Djokovic - Is the Grand Slam on this year?

First topic message reminder :

Djoko's form of late suggests we'll have to seriously think about the Grand Slam being on this year. But even for a guy in scintillating form it's still a big ask. One off day, one opponent on fire, an injury, (dare we mention the 2011 "Fognini effect") - and the chance has gone.
What's always stopped Fed and Djoko having a real go at the calendar slam is the French and a certain Rafa Nadal. Now I still think Rafa will have a big say in what happens at RG but obviously he's far less of a favourite than in previous years.
So can Nole do it? Thoughts please.

The odds on a CYGS always seem remarkably low. Its happened 3 times in 90 years and not at all in the last 45 years. For Novak to only be 5/1 after 1/4 of the events therefore seems way too low.

I will start to take the prospect seriously if he wins the French. That would be the first time anyone has even won Oz/French for more than 20 years (Courier).

Did somebody say the odds being given for Djokovic career slam are 5/1? If so, that is ridiculously short odds. Given that 1 male player has ever achieved this and none in probably 50 years including among greats of the game, the odds ought to be a lot longer than that.

I think the biggest obstacle will be the French Open, that is simply because of the huge expectation and pressure for novak to complete the careers slam. He is in great form and has to be the favourite (with nadal, who can simply never be written off at the French regardless of his previous form leading in). If Djokovic wins the French, he will get massive confidence from it.

That being said Murray and Federer would be big threats at Wimbledon, Murray in particular who is really at home on grass and has the home support. Federer is a big threat too but over 5 sets it makes the challenge greater for him.

I am surprised that Novak has only won the US open once. If I was to forecast now, I would say he is most likely to win the US open and perhaps the French but he will fall short at Wimbledon.

To be honest I would take that any day and I am sure Novak would too The calendar year slam is as close to impossible to achieve as it gets in sport

sorry my opening line meant to say odds on calendar year slam being 5/1 are ridiculous

If djokovic gets cygs he goes above Federer for me.

So lets go No1e

So if he gets to 11 slams this year, he is greater than feds at 17?

LuvSports! wrote:So if he gets to 11 slams this year, he is greater than feds at 17?

Don't bite, mate. It's not worth it

Too late pal! http://pix.iemoji.com/sbemojix2/0343.png. 
He's got my cheek!

Not the derriere one mind

legendkillarV2 wrote:I think it is quite laughable for the suggestion that the competition levels are lesser in 2015 than in previous years.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree on this one then.
I don't just think it's not laughable to suggest that it's would be easier for Djokovic to get the CYGS now than in previous years, I think the case is substantial and overwhelming.
For a start, in previous years it would be harder to win the French Open (needed for CYGS), as you had Nadal player better than he is now. Beating prime Nadal at FO was no easy task, and his drop has made it easier to win the FO, surely you acknowledge that ??
If we compared to 2008-2014, I think both Nadal and Federer are worse and less of a threat. Federer is a threat in BO3, but at his age I don't see him physically coping in a 5 setter. Murray has shown some good signs, and he could be Djokovic's threat. Still a bit early to tell though, at times this year he's played great but also folded in some big matches. The young players have not really kicked on.

So certainly I think Djokovic has a better chance to win CYGS than previous years, in terms of the challenge for him against the competition.

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I think it is quite laughable for the suggestion that the competition levels are lesser in 2015 than in previous years.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree on this one then.
I don't just think it's not laughable to suggest that it's would be easier for Djokovic to get the CYGS now than in previous years, I think the case is substantial and overwhelming.
For a start, in previous years it would be harder to win the French Open (needed for CYGS), as you had Nadal player better than he is now. Beating prime Nadal at FO was no easy task, and his drop has made it easier to win the FO, surely you acknowledge that ??
If we compared to 2008-2014, I think both Nadal and Federer are worse and less of a threat. Federer is a threat in BO3, but at his age I don't see him physically coping in a 5 setter. Murray has shown some good signs, and he could be Djokovic's threat. Still a bit early to tell though, at times this year he's played great but also folded in some big matches. The young players have not really kicked on.

So certainly I think Djokovic has a better chance to win CYGS than previous years, in terms of the challenge for him against the competition.

Have you considered that actually Novak at this time is just that good? The near perfect player for the conditions.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I think it is quite laughable for the suggestion that the competition levels are lesser in 2015 than in previous years.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree on this one then.
I don't just think it's not laughable to suggest that it's would be easier for Djokovic to get the CYGS now than in previous years, I think the case is substantial and overwhelming.
For a start, in previous years it would be harder to win the French Open (needed for CYGS), as you had Nadal player better than he is now. Beating prime Nadal at FO was no easy task, and his drop has made it easier to win the FO, surely you acknowledge that ??
If we compared to 2008-2014, I think both Nadal and Federer are worse and less of a threat. Federer is a threat in BO3, but at his age I don't see him physically coping in a 5 setter. Murray has shown some good signs, and he could be Djokovic's threat. Still a bit early to tell though, at times this year he's played great but also folded in some big matches. The young players have not really kicked on.

So certainly I think Djokovic has a better chance to win CYGS than previous years, in terms of the challenge for him against the competition.

Have you considered that actually Novak at this time is just that good? The near perfect player for the conditions.

Of course I rate Djokovic, he's a phenomenal player.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I think it is quite laughable for the suggestion that the competition levels are lesser in 2015 than in previous years.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree on this one then.
I don't just think it's not laughable to suggest that it's would be easier for Djokovic to get the CYGS now than in previous years, I think the case is substantial and overwhelming.
For a start, in previous years it would be harder to win the French Open (needed for CYGS), as you had Nadal player better than he is now. Beating prime Nadal at FO was no easy task, and his drop has made it easier to win the FO, surely you acknowledge that ??
If we compared to 2008-2014, I think both Nadal and Federer are worse and less of a threat. Federer is a threat in BO3, but at his age I don't see him physically coping in a 5 setter. Murray has shown some good signs, and he could be Djokovic's threat. Still a bit early to tell though, at times this year he's played great but also folded in some big matches. The young players have not really kicked on.

So certainly I think Djokovic has a better chance to win CYGS than previous years, in terms of the challenge for him against the competition.

Have you considered that actually Novak at this time is just that good? The near perfect player for the conditions.

Plus take into account that it could be argued that the Novak losing to all dominant Rafa was not the Novak of today.

This current weak era talk is such utter nonsense. Djokovic, federer, nadal, Murray, nishikori, wawrinka, berdych, ferrer, dimitrov, raonic and co. Yes they alone are truly awful players!!

Are people seriously kidding themselves here?? It is quite clear that this era is a strong one and the likes of nadal and federer are still more than formidable players that would wipe the floor with most of the players from the mid 90s to 2004.

Even the likes of Agassi, Sampras and others have said this is arguably the most competitive era ever.

This talk of weak eras is getting really old now. I remember being at Wimbledon in the late 90s and the players then were not a patch on this lot. Tennis is also far better to watch now. Not just ace ace and more aces!

The players of any era would wipe the floor with the players who were around 15 years previously - that's how the game progresses - it always has. In 15 years time the class of 2030 will be a lot better than the class of 2015.

JHM don't be alarmed... but you're GREEN! 
Fonzy hulking out.

LuvSports! wrote:So if he gets to 11 slams this year, he is greater than feds at 17?

Laver has 12 and most people make him the goat because he has the cygs. Same for Djokovic. Its the biggest achievement in the sport. Much better than pointless consecutive semi finals and quarter finals blah blah that big nosers like to bleat on about. So yeah in my book it would put him second only to Laver for achievements. That doesn't mean he's the best player ever. Rafa proved in 2013 that at his best hes still better than Djokovic.

slashermcguirk wrote:This current weak era talk is such utter nonsense. Djokovic, federer, nadal, Murray, nishikori, wawrinka, berdych, ferrer, dimitrov, raonic and co. Yes they alone are truly awful players!!

Well you can argue against what I'm saying, or if you wish you can take my argument to a hyperbolic extreme that I didn't ever imply and then knock down that strawman.
Another thing I would add is that what I'm saying is not to knock Djokovic. I remember HM's article on where Djokovic stands in the pantheon of greats, and I remember specifically rated him higher than the Djokovic fans on the thread (I think it was you, HM, and Socal). So if I rate Djokovic higher than many Djokovic fans, it's clear I'm not anti-Djokovic. It's my analysis and my opinion, if you want feel free to disagree.

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I think it is quite laughable for the suggestion that the competition levels are lesser in 2015 than in previous years.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree on this one then.
I don't just think it's not laughable to suggest that it's would be easier for Djokovic to get the CYGS now than in previous years, I think the case is substantial and overwhelming.
For a start, in previous years it would be harder to win the French Open (needed for CYGS), as you had Nadal player better than he is now. Beating prime Nadal at FO was no easy task, and his drop has made it easier to win the FO, surely you acknowledge that ??
If we compared to 2008-2014, I think both Nadal and Federer are worse and less of a threat. Federer is a threat in BO3, but at his age I don't see him physically coping in a 5 setter. Murray has shown some good signs, and he could be Djokovic's threat. Still a bit early to tell though, at times this year he's played great but also folded in some big matches. The young players have not really kicked on.

So certainly I think Djokovic has a better chance to win CYGS than previous years, in terms of the challenge for him against the competition.

Have you considered that actually Novak at this time is just that good? The near perfect player for the conditions.

Of course I rate Djokovic, he's a phenomenal player.

I fear this would lead to another Federer was past his peak when he started to lose to Nadal and Nadal was past his peak when Djokovic started beating him etc. It's never ending. It's all too simplistic to earmark titles for players before a racquet is swung. Yes us armchair fans do that and take it for granted as such, but I am sure the field goes into each match and tournament wanting to win.

When Federer was all conquering, no-one complained about the field. When Nadal did the same, no-one complained. Djokovic does it and now it's a weak era. This is not aimed at you IMBL. Just in this case the top player is that ahead of the rest.

slashermcguirk wrote:This current weak era talk is such utter nonsense. Djokovic, federer, nadal, Murray, nishikori, wawrinka, berdych, ferrer, dimitrov, raonic and co. Yes they alone are truly awful players!!

Are people seriously kidding themselves here?? It is quite clear that this era is a strong one and the likes of nadal and federer are still more than formidable players that would wipe the floor with most of the players from the mid 90s to 2004.

Even the likes of Agassi, Sampras and others have said this is arguably the most competitive era ever.

This talk of weak eras is getting really old now. I remember being at Wimbledon in the late 90s and the players then were not a patch on this lot. Tennis is also far better to watch now. Not just ace ace and more aces!

Here here for the slasher, excellent post. Very hard to add anything to it, jives completely with my thoughts.

IMBL, not taking a bash at you. I just find in general the whole weak era thing a bit much. I genuinely believe that nadal, federer and djokovic are 3 of the greatest players that have ever played the game. Their consistency and longevity at the top of the game is unrivalled. You just have to look at the sheer volume of classics they have played against each other. Murray has certainly played his part too.

When these guys are gone, mark my words it will be tough to ever find such great rivalries simultaneously again. I remember watching years of Becker vs edberg and Sampras vs Agassi, some epic matches.

However for me having these three bringing the best out of each other year after year has been unrivalled. I still all these years on watch in disbelief as this trivalry delivers time and again. They are phenomenal athletes that constantly bring each other to the limit, they also each bring something so unique to the court.

Gonna be impossible to replace them, legends of the game all three of them

Thanks social, glad somebody agrees :-)

legendkillarV2 wrote:

I fear this would lead to another Federer was past his peak when he started to lose to Nadal and Nadal was past his peak when Djokovic started beating him etc. It's never ending.

I don't think it's as simple as that.

lk wrote:Yes us armchair fans do that and take it for granted as such, but I am sure the field goes into each match and tournament wanting to win.

Agree with you there, the effort players put in is still 100%; but I'm not arguing anything differently

lk wrote:
When Federer was all conquering, no-one complained about the field. When Nadal did the same, no-one complained. Djokovic does it and now it's a weak era. This is not aimed at you IMBL. Just in this case the top player is that ahead of the rest.

No one said anything about 'weak era'- and I agree that Djokovic is considerably above the rest at the moment.

I do feel though that LK, that you seem to be arguing against what I could potentially be implying, rather than what I'm saying.
Perhaps we just share different opinions on this, in which case we'll have to agree to disagree. But I genuinely do think that with Nadal's form lower and with Federer's age meaning he can't really cope in 5 set matches; Djokovic has a better chance than previous years of winning the CYGS.
Of course it's due to Djokovic's very good form too, but it shouldn't be 'off the table' to discuss his opposition's form as well.

I think Djokovic has a very good chance to win the calendar slam, but I feel the test will be at Wimbledon, and not RG. I think his chances at RG are better than 50/50 - Federer used to give him trouble on this surface, not so much anymore. The way Nadal is playing he'd be lucky to get out of the first week.

At Wimbledon, there are a lot of players that could cause the Djoker problems (Murray, Federer, Nishikori, Nadal, Dimitrov, Berdych) and that's because on grass his biggest struggle would be footwork - last year there was virtually no rain, and that helps him a lot. The dryer the surface, the surer the footing, and all that sliding around is actually facilitated by dry grass. If they have to close the roof, and the surface gets slick, it will be hard for him to defend like he normally does, which will cause him problems against big hitters and/or resourceful players like Federer and Murray. I think the real test is Wimbledon, and not RG.

slashermcguirk wrote:IMBL, not taking a bash at you. I just find in general the whole weak era thing a bit much. I genuinely believe that nadal, federer and djokovic are 3 of the greatest players that have ever played the game. Their consistency and longevity at the top of the game is unrivalled. You just have to look at the sheer volume of classics they have played against each other. Murray has certainly played his part too.

When these guys are gone, mark my words it will be tough to ever find such great rivalries simultaneously again. I remember watching years of Becker vs edberg and Sampras vs Agassi, some epic matches.

However for me having these three bringing the best out of each other year after year has been unrivalled. I still all these years on watch in disbelief as this trivalry delivers time and again. They are phenomenal athletes that constantly bring each other to the limit, they also each bring something so unique to the court.

Gonna be impossible to replace them, legends of the game all three of them

I agree with that totally Slasher. And as I said earlier, from the evidence of past threads I probably rate Djokovic more than most Djokovic fans on this forum in terms of greatness.
But I still hold my opinion about the competition and opposition this year, and you've not really contradicted that in any of your posts after I argued it.

I would disagree that opposition is weaker. I think Murray is playing great in 2015, I also think federers form has been good. Ferrer and berdych have performed better than last year. Nadal is the only one for me that has seen a noticeable decline this year but even at that I bet you he will be back close to his best in Paris, he has done it time and again and despite recent form wait till you see him work through the draw at the French open. With every match his confidence will grow and he loves that Philippe chatrier court! Watch this space, I just hope Novak is the man to stop him

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

I fear this would lead to another Federer was past his peak when he started to lose to Nadal and Nadal was past his peak when Djokovic started beating him etc. It's never ending.

I don't think it's as simple as that.

lk wrote:Yes us armchair fans do that and take it for granted as such, but I am sure the field goes into each match and tournament wanting to win.

Agree with you there, the effort players put in is still 100%; but I'm not arguing anything differently

lk wrote:
When Federer was all conquering, no-one complained about the field. When Nadal did the same, no-one complained. Djokovic does it and now it's a weak era. This is not aimed at you IMBL. Just in this case the top player is that ahead of the rest.

No one said anything about 'weak era'- and I agree that Djokovic is considerably above the rest at the moment.

I do feel though that LK, that you seem to be arguing against what I could potentially be implying, rather than what I'm saying.
Perhaps we just share different opinions on this, in which case we'll have to agree to disagree. But I genuinely do think that with Nadal's form lower and with Federer's age meaning he can't really cope in 5 set matches; Djokovic has a better chance than previous years of winning the CYGS.
Of course it's due to Djokovic's very good form too, but it shouldn't be 'off the table' to discuss his opposition's form as well.

What your saying is that Djokovics only competition is Federer and Nadal and that because they are not at the height of their powers anymore has increased Djokovics chances of the CYGS. I don't share that notion given there are other players who can beat him.

MMT1 wrote:I think Djokovic has a very good chance to win the calendar slam, but I feel the test will be at Wimbledon, and not RG. I think his chances at RG are better than 50/50 - Federer used to give him trouble on this surface, not so much anymore. The way Nadal is playing he'd be lucky to get out of the first week.

At Wimbledon, there are a lot of players that could cause the Djoker problems (Murray, Federer, Nishikori, Nadal, Dimitrov, Berdych) and that's because on grass his biggest struggle would be footwork - last year there was virtually no rain, and that helps him a lot.  The dryer the surface, the surer the footing, and all that sliding around is actually facilitated by dry grass.  If they have to close the roof, and the surface gets slick, it will be hard for him to defend like he normally does, which will cause him problems against big hitters and/or resourceful players like Federer and Murray. I think the real test is Wimbledon, and not RG.

I actually agree that Wimby will be a tougher call for Novak because Murray and Fed love the surface and it is Djokovic's third favorite surface despite the fact that he has won wimbeldon twice. However, this year Novak is averaging an ace more per set than he was in 2011 (4.2 to 5.1) and he is actually defending his second serve better than in 2011. And his slice backhand and volleys are improved as well in my opinion. If he can put that all together on grass with as well as he defends and returns then he could lift the trophy again and maybe easier than the previous two titles.

I will never say there is an easier slam to win than the FO with Rafa around.
He hasn't won the thing yet!

We could go round in circles though. As in a year or two ago when Nadal was playing better then on the other side of the coin Nishikori, Cilic and the youngsters weren't playing as well as they are now so you see it counter-balances everything.

CaledonianCraig wrote:We could go round in circles though. As in a year or two ago when Nadal was playing better then on the other side of the coin Nishikori, Cilic and the youngsters weren't playing as well as they are now so you see it counter-balances everything.

Well that's your opinion.
I personally don't think Cilic or any of the youngsters have shown themselves to be a threat on the Grand Slam stage at all, in fact they've been quite disappointing. Same applies to Nishikori, I actually feel Nishi was in better form before his injury in the clay court season last year.
So overall I don't feel that counter-balances or compensates for Nadal's massive drop in form.

Well Nishikori did reach the US Open final to be beaten by Cilic which suggests they are stronger forces than a couple of years ago - I don't see how that can be disputed at all. Two years ago we were hearing how there were a dearth of youngsters around but now we have the emergence of the likes of Kyrgios and Coric which strengthens the here and now above say two years ago. That is not to say that the here and now is any stronger (or weaker) than say two years ago - frankly it is so marginal that it isn't even worth considering it.

Laver played on Grass and Clay, Djokovic is playing on Clay, Grass and Hard. Connors' refusal to give up on WTT can also be debated. I agree with MMT1, SoCal and others that W is where the CYGS is more likely to be won or lost.

Every slam is a test that the winner passes successfully. If Djokovic gets the CYGS, it would be a wonderful achievement, for the sport and for Djokovic, both, no matter what his competition can or cannot do.

Many players have stopped each other from potential CYGSes, non-CYGSes, etc. this is what the sport is all about.

Era comparison is fraught with so many parameters that a model is impossible, that there has never been, and never will be a consensus.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well Nishikori did reach the US Open final to be beaten by Cilic which suggests they are stronger forces than a couple of years ago - I don't see how that can be disputed at all. Two years ago we were hearing how there were a dearth of youngsters around but now we have the emergence of the likes of Kyrgios and Coric which strengthens the here and now above say two years ago. That is not to say that the here and now is any stronger (or weaker) than say two years ago - frankly it is so marginal that it isn't even worth considering it.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, because from what I've observed it's not marginal at all- none of the youngsters have really shown they can be a threat in majors and impressed me really- and certainly any rise from them would not compensate Nadal's drop in form when he has been the hardest opponent for Djokovic in Slams in the past few years (4-0 Nadal in Slams after the AO2012 epic).

Yes we shall agree to disagree.

One thing to note, really great players in form always make the rest of the field look weak, theres only so much success to dole around

temporary21 wrote:One thing to note, really great players in form always make the rest of the field look weak, theres only so much success to dole around

This argument can work both ways if you think about it.

I can actually see where IMBL is coming from in that I think the decline of Nadal over the last 11 months has been a big deal in tennis. He was the impenetrable wall on clay and the guy who was always one of the favorites for the slams on other surfaces. That being said there is still a lot of quality in the field. I think if we were seeing Fed, Murray, and Nadal simultaneously playing poorly then we would certainly be in what I would call a weak era. I think the competition levels in 2010,11, 12, and 13 where a little more intense and close among the big 4. I think with Nadal not being there it does take the competition level down a significant amount but the level was so damn high during that period that we are still dealing with a good level of top level competition.

I think it is quite axiomatic what IMBL is saying.

For example would people say that feds was at his best in '13 (bar aus when he lost to Murray) - with the back injury, poor form and low confidence? Similar thing with Murray last year.

Rafa has won the FO 9 times. For Djoko to not have to face a bristling with energy Rafa at full tilt that makes a big difference imo. 
For me it doesn't demean or take away what a monumental achievement it would be to pull it off for Novak but I do think it's something to take note of for sure but deffo no *.

Is Novak really playing so well now that hes comparable or even better than his 2011? Certainly not IMO! To think that both Fed and Rafa are as good now as when they're in 2011 is laughable. And, I would say a Rafa playing at his 2013 level is enough to match this Novak, even that 2011 Novak. Both Rafa and Fed are playing at least one or two notches down from their 2011 level, so Novak has it easier now than four years ago. Even the Murray of 2011 was tough to beat, and caused Novak all sorts of troubles at Rome and beat Novak at Cincy, though Novak retired half way through that match.

We cant expect the big four would always play at a high level all the time; one or two members may/might not play well at times, like Fed in 2013, Murray in 2014 and Rafa in 2015. I would say all of the big four played well in 2011 just like they did in 2008, but not since 2011..

Reading this thread I'm amazed at how blinkered the proponents of this Djokovic era are. Lets gets the facts straight.

1) His no 2 is a 34 year old. How has this 34 year old declined? Well in lots of ways, but for one thing his movement, and particularly his movement to his right hand side. Can anyone seriously deny this?

2) His other rivals are a guy who chokes in every match against him, and a Spaniard whose current form indicates his career is moribund.

3) The other players show no signs of wanting to join him at the top. Wawrinka is perhaps having personal problems, Dimitrov and tomic are useless, Berdych and ferrer are where they always been.

I'm afraid tennis is not in a good state currently in terms of competition at the top. For those folk saying these players would beat 90's players. Would that be in 90's conditions with 90's rackets or in current conditions?

They all played well in 2012.... the year each of them won a slam.

Again federers age is an irrelevance. He's still playing extremely well.

Belovedluckyboy wrote:Is Novak really playing so well now that hes comparable or even better than his 2011?  Certainly not IMO!  To think that both Fed and Rafa are as good now as when they're in 2011 is laughable.  And, I would say a Rafa playing at his 2013 level is enough to match this Novak, even that 2011 Novak. Both Rafa and Fed are playing at least one or two notches down from their 2011 level, so Novak has it easier now than four years ago.  Even the Murray of 2011 was tough to beat, and caused Novak all sorts of troubles at Rome and beat Novak at Cincy, though Novak retired half way through that match.

We cant expect the big four would always play at a high level all the time; one or two members may/might not play well at times, like Fed in 2013, Murray in 2014 and Rafa in 2015. I would say all of the big four played well in 2011 just like they did in 2008, but not since 2011..

No I'd have to disagree about Murray in 2011. He had still not made the mental breakthrough in the slam finals. He could make it to the finals but mentally failed to show up. Signs that Murray begun to crack his mental issues in crunch matches came early in 2012 I'd say.

greengoblin wrote:Reading this thread I'm amazed at how blinkered the proponents of this Djokovic era are. Lets gets the facts straight.
1) His no 2 is a 34 year old. How has this 34 year old declined? Well in lots of ways, but for one thing his movement, and particularly his movement to his right hand side. Can anyone seriously deny this?

2) His other rivals are a guy who chokes in every match against him, and a Spaniard whose current form indicates his career is moribund.

3) The other players show no signs of wanting to join him at the top. Wawrinka is perhaps having personal problems, Dimitrov and tomic are useless, Berdych and  ferrer are where they always been.

I'm afraid tennis is not in a good state currently in terms of competition at the top. For those folk saying these players would beat 90's players. Would that be in 90's conditions with 90's rackets or in current conditions?

Are these Benitez type facts?

LK 

legendkillarV2 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:Reading this thread I'm amazed at how blinkered the proponents of this Djokovic era are. Lets gets the facts straight.
1) His no 2 is a 34 year old. How has this 34 year old declined? Well in lots of ways, but for one thing his movement, and particularly his movement to his right hand side. Can anyone seriously deny this?

2) His other rivals are a guy who chokes in every match against him, and a Spaniard whose current form indicates his career is moribund.

3) The other players show no signs of wanting to join him at the top. Wawrinka is perhaps having personal problems, Dimitrov and tomic are useless, Berdych and  ferrer are where they always been.

I'm afraid tennis is not in a good state currently in terms of competition at the top. For those folk saying these players would beat 90's players. Would that be in 90's conditions with 90's rackets or in current conditions?

Are these Benitez type facts?

(Sigh) There does seem be little point trying to debate on here. If you're unwilling to respond to my points can I at least ask you some simple questions

1) Is Federer's movement and forehand (some of his best assets) anything like they used to be?

2) Is murray choking in matches against Djokovic?

3) Has Nadal been showing worrying level's of form for the whole of this year?

4) Is Wawrinka playing at a level he was in 2012/2013/early 2014?

That's my last attempt to try to inject some honesty into this laughable debate.

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:Reading this thread I'm amazed at how blinkered the proponents of this Djokovic era are. Lets gets the facts straight.
1) His no 2 is a 34 year old. How has this 34 year old declined? Well in lots of ways, but for one thing his movement, and particularly his movement to his right hand side. Can anyone seriously deny this?

2) His other rivals are a guy who chokes in every match against him, and a Spaniard whose current form indicates his career is moribund.

3) The other players show no signs of wanting to join him at the top. Wawrinka is perhaps having personal problems, Dimitrov and tomic are useless, Berdych and  ferrer are where they always been.

I'm afraid tennis is not in a good state currently in terms of competition at the top. For those folk saying these players would beat 90's players. Would that be in 90's conditions with 90's rackets or in current conditions?

Are these Benitez type facts?

(Sigh) There does seem be little point trying to debate on here. If you're unwilling to respond to my points can I at least ask you some simple questions

1) Is Federer's movement and forehand (some of his best assets) anything like they used to be?

2) Is murray choking in matches against Djokovic?

3) Has Nadal been showing worrying level's of form for the whole of this year?

4) Is Wawrinka playing at a level he was in 2012/2013/early 2014?

That's my last attempt to try to inject some honesty into this laughable debate.

Fact is he is still playing a high level that enables him to be the second best player on tour! That's more testiment to his longevity rather than the quality of the field. For all his sheer talent, age shouldn't be a barrier to his performance. Seriously, how many of the field right now who are around their peak will be able to play with the consistency into their 30's like Federer and rely on 'talent' and 'brilliance' to win matches when they have lead in the legs?

You talk about a 'serious' debate. Seriously?

As many have stated, regardless of the field the CYGS is a huge ask given the events played in between. Is Djokovic really going to be as fresh now running into the US Open? Not likely. Why are many of the former tennis pro's on TV still making Rafa the man to beat at RG despite his form this year? In terms of Murray yes he choked at the AO, but that doesn't mean that is par for course throughout their future meetings. Remember, Djokovic himself is prone to a choke. Stan should've had him at the AO as should've Murray too. All you need is for a Nadal, Murray, Wawrinka and Nishikori even to hold together upstairs and then Djokovic might wilt.

Djokovic's form hasn't been blistering.

I am sorry but it is far too simplistic to say just because Rafa or whoever isn't at their best it equates to an era being automatically easier. You have to factor in what level other players are at now such as Nishikori, Cilic, Raonic etc compared to say a couple of years ago. Rafa may have fallen from the high standards he was at but others are now at a higher level than they were as well. In short a CYGS is an immense achievement without any ifs or buts.

In 2012, Rafa had missed the second half of the season, so it's one threat down during that period.

CYGS is an enormous achievement virtually irrespective of competition. It was when Laver did it, it would've been in 2004-2007 had it occurred, and it will be this year if Novak does it. No arguing with that.

I would personally not describe Federer's age as an 'irrelevance', and to do so is surely discounting an entire line of discussion via personal bias. Food for thought, here are the players who have held the #2 ranking since 2007. It doesn't tell the whole story as we know, but it gives a good idea:

2007: Nadal
2008: Nadal, Federer
2009: Nadal, Federer, Murray
2010: Djokovic, Nadal, Federer
2011: Djokovic, Nadal, Federer
2012: Djokovic, Nadal, Federer
2013: Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Murray
2014: Djokovic, Nadal, Federer

Federer is playing well, no doubt about it. But to say that he's playing better than anyone in the above list in that particular year would be stretching it, other than himself in 2013 and Murray in 2009. He is one of the weakest #2's we've had since Nadal in 2007 - and conversely, statistically the strongest. On this forum, he is rarely praised unless it's an era discussion and people want to promote the current era. In general match threads and chat, the strong consensus is that he has little to no chance against Novak and Rafa, and is vulnerable against lower ranked players. Surely that is an indication; as is the fact that most would currently pick Murray to beat him on clay.

Note that I'm not trying to diminish Novak or anyone else here. But this is a continuation of the decline in overall quality since those stellar years of 2009 - 12 where we had all the big hitters playing well for most of it (Craig's point about Murray excepted). I do worry about the tour going forward, particularly looking at the 10-20 ranked players