PDA

View Full Version : Djokovic's current place in history as it stands 'right now'


Nathaniel_Near
12-15-2011, 05:41 PM
This thread deals with Djokovic's place in history in terms of his tennis playing ability and career results, rather than just judging a singular season among other great singular seasons, however I do present to you:

Djokovic's full 2011 REVIEW

Part One
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5_v23rk-7w

Part Two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLXkTbT2NOs

Novak Djokovic's 2011 was one of the best seasons in Tennis history (specifically the Open Era). Where does his legendary season place him among the pantheon of greats?

(I put tremendous effort into these 2 videos, watching them will surely be worth your time! :D)

Here is a list of elite titles won by players mainly from Open Era:

Federer - 22 (16 Slams, 6 Year-end Championship equivalents)
Sampras - 21 (14 , 7)
Lendl - 15 (8 , 7)
McEnroe - 15 (7 , 8)
Borg - 14 (11, 3)
Nadal - 11 (10, 1 Olympic Gold)
Connors - 11 (8 , 3)
Becker - 10 (6 , 4)
Agassi - 10 (8 , 1 , 1)
Newcombe - 8 (7 , 1)
Edberg - 7 (6 , 1)
Wilander - 7 (7)
Nastase - 6 (2 , 4)
Djokovic - 5 (4 , 1)
Vilas - 5 (4 , 1)
Ashe - 4 (3 , 1)
Courier - 4 (4)
Kuerten - 4 (3 , 1)
Kodes - 3 (3)
Murray - 0
***

More contentious:

Rosewall - 25 + (not including probably lots of YEC wins or tournaments of equal prestige - but includes 2 WCT Finals wins which were both over Rod Laver)
Laver 19+ (not including probably lots of YEC wins or if not, then tournaments of equal prestige)


Reason? Didn't always partake in the same Slam equivalent tournaments due to being on different tours for a few years and, even when both on the same tour for several years, still a divide existed between two alternative tours (implications are obvious. I am not the type to spell them out).

****

This is based on Slams and Year-end Championship tournaments containing only the cream of the crop (Oh, and Olympic Gold). Winning these tournaments generally takes an incredibly high level of play and requires victory over an elite field.

Please, those who have a greater insight into the status of tournaments at certain times, feel free to give alternative numbers for these players.''[/QUOTE]

Where does Djokovic Stand?

BeHappy
12-15-2011, 05:56 PM
My thread is far better.

Nathaniel_Near
12-15-2011, 05:59 PM
My thread is far better.

Cheers, i'll bear that in mind.

fed_rulz
12-15-2011, 05:59 PM
Djokovic's full 2011 REVIEW

Part One
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5_v23rk-7w

Part Two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLXkTbT2NOs

Novak Djokovic's 2011 was one of the best seasons in Tennis history (specifically the Open Era). Where does his legendary season place him among the pantheon of greats?

Here is a list of elite titles won by players mainly from Open Era:

Federer - 22 (16 Slams, 6 Year-end Championship equivalents)
Sampras - 21 (14 , 7)
Lendl - 15 (8 , 7)
McEnroe - 15 (7 , 8)
Borg - 14 (11, 3)
Nadal - 11 (10, 1 Olympic Gold)
Connors - 11 (8 , 3)
Becker - 10 (6 , 4)
Agassi - 10 (8 , 1 , 1)
Newcombe - 8 (7 , 1)
Edberg - 7 (6 , 1)
Wilander - 7 (7)
Nastase - 6 (2 , 4)
Djokovic - 5 (4 , 1)
Vilas - 5 (4 , 1)
Ashe - 4 (3 , 1)
Courier - 4 (4)
Kuerten - 4 (3 , 1)
Murray - 0
***

More contentious:

Rosewall - 25 + (not including probably lots of YEC wins or tournaments of equal prestige - but includes 2 WCT Finals wins which were both over Rod Laver)
Laver 19+ (not including probably lots of YEC wins or if not, then tournaments of equal prestige)


Reason? Didn't always partake in the same Slam equivalent tournaments due to being on different tours for a few years and, even when both on the same tour for several years, still a divide existed between two alternative tours (implications are obvious. I am not the type to spell them out).

****

This is based on Slams and Year-end Championship tournaments containing only the cream of the crop (Oh, and Olympic Gold). Winning these tournaments generally takes an incredibly high level of play and requires victory over an elite field.

Please, those who have a greater insight into the status of tournaments at certain times, feel free to give alternative numbers for these players.''

Where does Djokovic Stand?[/quote]

this ranking favors players from 90-99 -- they had 6 tournaments (4 slams, YEC, grand slam cup) to win from, where as others had only 5. I'd say rank based on slams; break ties using YEC, discard grand slam cup results.

_maxi
12-15-2011, 06:03 PM
Why Sampras has seven WTF's??? why Lendl 7? McEnroe 8???

Nathaniel_Near
12-15-2011, 06:07 PM
Where does Djokovic Stand?

this ranking favors players from 90-99 -- they had 6 tournaments (4 slams, YEC, grand slam cup) to win from, where as others had only 5. I'd say rank based on slams; break ties using YEC, discard grand slam cup results.[/QUOTE]

Yep possibly should do this. I realise the system isn't perfect and I've had different people tell me different things so I'm not entirely sure what to do with it. I'll let the opinions keep rolling in and hopefully make some informed decisions and changes and I'd thank you for your patience while that process ensues, cheers. :D



Why Sampras has seven WTF's??? why Lendl 7? McEnroe 8???

It's because I'm currently also counting Grand Slam Cups and other Year-end Championship equivalents such as when the end of the year saw the Masters YEC and the WTC YEC.


BTW for anyone who wants to complain about my player groupings in the poll, it's just a ballpark figure, I realise Vilas and Năstase are almost certainly greater than Courier and Kuerten but it's just a ballpark figure. Same goes for Nadal and Lendl being greater than Agassi, probably.

NadalAgassi
12-15-2011, 06:23 PM
I would say he is above the Courier group but below the Edberg group as it stands now.

Nathaniel_Near
12-15-2011, 06:29 PM
I would say he is above the Courier group but below the Edberg group as it stands now.

LOL. Trust you, pick an option now, I demand! Never mind, you already did. Actually this post makes no sense (mine) given the poll options; fail post.

dr325i
12-15-2011, 09:21 PM
IMO, there are more important and psychologically demanding events than the WTF/YEC and Olympic event...

merlinpinpin
12-15-2011, 11:19 PM
The Grand Slam Cup really is a problem for this kind of lists/polls. It never really caught, wasn't recognized by the ATP (ie no ranking points) and just survived by awarding the greatest prizes out there. Good thing Sampras won it twice, otherwise, when you look at the winners' list, it's more of a glorified exhibition than anything else (I mean, Rusedski and *Wheaton* winning a YEC, really?). The field was the best 16 of the four GS events of the year, so a fluke 1/4 final run was generally enough to qualify (I mean, even Thierry Champion qualified for it, although that wasn't the year he got triple-bagelled by Brugera at RG).

It was really an ITF move to take over the YEC championship, but it failed. The only thing that is left from it is a rule added to WTF, that is that a grand slam winner who doesn't qualify in the top 8 will still go and play the WTF if he is in the top 20, which wasn't the case before (the Masters was just the eight players who had scored the most points during the year, irrespective of their results).

Russeljones
12-16-2011, 12:44 AM
Djokovic is somewhere in the top 20 for sure.

Russeljones
12-16-2011, 01:06 AM
A commendable effort on the 2 videos. To answer the question, with which the 2nd one ends, I believe 2012 will bring heartbreak for Novak's fans. He overachieved in 2011 and it will be a miracle if he wins another GS title imho. Great work on the editing and music.

roysid
12-16-2011, 10:23 AM
Djokovic has 4 slams now same as courier and comparable to kuerten, vilas etc.

But none of them had a staggering season like this in which they whipped two best players in history multiple times. 3 slams, 5 masters and world no.1 ranking for a long time (atleast 1 year)
So he has surpassed them.
Where he will end only time will tell.

DjokovicForTheWin
12-16-2011, 10:37 AM
In terms of peak years Djoker has only had 1 compared to 6 peak years for Nadal so far. So we have to wait and see. But if we extrapolate Djoker based on 2011, then he is way ahead of Nadal too.

nadalwon2012
12-17-2011, 12:26 AM
Djokovic is number one in retirements, all-time. Greatest quitter of all-time.

Nathaniel_Near
12-17-2011, 12:29 AM
Djokovic is number one in retirements, all-time. Greatest quitter of all-time.

He's pretty excellent in this category, though his fellow countryman, Janko Quitsarevic, makes him look like an amateur.:???:

Tony48
12-17-2011, 01:27 AM
These days, your legacy is purely based upon your slam count. So....whoever has 4. If it's a tie, then weeks at No. 1/YECs/Masters become the tiebreaker.

zagor
12-17-2011, 01:36 AM
Djokovic is number one in retirements, all-time. Greatest quitter of all-time.

True but he also has some other records:

-Most overall wins against Nadal than any other player

-Most wins in a row against Nadal across different surfaces

-Most sets in a row taken from Nadal on clay(straight set Rome and Madrid spankings)

-The only player who beat Nadal in two consecutive slams.

We all hope he will add more to this list in the future, who knows, one day he might even win a Nadal slam.

nadalwon2012
12-17-2011, 02:08 AM
Overall wins vs Nadal? Nadal has 16 overall wins vs Djokovic. Djokovic only has 13 wins vs Nadal. The point being, they have met more times than any active players in history. Oh and they've met 7 times in slams, Nadal has won 5 of them :lol:

Hitman
12-17-2011, 05:28 AM
This thread deals with Djokovic's place in history in terms of his tennis playing ability and career results, rather than just judging a singular season among other great singular seasons, however I do present to you:

Djokovic's full 2011 REVIEW

Part One
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5_v23rk-7w

Part Two
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLXkTbT2NOs

Novak Djokovic's 2011 was one of the best seasons in Tennis history (specifically the Open Era). Where does his legendary season place him among the pantheon of greats?

(I put tremendous effort into these 2 videos, watching them will surely be worth your time! :D)

Here is a list of elite titles won by players mainly from Open Era:

Federer - 22 (16 Slams, 6 Year-end Championship equivalents)
Sampras - 21 (14 , 7)
Lendl - 15 (8 , 7)
McEnroe - 15 (7 , 8)
Borg - 14 (11, 3)
Nadal - 11 (10, 1 Olympic Gold)
Connors - 11 (8 , 3)
Becker - 10 (6 , 4)
Agassi - 10 (8 , 1 , 1)
Newcombe - 8 (7 , 1)
Edberg - 7 (6 , 1)
Wilander - 7 (7)
Nastase - 6 (2 , 4)
Djokovic - 5 (4 , 1)
Vilas - 5 (4 , 1)
Ashe - 4 (3 , 1)
Courier - 4 (4)
Kuerten - 4 (3 , 1)
Kodes - 3 (3)
Murray - 0
***

More contentious:

Rosewall - 25 + (not including probably lots of YEC wins or tournaments of equal prestige - but includes 2 WCT Finals wins which were both over Rod Laver)
Laver 19+ (not including probably lots of YEC wins or if not, then tournaments of equal prestige)


Reason? Didn't always partake in the same Slam equivalent tournaments due to being on different tours for a few years and, even when both on the same tour for several years, still a divide existed between two alternative tours (implications are obvious. I am not the type to spell them out).

****

This is based on Slams and Year-end Championship tournaments containing only the cream of the crop (Oh, and Olympic Gold). Winning these tournaments generally takes an incredibly high level of play and requires victory over an elite field.

Please, those who have a greater insight into the status of tournaments at certain times, feel free to give alternative numbers for these players.''

Where does Djokovic Stand?[/QUOTE]

I loved the videos! Awesome stuff, seen them a few times now. Amazing how all the talk was about the Rafa slam at the start, and Roger being right there also. And how Novak smashed that Fedal dominance. You can see how he physically, mentally and emotionally broke down Nadal in the end. Incredible year for Novak, and one of the greatest years of all time.

vernonbc
12-17-2011, 05:37 AM
These days, your legacy is purely based upon your slam count. So....whoever has 4. If it's a tie, then weeks at No. 1/YECs/Masters become the tiebreaker.
No it's not. Slam count only became a big deal in the American media when Sampras was chasing them and the Fedfans have continued the nonsense. There is far more that makes up a player's legacy than just slams.

abmk
12-17-2011, 05:43 AM
Djoker is somewhere in b/w Courier and Newcombe/Edberg/Becker/Wilander right now IMO ...

nadalwon2012
12-17-2011, 06:31 AM
No it's not. Slam count only became a big deal in the American media when Sampras was chasing them and the Fedfans have continued the nonsense. There is far more that makes up a player's legacy than just slams.

I agree, especially given that Laver wasn't rewarded for his pre-Open achievements.

dr325i
12-17-2011, 06:55 AM
Overall wins vs Nadal? Nadal has 16 overall wins vs Djokovic. Djokovic only has 13 wins vs Nadal. The point being, they have met more times than any active players in history. Oh and they've met 7 times in slams, Nadal has won 5 of them :lol:

Ah, yes, and when was the last time Nadal won...more than a year ago;)
Your statistics are good for up to 2011. In 2011, it was a one-way road... I don't recall anyone kicking buttpicker's ***** that badly...ever ;)

Lets talk more next year at this time :)

billnepill
12-17-2011, 09:14 AM
No it's not. Slam count only became a big deal in the American media when Sampras was chasing them and the Fedfans have continued the nonsense. There is far more that makes up a player's legacy than just slams.

yes, like weeks being number 1, consecutive weeks nr 1, the ability to win multiple slams on different surfaces, the ability to perform throughout the whole year, not just between april-july, the YECs/WTFs...

nadalwon2012
12-17-2011, 05:24 PM
Ah, yes, and when was the last time Nadal won...more than a year ago;)
Your statistics are good for up to 2011. In 2011, it was a one-way road... I don't recall anyone kicking buttpicker's ***** that badly...ever ;)

Lets talk more next year at this time :)

Oh don't worry, we'll be talking, talking about how Djokovic could only dominate when Nadal dropped his level in 2011.

abmk
12-17-2011, 05:34 PM
yes, nadal making so many finals ( was it 7 or 8 in a row ? ) only shows nadal dropped his level in 2011. Nothing to do with djoker who beat him in many of those finals raising his level. People are that dumb to make/believe it the way you want :oops:

Oh wait, maybe you think many other people also have a negative IQ like you ? :)

NadalAgassi
12-17-2011, 06:13 PM
I am surprised at this poll. I cant see how anyone would rate players like Nastase (a huge underachiever who won only 2 slams, and 1 of those was a semi joke with nobody showing up IIRC), Vilas (a one surface wonder who was a perennial bridesmaid even there), or Kuerten (another one surface wonder). Djokovic is already clearly above those 3. PS- anyone who brings up Vilas's 2 Australian Opens, everyone knows those were a joke, that was around the time Chris O Neill and Barbara Jordan were winning the Australian Open, and everyone knows Vilas was not even a good grass court player as his performances at Wimbledon prove.

Courier is the only one on that bottom line who could be argued to be close to him but Courier never had a year close to Djokovic's 2011, was not a solid top 3 player for 5 years and counting like Djokovic, isnt as accomplished across all types of surfaces. The votes on this poll drastically underrate Djokovic.

Cup8489
12-17-2011, 06:36 PM
No it's not. Slam count only became a big deal in the American media when Sampras was chasing them and the Fedfans have continued the nonsense. There is far more that makes up a player's legacy than just slams.

yep.. alot of the stuff the poster you just quoted counts. And, obviously nowadays Slam count is the biggest criteria in the majority of people's minds. Mostly the minority ***** disagree.

Sentinel
12-18-2011, 01:34 AM
Oh don't worry, we'll be talking, talking about how Djokovic could only dominate when Nadal dropped his level in 2011.
And why did Nadal drop his level ?

Or lets say only if Joker drops his 2011 level, will Nadal come within sniffing distance of a slam.

(I hope i used the word sniff correctly, N.N.?)

timnz
12-18-2011, 01:41 AM
[/quote]

this ranking favors players from 90-99 -- they had 6 tournaments (4 slams, YEC, grand slam cup) to win from, where as others had only 5. I'd say rank based on slams; break ties using YEC, discard grand slam cup results.[/QUOTE]

But players of the 70s and 80s had the wct finals.

zagor
12-18-2011, 01:45 AM
Oh don't worry, we'll be talking, talking about how Djokovic could only dominate when Nadal dropped his level in 2011.

You're right of course. Aside from FO 2011 was a humourless year for Nadal.


On the other hand if he continues to dominate Nadal(and the field) we'll be talking how Nadal is a transitional champion, who used a period between decline of Fed and maturing of Novak to inflate his slam count.

jean pierre
12-18-2011, 08:17 AM
I am surprised at this poll. I cant see how anyone would rate players like Nastase (a huge underachiever who won only 2 slams, and 1 of those was a semi joke with nobody showing up IIRC), Vilas (a one surface wonder who was a perennial bridesmaid even there), or Kuerten (another one surface wonder). Djokovic is already clearly above those 3. PS- anyone who brings up Vilas's 2 Australian Opens, everyone knows those were a joke, that was around the time Chris O Neill and Barbara Jordan were winning the Australian Open, and everyone knows Vilas was not even a good grass court player as his performances at Wimbledon prove.

Courier is the only one on that bottom line who could be argued to be close to him but Courier never had a year close to Djokovic's 2011, was not a solid top 3 player for 5 years and counting like Djokovic, isnt as accomplished across all types of surfaces. The votes on this poll drastically underrate Djokovic.

I don't agree with the idea that Vilas's victories at the AO were not big victories, and that Vilas wasn't a grass player. OK, Borg and Connors didn't play the AO. But :
Vilas won in january 75 the Masters on grass, beating Newcombe, Nastase and Borg !!!
Vilas beated a lot of very good grass players at the AO : Amaya (leads 2 sets ton 1 and 4/2 against Borg at Wimbledon), Chris Lewis (Wimbledon finalist), McNamara. It's not his fault if in 1978, Marks beats Ashe in semi-final !
Wimbledon is to close to the French. Vilas had no time to prepare Wimbledon. He went in Australia 2 months before the Open to prepare it ! That's why he didn't make big things in Wimbledon, except in 1976, when he did a good tournament, 1/4 Final lost in 5 sets against Tanner.
I think personnaly that for Vilas, the victories at the AO are more important than French or USOpen, because it was not his natural surface, and he worked very much to win.

Mustard
12-18-2011, 08:45 AM
The Masters Vilas won in Kooyong was actually held in December 1974. It wasn't until the tournament moved to MSG that it was moved to January, while the Australian Open was moved to late in the calendar year. They were both moved back in 1986.

Hitman
12-18-2011, 12:42 PM
You're right of course. Aside from FO 2011 was a humourless year for Nadal.


On the other hand if he continues to dominate Nadal(and the field) we'll be talking how Nadal is a transitional champion, who used a period between decline of Fed and maturing of Novak to inflate his slam count.

As outrageous as that sounds, you maybe onto something here. 2012 will certainly be interesting, gotta love how Novak came out of nowhere and pulled the rug from under everyone with his play this past season.

Mustard
12-18-2011, 12:51 PM
On the other hand if he continues to dominate Nadal(and the field) we'll be talking how Nadal is a transitional champion, who used a period between decline of Fed and maturing of Novak to inflate his slam count.

LOL. A "transitional period" which yielded all those majors for Nadal. That's a good one :lol:

timnz
12-18-2011, 01:05 PM
Why Sampras has seven WTF's??? why Lendl 7? McEnroe 8???

The author is including the major indoor titles: The YEar End Masters Cup, The WCT Finals and the Grand Slam cup.

McEnroe - 3 Masters Cups + 5 WCT

Lendl - 5 Masters Cups + 2 WCT

Sampras - 5 Masters Cups + 2 Grand Slam Cups

Becker - 3 Masters Cups + 1 WCT final + 1 Grand Slam Cup

A lot of people minimise the Grand Slam Cup - but you had to see a few of them to know that he field was very deep most of the time - lots of best of 5 set matches and the players played very hard. And the prize money was huge which the players were very motivated to win.

In my view the Olympics doesn't belong at this level ... however, I won't contest it too much. But on second thought the players since 2000 haven't had the WCT finals or the Grand Slam Cup. So maybe we should include the Olympics only since 2000. (Which doesn't miss too many of them ie 1988, 1992 & 1996 - Apologies to Andre Agassi).

krosero
12-18-2011, 01:20 PM
I cant see how anyone would rate players like Nastase (a huge underachiever who won only 2 slams, and 1 of those was a semi joke with nobody showing up IIRC), The French Open that Nastase won in '73 was well attended: 8 of the top 10 and 16 of the top 20 were there. It was Wimbledon that year that was gutted, with 81 of the top players missing.

And of course Nastase's other Slam was the '72 USO, which nearly all the top players attended; it was the best attended Slam event of that year.

Still fair to call him an underachiever, though.

Mike Sams
12-18-2011, 01:29 PM
Oh don't worry, we'll be talking, talking about how Djokovic could only dominate when Nadal dropped his level in 2011.

:lol: Silly *******s! As if Nadal was a multi-surface monster throughout his career. LOL!!! A natural moonballing pusher who managed to bag Slams in 2010 against relatively junk opposition, especially at the USO 2010. Biggest joke of a draw in history.

kiki
12-18-2011, 02:01 PM
The French Open that Nastase won in '73 was well attended: 8 of the top 10 and 16 of the top 20 were there. It was Wimbledon that year that was gutted, with 81 of the top players missing.

And of course Nastase's other Slam was the '72 USO, which nearly all the top players attended; it was the best attended Slam event of that year.

Still fair to call him an underachiever, though.

Nadalagassi doesnīt even know that Nastase held the record for consecutive YEC titles, four in a row, which Sampras broke in the 90īs.

celoft
12-18-2011, 03:34 PM
Between Edberg et al and Vilas/Năstase/Kuerten/Courier.

Mustard
12-18-2011, 04:01 PM
Nadalagassi doesnīt even know that Nastase held the record for consecutive YEC titles, four in a row, which Sampras broke in the 90īs.

Nastase won 3 in a row (1971, 1972 and 1973), lost the 1974 final to Vilas, and then won his 4th Masters title in 1975. The only other player to win 3 in a row since is Lendl. Sampras won his 5 titles in 1991, 1994, 1996, 1997 and 1999.

kiki
12-19-2011, 03:50 PM
Nastase won 3 in a row (1971, 1972 and 1973), lost the 1974 final to Vilas, and then won his 4th Masters title in 1975. The only other player to win 3 in a row since is Lendl. Sampras won his 5 titles in 1991, 1994, 1996, 1997 and 1999.

So, Lendl and Nastase won 3 in a row.And Federer did not?

As for WCT, nobody won it more than twice in a row

Rosewall: 1971,72

Mc Enroe: 1983,84

That proves how tough was repeating in Dallas.

Mustard
12-19-2011, 03:56 PM
So, Lendl and Nastase won 3 in a row.And Federer did not?

Federer's 6 titles were in 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2010 and 2011.

jackson vile
12-19-2011, 04:36 PM
I will always remember him as the guy that dominated the dominators:)

kiki
12-19-2011, 04:41 PM
Stands in the same league as Vilas.Able to win 3 out of 4 majors and a YEC title.He has a DC advantage over Vilas, so he may overcome him soon.That would put him in the top 15 in the open era ( 1968-2011)