makes no difference in the points race anyway so I will concede the point on the injury from last year. But it did effect his play in the final couple months and the results he got.