Djokovic threatening the top tier the all time top five

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 12:34 am

First topic message reminder :

When you look at the list of all time greats of the open era Novak is threatening the top 5 players and make a strong case to join them. Of course we are talking about Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Laver, and Borg. Novak has 9 slams 8th on the all time list and with 17 slam final appearances puts him 5th on the all time list. Novak is now almost a lock to be the world #1 at the year end for the 4th time in 5 years. Additionally, he has a chance to become only the 9th player since 1932 to make the finals of all 4 slams in the same season. Djokovic also stands a great chance of finishing his career with the most master's titles of any player in history. His consistent brilliance and longevity at the very top level of the game places him probably just outside the group of players mentioned in the super elite level of the game. But with his dominance looking like it will continue for at least a little while longer he has a great chance to leap frog into the top 5. He has improved all the rough edges to his game to the point where he really has no weaknesses and numerous weapons from return, backhand, forehand, and serve to attack his opposition. Who would have thought this was possible when he was considered the nearly man back in 2010 struggling with his serve and fitness. Since then he has been able to win 8 of the last 19 slams.

by Belovedluckyboy Mon Jul 13, 2015 10:38 am

Nah, Rafa at FO2008 was awesome to watch, the way he annihilated all his opponents, from R1 low ranked opponents to the then no.1 player. His MC2010 performance too. I thought Novak's 2011 AO/IW/Miami were awesome too?

Both their performances certainly were not unexciting, certainly dramatic that left their audiences or spectators with mouths opened wide in awe.

by temporary21 Mon Jul 13, 2015 11:06 am

Are we skewing head to head stuff again? Feds stats against rafa are bad even if we take out clay. If we take out grass it's even worse On the other hand novak Djokovic and nadal have not met their appointments a lot to each other. The point is in the slams they're quite close, even outside of clay. It's again all to do with the evil goat. We should appreciate how good all these guys have been. Since these guys have been so dominant, you cannot simply say if they avoided eachother to pad their stats do to speak they would better, because they would be many slams down if they did

by kemet Mon Jul 13, 2015 12:19 pm

This is an very good article that sums up all of the points many of the points discussed in this thread:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon/11735205/Wimbledon-2015-Where-is-the-love-for-Novak-Djokovic.html

by TRuffin Mon Jul 13, 2015 12:41 pm

Guest82 wrote:
slashermcguirk wrote:There is no doubt Djokovic is in a great place right now. For me he has already cemented an amazing legacy in the game. I would really like to see him add another US open to his tally, he has been amazing consistent at that tournament but has not won as many titles as he probably should have.

The French Open is going to be really tough but you would have to think he will give himself at least another few chances there. Should he win one more US open and a French open, that would put him right up there for me. Even if he doesn't win the French Open, the sheer scale of his achievements at slams, masters, tour finals, davis cup put him up among some of the greats of the game.

I definitely think that the Federer total of slams is out of reach but if Novak can continue in this form for another 2-3 years, you would have to think he could threaten the current total of 14 that Nadal has. It would be a lot to ask for him to reach that total or exceed it but you just never know. Staying injury free will be key and with that the rise of young talent further down the line.

For me, the most impressive thing about Djokovic is his consistency across all surfaces, also to have beaten both Nadal and Federer at all 4 slams is a remarkable achievement that should never be overlooked. When you think how hard it has been for most players to even get one win against them at a slam, to do so regularly and across surfaces is incredible.

The US open this year will be a big challenge, I think Federer, Murray and Wawrinka will all be very dangerous and we know what happened last year with Cilic and Nishikori. If Novak could somehow win in New York this year, he will put himself in a really strong position going into 2016.

The other thing to keep an eye on in his weeks at world #1. He is really racking up the weeks and if he does keep going strong on and off for the next few years, who knows how many weeks he could stay there. All what ifs but regardless, he has already achieved more than I could ever have imagined, particularly when you go back to 2010. That win against Federer at the US open 2010 in 5 sets and winning the Davis cup that year were the making of him as it gave him the confidence to go on that golden run in 2011 and now he is picking his game up yet again.

Say he gets to 14. By winning a French plus another US and a couple of others. Does he then rank above Nadal?

How could you not rate him over Nadal at that point? IF (and this is obviously if) he gets there and he's on track for most of this- he will have more year ends #1's than Nadal, more weeks at #1 than Nadal, a better H2H over both Nadal AND Federer, more Master 1000's than Nadal, similar Major stats, and may be up there with Fed as the most successful WTF champion (which all three of those players say is the 5th most important title) vs. 0 for Nadal. He's going to end up prob #2 behind Federer on most semis and Quarters at Majors in a row, maybe even overall appearances.

Like Federer and Nadal, Djoko will have 1 Major that is his signature Major- the Australian.

The clincher is he and Nadal are basic same age and of the exact same era.. He'll never touch Nadal as Clay Goat or Federer at Grass Goat, but all around ranking- how would Nadal possibly be rated above him?

IF Djoko stays on this track- I think he flirts with some of Federer's monster stats and does move into #2 all time.

by temporary21 Mon Jul 13, 2015 12:46 pm

If rate them the same , as phenomenal players. They'll have very similar stats, rafa coming from a clay player to an all rounded one and novak the hc equivalent.

by Belovedluckyboy Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:10 pm

I think we are getting too far ahead of ourselves. The other day John Mac was saying Fed is now the goat again, not Rafa (he rate Rafa above Fed previously), after seeing how he demolished Murray. He (and many assumed) that Fed would go on and beat Novak to get his no.18 slam. I wonder how John Mac feels now after the final.

Some are asking what if Novak get to 14 slams, ie he has to win 5 more; but how about Rafa getting one more to reach 15? Novak would then have to win 6 more, not 5, in order to catch Rafa. Ill bet that Rafa would get one more, rather than Novak to get another 5!

by CAS Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:22 pm

Belovedluckyboy wrote:I think we are getting too far ahead of ourselves. The other day John Mac was saying Fed is now the goat again, not Rafa (he rate Rafa above Fed previously), after seeing how he demolished Murray. He (and many assumed) that Fed would go on and beat Novak to get his no.18 slam. I wonder how John Mac feels now after the final.

I saw a quote earlier that he said Novak is now in his all time top 5 with Roger, Rafa, Laver and Sampras. He is such a sensationalist it's tiresome.

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:29 pm

It is very hard to prognosticate into the future with a sport as fickle as tennis where margins between being the number 1 player and being just another top 5 or top ten guy are pretty thin. But I will say that there are certain factors in favor of Djokovic continuing to do well for I would say at least the next 2-3 years.

1. He is federesque in durability and consistency

2. You will be hard pressed to find a more disciplined worker on tour or in life in general

3. Contrary to opinion that he is a grinder, he actually has a pretty economical and efficient game. He tries to take the ball as early as he can, changes direction on both sides fluidly, and will move into the court as soon as possible. Additionally, he doesn't sell out like Nadal and Federer and run around every backhand this allows him to conserve a lot of energy and to not put undue pressure on the shot.

4. Improved serve that is giving him more aces and free points

5. Other top rivals are ageing or hitting the wall or in Murray's case just a notch below in quality

6. Lack of young players rising who are of a similar level to challenge

Considering these factors I would say that Novak most likely can get to 12-14 range. And if he does that I think he could get into 2 or 3 slot. Fed's slam total I think is well out of reach unless Djokovic wins the USO and then goes onto do a CYGS the following year he would then still be 3 slams away from a tie.

Ruffin makes an interesting point the discussion has been Nadal eclipsing Fed, if Novak plays at the same level for the next 2 or three years with the level of consistency and durability he has shown and an extended period of dominance across all surfaces a very strong argument exists for him taking the number 2 in the GOAT sweepstakes.

To me as a fan I am happy even if he never wins another slam. The credentials to date have far exceeded my expectations. When he won in Australia I thought he would be a 3-6 slam player. I never wavered despite his 3 year slam slump I thought he would get into that range of victories. Well I undersold the guy and I am one of his biggest fans.

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:36 pm

CAS wrote:
Belovedluckyboy wrote:I think we are getting too far ahead of ourselves. The other day John Mac was saying Fed is now the goat again, not Rafa (he rate Rafa above Fed previously), after seeing how he demolished Murray. He (and many assumed) that Fed would go on and beat Novak to get his no.18 slam. I wonder how John Mac feels now after the final.

I saw a quote earlier that he said Novak is now in his all time top 5 with Roger, Rafa, Laver and Sampras. He is such a sensationalist it's tiresome.

I don't know his comment as many who have discussed on this thread is not so outside the standard deviation to be deemed sensationalist. As for changing who he thinks is GOAT between Fed and Nadal I think a rational basis can be made for that comment as well. Back in 2013 with the way Nadal was playing many people thought he was on track to replace Fed as GOAT. And as for Djoko being in the top 5 I mean he is pushing into that category pretty hard at this point.

One thing I believe cuts in Novak's favor and to me is the most impressive aspect is that for the first time that I can remember Djokovic is the best player on all 4 surfaces. He is the best indoor player in the world, best grass court player, best clay courter, and best indoor player. Yes Stan has beaten Novak in the final but if you look at Novak's overall clay master's haul and FO performances you would probably make him the favorite at any clay court event. And Wawrinka really doesn't play the way he did in that final very often. In my 35 years of watching tennis I can't think of any number 1 who would be considered the best player and the favorite on all 4 surfaces.

by CAS Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:45 pm

Socal, I think thats circumstantial. He is right now but is he overall? Rafa is out of form but he is still the best clay court player in the world.

Federer in '09 you could say he was the best on clay, grass and hard for the year but we know Rafa is the better clay court player. Rafa in 2010 was the best on all surfaces too even though we know Novak is the better hard court player.

Federer was just as good as Novak in 05-09 on all surfaves but '15 Novak doesn't have the same Rafa or Roger. I agree he is the favourite for every slam but thats circumstance, I don't think he is the best on every surface in terms of potential etc

I don't know for a fact but I would say Federer in 04' was the favourite for every slam.

just my opinion anyway

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:48 pm

I think currently CAS you would be hard pressed to argue that he isn't the best player when you look at recent record over the last couple of years on each and every surface across Masters and slams.

by CAS Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:52 pm

socal1976 wrote:I think currently CAS you would be hard pressed to argue that he isn't the best player when you look at recent record over the last couple of years on each and every surface across Masters and slams.

He is the best player thats not what I said, I was disagreeing that he is the first player to be favourite at all 4 slams or best player on all surfaces in 35 years

by Belovedluckyboy Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:55 pm

Novak is also aging , not only his main rivals. Talking about durability , I thought he too had problems with his ankle, due to his frequent sliding around even on HCs and grass. Novak does benefit from his main rivals recent plight - Fed's during 2013, Murray's during 2014 and Rafa's during 2014/2015.

It's unfortunate for Murray that he had his back issue just when he was starting to win slams. He ought to be the one challenging Novak at the slams when Rafa is/was struck with his injuries almost every year from 2012 onwards and when Fed has reached his 30s.

Murray had his chances at the AO this year but threw that away. We also have Stan to provide some resistance to Novak. Stan looks strong and healthy and motivated after his FO triumph so perhaps these two may be Novak's main rivals for the coming two years?

by CAS Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:58 pm

I will say that it's testament to Novak that he doesn't get injured, he is an incredible athlete. He has run around and played just as many matches as Rafa and Andy over the years but they broke down and he didn't.

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:08 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:I feel Djokovic has to be the most under-apreciated multi slam winner ever. It's strange. You tell someone who has never watched tennis in their life Djokovic's list of achievements and they would be like 'wow this guy must be great' and yet there is a strong resistence from most in the tennis world to give him his due and credit.

It's sad. He is a pretty solid guy who can easily be an inspirational to others, isn't dogged by scandals, never says a bad word on anyone and yet he is met with 'meh'

We could go through list of past champions and to the most part have a USP. That separates them apart when achievements alone can't do that. He is like Wilander in the sense of no-one wants to remember him as a great champion and lacks a lot of popularity. I don't know what more he can do that he isn't already.

I am not a fan, but I can't quite think of a real reason to dislike the guy. He doesn't get me jumping out of my seat. The guy is the best mover I have seen in the game, but when he does pull off a shot like the one he did on the opening point of the TB, I found myself in disbelief as in that shouldn't happen given it was a pretty decent volley from Federer.

I will try my hardest to appreciate him.

The excessive time he takes between points and the regular trainer breaks when he's losing or underperforming rightfully go against him, it's gamesmanship bordering on cheating if you ask me.

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:17 pm

Well he also takes MTO when he is winning as well, medical timeouts are part of the rules of the game and he is allowed to take them. If we have a problem with it we would change the rules. I haven't really seen his MTOs as away to influence his opponent. I have seen call for the trainer in many matches that he is winning, he doesn't just call for them when he is losing that is a gross mischaracterization of reality. If he did only take them when he was losing that would be suspicious.

by CAS Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:20 pm

it seems in tennis, when someone calls for the trainer its automatically assumed he is faking to put off his opponent or making an excuse for him losing. I don't doubt it must happen, however sometimes the guy is just hurting!

by Belovedluckyboy Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:20 pm

I agree with CAS. I won't call Novak the best on all surfaces; he did poorly at USO and the two Masters before that and was beaten by Fed at Shanghai. Is he the best on clay this year? We can argue about that, yes points wise maybe but he fails to win the FO, the biggest prize on clay.

I would say he's the best on slow HCs ( has always been the case since 2011), best on grass too (for three out of five years makes for a strong case) and also best on indoor HCs (from 2012-2014). He's not the best on clay as he has no FO vs someone who has 4 in the last five years. He's not the best on medium to quick HCs either as he couldn't dominate his main rivals there at Canada/Cincy/USO and Shanghai. Those titles were won by all four of them (the big four) in the last four years plus Cilic winning one USO.

I think Fed was really dominant during his heydays of 2004-2007, sweeping up Hc titles almost everywhere,indoors or outdoors, slow or quick, plus dominating on grass and second only to Rafa on clay.

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:25 pm

I have yet to see him take a MTO when he's in the ascendency of a match so don't try twisting what I actually said and yes the rules should be changed as the amount of times he calls for the trainer is frankly pathetic. You ask any of Murray, Nadal or Federer if he does it as a blatant way of getting a breather or to disrupt his opponent then would all say yes as they would of his excessive ball bouncing.

The biggest problem I have is with his wins at Wimbledon which are done to circumstance rather than being a particularly good grass court player; slower courts and more wear on the baseline plays to his advantage, go back 15/20 years and I have my doubts whether he gets past the quarters.

by Belovedluckyboy Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:28 pm

How can Novak be the best player on clay over the past few years?? That's ridiculous! He has won six Masters on clay from 2011-2015, Rafa too has won six. Rafa has won four FO vs Novak's zero!

by TRuffin Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:36 pm

Belovedluckyboy wrote:I think we are getting too far ahead of ourselves. The other day John Mac was saying Fed is now the goat again, not Rafa (he rate Rafa above Fed previously), after seeing how he demolished Murray. He (and many assumed) that Fed would go on and beat Novak to get his no.18 slam. I wonder how John Mac feels now after the final.

Some are asking what if Novak get to 14 slams, ie he has to win 5 more; but how about Rafa getting one more to reach 15? Novak would then have to win 6 more, not 5, in order to catch Rafa. Ill bet that Rafa would get one more, rather than Novak to get another 5!

Mac said on ESPN Sportscenter interview afterwards yesterday that he still rated Federer as greatest ever, Nadal 2nd, laver, Sampras, and now had Djoko past Borg. Mac isn't basing raising Fed back over Nadal on one match.. If you listened to what he said- he said he thought after 2013 and Nadal winning the record French title that Nadal was going to stay on that track and be the dominant #1, but he hasn't. he said he started thinking about the level Federer has been able to maintain consistently at an age that Mac at least didn't think was possible in todays game and that "I was wrong, I fell into the trap of thinking in the current moment and not looking at the big picture." At the same time- which was a fair statement I think- he said both should be celebrated and 1 or 2 is certainly rarefied air. McEnroe is always been a bandwagoner though... even on the Fed side- he was calling Federer Goat at 7 Majors.... He turned out to be right, but he always jumps the gun and goes with whoever is the flavor of the moment.

If Nadal gets to 15 and Djoko 14- it's still in play. Many Nadal fans and even Mac were ready to put Nadal over Federer at 3 slams behind him, mostly based on H2H. IF Djoko can get to 1 or two slams behind Nadal, yet be ahead of him on all those things I mentioned which most of those Nadal is way behind Federer, how can we not do the same for Djoko and elevate him above Nadal?

Lets look at it another way, it's approaching this point even now, but especially if Djoko continues to win which is the hypothetical that was metioned.-- Maybe Nadal fans like yourself don't think this, but I think most unbiased observers could make a strong argument that Djokovic is a greater hardcourt, grass, and indoor player than Nadal, and Nadal is a better clay courter than Djokovic. So overall- lets says Nada is at 15 and Djoko is at 13, but Djoko has #1's over him, the h2n over him, the WTFs over him, the Masters over him, and seen as better on three of the four surfaces.................. what rational person would still say Nadal is better overall across a whole tennis season and carreer than Djoko?

by Belovedluckyboy Mon Jul 13, 2015 2:56 pm

TRuffin, If!

We're not there yet. Novak has a bit of catch up first at least on the slam count. At least the talk about Rafa > Fed started only when Rafa was 3 behind Fed. Novak now is five behind Rafa, and Rafa is not that old yet that he will never win any more slams, so we ARE getting ahead of ourselves at this point.

We also don't know will Rafa not win any more Masters, wins the WTF or gets back to no.1, or has a losing H2H vs Novak. Too many Ifs! At least Rafa was ahead of Fed in the Masters and H2H when the 'goat' talk started.

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:00 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:I have yet to see him take a MTO when he's in the ascendency of a match so don't try twisting what I actually said and yes the rules should be changed as the amount of times he calls for the trainer is frankly pathetic. You ask any of Murray, Nadal or Federer if he does it as a blatant way of getting a breather or to disrupt his opponent then would all say yes as they would of his excessive ball bouncing.

The biggest problem I have is with his wins at Wimbledon which are done to circumstance rather than being a particularly good grass court player; slower courts and more wear on the baseline plays to his advantage, go back 15/20 years and I have my doubts whether he gets past the quarters.

His first slam final in 2008 he took an MTO against Tsonga when up a set and a break and after the MTO Tsonga came back and evened the match. He almost lost the match when he was up. Off the top of my head I remember that one because he was ahead and it was a grandslam final I haven't done a study of his MTOs to be honest but since that was huge match I remembered it.

The conditions have been slowed down for over a decade and half so those are the conditions that players get judged on and train to compete on. It would be silly to knock Djokovic because oh he couldn't win if he played 15 years ago. That is like saying Nadal isn't great because if he had to play with a wooden racquet he wouldn't be as good. That is like saying well Laver was 5 foot 8 and if he played today he wouldn't win anything because he physically wouldn't be able to complete. You judge a player against the prevailing conditions and technology they grew up and played on, you don't lessen their accomplishments because if they had played 15 or 40 years ago or whatever they wouldn't be as good. Djokovic didn't set these conditions he just styled his game to succeed on them better than anyone else if you want to use that to knock him that is your prerogative.

by Belovedluckyboy Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:01 pm

So you see, John Mac was always flipping around with this goat thing. I bet when Rafa starts winning slams again, he'll flip it and backs Rafa to be the goat again. That's nothing new from J Mac.

by banbrotam Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:12 pm

Anyone thinking that Novak winning finals and Murray occasionally reaching them is going to fade fast, need to remind themselves that they are only the 49th and 50th oldest in the Top 100

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:21 pm

socal1976 wrote:
Hammersmith harrier wrote:I have yet to see him take a MTO when he's in the ascendency of a match so don't try twisting what I actually said and yes the rules should be changed as the amount of times he calls for the trainer is frankly pathetic. You ask any of Murray, Nadal or Federer if he does it as a blatant way of getting a breather or to disrupt his opponent then would all say yes as they would of his excessive ball bouncing.

The biggest problem I have is with his wins at Wimbledon which are done to circumstance rather than being a particularly good grass court player; slower courts and more wear on the baseline plays to his advantage, go back 15/20 years and I have my doubts whether he gets past the quarters.

His first slam final in 2008 he took an MTO against Tsonga when up a set and a break and after the MTO Tsonga came back and evened the match. He almost lost the match when he was up. Off the top of my head I remember that one because he was ahead and it was a grandslam final I haven't done a study of his MTOs to be honest but since that was huge match I remembered it.

The conditions have been slowed down for over a decade and half so those are the conditions that players get judged on and train to compete on. It would be silly to knock Djokovic because oh he couldn't win if he played 15 years ago. That is like saying Nadal isn't great because if he had to play with a wooden racquet he wouldn't be as good. That is like saying well Laver was 5 foot 8 and if he played today he wouldn't win anything because he physically wouldn't be able to complete. You judge a player against the prevailing conditions and technology they grew up and played on, you don't lessen their accomplishments because if they had played 15 or 40 years ago or whatever they wouldn't be as good. Djokovic didn't set these conditions he just styled his game to succeed on them better than anyone else if you want to use that to knock him that is your prerogative.

You judge them against the people they are being rated against so how he performs in Sampras' era is important, as it is against Lendl in his era and etc.

by LuvSports! Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:23 pm

socal1976 wrote:
Hammersmith harrier wrote:I have yet to see him take a MTO when he's in the ascendency of a match so don't try twisting what I actually said and yes the rules should be changed as the amount of times he calls for the trainer is frankly pathetic. You ask any of Murray, Nadal or Federer if he does it as a blatant way of getting a breather or to disrupt his opponent then would all say yes as they would of his excessive ball bouncing.

The biggest problem I have is with his wins at Wimbledon which are done to circumstance rather than being a particularly good grass court player; slower courts and more wear on the baseline plays to his advantage, go back 15/20 years and I have my doubts whether he gets past the quarters.

His first slam final in 2008 he took an MTO against Tsonga when up a set and a break and after the MTO Tsonga came back and evened the match. He almost lost the match when he was up. Off the top of my head I remember that one because he was ahead and it was a grandslam final I haven't done a study of his MTOs to be honest but since that was huge match I remembered it.

The conditions have been slowed down for over a decade and half so those are the conditions that players get judged on and train to compete on. It would be silly to knock Djokovic because oh he couldn't win if he played 15 years ago. That is like saying Nadal isn't great because if he had to play with a wooden racquet he wouldn't be as good. That is like saying well Laver was 5 foot 8 and if he played today he wouldn't win anything because he physically wouldn't be able to complete. You judge a player against the prevailing conditions and technology they grew up and played on, you don't lessen their accomplishments because if they had played 15 or 40 years ago or whatever they wouldn't be as good. Djokovic didn't set these conditions he just styled his game to succeed on them better than anyone else if you want to use that to knock him that is your prerogative.

Tsonga won the first set so he couldn't have "evened" the match.
Was it in another set?

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:24 pm

Good point Banbro, I actually think that the next 2-3 years we will see Murray and Djokovic a top the rankings and I think if Stan can string together results he will challenge as well for slams in the next couple of years. To me Nishikori has potential to be in the slam mix as well but he hasn't yet got the trophy and done the job like the other 3. Kyrgios has talent but to me he is very raw and has a lot of work to do not only with his game but with his professionalism.

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:27 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:
socal1976 wrote:
Hammersmith harrier wrote:I have yet to see him take a MTO when he's in the ascendency of a match so don't try twisting what I actually said and yes the rules should be changed as the amount of times he calls for the trainer is frankly pathetic. You ask any of Murray, Nadal or Federer if he does it as a blatant way of getting a breather or to disrupt his opponent then would all say yes as they would of his excessive ball bouncing.

The biggest problem I have is with his wins at Wimbledon which are done to circumstance rather than being a particularly good grass court player; slower courts and more wear on the baseline plays to his advantage, go back 15/20 years and I have my doubts whether he gets past the quarters.

His first slam final in 2008 he took an MTO against Tsonga when up a set and a break and after the MTO Tsonga came back and evened the match. He almost lost the match when he was up. Off the top of my head I remember that one because he was ahead and it was a grandslam final I haven't done a study of his MTOs to be honest but since that was huge match I remembered it.

The conditions have been slowed down for over a decade and half so those are the conditions that players get judged on and train to compete on. It would be silly to knock Djokovic because oh he couldn't win if he played 15 years ago. That is like saying Nadal isn't great because if he had to play with a wooden racquet he wouldn't be as good. That is like saying well Laver was 5 foot 8 and if he played today he wouldn't win anything because he physically wouldn't be able to complete. You judge a player against the prevailing conditions and technology they grew up and played on, you don't lessen their accomplishments because if they had played 15 or 40 years ago or whatever they wouldn't be as good. Djokovic didn't set these conditions he just styled his game to succeed on them better than anyone else if you want to use that to knock him that is your prerogative.

You judge them against the people they are being rated against so how he performs in Sampras' era is important, as it is against Lendl in his era and etc.

Ok take Sampras and put him on the court in today's game and he would struggle to dominate as the conditions are slower, the strings allow for better returns and passing shots. I mean why only use this tool to cut players of today, do you think Pete would win 7 wimbeldons on today's tour? The fact is that Djokovic succeeds on the tour as it exists and he has been the best player 4 out of the last 5 years. If he is a creature of his conditions so is everyone else but no one has succeeded to his level in recent years.

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:28 pm

LuvSports! wrote:
socal1976 wrote:
Hammersmith harrier wrote:I have yet to see him take a MTO when he's in the ascendency of a match so don't try twisting what I actually said and yes the rules should be changed as the amount of times he calls for the trainer is frankly pathetic. You ask any of Murray, Nadal or Federer if he does it as a blatant way of getting a breather or to disrupt his opponent then would all say yes as they would of his excessive ball bouncing.

The biggest problem I have is with his wins at Wimbledon which are done to circumstance rather than being a particularly good grass court player; slower courts and more wear on the baseline plays to his advantage, go back 15/20 years and I have my doubts whether he gets past the quarters.

His first slam final in 2008 he took an MTO against Tsonga when up a set and a break and after the MTO Tsonga came back and evened the match. He almost lost the match when he was up. Off the top of my head I remember that one because he was ahead and it was a grandslam final I haven't done a study of his MTOs to be honest but since that was huge match I remembered it.

The conditions have been slowed down for over a decade and half so those are the conditions that players get judged on and train to compete on. It would be silly to knock Djokovic because oh he couldn't win if he played 15 years ago. That is like saying Nadal isn't great because if he had to play with a wooden racquet he wouldn't be as good. That is like saying well Laver was 5 foot 8 and if he played today he wouldn't win anything because he physically wouldn't be able to complete. You judge a player against the prevailing conditions and technology they grew up and played on, you don't lessen their accomplishments because if they had played 15 or 40 years ago or whatever they wouldn't be as good. Djokovic didn't set these conditions he just styled his game to succeed on them better than anyone else if you want to use that to knock him that is your prerogative.

Tsonga won the first set so he couldn't have "evened" the match.
Was it in another set?

Possibly I am going off memory seven years ago. Maybe he was up a break later in the match the third set I believe.

by Hammersmith harrier Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:31 pm

The tour as it is sucks that's why I rate it backwards, on proper grass courts the ones Sampras played on he'd dominate Djokovic just like Federer would just like Nadal would always dominate him on clay. Just like Sampras, Lendl and Federer would always dominate him at the US open, the failure to make a particular grand slam his own also goes against him as does the fact I don't respect him in the slightest.

by Guest Mon Jul 13, 2015 4:09 pm

by TRuffin Mon Jul 13, 2015 4:49 pm

Belovedluckyboy wrote:TRuffin, If!

We're not there yet. Novak has a bit of catch up first at least on the slam count. At least the talk about Rafa > Fed started only when Rafa was 3 behind Fed. Novak now is five behind Rafa, and Rafa is not that old yet that he will never win any more slams, so we ARE getting ahead of ourselves at this point.

We also don't know will Rafa not win any more Masters, wins the WTF or gets back to no.1, or has a losing H2H vs Novak. Too many Ifs! At least Rafa was ahead of Fed in the Masters and H2H when the 'goat' talk started.

I agree it's if. Rafa might come surging back, though I personally don't see it happening.

by HM Murdock Mon Jul 13, 2015 4:58 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:the failure to make a particular grand slam his own also goes against him

The most Australian Open wins in the open era doesn't count as making a slam his own?

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 5:08 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The tour as it is sucks that's why I rate it backwards, on proper grass courts the ones Sampras played on he'd dominate Djokovic just like Federer would just like Nadal would always dominate him on clay. Just like Sampras, Lendl and Federer would always dominate him at the US open, the failure to make a particular grand slam his own also goes against him as does the fact I don't respect him in the slightest.

You deem the grass courts of 90s as proper well that is fine that is your opinion. I don't really need to deal with the idea of Djokovic playing in your idealized, hypothetical tour with the conditions you prefer. I just will sit back and enjoy the fact that he has been the most dominant player on tour the last few years and looks to add further to his trophy case. All of the points you make are particular to you and your tastes. They don't actually analyze the guys accomplishments or his game. You don't like him and his demeanor so that makes him not as good, sorry doesn't make much sense. The tour is the way that it is, players have to play with same conditions and technology and still Djokovic dominates. By the way he has the open era record for most AOs, so some of your criticisms are just wrong. Just like Sampras would have the edge over Novak with his conditions or technology Novak would have the same edge if Sampras played with today's conditions and technology. Yet, you ding Novak for being a creature of his conditions and credit Sampras for being a creature of his era.

by HM Murdock Mon Jul 13, 2015 5:20 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote: on proper grass courts the ones Sampras played on he'd dominate Djokovic just like Federer would

Would it be churlish of me to point out that Federer has never won a Wimbledon title on one of your "proper" grass courts?

by Guest Mon Jul 13, 2015 5:23 pm

All I'll say to the little fishies is don't bite.

Just think George Carlin and you can't go wrong Wink

by summerblues Mon Jul 13, 2015 6:37 pm

Agree that Djokovic is being appreciated relatively less than Roger or Rafa were when they were reaching similar milestones. Not sure why but can think of a number of possible explanations - some of all of these may be wrong Smile

:

1. His game is somewhat robotic. Sort of like German soccer teams of the 1980s and 1990s - for all their efficiency they did not win nearly as many fans as Brazilian teams even with similar level of success.

2. He has been around for a while. It might have been better if he came out of nowhere. However, he had been around in the upper echelons for a while before really breaking through in 2011, so that by then he did not quite have the appeal of the "new" thing.

3. He comes too close on the heels of Roger and Rafa. They have usurped fan allegiances already. Also, relative to the two of them, his success is still the third best. Nine slams might have looked more unique in an era where no other active players were crossing five slams.

4. He is from a wrong country, so to speak.

by summerblues Mon Jul 13, 2015 6:46 pm

I have to admit Djokovic has exceeded my expectations. Even after his 2011 and then 2012 AO, I thought he was unlikely to reach double digits in slams. Now I think he will get there. I doubt he will reach Rafa's current total of 14, but I suppose it is not entirely out of question. My best guess at this point would be for him to finish with maybe 12 slams.

I still think that people tend to extrapolate from the current status to future too readily and that slams can dry up far quicker than people expect. Nevertheless, Djokovic is certainly looking pretty good right now.

I have updated the chart counting the slam totals of the big four relative to their age. Rafa and Roger both reached 9 slams much younger than Novak.

Roger's slams just about dried up by Novak's current age and Rafa slam count has been stuck from about the same age too - though too early to tell if the situation is permanent.

If Novak wants to get close to Rafa and Sampras (let alone Roger), he has his work cut out for him - he will have to collect many more slams late in his career than players have been traditionally able to do.

Djokovic threatening the top tier the all time top five - Page 2 MSkvoAP

Djokovic threatening the top tier the all time top five - Page 2 MSkvoAP

by lydian Mon Jul 13, 2015 6:47 pm

No point in comparing players, who grew up adapted to playing conditions of their day, to different surfaces. What makes these very top elite players special is their mentality, other-worldly athletic ability and ball striking skills. They wouldn't have made it to the very top and 8+ slams otherwise. Had Sampras grown up today he would likely have dominated in a different way, same if Nadal was brought up on hardcourts in the 80s. These guys have the raw ability inside them needed to succeed...raw talent, like nature itself, finds the way to succeed. So its a waste of time teleporting players from one era to another whilst referring to what they were good at, at the time. The measure of their success probably comes down to the "gene pool" they were fighting against and whether their careers would have been longer/shorter with differing conditions.

Anyway, of course Nole is near the top-table now. I wager he'll get another 3-4 slams...we always think these players will just keep going, but they don't...just subtle differences can make all the difference. If Nole lost 5% of his sliding ability out to his BH side, his game would be a lot different...just like Federer losing 5-10% of his footspeed has made a big difference now. I watched him play Agassi at 2005 USO final recently and the difference in speed is huge...add that to the way he played at Wimb on Sunday and you have very different conditions because Federer was late on a lot of shots when pulled wide.

by summerblues Mon Jul 13, 2015 6:49 pm

I suppose the silver lining for Andy's fans in this year's Wimbledon is that Andy is now a 10-slam talent Wink

by lydian Mon Jul 13, 2015 6:51 pm

Agree SB, Novak's footspeed will start to fall at some point over the next 18 months...its inevitable plus he's starting to clock up the miles now. His other problem is motivation if Rafa and Roger aren't around to the same extent either...

by lydian Mon Jul 13, 2015 6:56 pm

The performances I enjoyed the most this year was oddly enough Martina Hingis 2 doubles finals...that was some serious talent for volleying on display and still the best BH in the game from a relative position. Re: mens final, I couldn't help but think Roger adopted the wrong tactics vs Novak, as he often seems to these days...seems to think he can hit through Novak and then ends up red-lining his game until he's lost his rhythm, ok he competed well for 2 sets but it knocked the wind out of his sails...should have attacked the net more as I'm sure Edberg was advocating ahead of the match!

by socal1976 Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:08 pm

lydian wrote:No point in comparing players, who grew up adapted to playing conditions of their day, to different surfaces. What makes these very top elite players special is their mentality, other-worldly athletic ability and ball striking skills. They wouldn't have made it to the very top and 8+ slams otherwise. Had Sampras grown up today he would likely have dominated in a different way, same if Nadal was brought up on hardcourts in the 80s. These guys have the raw ability inside them needed to succeed...raw talent, like nature itself, finds the way to succeed. So its a waste of time teleporting players from one era to another whilst referring to what they were good at, at the time. The measure of their success probably comes down to the "gene pool" they were fighting against and whether their careers would have been longer/shorter with differing conditions.

Anyway, of course Nole is near the top-table now. I wager he'll get another 3-4 slams...we always think these players will just keep going, but they don't...just subtle differences can make all the difference. If Nole lost 5% of his sliding ability out to his BH side, his game would be a lot different...just like Federer losing 5-10% of his footspeed has made a big difference now. I watched him play Agassi at 2005 USO final recently and the difference in speed is huge...add that to the way he played at Wimb on Sunday and you have very different conditions because Federer was late on a lot of shots when pulled wide.

Certainly agree with those points. Nice to see you Lydian. What did you think of the final? I think the best tennis players today brought up playing with different conditions and technology would still find away to reach the very top. It is a huge rarity to have a pro win 5,6, 8 or more slams. Those that have a rare thoroughbred that would probably find a very high level success in any era. Sampras if he came up today probably would keep his two handed backhand and thus play totally differently. I think as you do that regardless of the conditions the absolute best players would still adapt better to the conditions prevalent at that time and manage their games better regardless of the conditions or technology. Especially, when you consider that the biggest thing that separates the all time greats from just other good pros is really between the ears. I think if you look at all the dominant number 1s in history I think you will find that they are all highly intelligent athletes and very disciplined and hardworking. I think that you would find that they are outside the standard deviation in regards to these areas compared with the rest of the tour. All these guys at or near the top of the game have huge shots, they all can play tennis. The difference is not everyone has the desire, brains, or decision making to be the absolute best. Its supreme talent with steely mental fortitude that gets the job done to the level of greatness we are talking about.

by temporary21 Mon Jul 13, 2015 8:48 pm

Much goatness to be had. All I can see is goat simulator when we get into this discussion for some reason. I agree that comparing players from different eras means jack. The proper old 90,s courts were apparently so good that the best tactic was to never let the ball hit them.

I also agree that the weekerra is a silly thing to try and make as is devaluing one player over another based in style, personal preference absolutely, but achievement no.

by Belovedluckyboy Tue Jul 14, 2015 1:43 am

Agree with Lydian's take on Fed's strategy in the final. I was surprised he was staying back at the baseline and rallied with Novak. When Novak was in that kind of mood and mode, no one can out rally him, not even Rafa, perhaps only the Rafa of old, from 2008-2010, could. I thought the Fed of old would also try finishing the point asap, and not be involved with too much rallying on grass.

Well, maybe the way Novak hit his shots, ie with depth,power and precision had made it tough for Fed to move forward. Fed wasnt serving as well in the final compared to his SF, the pressure of facing Novak. Once he had to serve a second serve, he was under threat. Its hard to move to the net in ypur service game when you had pressure on your serves most of the time.

by HM Murdock Tue Jul 14, 2015 4:03 am

summerblues wrote:I still think that people tend to extrapolate from the current status to future too readily and that slams can dry up far quicker than people expect.

I strongly agree with this.

I've really been surprised by how much commentary is saying that Novak is "only" 28. 28 is pretty old for a tennis player!

All the references to Federer still being around at nearly 34 overlook the fact the he is not actually winning slams at that age. His slam tally between the ages of 30 and 34 is one.

As things stand, I'd say Novak has a very plausible chance of reaching double digit slams. By that, I mean I rate the chances of his winning one more slam between now and the end of his career as greater than 50%.

Two more slams to equal Borg is not unrealistic but I think winning 3 more to get to 12 is a tough propsition.

by Calder106 Tue Jul 14, 2015 4:38 am

Think you are underplaying it a bit HM. Novak only turned 28 in May. Therefore he still has 6 slams to play (if fit) before he even turns 30. Wawrinka has just won 2 slams at an older age than Djokovic currently is. He is well ahead of the rest of the field at present both in ability to win and consistency at the big tournaments. I don't see him slowing down yet. I can't see anyone in the 22-27 age group who I think will consistently challenge him. Some good younger ones coming through but will it will take a couple of years for them to progress (if they do). I would be very surprised if he does not end up with at least 12 slams in his career. That said I'm not expecting him to get too close to 17.

by Guest Tue Jul 14, 2015 4:42 am

lydian wrote:The performances I enjoyed the most this year was oddly enough Martina Hingis 2 doubles finals...that was some serious talent for volleying on display and still the best BH in the game from a relative position. Re: mens final, I couldn't help but think Roger adopted the wrong tactics vs Novak, as he often seems to these days...seems to think he can hit through Novak and then ends up red-lining his game until he's lost his rhythm, ok he competed well for 2 sets but it knocked the wind out of his sails...should have attacked the net more as I'm sure Edberg was advocating ahead of the match!

Long time no see Wink

I don't think the tactics were wrong on Federer's behalf, just it was always going to be a step up in class from the performance Murray put in. I find it annoying the commentators say Andy didn't do much wrong, when infact you could see his length was poor as was the power in his shots. Simply for me it was like an exhibition match. It's testament to Djokovic's consistency. He wasn't going to put in a 'soft' performance like Murray did. The return as well killed Roger. Djokovic will always look to return aggressive and not throw in any slice returns. For 2 sets in a way Djokovic was in cruise mode and it was only in the 3rd set that Djokovic's intensity went up a level. Federer really struggled to hold any court position in the rallies and as BB alluded to the use of the squash shot. Almost a white flag if you will. Most importantly the serve deserted Federer in key moments. Especially in the first set at 4-2. The pressure Djokovic exerts is immense. Just look at the 1st point in the 1st TB. Nothing wrong with the volley and yet Djokovic picked it up. Must be crushing to see fine play not rewarded.

by Belovedluckyboy Tue Jul 14, 2015 5:01 am

Novak was struggling a bit during the first two sets, faced many BPs but each time he came out with a good serve to save the BP(s). Hes really clutch with his serving when needed to whilst Fed wasnt as clutch. I noticed Novak took a bit more time to steady himself before an important serve and each tine he could deliver. Fed OTOH, seemed to rush through his serves and many times had to serve a second serve. From the stats, Fed was poor in winning points on his second serves compared to Novak.

For Fed, its a pity that he couldnt win the first set having broken Novak's serve but couldnt sustain the lead. A two sets lead would give him a good chance of winning the match.

by Sponsored content