Novak Djokovic - Warrior Extraordinaire

Tennis over the ages has created some players over the years. The ridiculous sublime to which I plant Borg and Federer in. The damn right ruthless in McEnroe, Lendl, Sampras. The loveable terriers in Laver, Nadal and Agassi. Then the warriors who don't know when they are down. Connors was the only one I could think of....Until now. I know throw Djokovic right besides him.

2011 Djokovic was just granite. Impervious to defeat and was like swashbuckling musketeer who defended and then landed a killer blow. Stylish and even with a smile on his face was able to tie opponents in knots. Nadal and Federer tried in vain to put this new hero down and failed. He may have been vanquished by Federer at the FO, but Djokovic was not to be denied in New York 3 months later.

2012. To many the end of the world, supposedly, if that rocks your boat. The 2nd year syndrome which afflicted Nadal, was starting to afflict Djokovic. 2012 saw a different Djokovic. Gone was the feather in his cap and the swashbuckling style seemed to have been a different memory of a different life. Djokovic turned into a grizzly warrior. He out-toughed Murray and Nadal at the Australian Open. I think that is what he has done. Yes the performances haven't been vintage, but they have toughness written all over them. At the FO he out-toughed Seppi and Tsonga. Nearly out-toughed Nadal. The chest beating, shirt ripping, arms alofting war cries of a warrior. Yes he doesn't have the soundbite of a Connors, but Djokovic feels plugged in to the crowd and the arms alofting reeks of the Russell Crowe legendary "Are you not entertained" speech. He has turned the tide in many matches this year. At the US Open he out-toughed Ferrer and he nearly done it to Murray too. Djokovic is down, but not out. He has one more round left in him. Reminds me of the Rocky V speech "Get up you son of a b*tch. I didn't hear no bell. Mickey loves ya"

Yes the performances in 2012 have seemed scratchy, but they fit the mould. Scruffy, but that is the beauty of them. He isn't trying to be something he is not. Djokovic has evolved from the 2011 shell. He is now a Warrior like Connors was. I look forward to seeing him on court going the distance.

You know all the multislammers have been warriors in their time...tennis is a combative sport piting two men against each other who dont want to budge an inch. Their styles of combat may vary but they all have the heart of a "warrior" inside them...they have to or else they couldnt succeed as they do. Djokovic just happens to be more extrovert about it. If you were to rewind 4 years we'd be calling Nadal the ultimate warrior...and in some respects maybe he is after all he turned a 0-7 deficit against the warrior of the OP into a 3-0 turnaround..is that not also warrior extraordinaire? To face your worst enemy and overcome them again consistently?

I think what lies behind being a "warrior" is a huge topic...and a very interesting one at that. But as I say I think all the guys on 4-5+ slams are warriors extraordinaire...for these are the guys that dont flinch away from "battle".

Think for me Nadal was deemed an ultimate warrior, but I think for me over time has demonstrated a less reliance on speed and stamina in chasing shots down or playing them.

I don't think past multi slam winners have all shown the warrior sense in how much it streams through their play. Sampras/Lendl/Borg/Federer could turn matches based on their self confidence.

I think what I see in Connors and Djokovic is more of hang in there quality than being able to play themselves out of situation like the other players who just have something else a bit different in resiliance.

It's difficult to quantify, because some styles of play are inherently more risky than others so that in clutch situations there's more that can go wrong for some players than others.

For that reason I have Sampras as the absolute warrior of the last 20 years. His game always involved taking the initiative to his opponent and his ability to pull out extraordinary 2nd serves and crucial volleys was awesome.

Others on the list, such as Connors, Djoko, and Nadal are clearly 'never-say-die' players, but the way their games set up tends to reduce the pressure on them in clutch situations.

I wouldn't say quantify to an extent, more who personifies that characteristic. For me Sampras was just a force more than a warrior. I mean he could just overwhelm his opponent and just land blow after blow after blow. A very intense winning machine.

legendkillarV2 wrote:I wouldn't say quantify to an extent, more who personifies that characteristic. For me Sampras was just a force more than a warrior. I mean he could just overwhelm his opponent and just land blow after blow after blow. A very intense winning machine.

Funny you should say that, I was just watching highlights of Sampras v Pioline in the 1997 Wimbledon final and he was amazing. So many return winners, big serves on the big points and he was just a force.

You've got to overcome the image; just because a guy dresses tough doesn't make him a warrior. Jimmy Connors dressed like his Mum sent him out with his high socks and bad hair, but he was a killer. On the other hand Robbie Ginepri tried to look like some kind of tough street player but was useless.

Novak looks like a neat boy with his perfectly turned out clothes and cropped hair but he's got loads of grit.

Not sure anyone tops this guy though;

http://tinyurl.com/8vsz75o

Looks a cross between Mikey Rourke's the Wrestler and a Kiss lead singer!

I agree with barry about Sampras. He was incredibly tough in some matches...sometimes we forget about the guys of old. He wasnt just a good serve...he would hang in sets until it came to 4-4, 5-5, then apply pressure more and more. But he could tough it out...anyone remember him beating Corretja wholst throwing up, or winning through tears against Courier at AO95 after news of his coach diagnosed with terminal cancer? Sometimes being the ultimate int about winning but how you face adversity with a grim determination to carry on. Sampras definitely embodied that.

I think Sampras had a fear factor on his opponents. As you say lydian he could hold his own at 4-4 or 5-5 and you can bet his opponent would crack under the pressure. For me Sampras was a brutal force. The way he served matches and sets out was stunning.

For me warriors are guys that win in any manner good or bad on the eye in scruffy gritty manners. For me Connors and Djokovic can turn matches into a scrap or a battle of wills.

The guys who we think of as 'personifying' warriors tend to have at least the following characteristics on Court:

a. They have a pretty grooved form of game which doesn't involve seizing the initiative quickly, but seizing it by breaking the other guy down - that sort of player tends to look better more often in clutch situations;

b. They behave like muppets on Court. I have enjoyed watching the look of bewilderment on the faces of Connors or Nadal on the rare occasions when they are being totally outclassed and humbled by an opponent. They can't ponce around fist-pumping and yelling - they just don't know where to go and look like rabbits in the headlights. Good examples are Mac. v Connors Wimbledon 1984 and Del Boy vs. Nadal USO 2009.

I never liked Sampras, but for me he was the ultimate clutch player. He didn't dance around like a jerk yelling and fist-pumping when he pulled off an escape either.

That's a fair point barry; "warrior" mentality can be confused with "bully".

Only real warriors call for the match to stop from a slight gush of wind swirling the stadium. Gushes of wind are evidently not strong enough conditions for the Serb Marathon man.

Nice post legendkillar, I think to get the top of tennis you have to the mental toughness required to believe in your self in the clutch moments and to keep fighting. I think Djokovic personifies this as many others have as well. To me he will be back and soon, it is hard to say but frankly 3 finals, 1 slam, and 2 masters and it has been a pretty crappy year in my opinion. He is leading the ATP points race but frankly he has rarely hit top gear this year. To me this means he will come back and have a great 2013 if health permitting, and for Djokovic now a great year means he finishes number 1 and wins slams. So far this year has been poor in the middle but he can salvage it by finishing #1. Then in retrospect it won't look so crappy, he will have a slam the number 1 ranking. To me he has rarely played above 4th gear the whole season, touching the higher levels that he can and will get to in very fleeting moments.

If this is Djokovic in 3rd 4th gear, Nadal is in 1st and Federer edged into3rd at Wimbledon.

My point is that they all have their dodgy spells; denigrating everyone else by saying they only win things because Djokovic let's them doesn't really wash.

Technically if Djokovic was crap this year, then he has been crap all years apart from 2011

Yes that is a fair point IMBL, but you don't think players can get better over there career and raise their level.

Of course that is not what i said BB more lies, do you never get tired of lying. Novak was down this year so what, I never said any other player didn't deserve their success. But I do distinctly remember a certain hypocrite who now posts on 606v2 back in the day saying that Novak got a lucky win at the AO because fed had mono at the 2008 AO. I wonder who that player accomplishment denigrating loser was? Maybe the same guy who tried to denigrate nadal for years and year and who now has moved on to another target?


Don't lecture me on denigrating player's accomplishments BB don't embarass yourself with YOUR LENGTHY TRACK RECORD OF DOING JUST THAT TO NADAL over the years. Now you play kissy face with Nadal's fans but that hasn't always been the case now has it.

Do stop shouting, we can read you (very) loud and clear.

socal1976 wrote:Yes that is a fair point IMBL, but you don't think players can get better over there career and raise their level.

Of course that is not what i said BB more lies, do you never get tired of lying. Novak was down this year so what, I never said any other player didn't deserve their success. But I do distinctly remember a certain hypocrite who now posts on 606v2 back in the day saying that Novak got a lucky win at the AO because fed had mono at the 2008 AO. I wonder who that player accomplishment denigrating loser was? Maybe the same guy who tried to denigrate nadal for years and year and who now has moved on to another target?


Don't lecture me on denigrating player's accomplishments BB don't embarass yourself with YOUR LENGTHY TRACK RECORD OF DOING JUST THAT TO NADAL over the years. Now you play kissy face with Nadal's fans but that hasn't always been the case now has it.

Do you behave like this when you are out socal?

Towards him yes whenever I feel like it, TP. Besides every sinlge word of what I said is 100 percent true.

Countless times Sampras came back from 2 sets down against very good players one of them being Jim Courier, if you don't call those matches as warrior performance then no idea what you call as warrior attitude.

Djoko on the other hand riding on the form and luck that came his way in 2011, unless he is consistent and prove this game say after 3-4 years for me its too early to call him a warrior. Yes the two USO semi's against Fed was impressive and AO so is AO 2012, but I don't count FO performance as Warrior ones, in my view he is shaping up into a warrior, for me Nadal would classify as a warrior ahead of the joker.

If I had to classify them as warriors.....

Federer would be like Zorro. Precision is the key and he could hack a "Z" into you before you realised what had happened. He's also quick and "light" in his strokes and has brilliant footwork.

Djokovic would be the Black Knight from Monty Python (the Holy Grail film). He never gives up; you could chop off his arms and legs and he'd still fight until the end.

Nadal's a difficult one. I imagine he's like Lurtz from the Fellowship of the Ring. He's very powerful and very quick and combines the two well. Like Djokovic, you'd need to cut off a few limbs to stop him from performing at his peak (near enough).

I mean to reach this level of play you have to be resilient and focused on the court. So much of tennis is keeping your focus. Keeping your eye on the ball till the moment you make contact and not looking up to the target or your opponent till you hit. Being able to keep your cool when the bounces or breaks don't go for you. Figuring out different game plans when faced with different opponents or when having to play when one or more aspects of your own game is off. That is the reason I really love tennis is that while it is incredibly physical it is a constant test of one individuals technique, focus, determination, and yes fitness. All of these things at the same time.

To get to the point where you can regularly pass the test at the grandslam level you need these qualities to some extent. As Lydian said all the guys that win multislams have to differing degrees mastered themselves and their own games. Because there are literally lots of guys who hit just as hard or harder than these 4, and there are guys that are faster. It becomes all mental at the highest levels when faced with guys who can all move and who can all bomb 130 mile an hour serves.

It would be wonderful to see Djokovic address whatever ails him currently, physical or mental, and become the warrior, that we had a glimpse of in 2011.

Murray, under the tutelage of Lendl, is beginning to show the aggressive aspect of his game. Now that the chastity belt of being slam-less has crumbled, he can concentrate on honing his talent for future achievements.

Fedal will always be legendary. Even if we do not get a Fedal-like rivalry, a Djokurray one can keep us mesmerised for a few years yet.

@SoCal... let the departed rest in peace. Stirring old bones is a bad omen.

laverfan wrote:It would be wonderful to see Djokovic address whatever ails him currently, physical or mental, and become the warrior, that we had a glimpse of in 2011.

Murray, under the tutelage of Lendl, is beginning to show the aggressive aspect of his game. Now that the chastity belt of being slam-less has crumbled, he can concentrate on honing his talent for future achievements.

Fedal will always be legendary. Even if we do not get a Fedal-like rivalry, a Djokurray one can keep us mesmerised for a few years yet.

@SoCal... let the departed rest in peace. Stirring old bones is a bad omen.

There's nothing ailing Fjokovic in my opinion, it's just that some other players have rectified some weaknesses last year and the breaks that went his way in 2011 didn't in 2012.

laverfan wrote:...Murray, under the tutelage of Lendl, is beginning to show the aggressive aspect of his game. Now that the chastity belt of being slam-less has crumbled, he can concentrate on honing his talent for future achievements. ...

Not sure that analogy quite works

Nore Staat wrote:

laverfan wrote:...Murray, under the tutelage of Lendl, is beginning to show the aggressive aspect of his game. Now that the chastity belt of being slam-less has crumbled, he can concentrate on honing his talent for future achievements. ...

Not sure that analogy quite works

I hope for Kim's sake, that that has happened a long while ago.......

How did this great thread descend into talking about Murray's willy, JK and Nore staat I hold you to responsible.

Maybe it wasn't that great......Anyway check on the vivid imagination of LF for an answer.

I use a metaphor, and the topic descends into sexual innuendo.

laverfan wrote:I use a metaphor, and the topic descends into sexual innuendo.

You should watch your metaphors with this group Laverfan, you should know better. LOL