387 weeks at the top of the world for the 1987-born legend! Novak Djokovic has always been THE ONE!

1065 Views 35 Replies 19 Participants Last post by Slasher1985, 13 d ago

Tennis9000+

Discussion Starter · 14 d ago (Edited)

He was born in 1987 and the greatest streak in tennis history ends at 387. Coincidence? I think not.

It's been always Djokovic's destiny to rule.

Happy birthday to the one true king! :hatoff:

:hatoff:

One burning ambition
One strong belief
One lonely walk out on court, day after day
One more, "okay, I lost, deal with it"
One more, "okay, I won, don't get complacent"
One more, ignore the critics
One more, humbled by the support of fans
One more, in spite of everything
Until you become
The One :worship:

:worship:

CC to MTF legends: @swiss_tennisgod, @Johnny Groove
BCC to the GOAT haters: @monfed, @NadalwillneverbeGoat, @The Federest, @Slasher1985

See less See more

Reactions: 5

21 - 36 of 36 Posts

MsNyxxMedvedeva

· #21 · 14 d ago

Tennis9000+ said:
He was born in 1987 and the greatest streak in tennis history ends at 387. Coincidence? I think not.

Very much so 😐

talicnitom

· #22 · 14 d ago

friður said:
he decided it by himself with no regrets ☺

did not know that he rejected himself 2000 W points.
Pretty stupid decision by him!

Reactions: 1

Lord Protector

· #23 · 14 d ago

Moozza said:
I said best player. I acknowledge Djokovic has had the ‘greater’ career but in terms of pure tennis talent Murray is better for me.

They are quite close in terms of talent.

Question would be: Why did Murray not develop his talents to become a better player? He has the skills to blow hos opponents of the court, but played tentatively most of his career.

Slasher1985

· #24 · 14 d ago

Lord Protector said:
They are quite close in terms of talent.

Question would be: Why did Murray not develop his talents to become a better player? He has the skills to blow hos opponents of the court, but played tentatively most of his career.

I think the main difference between them is
a) the body, we have to admit Novak's body is also special, the way he is able to store vast amounts of energy, channel them at the right time. His nutrition is also a huge boost, but you can't have that without fantastic genetics.
b) the mind, Novak's mental fortitude is legendary stuff, once in a century.

Reactions: 1

Moozza

· #25 · 14 d ago

Lord Protector said:
They are quite close in terms of talent.

Question would be: Why did Murray not develop his talents to become a better player? He has the skills to blow hos opponents of the court, but played tentatively most of his career.

1) Injuries. Murray had 2 majorly injuries and surgeries in his prime that both came just as he was starting to dominate.
2. Mental. Murray has had great mental strength throughout his career so it is not so much a negative for him. Djokovic just has this belief deep down that allows him to win matches and even tournaments he has no business winning.

artilerist13

· #26 · 14 d ago

Johnny44 said:
It’s fair to say though too that if Murray hadn’t had the hip injury when he did Djokovic wouldn’t be at 22 slams now or have as long a reign at number one.

First Happy birthday to the GOAT

.GOAT on the court, GOAT off the court,GOAT as a player,GOAT as a person let's wish he continue to make us happy for many years!
And about the fans of 1 former player show little respect for the GOAT at least on his birthday ! I know Bendtner would always like to compare himself to Messi but like in the above case one is newspaper star the other greatest legend of the game.

Brod107

· #27 · 14 d ago

Johnny Groove said:
Can still get to 400 weeks and a mythical 8th YE #1

But yes he already stands on top of the mountain

Only question is how tall the mountain will ultimately be

Everyone is talking about Wimbledon, but there is 0 chance (ignoring injuries) that he will drop out early there...so he will just add a lot of points there no matter what. RG is key....winning it would be big. And I really think he can.

MsNyxxMedvedeva

· #28 · 14 d ago

Brod107 said:
Everyone is talking about Wimbledon, but there is 0 chance (ignoring injuries) that he will drop out early there...so he will just add a lot of points there no matter what. RG is key....winning it would be big. And I really think he can.

Do I need to remind you of Sam Querrey?

Slasher1985

· #29 · 14 d ago

Brod107 said:
Everyone is talking about Wimbledon, but there is 0 chance (ignoring injuries) that he will drop out early there...so he will just add a lot of points there no matter what. RG is key....winning it would be big. And I really think he can.

0 chance until it isn't.

We call that... an UPSET! Welcome to tennis.

Reactions: 1

friður

· #30 · 14 d ago

talicnitom said:
did not know that he rejected himself 2000 W points.
Pretty stupid decision by him!

yes. i was wrong in this. but well others didnt get points either.

(some fans were undecided whether wimbledon should count. until their favorite won 🤭🤭🤭)

Reactions: 1

Brod107

· #31 · 14 d ago

Slasher1985 said:
0 chance until it isn't.

We call that... an UPSET! Welcome to tennis.

And I call "0 chance" a rhetorical figure.

Slasher1985

· #32 · 14 d ago

friður said:
yes. i was wrong in this. but well others didnt get points either.

(some fans were undecided whether wimbledon should count. until their favorite won 🤭🤭🤭)

Pretty sure that, had Nadal won and Nole was taken out by Sinner, NoleFam would be singing a very different tune right now, though many Rafatards would be the ones whining instead.

Reactions: 1

Tennis9000+

Discussion Starter · #33 · 13 d ago

talicnitom said:
he was already robbed of both

This. He would be on 400+ weeks and 8 YE#1 if not for politics. Oh well, at least tennis community knows.

Slasher1985

· #34 · 13 d ago

Tennis9000+ said:
This. He would be on 400+ weeks and 8 YE#1 if not for politics. Oh well, at least tennis community knows.

This will be forgotten in less than a decade. Only official numbers remain. Even something as dodgy as an actual ATP error for the number 1 doesn't make an impact, let alone something that is made up.

florentine

· #35 · 13 d ago

Slasher1985 said:
This will be forgotten in less than a decade.

This is a statement with which I do not agree.

I follow the game since RG 78, and I can assure you that I remember very well every "micro" event of the circuit during these years and even more everything that makes any comparison with the current circuit incoherent, even if they are rarely evoked by the media today focus on recency bias.
In all modesty, it happened to me here to recall a fact, today sometimes difficult to find on the web now, but which was mentioned at that time in the written specialized press, daily or monthly.

And it will fade from my mind, the day my memory fails me.

"Oblivion", as you say, only concerns casual observers of the game, not those who have followed regularly, and I can say... assiduously.

Oblivion will most certainly come in 60, 80, 100 years, when all the contemporaries will be dead. :dunno:

:dunno:

This is why it is always necessary to listen carefully to the anecdotes of the oldest great witnesses, such as Rosewall, Laver, Sedgman or others.

"An old man who dies is like a burning library".

It is knowledge lost forever.

See less See more

Reactions: 2

Slasher1985

· #36 · 13 d ago

florentine said:
This is a statement with which I do not agree.

I follow the game since RG 78, and I can assure you that I remember very well every "micro" event of the circuit during these years and even more everything that makes any comparison with the current circuit incoherent, even if they are rarely evoked by the media today focus on recency bias.
In all modesty, it happened to me here to recall a fact, today sometimes difficult to find on the web now, but which was mentioned at that time in the written specialized press, daily or monthly.

And it will fade from my mind, the day my memory fails me.

"Oblivion", as you say, only concerns casual observers of the game, not those who have followed regularly, and I can say... assiduously.

Oblivion will most certainly come in 60, 80, 100 years, when all the contemporaries will be dead.

This is why it is always necessary to listen carefully to the anecdotes of the oldest great witnesses, such as Rosewall, Laver, Sedgman or others.

"An old man who dies is like a burning library".

It is knowledge lost forever.

Ah no, I agree. I follow tennis too and rarely forget anything from the past.

What I meant is that "it will be forgotten by mainstream fans", you know the ones that come in, support a player for some years, then move on. That is the collective memory of tennis fandom, not us superfans/historians, we will probably remember Nastase's antics, Mac's antics and Agassi slowly losing his hair forever and ever and ever.

Reactions: 1

21 - 36 of 36 Posts