Novak has 2 years maximum

First topic message reminder :

To win the French. His body has clocked up many miles and he cannot expect to keep the standard as high as he has done. Stan was amazing.. but as a champion you have to counter an amazing performance with your own amazing performance and Novak did not do it.

What does he have to do to win the French???

I'm with BLB here. No one is discussing Cilic at FO: Kei is more of a contender than Cilic because of what ability he's shown on the stuff. He's even defended his title on clay. Furthermore, the comeback against Tsonga, although not achieved, was still a good fight back.

After all HN, you're the one who put age in the picture saying: "he is already 25yrs old as we speak.. and he is leaving it very late in his career to make a serious bid.. "
I agree with BLB that being 25 or 26 is not too late to start winning big... He might never win any slam, but he's one of the better pick out of the big 5 (adding Stan here).
Actually we've all witnessed how the "peak age" has been moving towards the second half of 20s - we might even not see a teenage winner before some kind of technical revolution comes in.

I am not going to defend my corner again.. its my opinion take it or leave
it

I have said my piece as well on this and we shall agree to disagree.

It was a pretty lame performance from Nishikori in the QF - not sure exactly why. That apart, he's been steadily improving at slams - one problem in the past was he was using so much effort to get to the second week that he was too exhausted to compete well, but now his ranking is up he should be getting through with much less effort. Now we're past the period where the big 4 are sitting as bouncers protecting each quarter of the draw, no reason why Nishikori can't punch through and win one (but then again, same for Cilic, Raonic, Dimitrov, Kygrios, etc - even Berdych!). The usual suspects are still the favourites but slams just feel that bit more open than they have for the last 5 years.

I would have to disagree about Novak being unlikely to win the French or only have two years max.

Djokovic has proven to be extremely consistent across the slams always getting to the latter stages. While he has often fallen short the key is that he keeps putting himself in contention. Most top sports stars will tell you that the key is getting consistently in the heat of battle and eventually the door will open.

The wawrinka final was a huge opportunity, no doubt about that. However watching some of the match back, wawrinka played tennis from the gods and there was little anybody could have done to stop him. Djokovic certainly didn't choke.

Also look no further than goran ivanisevic who went nearly his whole career without a slam and he craved a Wimbledon title. The stars aligned and he then came back as a wild card and won it. Even Sampras won his last slam after a barren spell.

The longer the wait for Novak the harder it will get. However if there is one thing I have certainly learned following Novak djokovic's career, it is that this guy is driven to succeed and he will leave no stone unturned to win at the French. I for one would not bet against him.

He has battled through greats like nadal and federer and made his mark, nothing to suggest with that determination that he couldn't win one prize that has remained elusive, particularly as his worst finish at the French in the last 7 years or so is the QF. Keep putting himself in contention and I would think he will kick down that door!

Bravo Slasher I fully agree I think he will have a couple of more chances as well. I mean he had easily the toughest draw he could have. If you asked me who where the three players out of the entire draw that you wouldn't want Djokovic to face in this FO it would be the players he played in his quarter, semi, and final. He got through two of those hurdles but I think that he was a bit flat in the final as a result. The fact is that he is not only very consistent but very driven to continually improve his game. He is get more free points on his serve than he ever has, he has really improved his touch and feel shots, the slice backhand, the volleys etc. In 2011 he upped the anti as well especially on the FH and his fitness.

And I also don't think he gets enough credit for how fit, durable, and consistent he has been. He is not an old 28 as athletics are involved. I think Agassi won 4 more slams after this age, and Andre was not as flexible, not as focused on diet and fitness, and not as lean as Djokovic. I also would not be willing to wager that he wouldn't win the FO at some point. Plus I think many of the people here who are claiming he won't win wouldn't take a thousand or even a hundred pound bet on Novak not winning it.

It's all about whether anyone good comes through. If not then he obviously has a very good chance, but if a new star emerges whose game suits clay then maybe time is short.

I think Djokovic has more than 2 chances left for Roland Garros - I think more like 4, given that there's no outstanding up and coming claycourters and the consistency of Djokovic over the years at the tournament.

He had a tough draw this year and the Murray semi-final took its toll. I expect he will get easier draws in future years.

MrInvisible wrote:I think Djokovic has more than 2 chances left for Roland Garros - I think more like 4, given that there's no outstanding up and coming claycourters and the consistency of Djokovic over the years at the tournament.

He had a tough draw this year and the Murray semi-final took its toll.  I expect he will get easier draws in future years.

Well I hope you are correct. I think the back to back Murray and Nadal matches took a toll. The Nadal match was easy in the scoreline but it is still expending a lot of mental and physical energy getting up for that match and coming down off that high. Murray I think while Andy upped his level was another case of Novak in control and all of sudden he loses focus. I honestly think he was impacted a bit by the fading light and wind in that third set it was strange how well he was cruising and then all of sudden from the middle of third set on he starts lunging at balls like he is picking them up late or they are moving on him. Still can't say that Murray didn't raise his level either. He certainly did improve in those middle sets.

Agree that maybe two more good chances at most. After that, he might be able to win but it would be a long shot.

I am not even sure he will have two more good chances. I would not be shocked if after next year, or even next year, he was no longer a strong #1 or #2 favorite to win the title going into the tournament.

Just seen a clip of that long, extraordinary outpouring of affection for Djoko in the form of the ovation he got during the presentation after the match.
It was as if the crowd realised that the Serb's RG dream was over and that his best chance had gone.
I agree with the assessment above that the Rafa and Andy matches might have caught up with Djoko. If you look at his most successful slam - the Australian - he is able to play at night for the key matches at the end and there's usually good gaps between matches.
You'll recall how flat Djoko was against Murray in the Wimbledon final of 2013. He'd had an exhausting semi in great heat against del Potro.
You wouldn't want to put money on his not ever winning the French, but IMHO it was now or never this year.

I'd go with more than 2 chances. More like 4. But probably his chances will steadily decline year on year rather than suddenly disappear one year.