Mens Tennis Forums banner

If Djokovic had no era how good is he to have won so much

5K views 98 replies 24 participants last post by  sheep85 
#1 ·
It is often said we live in the Nadal era as Nadal as dominated tennis since 2008, clay and decoturf hard court in particular.

Federer era was 2003-2007.

Djokovic never really dominated as has always been playing catch up yet he has won all 4 majors at once in that time dominated 2 Majors and amassed a winning h2h v federer everywhere and against Nadal at smaller events.

So with no Djokovic era, how spectacular has is career been, for me it puts him on the GOAT pedestal with Nadal .

Both the biggest and best sportspeople since Muhamed Ali. No ifs no buts.
 
#3 · (Edited)
If Djokovic has never dominated then no open-era Goat ever has or shall.

9 best consecutive seasons (with the most slams):

B.Borg, nine consecutive seasons 1973-1981 i.e. his whole career:
11 slams + 5 slam finals + 15 masters + 2 WTF + 2 y.e. no.1

P.Sampras nine consecutive seasons 1993-2001
12 slams + 3 slam finals + 10 masters + 4 WTF + 6 y.e. no.1

R.Federer nine consecutive seasons 2003-2011
16 slams + 7 slam finals + 18 masters + 6 WTF + 5 y.e. no.1

R.Nadal nine consecutive seasons 2006-2014
13 slams + 6 slam finals + 27 masters + 0 WTF + 3 y.e. no.1

N.Djokovic, nine consecutive seasons 2011-2019 (including injury period)
15 slams + 7 slam finals + 29 masters + 4 WTF + 5 y.e. no.1

+ 3x being very close to y.e. no.1 (winning more slams & masters than Murray'16, winning the same number of slams & masters as Nadal'19, winning more ITF points than Nadal'13)
 
#4 ·
If Djokovic has never dominated then nobody ever has or shall.

B.Borg, nine consecutive seasons 1973-1981 i.e. his whole career:

11 slams + 5 slam finals + 15 masters + 2 WTF + 2 y.e. no.1

N.Djokovic, nine consecutive seasons 2011-2019 (including injury period)

15 slams + 7 slam finals + 29 masters + 4 WTF + 5 y.e. no.1 + 3x very close to y.e. no.1.
You had to reply. I knew Djoker fans would not resist this trolling.
 
#9 ·
If Djokovic has never dominated then no open-era Goat ever has or shall.

9 best consecutive seasons (with the most slams):

B.Borg, nine consecutive seasons 1973-1981 i.e. his whole career:
11 slams + 5 slam finals + 15 masters + 2 WTF + 2 y.e. no.1

P.Sampras nine consecutive seasons 1993-2001
12 slams + 3 slam finals + 10 masters + 4 WTF + 6 y.e. no.1

R.Federer nine consecutive seasons 2003-2011
16 slams + 7 slam finals + 18 masters + 6 WTF + 5 y.e. no.1

R.Nadal nine consecutive seasons 2006-2014
13 slams + 6 slam finals + 27 masters + 0 WTF + 3 y.e. no.1

N.Djokovic, nine consecutive seasons 2011-2019 (including injury period)
15 slams + 7 slam finals + 29 masters + 4 WTF + 5 y.e. no.1 + 3x being very close to y.e. no.1 (winning more slams & masters than Murray'16, winning the same number of slams & masters as Nadal'19, winning more ITF points than Nadal'13)
I see facts not your strongest point. Nadal 2008 2013 2017 2019 was by far the vest player those years hence was YE1. Its 2020 now. Where has Djokovic 9 consecutive years come from lmao? Or is there an alternate reality where Djokovic was YE1 for 9 years?

Lets compare Nadal and Djokovic the two greatest ever.

MAJORS...Nadal
MASTERS 1000...Nadal
OLYMPICS.....Nadal
h2h MAJORS....Nadal
YE1.....NADAL
MULTIPLE MAJORS MULTIPLE SURFACES........NADAL
MOST MAJORS at A SLAM....NADAL
H2H SMALLER BO3 MATCHES...DJOKOVIC

Now by my calculation looking at the above, i think we could say advantage Nadal no?
 
#15 ·
It is often said we live in the Nadal era as Nadal as dominated tennis since 2008, clay and decoturf hard court in particular.

Federer era was 2003-2007.

Djokovic never really dominated as has always been playing catch up yet he has won all 4 majors at once in that time dominated 2 Majors and amassed a winning h2h v federer everywhere and against Nadal at smaller events.

So with no Djokovic era, how spectacular has is career been, for me it puts him on the GOAT pedestal with Nadal .

Both the biggest and best sportspeople since Muhamed Ali. No ifs no buts.
If last decade from 2011 to 2020 (so far) isnt Djokovic era than I dont understand definition of that word.
 
#16 ·
The Federer years: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 + (6 YE#2)
The Nadal years: 2008, 2010, 2013, 2017, 2019 + (6 YE#2)
The Djokovic years: 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2018 + (3 YE#2)

in all years since 2003 except one these three are the joint lords of tennis, all worthy, all champions, all masters of their field and 2020 has yet to convince us that this is changing as of yet but we shall see.
 
#31 ·
how this lame troll still isn't banned for good is totally beyond me.
 
#37 ·
If we take Djokovic out of the picture from the previous graph, and compare the 10 year period starting from 2005 (when Nadal broke thru) between Federer and Nadal, Nadal dominated over Federer in only 3 years, 2008, 2010, and 2013.
If we compare the span from 2011 (Novak's breakthru year) up to now, Nadal was dominant in only 3 years, 2013, 2017 and 2019, two of them by a narrow margin (2013 and 2019), and one when Djokovic was sidelined - 2017.
The absolute peak belongs to Djokovic's 2015. Yeah, that was the Nole Slam, remember!
 
#38 ·
The "era" argument is one of the dumbest ones.

Mr. Dominator, wins 1 slam in 2009, and 12 between 2010 and 2019. Another hypothetical player - Mr. Spread, wins 9 beween 2001 and 2009, and also 9 between 2010 and 2019. Clearly, Mr. Spread is worse according to this logic.

Let's dig deeper. Mr. Dominator started his career in 2009, won his 13 slams, finished in 2021. Mr. Spread started in 2004, won his 18 and finished in 2016. Both careers lasted 12 years. Should Mr. Spread be punished because he dared to get onto the tour earlier and his career spread around two decades? ?
 
#39 ·
@bighax, if you are referring to my post, you can see for yourself that I didn't stick to a strict decade span. I took both Nadal and Djokovic breakthrough years as a starting point, which in Djokovic's case almost coincide with a decade span by definition. Plus, none of their careers (all of the "Big 3") are over yet.

My post was about dominance over certain stretch of time. It's not easy to compare when their peak years (achievements-wise) don't overlap exactly, but they last long enough to have long enough overlapping periods between each others careers, so that periods with obvious domination can be identified if there were any.

In case of Nadal, such a period can not be identified. He may indeed end his career as a most successful player of our times (if we count big titles), but for the most of his career he just was not The Top dog. He didn't have by any means a consistent stretch with clear dominance over the other 2, who in fact did have such a stretch. OP is trying to convince us otherwise.

One can argue that Mr. Niche player can use his niche area to his advantage and amass titles on his safe grounds, at the same time prolonging his career by avoiding unnecessary energy expenditure out of his niche... I'm not pertaining to that argument, I'm just stating it as an example...
 
#40 ·
@bighax, if you are referring to my post, you can see for yourself that I didn't stick to a strict decade span. I took both Nadal and Djokovic breakthrough years as a starting point, which in Djokovic's case almost coincide with a decade span by definition. Plus, none of their careers (all of the "Big 3") are over yet.

My post was about dominance over certain stretch of time. It's not easy to compare when their peak years (achievements-wise) don't overlap exactly, but they last long enough to have long enough overlapping periods between each others careers, so that periods with obvious domination can be identified if there were any.

In case of Nadal, such a period can not be identified. He may indeed end his career as a most successful player of our times (if we count big titles), but for the most of his career he just was not The Top dog. He didn't have by any means a consistent stretch with clear dominance over the other 2, who in fact did have such a stretch. OP is trying to convince us otherwise.

One can argue that Mr. Niche player can use his niche area to his advantage and amass titles on his safe grounds, at the same time prolonging his career by avoiding unnecessary energy expenditure out of his niche... I'm not pertaining to that argument, I'm just stating it as an example...
OP is obviously trolling but I meant specifically the "dominated a decade" argument is terrible.
 
#84 ·
Well Djokovic was lucky his peak started January 2011 lol

The numbers say he is best player from 2010-2019, no doubt. But history is longer than a single decade snapshot
 
#92 ·
You could say the same thing for Federer though. Hes lucky his peak started in 2004/2005 or whatever. Nadal is the one that really got screwed with his peak being sandwiched between Djoker and Fed along with the injuries etc.. over the year. Its very possible Nadal would have been far and away the slam record holder years ago if he came along at a different time earlier or later
 
#89 ·
why only probably a top-25 player of all time? you'd care to come up with 25 players in the history of tennis you deem better than him and why?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RocketMan70
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top