Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 147 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,322 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
On the ATP regular tour has has played very well, but that's not where great champions are made and remembered, they're remembered at the slams.

Djokovic has only won three slams in the last three years (FO 2012-FO 2015) , which is very low for a great player

So while he gains lots of points in ATP WORLD Tour, is he tarnishing his legacy by under-performing in slams?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,568 Posts
#MajoringinMinors
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
He needs to win 2012 and 2013 us opens. 2015 french open. 2015-2018 needs to win us opens and wimbledon and 2016-2018 australian french
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,311 Posts
Nole has underachieved a bit. I think he should have won the US Open last year ... he could have this year's French Open. So he didn't and his opponents played great, but with that kind of dominance .. he should have won a couple of more slams.... not in these years but throughout his career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU90

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,378 Posts
4, actually. A year doesn't start from June. If you want to say he won 3 Slams, you have to say 'Since 2012 French Open'.

Nice try anyway. :lol:
Op does specify it like that though. Which is a highly subjective way of looking at the facts/manipulating them to make them more suitable for your own good.

Djokovic is an all time great, but not one of the all time greatest (yet?). That's about it and I don't really see any argument to deviate in either direction from this.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
6,478 Posts
Nole has underachieved a bit. I think he should have won the US Open last year ... he could have this year's French Open. So he didn't and his opponents played great, but with that kind of dominance .. he should have won a couple of more slams.... not in these years but throughout his career.
USO last year he was poorly prepared, it was definitely "the one that got away" -evidenced by the fact that he has schooled Nishikori since - hopefully there will be no repeat of that.
Had he won that, all this talk of a 1 year wonder, 1 Slam a year etc -would have laid to bed.
I can still see a ""Novak Slam"" (winning all 4 in a Non-Calendar Year) happening though, starting with Wimbledon next month.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,627 Posts
Op does specify it like that though. Which is a highly subjective way of looking at the facts/manipulating them to make them more suitable for your own good.

Djokovic is an all time great, but not one of the all time greatest (yet?). That's about it and I don't really see any argument to deviate in either direction from this.
firmly 2nd tier still, not an all time great 1 tier at this point
 
  • Like
Reactions: RocketMan70

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,238 Posts
Djokovic is a great player but, unlike Federer and Nadal, he doesn't seem possessed by an obsessive desire to dominate. When Novak wins the first set almost invariably he will donate the second before reestablishing control.

Djokovic isn't as great a champion as Federer and Nadal but he might have better mental health than both (especially Nadal).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,311 Posts
USO last year he was poorly prepared, it was definitely "the one that got away" -evidenced by the fact that he has schooled Nishikori since - hopefully there will be no repeat of that.
Had he won that, all this talk of a 1 year wonder, 1 Slam a year etc -would have laid to bed.
I can still see a ""Novak Slam"" (winning all 4 in a Non-Calendar Year) happening though, starting with Wimbledon next month.
Nole is a very frustrating player to watch. He looks so dominant at times and then inexplicably starts doubting himself or loses to someone out of nowhere when least expected. With Rafa and Roger, when you looked at the other side, you kind of knew if they had a chance. With Nole, it's not always easy. He has stumbled when being so close to glory a number of times. It's sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,535 Posts
How about we have this convo when his career is over 4-5 years from now huh? then you decide what he is and what he is not.

How can you ask if Novak is really that good because he only has 3 slams in 3 years when it's actually 4 but who cares. he has 8 slams that's more than the likes of McEnroe, Wilander, Edberg and the same amount as Connors, Lendl etc. Last time I check those are some of the all time greats of the game. But continue hating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RocketMan70

·
Registered User
Joined
·
6,478 Posts
How about we have this convo when his career is over 4-5 years from now huh? then you decide what he is and what he is not.

How can you say Novak is not that good because he only has 3 slams in 3 years when it's actually 4 but who cares. he has 8 slams that's more than the likes of McEnroe, Wilander, Edberg and the same amount as Connors, Lendl etc. Last time I check those are some of the all time greats of the game. But continue hating.
Exactly, some Fedal fans have no appreciation or understanding of tennis history - numbers like 17 and 14 are only a very recent phenomenon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,311 Posts
Exactly, some Fedal fans have no appreciation or understanding of tennis history - numbers like 17 and 14 are only a very recent phenomenon.
Tennis is like that. If Nole doesn't win any more slams this year, he should retire. If Rafa wins Wimbledon, he is back to being the best ever. If Fed wins another slam, he should play for 10 more years.... the media always pushes this idea that if you don't win any given slam, you are in crisis, career pretty much over. I remember they even said that about Serena when she lost Wimbledon to Lisicki ...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
923 Posts
Djokertards can't hide behind names like McEnroe, Wilander, Conmors, and Lendl, players who didn't even play all 4 slams in the year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RocketMan70

·
Registered
Joined
·
448 Posts
Eh? I would love to have 3 slams in 3 years. Federer would too and soon Nadal would suck .... to get 3 slams a year once he wins none this year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,203 Posts
He could have won more, sure. But in what universe is having 8 slams not an incredible achievement? Even if Novak retired right now and didn't win any more slams I'd still be proud of his accomplishments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,948 Posts
Even if he underachieved a bit, 5 years in a row winning slams ain't easy. He will end up with more slams than Connors, Mac, Agassi, Lendl and maybe even Borg, so yes, he is very good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,472 Posts
On the ATP regular tour has has played very well, but that's not where great champions are made and remembered, they're remembered at the slams.

Djokovic has only won three slams in the last three years (FO 2012-FO 2015) , which is very low for a great player

So while he gains lots of points in ATP WORLD Tour, is he tarnishing his legacy by under-performing in slams?
First, Djokovic won 4 out of 5 possible slams from AO10-AO11. Other than him, only Pete Sampras, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal have achieved this during the open era.

Second, "only 3 slams in 3 years" - there are no more than 17 players in the open era who have achieved this. Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Connors, Vilas, Borg, McEnroe, Lendl, Wilander, Becker, Edberg, Courier, Sampras, Agassi, Federer, Nadal, Djokovic. That's it. So even the Djokovic of the past 3 years - a reduction which of course doesn't do Djokovic's career justice at all - would still be one of the 17 greatest players of the past half century. If you don't think these 17 are "great", your standards for greatness are rather strict.

Third, where I agree with you is that Djokovic has lost a bit of sparkle. The dominant Djokovic of 2011 has not come back. He is still the best player in the world, but only because Federer and Nadal have deteriorated even more, and because there is no one else to take over the baton. Which leads back to this.

I also agree that Djokovic hasn't quite made it to the very first tier of dominant champions - the Lavers, Rosewalls, Borgs, Samprases, Federers, and Nadals. But he comes right thereafter, together with Lendl, Connors, Agassi. And of course his career is not yet over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,941 Posts
...
I also agree that Djokovic hasn't quite made it to the very first tier of dominant champions - the Lavers, Rosewalls, Borgs, Samprases, Federers, and Nadals. But he comes right thereafter, together with Lendl, Connors, Agassi. And of course his career is not yet over.
What is the most dominant period of Pistol Pete, the most slams+masters ?

If 1993-95 let's compare it with Djokovic' 2011-13.

Sampras 6 GS + 1F, 6 Masters + 2F, 1 WTF + 1 F ; = 13 titles + 4F.
Djokovic 5 GS + 4F, 11 Masters + 4F, 2 WTF ; = 18 titles + 8F.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novak_Djokovic_career_statistics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Sampras_career_statistics

Sampras virtually skipped every clay season (clay masters+RG) and Toronto, by going out early, to be ready for Wimbledon, Cinci, USO.

Sampras won 2 AO + 6 masters in the first half of the year, before Wimbledon; whereas 12 slams, 5 masters and 5 WTF in the second half, Wimbledon and after.

Nadal similarly played at 50% after Wimbledon or skipped post USO season altogether, winning 2 USO + 5 masters in the second (post Wimbledon) half of the year; whereas 12 slams + 22 masters in AO-Wimb. period.

Also, 2013 USO+two masters combo was after 7 months off + skipped AO and Wimb.(1R loss) that year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Nadal_career_statistics

If Djokovic wants more slams he should also start skipping masters and periods too, but it would probably cost him no.1 position and a lot of masters, + unlike Nadal he can't escape two best HC players at literally every AO/USO, so even making the HC finals will always be pretty hard from his half, fresh or exhausted.
 
1 - 20 of 147 Posts
Top