Novak's legacy ruined?

by Josiah Maiestas Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:02

It's a great achievement to have 6 slams and beating all his rivals when it mattered. We cannot ignore that he gifted 2 slams to the biggest finals choker of all time. I don't think Novak will comeback from this disappointment, he is 1 from 4 in USO finals losing to his main 2 rivals, his AO record is the only good thing he has now and once he loses there that he will hold none of the slams (he won't win USO with his mental woes). Murray did not have to be special to beat him yesterday, he returned well and made less unforced errors (which he usually does anyway) but Novak was not the champion we thought he was. His backhand which was the most consistent in the game is now not very good, like he wants to have everything on his forehand.

Djokovic was being hailed as the one to win from match points down and beat Nadal in many finals, now he will be known as the one to gift TWO slams to the biggest bottler in slam finals. He is becoming very easy to play against

by sirfredperry Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:07

JM. Nole will come again. It's been a gruelling season for him and I think I'm right in saying that it's the first time he's reached the final in each of the first three Slams of a calendar year.
All this was bound to take its toll - even for a guy as fit and mentally strong as Djoko. He needs a rest. I certainly would not count him out at the USO.

by Guest Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:08

by bogbrush Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:20

Ok, cutting through the rough stuff, there's a kernel of truth in that Djokovic seems not to have made that 2011 dominance stick.

You could say his opponents have improved, but that's just not the case. Federer has declined & Nadal's been injured most of the time. Why's he now finding guys like JMDP a serious threat on grass when he duffed Nadal up badly in 2011?
Sure, he's #1 by a mile and a very good player, but at the biggest moments he's finding it harder. I did say in 2012 that the biggest difference was that the knife-edge moments that all fell his way in 2011 now weren't - and that's not much of a difference - and I stand by that. It could be argued similarly at the French, where only a very daft hit on the net (probably) cost him the match. So by that argument he's the same as 2011, just not getting the lucky breaks (his return against Federer would fly out this year).

It wasn't long ago that socal was announcing the emergence of Djokovic 3.0 (God I hate that expression). I always thought that unfounded, and it looks so.

His biggest bonus is the lack of breakthrough talent to replace Federer and - maybe - Nadal.

by HM Murdock Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:29

Ignoring the dig at Andy, Novak's post-2011 matches against the other top 3 have often not gone well.

Post 2011:

Novak 5 - 4 Andy
Novak 3 - 2 Roger
Novak 2 - 4 Rafa

So it's 10-10 against the other top 4.

In 2011 it was 11-2.

by bogbrush Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:31

There's another thread more suited, I'll copy over.

by Danny_1982 Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:34

So Novak's past it, and Murray is just a loser who got lucky. Good, glad we got that sorted.

The sport must be in disarray, the world number 1 who holds a slam is crap and the number 2 who holds 2 slams isn't much cop either.

I say we close down tennis. Laugh

by Josiah Maiestas Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:36

sirfred

Gruelling season or not he was ahead in 2 of the 3 sets and served pathetically, he was the better of the 2 players coming to the final, and bottled the occasion. Losing to a guy who can only push and wait for mistakes is also a sign he is not fit as we were told. Murray looked good because Djokovic was so bad. As a world number 1 you cannot lose in finals to mentally inferior players.

by Danny_1982 Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:37

I like the title as well... Novak's legacy ruined! Laugh

Yep, I say we delete his 6 slams from the record books.

by Josiah Maiestas Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:40

Danny_1982 wrote:So Novak's past it, and Murray is just a loser who got lucky. Good, glad we got that sorted.

The sport must be in disarray, the world number 1 who holds a slam is crap and the number 2 who holds 2 slams isn't much cop either.

I say we close down tennis.

Only Delpo can save the plight of this sport. Murray needed 5 sets to beat club level Verdasco lest we forget. It shows how there is no big game player anymore.

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:40

His legacy (thus far) is 6 slams and 89 weeks at No 1.
Future losses don't ruin a legacy once it has been established. Djoko's legacy has already been established and will probably grow.

Was Mac's legacy ruined after he failed to win a slam after 1984, or Wilander's legacy ruined after he failed to win a slam after 1988?

Is his dominance over - certainly it's far less than in 2011, but that was to be expected.

by Danny_1982 Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:42

Josiah Maiestas wrote:
Danny_1982 wrote:So Novak's past it, and Murray is just a loser who got lucky. Good, glad we got that sorted.

The sport must be in disarray, the world number 1 who holds a slam is crap and the number 2 who holds 2 slams isn't much cop either.

I say we close down tennis.
Only Delpo can save the plight of this sport. Murray needed 5 sets to beat club level Verdasco lest we forget. It shows how there is no big game player anymore.

by sirfredperry Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:52

Josiah Maiestas wrote:sirfred

Gruelling season or not he was ahead in 2 of the 3 sets and served pathetically, he was the better of the 2 players coming to the final, and bottled the occasion. Losing to a guy who can only push and wait for mistakes is also a sign he is not fit as we were told. Murray looked good because Djokovic was so bad. As a world number 1 you cannot lose in finals to mentally inferior players.

Yes, he should certainly have won the second and third sets in the final and I thought he should really have polished off Del Po earlier, despite how gallantly the Argentinian was playing.
Trouble is, we've grown so used to Nole being so mentally and physically strong that we've been taken aback by his slips from his very high standard.
It could be argued that no one else would have got to the stage when they were 4-2 up on Rafa in a final set in a French final or that no one else would have been able to withstand, eventually, del Po's ferocious hitting.
But Djoko has still been the best player over the last two-and-a-half years. Yes, Fed was dominant for longer but Djoko's game takes far more out of him than Rog's.

by HM Murdock Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 12:55

sirfredperry wrote: It could be argued that no one else would have got to the stage when they were 4-2 up on Rafa in a final set in a French final or that no one else would have been able to withstand, eventually, del Po's ferocious hitting.

Excellent point.

by Silver Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 13:03

He's a victim of his own success, just as Federer and Nadal are. By setting such high standards, and not necessarily meeting them as consistently as in 2011, it seems as though he's failing. But lest we forget, his slam record since RG10: F, F, W, SF, W, W, W, F, SF, F, W, SF, F.

His legacy is secure, irrespective of what happens now. Like Murray, he could never win another match and still be regarded as a fantastic player.

by **laverfan** Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 13:04

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/23221398

Djokovic is pursuing retirement. He will become a monk in a Tibetan Monastery, because his legacy is ruined, by losing a final to world #2. Laugh

BTW, how many finals did Federer (#1) lose to Nadal (#2)? chin

Murray will be knighted for helping in the destruction of the Djokovic legacy with http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/23225645.

by sirfredperry Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 14:03

Laverfan. Your point about the number two beating the number one is a good one. Rafa, then number two, regularly beat Fed at number one between 06 and 08 and we also saw Nole, then two, beating Rafa, then one, in early 2011.
What's made the Rosol, Stakhovsky, Darcis shocks so startling is the fact that there have been so few times that the big four have lost to anyone other than each other (or perhaps a top eight player) in a major tournament.

by socal1976 Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 14:58

bogbrush wrote:Ok, cutting through the rough stuff, there's a kernel of truth in that Djokovic seems not to have made that 2011 dominance stick.

You could say his opponents have improved, but that's just not the case. Federer has declined & Nadal's been injured most of the time. Why's he now finding guys like JMDP a serious threat on grass when he duffed Nadal up badly in 2011?
Sure, he's #1 by a mile and a very good player, but at the biggest moments he's finding it harder. I did say in 2012 that the biggest difference was that the knife-edge moments that all fell his way in 2011 now weren't - and that's not much of a difference - and I stand by that. It could be argued similarly at the French, where only a very daft hit on the net (probably) cost him the match. So by that argument he's the same as 2011, just not getting the lucky breaks (his return against Federer would fly out this year).

It wasn't long ago that socal was announcing the emergence of Djokovic 3.0 (God I hate that expression). I always thought that unfounded, and it looks so.

His biggest bonus is the lack of breakthrough talent to replace Federer and - maybe - Nadal.

What are you talking about, Novak 3.0 when did I inaugurate rate that. Back to making up positions for me I see and passing them off as the truth. In fact I have been pretty honest in talking about how he has not played well. The guy has been to the semis of every slam for 4 years and has won quite a few, I never stated Novak would win every slam or be GOAT or that he was better than 2011.

by socal1976 Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 15:04

The only thing that will help Novak's legacy is the emergence of a new rollover generation that can rival Empanada Dave, the gutty Aussie with the dodgy limp, one shot Roddick, and the Russian playboy. If today's tennis players didn't care about condition and would prefer model hopping to working hard on their game Novak's legacy would be secure. Seeing how he is like 60 something and 0 against non-big four players in slams over the last 3 years then it might be easy for him to rack up 3 slams a year against the Gonzos and Baggy's of the world. If Djokovic possessed a rollover generation to beat up on for nearly half a decade like some he could easily glide to grandslam records as well and hardly break a sweat.

Now JM that is how you do a wind up post son.

by kingraf Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 15:34

JM - If you actually believed half the things you post I would be worried about your quality of Life... But they say you have to be smart to play dumb, and you play it well... Plus you entertaining, so more power to you

by FedsFan Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 16:14

Murray digs aside, Novak's performance yesterday was well below what we have come to expect from him now in GS finals. He was just not there except maybe in the 4th game of the 1st set and in the last game when at match point he nailed that winner. I thought he would turn it around in the second set when 4-2 up. Usually when up 4-2 he wins sets. It was not a good day at the office for him.

I think that match with JMDP did take a lot out of him, more than he would have liked to have admitted. It was different to Australia in 2012 because those were night sessions. It was baking on Friday afternoon and Murray was fortunate he played in the cool evening. That said Djokovic should have closed it out in the 4th set when leading, or when leading 5-2 in the t/b. He unnecessarily played about an hour extra tennis.

I think his confidence was dented after the semi. Up until then he was brilliant and even he said he is playing better than when he won in 2011 and it was true. He hasn't looked that irritated with everythng as he did yesterday. Also, the characteristic screams after a tough winning rally or securing a vital break were not there. He almost went into a shell and I think he was playing the crowd too. Lets face it, Verdasco lead Murray by 2-0 sets. JJ took a set off him and for Djokovic to not take a set means things were not working out there.

by Josiah Maiestas Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 16:39

one shot Roddick

Same one shot Roddick who thumped Chokovic in 2009 AO, very poor this servebot is he not? Laugh

If you actually believed half the things you post I would be worried about your quality of Life

I believe Darcis beat Nadal in 1st round Run

by invisiblecoolers Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 16:49

HM Murdoch wrote:Ignoring the dig at Andy, Novak's post-2011 matches against the other top 3 have often not gone well.

Post 2011:

Novak 5 - 4 Andy
Novak 3 - 2 Roger
Novak 2 - 4 Rafa

So it's 10-10 against the other top 4.

In 2011 it was 11-2.

Great stats, that sums up the story, I am becoming a fan of you HMM for how unbaised and truthful inspite of Djoko being your fav player Hug

, unlike some now I believe Novak do have some sensible fans. clap

HE wrote a brilliant article "Fedal biting it back in 2012" and Now its Andy bitting Nole in 2013, Nole enjoyed a great run in 2011 coz he wasn't the favorite and he wasn't the no.1 player at the start of the year hence there was no pressure to succeed but thats not the case now he is the top favourite for most tournaments [eventhough he isint a very good grass player he was still marked as the heavy fav to lift it even by punters] this and the pressure of being the no.1 all taking toll on him.

He played better in the 2nd part of 2012 once the pressure of NO.1 was taken of his back, its just time and again shows how difficult it is to be No.1. thumbsup

by invisiblecoolers Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 16:56

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Was Mac's legacy ruined after he failed to win a slam after 1984,

The better question would be "Was Mac's legacy ruined after he failed to win above 45 championships?' Whistle

I certainly see JM's article so refreshing after how much all Nole 2.0 , 3.0 hypes came up thumbsup

JM's article is tounge in cheek to nail some of those. Bubbly

by invisiblecoolers Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 16:58

Silver wrote:Like Murray, he could never win another match and still be regarded as a fantastic player.

Just a small change , Murray would do nothing from here on but would be seen as a Multi - Grandslam cham and Wimbledon Champ , and finally the man who created history by breaking British duck lasting more than half a century. Hug

by Josiah Maiestas Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 17:01

socal1976 wrote:Now JM that is how you do a wind up post son.

Did you wind someone up then? zen

by invisiblecoolers Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 17:10

socal1976 wrote:If Djokovic possessed a rollover generation to beat up on for nearly half a decade like some he could easily glide to grandslam records as well and hardly break a sweat.

Now JM that is how you do a wind up post son.

Another joke of a comment, its getting easy now , last time I checked in this is what I found

H2H

Novak - Safin -> 0 -2 [lost both in grandslams]
Novak - Roddick -> 4 -5
Novak - Gonzalez -> 01 -02
Novak - Federer -> 13 - 16
Novak - Nadal -> 15 - 20

Djokovic certainly didn't rollover those rollover generation Laugh

, but yes everybody have the rights to dream , my Next door Kid things he is the best Tennis will ever see if only he had the chance to hold the racquet.

by invisiblecoolers Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 17:15

FedsFan wrote:Murray digs aside, Novak's performance yesterday was well below what we have come to expect from him now in GS finals.

Not the case with me, I felt Novak over achieved in grass already by winning Wimbledon given his lack of grass play, thankfully we don't see Novak as a multiple Wimbledon champion, really that would have symbolized the death of grass court play.

Murray was a far superior grass court player and rightly fully put Djoko to sword, I don't think Djoko could have done anything different, the match could have been a complete white wash if not for Murray's jitters of playing for the Wimbledon.

However I should congratulate Djoko for winning Del Po in the semis with this grass play, it shows he is a very very good player but not a monster like how some of his selective box claim so.

by banbrotam Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 17:23

FedsFan wrote:Lets face it, Verdasco lead Murray by 2-0 sets. JJ took a set off him and for Djokovic to not take a set means things were not working out there.

This sentence is almost as daft as JM's article

So we can assume that if Player A just squeaks past Players B and C - then if Player D is on form he should at least be taking sets off Player A?

That might be the case in 'Top Spin 4' but it's certainly not the case in the real world

Borg nearly went out of at least one Wimbledon in the first round. Does that mean all his next six opponents were poor because they never pushed him as close picard

The impression is given that Murray won this because Novak didn't turn up. That's Bunkum, Djoko wasn't allowed to play as he quickly saw that for the first time this Championship Murray had his Olympic gameface on.

Why do you think Djoko constantly played the drop shot? Because on a fast court in the baking sun, he knew he was second best and had to try something unusual

We've heard it all now, whether it was Fed knacked for his Olympic final or Nole couldn't be bothered playing - I mean we really always have to find something to explain why that insufferable pusher has now got two slams and an Olympic gold Rolling Eyes

These boards are now a scream. I remember 5 years ago, when we were told that he's never win a Masters and half of those suggesting that are still here - busily licking their wounds looking for new bizarre excuses

All we need now is for Murray to win the French having played no-one in the Top 10 - could you imagine the meltdown on these boards Laugh

Mind you it didn't seem to do Fed any harm 10 years ago Whistle

by bogbrush Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 17:28

socal1976 wrote:
bogbrush wrote:Ok, cutting through the rough stuff, there's a kernel of truth in that Djokovic seems not to have made that 2011 dominance stick.

You could say his opponents have improved, but that's just not the case. Federer has declined & Nadal's been injured most of the time. Why's he now finding guys like JMDP a serious threat on grass when he duffed Nadal up badly in 2011?
Sure, he's #1 by a mile and a very good player, but at the biggest moments he's finding it harder. I did say in 2012 that the biggest difference was that the knife-edge moments that all fell his way in 2011 now weren't - and that's not much of a difference - and I stand by that. It could be argued similarly at the French, where only a very daft hit on the net (probably) cost him the match. So by that argument he's the same as 2011, just not getting the lucky breaks (his return against Federer would fly out this year).

It wasn't long ago that socal was announcing the emergence of Djokovic 3.0 (God I hate that expression). I always thought that unfounded, and it looks so.

His biggest bonus is the lack of breakthrough talent to replace Federer and - maybe - Nadal.

What are you talking about, Novak 3.0 when did I inaugurate rate that. Back to making up positions for me I see and passing them off as the truth. In fact I have been pretty honest in talking about how he has not played well. The guy has been to the semis of every slam for 4 years and has won quite a few, I never stated Novak would win every slam or be GOAT or that he was better than 2011.

What was it then? 2.5? 1.75? Pi?

by invisiblecoolers Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 17:28

banbrotam wrote:
All we need now is for Murray to win the French having played no-one in the Top 10 - could you imagine the meltdown on these boards

I wish that happens Laugh

and happen as early as 2014 believe me some of them would be in hospital unable to bear the news on a person who neither they have seen in reality or the vice versa. Laugh

by banbrotam Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 20:07

invisiblecoolers wrote:
banbrotam wrote:
All we need now is for Murray to win the French having played no-one in the Top 10 - could you imagine the meltdown on these boards

I wish that happens and happen as early as 2014 believe me some of them would be in hospital unable to bear the news on a person who neither they have seen in reality or the vice versa.

I'm a non violent person but would be tempted to kill to see it. To be honest I couldn't give a flying fig about him winning the French - don't see the point of making all that effort when it's not your surface, better to concentrate on your best surfaces

But it would just be a scream if he ever did it

Imagine the shrieks of 'weak era' if he did the Golden Slam Laugh

by invisiblecoolers Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 20:17

banbrotam wrote:
invisiblecoolers wrote:
banbrotam wrote:
All we need now is for Murray to win the French having played no-one in the Top 10 - could you imagine the meltdown on these boards

I wish that happens and happen as early as 2014 believe me some of them would be in hospital unable to bear the news on a person who neither they have seen in reality or the vice versa.

I'm a non violent person but would be tempted to kill to see it. To be honest I couldn't give a flying fig about him winning the French - don't see the point of making all that effort when it's not your surface, better to concentrate on your best surfaces

But it would just be a scream if he ever did it

Imagine the shrieks of 'weak era' if he did the Golden Slam

by Josiah Maiestas Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 21:14

banbrotam wrote:
invisiblecoolers wrote:
banbrotam wrote:
All we need now is for Murray to win the French having played no-one in the Top 10 - could you imagine the meltdown on these boards

I wish that happens and happen as early as 2014 believe me some of them would be in hospital unable to bear the news on a person who neither they have seen in reality or the vice versa.

I'm a non violent person but would be tempted to kill to see it. To be honest I couldn't give a flying fig about him winning the French - don't see the point of making all that effort when it's not your surface, better to concentrate on your best surfaces

But it would just be a scream if he ever did it

Imagine the shrieks of 'weak era' if he did the Golden Slam

Murray has not beaten Nadal or Federer in a slam final and looks like never will Very Happy

Two pushers making 3 out of 4 slam finals tells you its weak doesn't it?

Had Andy played someone good in USO/Wimb finals he would have a 0-7 record

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 22:18

Josiah Maiestas wrote:
banbrotam wrote:
invisiblecoolers wrote:
banbrotam wrote:
All we need now is for Murray to win the French having played no-one in the Top 10 - could you imagine the meltdown on these boards

I wish that happens and happen as early as 2014 believe me some of them would be in hospital unable to bear the news on a person who neither they have seen in reality or the vice versa.

I'm a non violent person but would be tempted to kill to see it. To be honest I couldn't give a flying fig about him winning the French - don't see the point of making all that effort when it's not your surface, better to concentrate on your best surfaces

But it would just be a scream if he ever did it

Imagine the shrieks of 'weak era' if he did the Golden Slam

Murray has not beaten Nadal or Federer in a slam final and looks like never will Two pushers making 3 out of 4 slam finals tells you its weak doesn't it?

Had Andy played someone good in USO/Wimb finals he would have a 0-7 record

Towel Island must be a nice place to live. It sounds quite easy to avoid reality there.

by summerblues Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 22:30

sirfredperry wrote:it's the first time he's reached the final in each of the first three Slams of a calendar year.

Poor, poor David Ferrer Crying or Very sad

by bogbrush Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 22:34

sirfredperry wrote:
Josiah Maiestas wrote:sirfred

Gruelling season or not he was ahead in 2 of the 3 sets and served pathetically, he was the better of the 2 players coming to the final, and bottled the occasion. Losing to a guy who can only push and wait for mistakes is also a sign he is not fit as we were told. Murray looked good because Djokovic was so bad. As a world number 1 you cannot lose in finals to mentally inferior players.

Yes, he should certainly have won the second and third sets in the final and I thought he should really have polished off Del Po earlier, despite how gallantly the Argentinian was playing.
Trouble is, we've grown so used to Nole being so mentally and physically strong that we've been taken aback by his slips from his very high standard.
It could be argued that no one else would have got to the stage when they were 4-2 up on Rafa in a final set in a French final or that no one else would have been able to withstand, eventually, del Po's ferocious hitting.
But Djoko has still been the best player over the last two-and-a-half years. Yes, Fed was dominant for longer but Djoko's game takes far more out of him than Rog's.

I wouldn't say he's dominated even these two & a half years.

Criteria #1 for dominance is you must be #1 throughout. He wasn't.there were about 65 weeks when his cumulative record was inferior to another's.

by bogbrush Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 22:36

sirfredperry wrote:JM. Nole will come again. It's been a gruelling season for him and I think I'm right in saying that it's the first time he's reached the final in each of the first three Slams of a calendar year.
All this was bound to take its toll - even for a guy as fit and mentally strong as Djoko. He needs a rest. I certainly would not count him out at the USO.

Well, except he didn't make the final of the French.

by summerblues Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 22:37

We should remember that Nole and Andy have now reached the age beyond which most top players of the past started their decline. In spite of the relative aging of the tour, I am unconvinced that we can expect anything dramatically different from them. I think they may have another couple of years at the very top or thereabouts, but even so I would not be surprised if those are marked by the first signs of descent from the peaks they have reached.

In particular, I certainly do not expect Nole to have another season anywhere near as fabulous as 2011. That was a once-in-a-lifetime season anyway.

by invisiblecoolers Mon 8 Jul 2013 - 22:53

summerblues wrote:
In particular, I certainly do not expect Nole to have another season anywhere near as fabulous as 2011. That was a once-in-a-lifetime season anyway.

I agree, too much luck involved in close shaved matches as well, I would be surprised if Nole could do any where close to 80% of that year let alone repeat it. thumbsup

by Jahu Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 9:11

Great OP, and yes it has been ruined.

by FedsFan Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 9:26

invisiblecoolers wrote:
FedsFan wrote:Murray digs aside, Novak's performance yesterday was well below what we have come to expect from him now in GS finals.

Not the case with me, I felt Novak over achieved in grass already by winning Wimbledon given his lack of grass play, thankfully we don't see Novak as a multiple Wimbledon champion, really that would have symbolized the death of grass court play.

Murray was a far superior grass court player and rightly fully put Djoko to sword, I don't think Djoko could have done anything different, the match could have been a complete white wash if not for Murray's jitters of playing for the Wimbledon.

However I should congratulate Djoko for winning Del Po in the semis with this grass play, it shows he is a very very good player but not a monster like how some of his selective box claim so.

I agree with you. Djokovic of the top 4 (or 5 I should say) is the weakest on grass and Murray far superior. Looking at the match objectively it was a great performance from Murray but Djokovic could have done a little more. Quite a few of the 'pundits' expected Djokovic to win in 4 possibly 5 going on his form over the past 12 days. Murray was the better player on the day and no one can say otherwise.

by banbrotam Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 12:54

summerblues wrote:We should remember that Nole and Andy have now reached the age beyond which most top players of the past started their decline. In spite of the relative aging of the tour, I am unconvinced that we can expect anything dramatically different from them. I think they may have another couple of years at the very top or thereabouts, but even so I would not be surprised if those are marked by the first signs of descent from the peaks they have reached.

In particular, I certainly do not expect Nole to have another season anywhere near as fabulous as 2011. That was a once-in-a-lifetime season anyway.

I'd be surprised if he either of them, especially Murray starts dipping before 2017. I think it's taken all this time for Andy to finally realise his own game and it's strengths at the key moments. Expect that experience to make him more affective and hence use less energy

Of course, back injury could be a factor

In all this you have to consider, who would challenge them. JJ? Not with that service return he won't.

Don't be surprised to see them winning half of the majors during the next 5 years

by sirfredperry Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 14:24

The age thing is now completely different. Look at Ferrer at 31 seemingly as fit as ever. Look at Fed's 2012, aged 30/31. Who was the last teenager to win a title? I think it was in Cilic....in 2008! Not sure how far down the rankings you have to go to find anyone under 20. Probably quite a long way
What I'm trying to say is that Djoko and Andy M may be 26 but should have some really good years ahead. They also have the time/ability to adapt their game to advancing years by playing more attackingly and shortening the rallies.

by CaledonianCraig Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 14:30

sirfredperry wrote:The age thing is now completely different. Look at Ferrer at 31 seemingly as fit as ever. Look at Fed's 2012, aged 30/31. Who was the last teenager to win a title? I think it was in Cilic....in 2008! Not sure how far down the rankings you have to go to find anyone under 20. Probably quite a long way
What I'm trying to say is that Djoko and Andy M may be 26 but should have some really good years ahead. They also have the time/ability to adapt their game to advancing years by playing more attackingly and shortening the rallies.

Totally agree.

Different players peak and fall away at different ages. Ferrer is doing as well as ever and is 31, Federer managed to win a slam in his 30's but other top players differ. Murray may be moving into his peak now whereas perhaps others of similar age may have passed their peak. We shall see.

by bogbrush Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 14:40

The only thing I'd say is that decline often surprises. In the case of Djokovic, the elasticity is central to his game. He loses that, he's gone. Is that going to stay there for the next 3/4 years? I have my doubts.

by HM Murdock Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 15:06

bogbrush wrote:The only thing I'd say is that decline often surprises. In the case of Djokovic, the elasticity is central to his game. He loses that, he's gone. Is that going to stay there for the next 3/4 years? I have my doubts.

This is key. Decline is so hard to predict.

When Fed won AO10, at which point he held three slams and had made the final in the other, who would have thought it would be 2 and a half years until his next slam?

McEnroe notched up maybe the greatest year ever in 84 but that was the end of the road. No more slams.

And there are other factors too.

Rafa looked set to dominate at the end of 2010. Then a rival suddenly surged forward and stopped Rafa capitalising.

Predicting the future on the basis of the present is a frequently flawed process!

by socal1976 Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 17:35

banbrotam wrote:
summerblues wrote:We should remember that Nole and Andy have now reached the age beyond which most top players of the past started their decline. In spite of the relative aging of the tour, I am unconvinced that we can expect anything dramatically different from them. I think they may have another couple of years at the very top or thereabouts, but even so I would not be surprised if those are marked by the first signs of descent from the peaks they have reached.

In particular, I certainly do not expect Nole to have another season anywhere near as fabulous as 2011. That was a once-in-a-lifetime season anyway.

I'd be surprised if he either of them, especially Murray starts dipping before 2017. I think it's taken all this time for Andy to finally realise his own game and it's strengths at the key moments. Expect that experience to make him more affective and hence use less energy

Of course, back injury could be a factor

In all this you have to consider, who would challenge them. JJ? Not with that service return he won't.

Don't be surprised to see them winning half of the majors during the next 5 years

I think both Andy and Novak will win more slams and multiple slams. Your prediction is actually a pretty well thought response considering how players are having their best results in their late 20s now and these two are still in the middle twenties.

by socal1976 Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 17:39

bogbrush wrote:The only thing I'd say is that decline often surprises. In the case of Djokovic, the elasticity is central to his game. He loses that, he's gone. Is that going to stay there for the next 3/4 years? I have my doubts.

The amount of yoga and stetching Novak does will only get stronger like a weight lifter lifting more and more weight. At some age he won't be as limber but I can't see him losing it in the short term or declining. 2 hrs of stretching makes you flexible just like 2hrs of weightlifting will make you stronger. I have 70 year old men in a yoga class do moves that would snap a healthy and fit 19 year old in half, flexibility is not something you lose when you work on it as much as Djokovic. Injuries? sure they can happen for anyone but Djokovic has been relatively pretty injury free except for his respiratory issues early in his career.

by slashermcguirk Tue 9 Jul 2013 - 21:29

Interesting people saying Novak not a good grass player and Murray far better. Please explain so why he has won wimbledon and in that final beat nadal who Murray has managed one set against at Wimbledon and lost 9!!!! Nadal owns Murray on grass and yet Novak has beaten nadal.

They are all good grass players, it is novaks weakest surface but he is far better on grass than Murray is on his weakest surface clay. At least in fairness to Novak he competes on all surfaces and even took nadal to 5 in the French, not too mention has managed 3 finals on clay against him.

by Sponsored content