PDA

View Full Version : Vajda: Djokovic will be able to dominate for another 4 or 5 years


5555
12-19-2011, 07:10 AM
Link http://video.eurosport.fr/tennis/mats-point/2011/djokovic-peut-encore-durer_vid207332/video.shtml

CocaCola
12-19-2011, 07:29 AM
Can't see the video. Stupid location rules.

Clarky21
12-19-2011, 07:31 AM
With such a weak era I would be surprised if he didn't dominate for the next 4-5 years. He has no competition so it will be easy for him to do it.

SLD76
12-19-2011, 07:33 AM
back peddaling on the shoulder comments?

oh btw...I dont think Djoker made Fed cry nearly as much as he made Rafa cry.

Im pretty sure Djoker had rafa lying in the fetal position after some matches.

Mustard
12-19-2011, 07:33 AM
Bold words, Marian, bold words.

Russeljones
12-19-2011, 07:47 AM
What else is he supposed to say? My boy had a great year but I expect his performance to to go down a notch or 2?

All-rounder
12-19-2011, 07:48 AM
Haha. No :)

rcglider
12-19-2011, 09:03 AM
jackson vile use the same Fed crying pic again? How old are you? Only you and other nardtroll find it funny. go hide in your cage.

tennis_pro
12-19-2011, 09:14 AM
more like

http://www.hititover.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Novak-Djokovic.jpghttp://www.tennisnews.gr/images/news_images/Nadal/2010/nadal_crying.jpg

aphex
12-19-2011, 09:32 AM
jackson vile use the same Fed crying pic again? How old are you? Only you and other nardtroll find it funny. go hide in your cage.

LolVile was a nadal fan until Djoko started owning him.
He then became a djoko fan.

oh I forgot:

LOL Dard!

TMF
12-19-2011, 09:49 AM
LolVile was a nadal fan until Djoko started owning him.
He then became a djoko fan.

oh I forgot:

LOL Dard!

I don't think he's a TRUE fan of Nadal. When Nadal was winning, he worships him, but when Nadal loses, he abandoned him. If he is a fan of Nadal, he would stick with him whether if Nadal is winning or losing. Now he jump on Nole's ship b/c he's #1. Watch him jump off once Nole struggles for awhile. I don't consider him as a fan of any player.

Mike Sams
12-19-2011, 09:52 AM
With such a weak era I would be surprised if he didn't dominate for the next 4-5 years. He has no competition so it will be easy for him to do it.

Exactly the same era which Federer and Nadal dominated, my son! Exactly the same era! :wink:

zagor
12-19-2011, 09:56 AM
LolVile was a nadal fan until Djoko started owning him.
He then became a djoko fan.

oh I forgot:

LOL Dard!

I don't think he's a TRUE fan of Nadal. When Nadal was winning, he worships him, but when Nadal loses, he abandoned him. If he is a fan of Nadal, he would stick with him whether if Nadal is winning or losing. Now he jump on Nole's ship b/c he's #1. Watch him jump off once Nole struggles for awhile. I don't consider him as a fan of any player.

LOLville is:

1. Fed hater(notice the sheer number of hate threads he made about the guy, not to mention insulting all of his family members, from his wifte, sister to his parents)


Large gap.


2. Nadal fanboy(routinely makes excuses for him and can't accept Nadal can ever be beaten when inform and healthy).

DjokovicForTheWin
12-19-2011, 10:07 AM
LOLville is:

1. Fed hater(notice the sheer number of hate threads he made about the guy, not to mention insulting all of his family members, from his wifte, sister to his parents)


Large gap.


2. Nadal fanboy(routinely makes excuses for him and can't accept Nadal can ever be beaten when inform and healthy).

Quoted for truth.

nikdom
12-19-2011, 11:20 AM
Don't see why Djoko can't be dominant for another 4-5 years. Question is whether it will be a rivalry, trivalry or Fed like monopoly. His GS count will vary accordingly.

celoft
12-19-2011, 11:22 AM
Nah.......

Mustard
12-19-2011, 11:28 AM
Don't see why Djoko can't be dominant for another 4-5 years. Question is whether it will be a rivalry, trivalry or Fed like monopoly. His GS count will vary accordingly.

He won't dominate for 4-5 years. Not even a younger Federer did that. After the way Djokovic ended 2011 with a 6-4 win-loss record after the US Open, he needs to start 2012 well to get back to all this "domination" talk.

dudeski
12-19-2011, 11:28 AM
http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa331/jacksonvile/Novak-Djokovic-Australian-Open-2011-SF-roar_2555678.jpg

http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa331/jacksonvile/Federer_Crying77.jpg

Nice try!

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_PNWPxvREDPU/SlF6IqmNAVI/AAAAAAAAJj4/nj4JUkZHsxE/s400/roger-federer-15-grand-slam-trophies.jpg

http://www.mintmagazine.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Confused-Nadal.jpg

celoft
12-19-2011, 11:53 AM
He won't dominate for 4-5 years. Not even a younger Federer did that. After the way Djokovic ended 2011 with a 6-4 win-loss record after the US Open, he needs to start 2012 well to get back to all this "domination" talk.

I don't think Djokovic can dominate for 4 or 5 years when he can't even crown his year with a YEC like Federer used to do when he dominated. All of Fed's seasons where he won 3 slams he also won the YEC.

Mike Sams
12-19-2011, 12:12 PM
I don't think Djokovic can dominate for 4 or 5 years when he can't even crown his year with a YEC like Federer used to do when he dominated. All of Fed's seasons where he won 3 slams he also won the YEC.

Why does every other player have to measure up to Federer? :-?
Yeah we get it, Federer is an all-time great! On the flip side, not even Federer in his absolute prime was able to do the kind of damage to Nadal that Djokovic has done.
And Djokovic has also won the YEC.

TheMusicLover
12-19-2011, 12:16 PM
How about first awaiting how he will do coming season before making any claims about the coming four, five years?
He already broke down post-USO this year and we've yet to see how he'll come back at the AO.

celoft
12-19-2011, 12:20 PM
Why does every other player have to measure up to Federer? :-?
Yeah we get it, Federer is an all-time great! On the flip side, not even Federer in his absolute prime was able to do the kind of damage to Nadal that Djokovic has done.
And Djokovic has also won the YEC.

Not in the year when he won 3 slams but in a year where he was titleless since Rome and was fresh for November.

Let's face it, Federer kind of domination is very rare.

I'm not even sure Djokovic can back this year with another year with multiple slams in 2012.

As for Nadal, he was lucky he was a bad matchup for Federer. Even in 2004.

kishnabe
12-19-2011, 01:08 PM
Djokovic will be top 5 for at least another 3 plus years.

Doubt his being dominate to that extent maybe have another great year like 2011 winning 2-3 slams but not every match. Never really know what will happen....maybe Murray may dominate for the next 3 years.

CDestroyer
12-19-2011, 01:15 PM
His domination is possible for 3 or 4 years but if I was Djokovic I would be very ****ed that Vajda would publicly make such a presumptuous statement.

Eternity
12-19-2011, 01:21 PM
^^It is presumptuous. 4 or 5 years is a long time.

Oh well, he's had an amazing season ... a little hype is to be expected, I suppose.

CDestroyer
12-19-2011, 01:39 PM
^^It is presumptuous. 4 or 5 years is a long time.

Oh well, he's had an amazing season ... a little hype is to be expected, I suppose.

Its fine if its the media, fans etc. but your coach? Seems like a dumb move. I wonder if its even true.

Eternity
12-19-2011, 02:11 PM
^^ Yeah I agree. But I can't see the video, maybe it makes more sense in context.

Tabash
12-19-2011, 02:15 PM
back peddaling on the shoulder comments?

oh btw...I dont think Djoker made Fed cry nearly as much as he made Rafa cry.

Im pretty sure Djoker had rafa lying in the fetal position after some matches.

If you can see the video, they're at the grounds of the US Open, interview was made then

Tabash
12-19-2011, 02:19 PM
They were talking over his voice in French the whole time.... He said he believes he can stay at the top level for another 4/5 years not that he would "dominate". When asked if Djok was a perfect player, he said in his opinion "perfection" is always far away. He didn't come across arrogant at all in the interview.

jackson vile
12-19-2011, 04:35 PM
They were talking over his voice in French the whole time.... He said he believes he can stay at the top level for another 4/5 years not that he would "dominate". When asked if Djok was a perfect player, he said in his opinion "perfection" is always far away. He didn't come across arrogant at all in the interview.

You will have to excuses the ****s, they **** on any player any time they get a chance.

flyinghippos101
12-19-2011, 04:41 PM
a little hype is to be expected, I suppose.

Delusion is more like it :rolleyes:

Intro
12-19-2011, 04:57 PM
You will have to excuses the ****s, they **** on any player any time they get a chance.

Like you do to Federer? The hypocrisy is overwhelming, no?

kiki
12-19-2011, 05:05 PM
With this weak competition, he certainly can...

TheMusicLover
12-19-2011, 05:11 PM
You will have to excuses the ****s, they **** on any player any time they get a chance.

And you **** on any poster that happens to have kind words for Federer even more, don't you? No difference whether some of those posters happen to like Nadal as well. Man, you truly are a sad person.

Does it really hurt *that* bad?

Mike Sams
12-19-2011, 06:07 PM
With this weak competition, he certainly can...

The competition is exactly the same as when Federer and Nadal were dominating.:)

ASantana
12-19-2011, 06:16 PM
I think that Djokovic can be number one in the world and win a couple of majors the next few years but I don't think that he will do nearly as well as he did this year ever again. But it's hard to say though because if it can happen once it can happen again.

Sentinel
12-19-2011, 09:56 PM
The competition is exactly the same as when Federer and Nadal were dominating.:)
You forget that Nadal has now lost his mental strength, and Fed is only an indoor player !!

Only Nadal had a strong era.:)

Mike Sams
12-19-2011, 10:00 PM
I think that Djokovic can be number one in the world and win a couple of majors the next few years but I don't think that he will do nearly as well as he did this year ever again. But it's hard to say though because if it can happen once it can happen again.

But the question is, will Djokovic TRY to repeat this season once again or will he decide to do what Federer and Nadal tend to do which is try to stay healthy and put his best foot forward only in the Slams?
I refuse to believe that Djokovic actually would want to win everything he possibly can. He's already made his statement. He said he wants to win Slams. No mention of wanting to win every tournament he plays.

gregor.b
12-19-2011, 10:16 PM
That is unusual. Djoko not beating his chest and trying to start a war in the stands. Or maybe that was just his family. Anyways, maybe the Djoker is starting to grow up. Oh, and telling his family to shut up. 'Bout time.

Cup8489
12-19-2011, 10:18 PM
The competition is exactly the same as when Federer and Nadal were dominating.:)

pay no attention to kiki. That poster had demonstrated exactly 0 knowledge in all things tennis.

jokinla
12-19-2011, 11:52 PM
So let me get this straight, his coach thinks he will continue to dominate, wow.

Clarky21
12-19-2011, 11:55 PM
So let me get this straight, his coach thinks he will continue to dominate, wow.

Who will stop him from dominating? As far as I can see there is noone good enough to do it.

tusharlovesrafa
12-20-2011, 12:21 AM
Who will stop him from dominating? As far as I can see there is noone good enough to do it.

Likes of federer,nadal and murray plus young guys such as raonic,tomic is always there and every improving delpo will be a force to reckon with.You may never know what will happen,anyone can spring surprises..
How many people here that expected nadal to loose so convingcingly to novak after dominating 2010??
Novak is no fedrerer who will dominate everything for next 4 to 5 years,his game is very physical which has it's own limitation..People will realize this next year..

monfed
12-20-2011, 12:29 AM
Why does every other player have to measure up to Federer? :-?
Yeah we get it, Federer is an all-time great! On the flip side, not even Federer in his absolute prime was able to do the kind of damage to Nadal that Djokovic has done.
And Djokovic has also won the YEC.

It's called matchups.

15_ounce
12-20-2011, 02:40 AM
Marin Vajda was just bluffing. I think he just want to scare other players and create a false sense of confidence for Djokovic. You can't dominate tennis for 4 or 5 years by playing brutal, running-all-day-long style of tennis.

celoft
12-20-2011, 04:37 AM
Novak is no fedrerer who will dominate everything for next 4 to 5 years,his game is very physical which has it's own limitation..People will realize this next year..

Nobody is.

kiki
12-20-2011, 01:33 PM
pay no attention to kiki. That poster had demonstrated exactly 0 knowledge in all things tennis.

And you, which knowledge have you got?

All-rounder
12-20-2011, 02:09 PM
Too many folks are looking for the next Federer. I just don't believe Djokovic can have another year yet alone another 2 to 3 years of playing at this level.

SLD76
12-20-2011, 02:20 PM
If you can see the video, they're at the grounds of the US Open, interview was made then

ahh ok, I thought this was a recent comment.

file this under dont count chickens before they hatch.

Paul Murphy
12-21-2011, 03:44 AM
I can't find see a weakness in his game, particularly now that his forehand is such a weapon.
But dominating over that length of time is a huge ask.
Having said that he's got Rafa where he wants him and Fed is now 30, so his chief rivals both have question marks in terms of the match-up in Nadal's case and the time Fed has left.
Hard to see anyone else seriously challenging him though.

Sentinel
12-21-2011, 04:37 AM
Likes of federer,nadal and murray plus young guys such as raonic,tomic is always there and every improving delpo will be a force to reckon with.You may never know what will happen,anyone can spring surprises..
How many people here that expected nadal to loose so convingcingly to novak after dominating 2010??
Novak is no fedrerer who will dominate everything for next 4 to 5 years,his game is very physical which has it's own limitation..People will realize this next year..
IF Nole can dominate for one more year, that would be awesome. We are all tired of the Fedal domination.

Adje Nole !

5555
12-21-2011, 09:25 AM
He said he believes he can stay at the top level for another 4/5 years not that he would "dominate".
I didn't say Vajda believes Djokovic will dominate, but will be able to dominate.

DjokovicForTheWin
12-21-2011, 09:48 AM
A coach thinking his pupil will dominate is natural of course, despite its actual truth. Kinda like DRII's mother thinking he was a cute baby.

Mike Sams
12-21-2011, 09:49 AM
It's called matchups.

I know it's called matchups. But I'm still pointing it out because it's worth pointing out. There are many players out there like Davydenko, Murray and Nalbandian who match up far better against Nadal than Federer does. But I don't see them doing squat when it really counts. Djokovic was the first to do it consistently and across all surfaces and in the biggest stages.

celoft
12-21-2011, 09:51 AM
I know it's called matchups. But I'm still pointing it out because it's worth pointing out. There are many players out there like Davydenko, Murray and Nalbandian who match up far better against Nadal than Federer does. But I don't see them doing squat when it really counts. Djokovic was the first to do it consistently and across all surfaces and in the biggest stages.

Nadal is a horrible matchup for Federer.

Djokovic gave up gluten and now is beating Nadal everywhere, which he always had the potential to do. His stamina and endurance were letting him down in the past.

Mike Sams
12-21-2011, 10:20 AM
Nadal is a horrible matchup for Federer.

Djokovic gave up gluten and now is beating Nadal everywhere, which he always had the potential to do. His stamina and endurance were letting him down in the past.

It's hard to say if Nadal is a bad matchup for Federer or if it's Federer's fragile psyche that lets him down.
Sort of like many boxers who had the talent to smash Mike Tyson but never tried because they were emotionally overwhelmed. Let's be realistic. It's not like Buster Douglas and Evander Holyfield were the biggest and strongest guys Tyson ever fought. They won because they had no fear.
Tennis and Boxing are so similar.
Federer had many many chances against Nadal. Look at the BP chances and conversions. 1/17 at RG 2007, 1/12 at Wimby 2008, and about 7-8 chances to go up 2 sets to 1 on Nadal at AO 2009. He just continued to squander his chances continuously.
So it's so hard to say if it's Nadal's actual style that bothers Federer or if it's Nadal's "snarl" if you know what I mean. :lol:
Djokovic on the other hand doesn't seem to care who is on the other side of the net. Then again, he's much younger and hungrier than Federer at this point and is basically the hunter.

Cup8489
12-21-2011, 10:47 AM
Just gimme an allcourter with a sweet 1hbh winning majors. I'll be happy. :)

Biscuitmcgriddleson
12-21-2011, 10:55 AM
It's hard to say if Nadal is a bad matchup for Federer or if it's Federer's fragile psyche that lets him down.
Sort of like many boxers who had the talent to smash Mike Tyson but never tried because they were emotionally overwhelmed. Let's be realistic. It's not like Buster Douglas and Evander Holyfield were the biggest and strongest guys Tyson ever fought. They won because they had no fear.
Tennis and Boxing are so similar.
Federer had many many chances against Nadal. Look at the BP chances and conversions. 1/17 at RG 2007, 1/12 at Wimby 2008, and about 7-8 chances to go up 2 sets to 1 on Nadal at AO 2009. He just continued to squander his chances continuously.
So it's so hard to say if it's Nadal's actual style that bothers Federer or if it's Nadal's "snarl" if you know what I mean. :lol:
Djokovic on the other hand doesn't seem to care who is on the other side of the net. Then again, he's much younger and hungrier than Federer at this point and is basically the hunter.

Vicious topspin to one handed backhand = matchup advantage.

DRII
12-21-2011, 11:55 AM
A coach thinking his pupil will dominate is natural of course, despite its actual truth. Kinda like DRII's mother thinking he was a cute baby.

Please stop violating the terms of your probation.

One restraining order against you should have been enough!

nikdom
12-21-2011, 01:15 PM
It's hard to say if Nadal is a bad matchup for Federer or if it's Federer's fragile psyche that lets him down.
Sort of like many boxers who had the talent to smash Mike Tyson but never tried because they were emotionally overwhelmed. Let's be realistic. It's not like Buster Douglas and Evander Holyfield were the biggest and strongest guys Tyson ever fought. They won because they had no fear.
Tennis and Boxing are so similar.
Federer had many many chances against Nadal. Look at the BP chances and conversions. 1/17 at RG 2007, 1/12 at Wimby 2008, and about 7-8 chances to go up 2 sets to 1 on Nadal at AO 2009. He just continued to squander his chances continuously.
So it's so hard to say if it's Nadal's actual style that bothers Federer or if it's Nadal's "snarl" if you know what I mean. :lol:
Djokovic on the other hand doesn't seem to care who is on the other side of the net. Then again, he's much younger and hungrier than Federer at this point and is basically the hunter.

Why does poor breakpoint conversion indicate pure psychological intimidation?
Rafa always goes to Feds bh when in trouble. Plus Roger is not the greatest converter even when winning against other guys. Show me a stat that says he wins 90% of his breakpoints when winning vs 10% when he loses and then there might be merit to it.

Simply because Roger doesnt beat his chest or pump his fists on every point like a neanderthal, does not make him a wuss. Its just a matchup issue.

namelessone
12-22-2011, 02:51 AM
Vadja does have a point.

Nadal doesn't look too good, Fed needs to access the JesusMode to stay with Djoko and beat him and everybody else is kinda crapping their pants.

If Djokovic can stay healthy and maintain the mental focus I think he can stay nr. for another 2 years or so.

Homeboy Hotel
12-22-2011, 04:02 AM
Vadja does have a point.

Nadal doesn't look too good, Fed needs to access the JesusMode to stay with Djoko and beat him and everybody else is kinda crapping their pants.

If Djokovic can stay healthy and maintain the mental focus I think he can stay nr. for another 2 years or so.

Mr Murray is coming, he can give Djokovic's game problems.

MariaRafael
12-22-2011, 04:30 AM
Vaida is this classy guy shaking his fat belly on somebody's car with his classy pupil clapping hands to this ugly sight.

http://www.rafaholics.com/2011/05/rafaole-bromance-over.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=rafah0lic

I don't trust morons. But I trust my eyes that saw only retirements and losses of ***** for nearly 3 months.

His end of the previous season proves one thing only: he's incapable of being in shape for a long period of time. ANd this allows me to hope that he'll be on the slump for the rest of his life, and all his Serbian followers will go back to their Serbian sites.

DjokovicForTheWin
12-22-2011, 04:51 AM
Vadja does have a point.

Nadal doesn't look too good, Fed needs to access the JesusMode to stay with Djoko and beat him and everybody else is kinda crapping their pants.

If Djokovic can stay healthy and maintain the mental focus I think he can stay nr. for another 2 years or so.

Why doesn't Nadal access his Jesus mode?

TMF
12-22-2011, 09:27 AM
Vadja does have a point.

Nadal doesn't look too good, Fed needs to access the JesusMode to stay with Djoko and beat him and everybody else is kinda crapping their pants.

If Djokovic can stay healthy and maintain the mental focus I think he can stay nr. for another 2 years or so.

You missed Davis Cup last month.

When you get a chance watch Nadal play and you'll change your mind !

DRII
12-22-2011, 10:04 AM
Vaida is this classy guy shaking his fat belly on somebody's car with his classy pupil clapping hands to this ugly sight.

http://www.rafaholics.com/2011/05/rafaole-bromance-over.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=rafah0lic

I don't trust morons. But I trust my eyes that saw only retirements and losses of ***** for nearly 3 months.

His end of the previous season proves one thing only: he's incapable of being in shape for a long period of time. ANd this allows me to hope that he'll be on the slump for the rest of his life, and all his Serbian followers will go back to their Serbian sites.

Don't let the Nadal hating delusion get to you too much. Nole is just these individual's current muse and will be ditched next year if he doesn't continue to dominate Nadal as he has this year.

However, i must say that Nole's success has shown a light on the Balkans and other parts of the region which has not always been so flattering.

FlashFlare11
12-22-2011, 01:51 PM
Vaida is this classy guy shaking his fat belly on somebody's car with his classy pupil clapping hands to this ugly sight.

http://www.rafaholics.com/2011/05/rafaole-bromance-over.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=rafah0lic

I don't trust morons. But I trust my eyes that saw only retirements and losses of ***** for nearly 3 months.

His end of the previous season proves one thing only: he's incapable of being in shape for a long period of time. ANd this allows me to hope that he'll be on the slump for the rest of his life, and all his Serbian followers will go back to their Serbian sites.

This is the definition of hypocrisy. So Djokovic had a subpar end to an otherwise spectacular year, and somehow this is going to mean he won't win anymore? How many times has Nadal ended the year on a high? In fact, how many titles has Nadal won after September in his career? I can't believe you're even trying to argue that Djokovic won't win anymore based on his performance at the end of the year when, at the same time, people are saying Federer's win over Nadal at the Tour Finals doesn't count because he was tired. Djokovic isn't the only one who can't sustain his level for a long period of time.

Bobby Jr
12-22-2011, 02:06 PM
Vadja does have a point.
...Fed needs to access the JesusMode to stay with Djoko and beat him and everybody else is kinda crapping their pants.

If Djokovic can stay healthy and maintain the mental focus I think he can stay nr. for another 2 years or so.
You could look at it another way and say it's the opposite. It's Djokovic who needs to access JesusMode to stay with regular Federer (or Nadal). 2011 showed this... when he wasn't in tip-top shape (physically or mentally) he went down in pretty average fashion.

Federer just needs to not have so many ho-hum performances but I'd still say on any average day for both players the result would usually be a win to Federer. 2011 Djokovic just made it through more draws than Federer this year who was bouncing around a bit in form.

Djokovic really had to play out of his tree for most of 2011 to dominate like he did. I am keen to see if he can repeat that form in 2012. Anything other than that sort of performance automatically means Nadal and Federer will beat him more often than not generally at the big tournaments if they continue their 2011 form. It's been that way for years and, even though Djokovic matured greatly in 2011, he also benefited a lot from both Nadal and Federer having patches of averageness (by their tournament peaking standards).

Subventricular Zone
12-22-2011, 02:18 PM
We will see.

Clarky21
12-22-2011, 02:48 PM
You could look at it another way and say it's the opposite. It's Djokovic who needs to access JesusMode to stay with regular Federer (or Nadal). 2011 showed this... when he wasn't in tip-top shape (physically or mentally) he went down in pretty average fashion.

Federer just needs to not have so many ho-hum performances but I'd still say on any average day for both players the result would usually be a win to Federer. 2011 Djokovic just made it through more draws than Federer this year who was bouncing around a bit in form.

Djokovic really had to play out of his tree for most of 2011 to dominate like he did. I am keen to see if he can repeat that form in 2012. Anything other than that sort of performance automatically means Nadal and Federer will beat him more often than not generally at the big tournaments if they continue their 2011 form. It's been that way for years and, even though Djokovic matured greatly in 2011, he also benefited a lot from both Nadal and Federer having patches of averageness (by their tournament peaking standards).



Yep,yep,and yep.

5555
12-23-2011, 02:43 AM
Fed needs to access the JesusMode to stay with Djoko and beat him
Yep,yep,and yep.

Mike Sams
12-23-2011, 09:09 AM
You could look at it another way and say it's the opposite. It's Djokovic who needs to access JesusMode to stay with regular Federer (or Nadal). 2011 showed this... when he wasn't in tip-top shape (physically or mentally) he went down in pretty average fashion.

Federer just needs to not have so many ho-hum performances but I'd still say on any average day for both players the result would usually be a win to Federer. 2011 Djokovic just made it through more draws than Federer this year who was bouncing around a bit in form.

Djokovic really had to play out of his tree for most of 2011 to dominate like he did. I am keen to see if he can repeat that form in 2012. Anything other than that sort of performance automatically means Nadal and Federer will beat him more often than not generally at the big tournaments if they continue their 2011 form. It's been that way for years and, even though Djokovic matured greatly in 2011, he also benefited a lot from both Nadal and Federer having patches of averageness (by their tournament peaking standards).

:lol: What a load of crap! He's a 24 year old who is fulfilling the potential which everybody on here knew he had. His game matches up extremely well against Nadal, much like Davydenko's.
Nadal played as well as he could. Djokovic was better. Nadal wasn't some exceptional killer on hardcourts. He had all sorts of problems against inferior players. Even at USO 2010, look at how much trouble he had against Gabashvilli. :lol: Look at him get blown off the court by Del Potro at USO 09 and by Murray at USO 10.
I could spin this around and say that Djokovic's average game is more than enough to give Nadal and Federer all sorts of fits. And his elite game is enough to crush them. Remember Djokovic/Federer at AO this year? Straight sets win it was. And Federer was the most in-form player after coming off TMC 2 months prior.

FlashFlare11
12-23-2011, 09:16 AM
:lol: What a load of crap! He's a 24 year old who is fulfilling the potential which everybody on here knew he had. His game matches up extremely well against Nadal, much like Davydenko's.
Nadal played as well as he could. Djokovic was better. Nadal wasn't some exceptional killer on hardcourts. He had all sorts of problems against inferior players. Even at USO 2010, look at how much trouble he had against Gabashvilli. :lol: Look at him get blown off the court by Del Potro at USO 09 and by Murray at USO 10.
I could spin this around and say that Djokovic's average game is more than enough to give Nadal and Federer all sorts of fits. And his elite game is enough to crush them. Remember Djokovic/Federer at AO this year? Straight sets win it was. And Federer was the most in-form player after coming off TMC 2 months prior.

I think you mean USO 08.

By the way, I don't mean to derail this thread. But Djokovic hits with a full-western grip, right? How is it that Federer still gets more spin on the ball than Djokovic? And it seems Djokovic can hit winners much easier than Nadal, and this with a western grip also.

Rjtennis
12-23-2011, 09:20 AM
If he plays like he did last year he will win multiple slams and keep the number 1 ranking. His level was way above the rest last year. However, nole also plays a physical style of tennis. It is not as demanding as what rafa does, but it still will take its toll. It will be interesting to see if he can stay healthy.

Rjtennis
12-23-2011, 09:22 AM
:lol: What a load of crap! He's a 24 year old who is fulfilling the potential which everybody on here knew he had. His game matches up extremely well against Nadal, much like Davydenko's.
Nadal played as well as he could. Djokovic was better. Nadal wasn't some exceptional killer on hardcourts. He had all sorts of problems against inferior players. Even at USO 2010, look at how much trouble he had against Gabashvilli. :lol: Look at him get blown off the court by Del Potro at USO 09 and by Murray at USO 10.
I could spin this around and say that Djokovic's average game is more than enough to give Nadal and Federer all sorts of fits. And his elite game is enough to crush them. Remember Djokovic/Federer at AO this year? Straight sets win it was. And Federer was the most in-form player after coming off TMC 2 months prior.

Agreed. Nole was just a beast this year.

tusharlovesrafa
12-23-2011, 09:28 AM
:lol: What a load of crap! He's a 24 year old who is fulfilling the potential which everybody on here knew he had. His game matches up extremely well against Nadal, much like Davydenko's.
Nadal played as well as he could. Djokovic was better. Nadal wasn't some exceptional killer on hardcourts. He had all sorts of problems against inferior players. Even at USO 2010, look at how much trouble he had against Gabashvilli. :lol: Look at him get blown off the court by Del Potro at USO 09 and by Murray at USO 10.
I could spin this around and say that Djokovic's average game is more than enough to give Nadal and Federer all sorts of fits. And his elite game is enough to crush them. Remember Djokovic/Federer at AO this year? Straight sets win it was. And Federer was the most in-form player after coming off TMC 2 months prior.
YEP,YEP,YEP AND YEP..
COOL STORY BRO!
Why don't you contact David Camroon and try making a movie on this named "AVATAR 2" with fedal as an alien species and novak as human conquerer.I bet it would be a Super hit.

ALL IN
12-23-2011, 03:41 PM
Vaida is this classy guy shaking his fat belly on somebody's car with his classy pupil clapping hands to this ugly sight.

http://www.rafaholics.com/2011/05/rafaole-bromance-over.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=rafah0lic

I don't trust morons. But I trust my eyes that saw only retirements and losses of ***** for nearly 3 months.

His end of the previous season proves one thing only: he's incapable of being in shape for a long period of time. ANd this allows me to hope that he'll be on the slump for the rest of his life, and all his Serbian followers will go back to their Serbian sites.

So let me get this straight.....You "hope" that a person who you've never made contact with, goes into a "slump for the rest of his life"? I think it's time you sit on a couch with a professional and let it all out. There's alot there.........

ALL IN
12-23-2011, 03:43 PM
You could look at it another way and say it's the opposite. It's Djokovic who needs to access JesusMode to stay with regular Federer (or Nadal). 2011 showed this... when he wasn't in tip-top shape (physically or mentally) he went down in pretty average fashion.

Federer just needs to not have so many ho-hum performances but I'd still say on any average day for both players the result would usually be a win to Federer. 2011 Djokovic just made it through more draws than Federer this year who was bouncing around a bit in form.

Djokovic really had to play out of his tree for most of 2011 to dominate like he did. I am keen to see if he can repeat that form in 2012. Anything other than that sort of performance automatically means Nadal and Federer will beat him more often than not generally at the big tournaments if they continue their 2011 form. It's been that way for years and, even though Djokovic matured greatly in 2011, he also benefited a lot from both Nadal and Federer having patches of averageness (by their tournament peaking standards).

All he needs to do is access that "mode" when he needs to. Just like Fed and Nadal do in the slams. I don't think he needs it in every event to remain #1 for a few more years.

gregor.b
12-23-2011, 04:21 PM
All he needs to do is access that "mode" when he needs to. Just like Fed and Nadal do in the slams. I don't think he needs it in every event to remain #1 for a few more years.

He doesn't need it even for whole matches. Just points. Nole's problem has maybe been that he has accessed when he didn't really need it. Let's face,there is a gas tank and it does get empty from time to time. He needs to learn when to drain it and when not to. As he spends more time at the top he will hopefully figure it out. If he does,look out records.

Bobby Jr
12-23-2011, 04:46 PM
:lol: What a load of crap! He's a 24 year old who is fulfilling the potential which everybody on here knew he had.
How is it crap when most of the match history prior to 2011 with Federer/Nadal proves the point? Both Nadal and Federer, on form, are better players than anything but a 100% Djokovic (or anyone else for that matter). We have pretty much half a decade of proof of this.

Bobby Jr
12-23-2011, 05:16 PM
All he needs to do is access that "mode" when he needs to. Just like Fed and Nadal do in the slams. I don't think he needs it in every event to remain #1 for a few more years.
I agree. 2012 will be the year to see how often he can access it. Many players before him have done had a blinder year and then never been able to keep up the consistency again - in fact that is more common historically than players like Federer/Nadal who have kept their form for many years with few long-term slumps.

cc0509
12-23-2011, 05:27 PM
How is it crap when most of the match history prior to 2011 with Federer/Nadal proves the point? Both Nadal and Federer, on form, are better players than anything but a 100% Djokovic (or anyone else for that matter). We have pretty much half a decade of proof of this.

You are right that it is very rare for a player to consistently show greatness like Nadal and Federer have but the truth is, I think it is Djokovic's time. I don't think Djokovic will be in the Nadal or Federer greatness league but I think he will stay number one for next year and I think he will win a couple of slams. There is always somebody new in tennis who steps up to the plate. I think now that Federer is past his prime and Nadal is starting to decline as well, Djokovic will step up. He has acquired the confidence after his great year.

bullfan
12-23-2011, 05:51 PM
Given that the person claiming this humped a car, I have to consider it suspect. No one can claim that many years out for a player, injuries can happen at any time to anyone.

Forehand Of Doom
12-25-2013, 07:31 PM
Link http://video.eurosport.fr/tennis/mats-point/2011/djokovic-peut-encore-durer_vid207332/video.shtml

Vajda failed.

Mustard
12-26-2013, 08:12 AM
Rafael Nadal is made of much more resilient stuff, Mr. Vajda :twisted:

5555
12-26-2013, 08:21 AM
Vajda failed.

No, he has not

- 2013: Novak Djokovic (SRB)
- 2012: Novak Djokovic (SRB)
- 2011: Novak Djokovic (SRB)
- 2010: Rafael Nadal (ESP)
- 2009: Roger Federer (SUI)
- 2008: Rafael Nadal (ESP)
- 2007: Roger Federer (SUI)
- 2006: Roger Federer (SUI)
- 2005: Roger Federer (SUI)
- 2004: Roger Federer (SUI)
- 2003: Andy Roddick (USA)
- 2002: Lleyton Hewitt (AUS)
- 2001: Lleyton Hewitt (AUS)
- 2000: Gustavo Kuerten (BRA)
- 1999: Andre Agassi (USA)
- 1998: Pete Sampras (USA)
- 1997: Pete Sampras (USA)
- 1996: Pete Sampras (USA)
- 1995: Pete Sampras (USA)
- 1994: Pete Sampras (USA)
- 1993: Pete Sampras (USA)
- 1992: Jim Courier (USA)
- 1991: Stefan Edberg (SWE)
- 1990: Ivan Lendl (TCH)
- 1989: Boris Becker (GER)
- 1988: Mats Wilander (SWE)
- 1987: Ivan Lendl (TCH)
- 1986: Ivan Lendl (TCH)
- 1985: Ivan Lendl (TCH)
- 1984: John McEnroe (USA)
- 1983: John McEnroe (USA)
- 1982: Jimmy Connors (USA)
- 1981: John McEnroe (USA)
- 1980: Bjorn Borg (SWE)
- 1979: Bjorn Borg (SWE)
- 1978: Bjorn Borg (SWE)
http://www.itftennis.com/about/world-champions/men.aspx

Mustard
12-26-2013, 08:25 AM
No, he has not

- 2013: Novak Djokovic (SRB)

So you'd be happy if Nadal and Djokovic both had the same tournament results in 2014 that they had in 2013? I'd take that.

KillerServe
12-26-2013, 08:37 AM
So you'd be happy if Nadal and Djokovic both had the same tournament results in 2014 that they had in 2013? I'd take that.

No, I think he'd prefer that Djokovic outdo Nadal in 2014 more than the margin by which he did it in 2013.

Forehand Of Doom
12-26-2013, 08:39 AM
Rafael Nadal is made of much more resilient stuff, Mr. Vajda :twisted:

Indeed. Cured Majorcan steel. :)

ksbh
12-26-2013, 08:39 AM
I've said this before, Marian Vajda is a moron and the less that fool speaks, the better it is for Djokovic.

Vajda failed.

Forehand Of Doom
12-26-2013, 08:40 AM
No, I think he'd prefer that Djokovic outdo Nadal in 2014 more than the margin by which he did it in 2013.

An additional ATP 500 to outdo his already glorious domination margin. LMFAO

Forehand Of Doom
12-26-2013, 08:42 AM
I've said this before, Marian Vajda is a moron and the less that fool speaks, the better it is for Djokovic.

Marian Vajayjay may be a fool, but I'm not sure Becker is any less of a fool himself. We'll see. Hopefully he won't have many chances to run his mouth.

Graf=GOAT
12-26-2013, 08:45 AM
No, I think he'd prefer that Djokovic outdo Nadal in 2014 more than the margin by which he did it in 2013.

6-6 in slam finals. Lost a winnable USO to a clay courter. Lol.

Forehand Of Doom
12-26-2013, 08:55 AM
6-6 in slam finals. Lost a winnable USO to a clay courter. Lol.

What about slam finals? A Federer fan should NEVER EVER make fun of other player's fans for their slam final record against Nadal. Federer has the worst record in slam finals against Nadal by a nice margin. :)

KillerServe
12-26-2013, 09:04 AM
An additional ATP 500 to outdo his already glorious domination margin. LMFAO

Stop stalking me.

KillerServe
12-26-2013, 09:05 AM
6-6 in slam finals. Lost a winnable USO to a clay courter. Lol.

Tell that to the ITF ;)

sam_p
12-26-2013, 09:20 AM
Obviously this prediction didn't work out so hot for Vajda. I feel sorry for him being shunted aside for BoomBoom, he seems like a decent guy. Clearly Vajda is not responsible for Djoko's mental failings in GS finals outside of Australia...

Graf=GOAT
12-26-2013, 09:22 AM
What about slam finals? A Federer fan should NEVER EVER make fun of other player's fans for their slam final record against Nadal. Federer has the worst record in slam finals against Nadal by a nice margin. :)

Why not? Fed is 17-7 in slams, much better than 6-6.

Forehand Of Doom
12-26-2013, 10:02 AM
Why not? Fed is 17-7 in slams, much better than 6-6.

Fair enough. I thought slam H2H with Nadal was what was being discussed. Yes, Djokovic's slam conversion rate is below Federer's. Still not as bad as Murray or Lendl.

octobrina10
12-26-2013, 11:08 AM
The ATP (Association of Tennis Professionals) represents interests of male professional tennis players and organizes the worldwide tennis tour for men - the ATP World Tour.
The ATP has clear rules to calculate the ATP rankings!
The ATP Rankings...period is the immediate past 52 weeks.
9.03 Emirates ATP Rankings
A. Commitment Players. The year-end ATP Rankings is based on calculating, for each player, his total points from the four /4/ Grand Slams, the eight /8/ mandatory ATP World Tour Masters 1000 tournaments and the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals of the ranking period, and his best six /6/ results from all ATP World Tour 500, ATP World Tour 250, ATP Challenger Tour and Futures tournaments.
A commitment player is any player positioned in the top 30 in the end of the previous season (before the WTF).

Points earned during the 2013 ATP season: Rafa 13,030 > Djoko 12,260.
The 2013 ATP World Tour No.1 is Rafa Nadal:
http://rafaelnadalfans.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/rafael-nadal-poses-with-the-atp-world-tour-no-1-award-2.png?w=770&h=&crop=1

octobrina10
12-26-2013, 11:11 AM
The year-end No.1 ranked players
1978 Jimmy Connors
1979 Bjrn Borg
1980 Bjrn Borg
1981 John McEnroe
1982 John McEnroe
1983 John McEnroe
1984 John McEnroe
1985 Ivan Lendl
1986 Ivan Lendl
1987 Ivan Lendl
1988 Mats Wilander
1989 Ivan Lendl
1990 Stefan Edberg
1991 Stefan Edberg
1992 Jim Courier
1993 Pete Sampras
1994 Pete Sampras
1995 Pete Sampras
1996 Pete Sampras
1997 Pete Sampras
1998 Pete Sampras
1999 Andre Agassi
2000 Gustavo Kuerten
2001 Lleyton Hewitt
2002 Lleyton Hewitt
2003 Andy Roddick
2004 Roger Federer
2005 Roger Federer
2006 Roger Federer
2007 Roger Federer
2008 Rafael Nadal
2009 Roger Federer
2010 Rafael Nadal
2011 Novak Djokovic
2012 Novak Djokovic
2013 Rafael Nadal

ksbh
12-26-2013, 11:43 AM
FOD ... while Becker may be a fool himself, at least he was a champion and understands what it takes to deal with the pressures of the game. And that's something that Mayiru Vajda clearly lacks. And by making such absurd claims, all he's doing is heaping the expectations and thereby the pressure on Djokovic who isn't well known for his mental strength. It doesn't help.

Marian Vajayjay may be a fool, but I'm not sure Becker is any less of a fool himself. We'll see. Hopefully he won't have many chances to run his mouth.

Forehand Of Doom
12-26-2013, 12:05 PM
FOD ... while Becker may be a fool himself, at least he was a champion and understands what it takes to deal with the pressures of the game. And that's something that Mayiru Vajda clearly lacks. And by making such absurd claims, all he's doing is heaping the expectations and thereby the pressure on Djokovic who isn't well known for his mental strength. It doesn't help.

That's very true, ksbh. What's not well known is that Djokovic has several 80s tennis mags with Becker on the cover in his night stand. :)

ksbh
12-26-2013, 12:13 PM
FOD ... ROFL X million squared! :)

Please be more respectful of Djokovic. We don't want to offend his biggest cheer leading group ... the Federer fanboys :)

That's very true, ksbh. What's not well known is that Djokovic has several 80s tennis mags with Becker on the cover in his night stand. :)

Forehand Of Doom
12-26-2013, 12:17 PM
FOD ... ROFL X million squared! :)

Please be more respectful of Djokovic. We don't want to offend his biggest cheer leading group ... the Federer fanboys :)

LMFAO. It's hilarious because it's absolutely true. TMF probably says a prayer every night now so that Becker may be able to help Djokovic stop Nadal.

jg153040
12-26-2013, 12:29 PM
LMFAO. It's hilarious because it's absolutely true. TMF probably says a prayer every night now so that Becker may be able to help Djokovic stop Nadal.

That doesn't make sense. Djokovic will also stop Fed. So, I don't see how this helps Federer.

Djokovic beat Fed at WTF and 5 times at majors. He beat Rafa only 3 times.

And in 2012, without Djokovic, Fed would have more weeks nr.1, and year end nr.1.

Nadal was ranked lower anyway, so without Djokovic he still isn't nr.1.

So, Djokovic hurt Fed even more.

driscoll
12-26-2013, 12:48 PM
That doesn't make sense. Djokovic will also stop Fed. So, I don't see how this helps Federer.


Lets be real here. Without Djokovic playing extremely strongly, Nadal will clean up almost every major (outside maybe Wimbledon and only if he keeps struggling there) and fly past Federers slam record even easier and quicker than anyone imagined. Djokovic needs to be there and stop Nadal often to even keep it suspenseful whether Nadal reaches 17-19 (without him he would go way over 20) or not. Djokovic being in beast mode is exactly what a Federer fan is hoping for. Federer isnt going to win many, or more likely any, more majors whether Djokovic is there or not. Nadal is the one by far Djokovic and his success makes a bigger difference too in the future. Said from someone who isnt much of a fan of either player (or Djokovic for that matter).

driscoll
12-26-2013, 12:52 PM
The year-end No.1 ranked players
1978 Jimmy Connors
1979 Bjrn Borg
1980 Bjrn Borg
1981 John McEnroe
1982 John McEnroe
1983 John McEnroe
1984 John McEnroe
1985 Ivan Lendl
1986 Ivan Lendl
1987 Ivan Lendl
1988 Mats Wilander
1989 Ivan Lendl
1990 Stefan Edberg
1991 Stefan Edberg
1992 Jim Courier
1993 Pete Sampras
1994 Pete Sampras
1995 Pete Sampras
1996 Pete Sampras
1997 Pete Sampras
1998 Pete Sampras
1999 Andre Agassi
2000 Gustavo Kuerten
2001 Lleyton Hewitt
2002 Lleyton Hewitt
2003 Andy Roddick
2004 Roger Federer
2005 Roger Federer
2006 Roger Federer
2007 Roger Federer
2008 Rafael Nadal
2009 Roger Federer
2010 Rafael Nadal
2011 Novak Djokovic
2012 Novak Djokovic
2013 Rafael Nadal

A few of those were wrong though.

Connors in 78, McEnroe in 82, Lendl in 89 did not deserve #1.

Mustard
12-26-2013, 02:44 PM
My best player of the year in bold. Players not in bold are the best in the other pro/am code (pre-open era).

My Best players per year (pre-open era)
1877: Spencer Gore (amateur)
1878: Frank Hadow (amateur)
1879: John Hartley (amateur)
1880: John Hartley (amateur)
1881: William Renshaw (amateur)
1882: William Renshaw (amateur)
1883: William Renshaw (amateur)
1884: William Renshaw (amateur)
1885: William Renshaw (amateur)
1886: William Renshaw (amateur)
1887: Herbert Lawford (amateur)
1888: Ernest Renshaw (amateur)
1889: William Renshaw (amateur)
1890: Willoughby Hamilton (amateur)
1891: Wilfred Baddeley (amateur)
1892: Wilfred Baddeley (amateur)
1893: Joshua Pim (amateur)
1894: Joshua Pim (amateur)
1895: Joshua Pim (amateur)
1896: Harold Mahony (amateur)
1897: Reggie Doherty (amateur)
1898: Reggie Doherty (amateur)
1899: Reggie Doherty (amateur)
1900: Reggie Doherty (amateur)
1901: Arthur Gore (amateur)
1902: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
1903: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
1904: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
1905: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
1906: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
1907: Norman Brookes (amateur)
1908: William Larned (amateur)
1909: William Larned (amateur)
1910: Tony Wilding (amateur)
1911: Tony Wilding (amateur)
1912: Tony Wilding (amateur)
1913: Tony Wilding (amateur)
1914: Tony Wilding (amateur)
1915: Bill Johnston (amateur)
1916: Richard Norris Williams (amateur)
1917: Lindley Murray (amateur)
1918: Lindley Murray (amateur)
1919: Bill Johnston (amateur)
1920: Bill Tilden (amateur), Romeo Acquarone (professional)
1921: Bill Tilden (amateur), John CS Rendall (professional)
1922: Bill Tilden (amateur), John CS Rendall (professional)
1923: Bill Tilden (amateur), John CS Rendall (professional)
1924: Bill Tilden (amateur), Albert Burke (professional)
1925: Bill Tilden (amateur), Karel Kozeluh (professional)
1926: Rene Lacoste (amateur), Karel Kozeluh (professional)
1927: Rene Lacoste (amateur), Vinny Richards (professional)
1928: Henri Cochet (amateur), Vinny Richards (professional)
1929: Henri Cochet (amateur), Karel Kozeluh (professional)
1930: Henri Cochet (amateur), Karel Kozeluh (professional)
1931: Bill Tilden (professional), Ellsworth Vines (amateur)
1932: Ellsworth Vines (amateur), Bill Tilden (professional)
1933: Jack Crawford (amateur), Bill Tilden (professional)
1934: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Fred Perry (amateur)
1935: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Fred Perry (amateur)
1936: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Fred Perry (amateur)
1937: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Don Budge (amateur)
1938: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Don Budge (amateur)
1939: Don Budge (professional), Bobby Riggs (amateur)
1940: Don Budge (professional), Don McNeill (amateur)
1941: Fred Perry (professional), Bobby Riggs (amateur)
1942: Don Budge (professional), Ted Schroeder (amateur)
1943: Joseph Hunt (amateur), ??? (professional)
1944: Bobby Riggs (professional), Frank Parker (amateur)
1945: Bobby Riggs (professional), Frank Parker (amateur)
1946: Bobby Riggs (professional), Jack Kramer (amateur)
1947: Bobby Riggs (professional), Jack Kramer (amateur)
1948: Jack Kramer (professional), John Bromwich (amateur)
1949: Jack Kramer (professional), Pancho Gonzales (amateur)
1950: Jack Kramer (professional), Budge Patty (amateur)
1951: Jack Kramer (professional), Frank Sedgman (amateur)
1952: Pancho Segura (professional), Frank Sedgman (amateur)
1953: Jack Kramer (professional), Tony Trabert (amateur)
1954: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Jaroslav Drobny (amateur)
1955: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Tony Trabert (amateur)
1956: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Lew Hoad (amateur)
1957: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Lew Hoad (amateur)
1958: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Ashley Cooper (amateur)
1959: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Alex Olmedo (amateur)
1960: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Neale Fraser (amateur)
1961: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Roy Emerson (amateur)
1962: Ken Rosewall (professional), Rod Laver (amateur)
1963: Ken Rosewall (professional), Roy Emerson (amateur)
1964: Rod Laver (professional), Roy Emerson (amateur)
1965: Rod Laver (professional), Roy Emerson (amateur)
1966: Rod Laver (professional), Fred Stolle (amateur)
1967: Rod Laver (professional), John Newcombe (amateur)

My best players per year (open era)
1968: Rod Laver (professional)
1969: Rod Laver (professional)
1970: Rod Laver (professional)
1971: John Newcombe (professional)
1972: Stan Smith (amateur/professional) - turned professional in July 1972
1973: Ilie Nastase (professional)
1974: Jimmy Connors (professional)
1975: Arthur Ashe (professional)
1976: Jimmy Connors (professional)
1977: Guillermo Vilas (professional)
1978: Bjorn Borg (professional)
1979: Bjorn Borg (professional)
1980: Bjorn Borg (professional)
1981: John McEnroe (professional)
1982: Jimmy Connors (professional)
1983: John McEnroe (professional)
1984: John McEnroe (professional)
1985: Ivan Lendl (professional)
1986: Ivan Lendl (professional)
1987: Ivan Lendl (professional)
1988: Mats Wilander (professional)
1989: Boris Becker (professional)
1990: Stefan Edberg (professional)
1991: Stefan Edberg (professional)
1992: Jim Courier (professional)
1993: Pete Sampras (professional)
1994: Pete Sampras (professional)
1995: Pete Sampras (professional)
1996: Pete Sampras (professional)
1997: Pete Sampras (professional)
1998: Pete Sampras (professional)
1999: Andre Agassi (professional)
2000: Gustavo Kuerten (professional)
2001: Lleyton Hewitt (professional)
2002: Lleyton Hewitt (professional)
2003: Andy Roddick (professional)
2004: Roger Federer (professional)
2005: Roger Federer (professional)
2006: Roger Federer (professional)
2007: Roger Federer (professional)
2008: Rafael Nadal (professional)
2009: Roger Federer (professional)
2010: Rafael Nadal (professional)
2011: Novak Djokovic (professional)
2012: Novak Djokovic (professional)
2013: Rafael Nadal (professional)

Cup8489
12-26-2013, 03:30 PM
Fed for 3 majors in 2014.

FO, Wimbledon, USO, so he can become the first oldest player in world history to win three majors in a year on three different surfaces consecutively. First.

beast of mallorca
12-26-2013, 03:36 PM
LMFAO. It's hilarious because it's absolutely true. TMF probably says a prayer every night now so that Becker may be able to help Djokovic stop Nadal.

I guess he's the cheerleader of the Cheerleading brigade of Federer rooting for Djokovic..........hahaha.....oh, the irony !!! :twisted:

octobrina10
12-26-2013, 03:43 PM
Fed for 3 majors in 2014.
FO, Wimbledon, USO, so he can become the first oldest player in world history to win three majors in a year on three different surfaces consecutively. First.

Rafa is the only male player ever to win 3 majors on 3 different surfaces in the same calendar year. He won FO, Wimby, USO in 2010, at the age of 24.

Cup8489
12-26-2013, 10:58 PM
Rafa is the only male player ever to win 3 majors on 3 different surfaces in the same calendar year. He won FO, Wimby, USO in 2010, at the age of 24.

But he will never be the oldest male player to win 3 majors on 3 surfaces.

Thanks, En Es Kay, Welcome back to the forums, I knew it was you.

Forehand Of Doom
12-27-2013, 12:45 AM
But he will never be the oldest male player to win 3 majors on 3 surfaces.

Thanks, En Es Kay, Welcome back to the forums, I knew it was you.

Sure he can be the oldest. Federer can never be the youngest though.

Sentinel
12-27-2013, 02:08 AM
FOD ... while Becker may be a fool himself, at least he was a champion and understands what it takes to deal with the pressures of the game. And that's something that Mayiru Vajda clearly lacks. And by making such absurd claims, all he's doing is heaping the expectations and thereby the pressure on Djokovic who isn't well known for his mental strength. It doesn't help.
Marian Vajda is only making you shake in your Christmas stockings, Senor Ksbh, haha. Nice to see your camp rattled in the holiday season ;)

jg153040
12-27-2013, 06:48 AM
Lets be real here. Without Djokovic playing extremely strongly, Nadal will clean up almost every major (outside maybe Wimbledon and only if he keeps struggling there) and fly past Federers slam record even easier and quicker than anyone imagined. Djokovic needs to be there and stop Nadal often to even keep it suspenseful whether Nadal reaches 17-19 (without him he would go way over 20) or not. Djokovic being in beast mode is exactly what a Federer fan is hoping for. Federer isnt going to win many, or more likely any, more majors whether Djokovic is there or not. Nadal is the one by far Djokovic and his success makes a bigger difference too in the future. Said from someone who isnt much of a fan of either player (or Djokovic for that matter).

I don't think so. You do know that Djokovic hurt Fed's career even more than Rafa's. Why would Fed fans want more of this?

Djokovic beat Fed about 5 times in majors. So, he stopped him from 5 potential majors. Nole beat Rafa only 3 times, stopping him only from 3 potential majors.

Oh and Nole stopped Fed from a WTF title too.

LazyNinja19
12-27-2013, 07:00 AM
I don't think so. You do know that Djokovic hurt Fed's career even more than Rafa's. Why would Fed fans want more of this?

Djokovic beat Fed about 5 times in majors. So, he stopped him from 5 potential majors. Nole beat Rafa only 3 times, stopping him only from 3 potential majors.

Oh and Nole stopped Fed from a WTF title too.

Novak defeated Fed 5 times in Majors, but NONE of them were Finals. Even if Fed had won any of those, there was no guarantee that he would have gone on to win that Slam.

However, Novak defeated Rafa 3 times, ALL of them in the Finals!

It's pretty simple actually. If you don't apply your circular logic in every single post, Jg!

Roddick85
12-27-2013, 09:59 AM
I don't agree with Vajda. The only year Djokovic was truly "dominant" was 2011, and even then, once the US Open was over, he disappeared in the indoor swing. Let's face it, his style of play is so defensive, he can only maintain his domination for so long before he's burned out physically. In 2012/2013, he was still a top guy, but nowhere near as dominant. I believe he'll still win majors in the next couple of years, and he's still my pick for the guy who will beat Nadal at the french open, but I don't think he will be dominant as he was in 2011. While people like to bring up Federer's age, Djokovic & Nadal aren't getting any younger either. Nadal had a couple of long breaks through the year which mean he might be able to play a bit longer than expected, but I don't recall seeing Djokovic take a big hiatus in the last 5 years. In the end, he'll be a top dog for a couple of years, but won't be "dominant" like Vajda says.

Forehand Of Doom
12-27-2013, 10:19 AM
I don't think so. You do know that Djokovic hurt Fed's career even more than Rafa's. Why would Fed fans want more of this?

Djokovic beat Fed about 5 times in majors. So, he stopped him from 5 potential majors. Nole beat Rafa only 3 times, stopping him only from 3 potential majors.

Oh and Nole stopped Fed from a WTF title too.

Baloney. Out of the times Djokovic beat Fed, how many times did he end up playing Rafa in the Final?

Thanks to Djokovic Nadal hasn't beaten the slam count already, and the H2H isn't 25-10 or something like that. Fed should be very grateful to Djokovic for beating him.

Dedans Penthouse
12-27-2013, 10:57 AM
That's very true, ksbh.

What's not well known is that Djokovic has several 80s tennis mags

with Becker on the cover in his night stand.

:)
'Cause Becker makes his Knight stand?


http://st.depositphotos.com/1024768/3387/v/110/depositphotos_33879161-knight-with-sword-cartoon-illustration.jpg

Forehand Of Doom
12-27-2013, 11:02 AM
'Cause Becker makes his Knight stand?


http://st.depositphotos.com/1024768/3387/v/110/depositphotos_33879161-knight-with-sword-cartoon-illustration.jpg

LMFAO. Well played, sir.

Yes, that was a sarcastic comment carrying over from the "Roger announces Mirka is pregnant!" thread. :)

Chanwan
12-27-2013, 12:02 PM
Baloney. Out of the times Djokovic beat Fed, how many times did he end up playing Rafa in the Final?

Thanks to Djokovic Nadal hasn't beaten the slam count already, and the H2H isn't 25-10 or something like that. Fed should be very grateful to Djokovic for beating him.

3 times, losing all of them. Delpo remains the only man to beat Fedal back to back in a slam.

5555
12-27-2013, 12:17 PM
So you'd be happy if Nadal and Djokovic both had the same tournament results in 2014 that they had in 2013? I'd take that.

If Djokovic wins 1 slam in 2014 that would be his third season in a row he won one slam so I would not be happy.

Obviously this prediction didn't work out so hot for Vajda.

http://www.itftennis.com/about/world-champions/men.aspx

The 2013 ATP World Tour No.1 is Rafa Nadal

ATP World Tour No.1 = ATP year-end No. 1. Jimmy Connors was the ATP year-end No. 1 in 1977 so do you believe that Connors was the best player in 1977?

I don't agree with Vajda. The only year Djokovic was truly "dominant" was 2011, and even then, once the US Open was over, he disappeared in the indoor swing.

Being dominant means being higher ranked than all others. So, Djokovic was truly dominant in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

Forehand Of Doom
12-27-2013, 01:44 PM
Being dominant means being higher ranked than all others. So, Djokovic was truly dominant in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

Djokovic had a great 2011, but after that he has been one of the less dominant #1 Players ever. First losing his #1 to old man Federer in 2012, then losing Wimbledon to Murray, and also losing the last 3 slam matches to Nadal, along with the YE #1.

If that's what Djokovic's dominance is like Nadal fans never want it to end. LMFAO.

Chico
12-27-2013, 01:53 PM
Djokovic is current dominant player since 2011 and will continue his dominance for another couple of years at least.

Forehand Of Doom
12-27-2013, 01:56 PM
Djokovic is current dominant player since 2011 and will continue his dominance for another couple of years at least.

I'm looking forward to his continued 1-slam-a-year dominance. If he keeps it up he will catch Borg's slam count in 2018. :)

NatF
12-27-2013, 03:21 PM
3 times, losing all of them. Delpo remains the only man to beat Fedal back to back in a slam.

USO 2011?

10chars

bullfan
12-27-2013, 03:26 PM
If Djokovic wins 1 slam in 2014 that would be his third season in a row he won one slam so I would not be happy.



http://www.itftennis.com/about/world-champions/men.aspx



ATP World Tour No.1 = ATP year-end No. 1. Jimmy Connors was the ATP year-end No. 1 in 1977 so do you believe that Connors was the best player in 1977?



Being dominant means being higher ranked than all others. So, Djokovic was truly dominant in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

Seriously, it's getting absurd the way you are equating Jimmy Connors 77 vs Nadal's 2013! There is no comparison other than you trying to indicate there is, which is faulty logic. Nadal rose from #5 to number 1, beating # 1 in 2 GS, as well as a Masters. Novak beat Nadal in 2 Masters and WTF. Case closed.

tennisfan87
12-27-2013, 03:42 PM
Bullfan - actually he didn't :) Novak beat Rafa in 1 masters (Monte Carlo F), 1 500 tournament (Beijing F) and the WTF F (year-ending masters).

It wasn't 2 masters and WTF.

It's clear who won the most important matches :wink:

Forehand Of Doom
12-27-2013, 03:49 PM
Bullfan - actually he didn't :) Novak beat Rafa in 1 masters (Monte Carlo F), 1 500 tournament (Beijing F) and the WTF F (year-ending masters).

It wasn't 2 masters and WTF.

It's clear who won the most important matches :wink:

Indeed. There is no comparison.

maruzo
12-27-2013, 07:15 PM
Lets be real here. Without Djokovic playing extremely strongly, Nadal will clean up almost every major (outside maybe Wimbledon and only if he keeps struggling there) and fly past Federers slam record even easier and quicker than anyone imagined. Djokovic needs to be there and stop Nadal often to even keep it suspenseful whether Nadal reaches 17-19 (without him he would go way over 20) or not. Djokovic being in beast mode is exactly what a Federer fan is hoping for. Federer isnt going to win many, or more likely any, more majors whether Djokovic is there or not. Nadal is the one by far Djokovic and his success makes a bigger difference too in the future. Said from someone who isnt much of a fan of either player (or Djokovic for that matter).

So what you're saying is, Nadal can only win another slam if Joker was never born? Then by the same logic, I think you'll agree that Federer is already 20+ slams and counting if Nadal wasn't in his way all this time, no?

The field is what it is. A champion make do with what he faces, not what ifs.

And the reality is, Fed is still ahead. Nadal is still trying to catch up to him, not to mention Njokovic. Murray is a distant fourth and the way it looks now, it's unlikely he'll ever overtake either guy for a shot at Fed.

driscoll
12-27-2013, 08:31 PM
So what you're saying is, Nadal can only win another slam if Joker was never born? Then by the same logic, I think you'll agree that Federer is already 20+ slams and counting if Nadal wasn't in his way all this time, no?

The field is what it is. A champion make do with what he faces, not what ifs.

And the reality is, Fed is still ahead. Nadal is still trying to catch up to him, not to mention Njokovic. Murray is a distant fourth and the way it looks now, it's unlikely he'll ever overtake either guy for a shot at Fed.

I didnt say any of that. Obviously Nadal can win slams beating Djokovic. He has won all 3 of his slams the last 2 years that way, and nearly a 4th.

I was disagreeing with the poster who implied Djokovic being in the way is a bad thing for Federer, as much more more than Nadal. Going forward that is totally not true. Djokovic is the only thing that keeps Nadal from winning practically every slam moving forward (other than injury and a bit of Murray). So for a Federer fan Djokovic falling off would be the worst thing that can happen. Federer isnt going to win hardly any slams either way, especialy with Nadal around (if there is one thing everyone can agree on, it is that Federer will never beat Nadal in a slam again), so Djokovic going strong and stopping Nadal from some potential slams is what any Federer fan should root for at this point.

jg153040
12-28-2013, 04:52 AM
How can Nole dominate next 5 years. He isn't even dominating now. I wouldn't call 2012 and 2013 a domination.

What is the definition of domination anyway?

forthegame
12-28-2013, 04:57 AM
Pride goes before a fall.

Fed's dominance ended when he started talking about 'feeling invincible'.

Djoker's team to take note.

Roddick85
12-28-2013, 05:33 AM
Being dominant means being higher ranked than all others. So, Djokovic was truly dominant in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

Don't really agree with you on that, but then again, perhaps we don't have the same definition of dominating. If you look at ranking alone, one could say Wozniacki was dominating for 67 weeks. We both know that's not the case as she was more of a "on paper" champion than anything else. When you can say your dominating, it's because you clearly got the edge on the playfield, like Sampras in the 90's, like Federer in 03-07, like Djokovic in 2011, like Nadal 2013 summer. In 2012-2013, Djokovic was still consistent enough to be #1, he made SF or better in all the slams, won a few MS-1000. He was playing well, don't get me wrong but not good enough to qualify as dominating imo. People like to talk about all the upsets Federer had in 2013, but let's not forget Djokovic's lost to Dimitrov in Madrid, Haas in Miami. He struggled with Del Potro at IW and W, with Wawrinka at the Australian Open and US Open. 2011 Djokovic would of been a different story.

jg153040
12-28-2013, 05:38 AM
Don't really agree with you on that, but then again, perhaps we don't have the same definition of dominating. If you look at ranking alone, one could say Wozniacki was dominating for 67 weeks. We both know that's not the case as she was more of a "on paper" champion than anything else. When you can say your dominating, it's because you clearly got the edge on the playfield, like Sampras in the 90's, like Federer in 03-07, like Djokovic in 2011, like Nadal 2013 summer. In 2012-2013, Djokovic was still consistent enough to be #1, he made SF or better in all the slams, won a few MS-1000. He was playing well, don't get me wrong but not good enough to qualify as dominating imo.

Yeah, I think dominating is when you are clearly above nr.2 and the field. Like tons of points above. More majors, more finals... You need to be ranked nr.1 entire year and also have year end nr.1.

I would call 2010 and 11 domination. I wouldn't call 2013 domination of Nadal. If he was really dominating, ITF wouldn't be confused. I would call 2013, Nadal slightly edging Djokovic.

Roddick85
12-28-2013, 06:00 AM
Yeah, I think dominating is when you are clearly above nr.2 and the field. Like tons of points above. More majors, more finals... You need to be ranked nr.1 entire year and also have year end nr.1.

I would call 2010 and 11 domination. I wouldn't call 2013 domination of Nadal. If he was really dominating, ITF wouldn't be confused. I would call 2013, Nadal slightly edging Djokovic.

2010 was a good year for Nadal, but did he really dominate that much? I mean, he retired in the QF at the Australian Open which Federer ended up winning. Did his usual clay court season, weak opposition at Wimbledon and the US Open, then once again disappeared into oblivion in Fall. That's one of the things that bug me about Nadal, throughout the years, he's able to dominate the tour for a few months, but he's never consistent enough to be dominating from the first tournament of the year until the last one.

I wouldn't call 2013 a total Nadal domination either. However, we can say he dominated the summer (North American hard court swing) where he swept Montreal, Cincinnati and the US Open, all back to back events. He then disappeared in fall, didn't play the 1st major of the year either, so can't say he was dominating for the whole 2013.

jg153040
12-28-2013, 06:14 AM
2010 was a good year for Nadal, but did he really dominate that much? I mean, he retired in the QF at the Australian Open which Federer ended up winning. Did his usual clay court season, weak opposition at Wimbledon and the US Open, then once again disappeared into oblivion in Fall. That's one of the things that bug me about Nadal, throughout the years, he's able to dominate the tour for a few months, but he's never consistent enough to be dominating from the first tournament of the year until the last one.

I wouldn't call 2013 a total Nadal domination either. However, we can say he dominated the summer (North American hard court swing) where he swept Montreal, Cincinnati and the US Open, all back to back events. He then disappeared in fall, didn't play the 1st major of the year either, so can't say he was dominating for the whole 2013.

Yeah, I guess, Rafa's domination is non-linear. His peak is amazing. Then he gets tired.

At his peak, he is nr.1. But he can never sustain his peak, like Fed or Djokovic. When Rafa slows down a bit, he turns to average.

But when Fed and Nole slow down, they are still nr.2.

I guess results prove that. Like consecutive semis/finals, streaks.

I think this shows how complete Fed and Nole really are.

I think Nadal and Sampras aren't as complete. When conditions aren't perfect, they can look pretty average.

5555
12-28-2013, 08:30 AM
Djokovic had a great 2011, but after that he has been one of the less dominant #1 Players ever. First losing his #1 to old man Federer in 2012, then losing Wimbledon to Murray, and also losing the last 3 slam matches to Nadal, along with the YE #1.

If that's what Djokovic's dominance is like Nadal fans never want it to end. LMFAO.

Nadal has never been dominant player consecutive years. Djokovic, Federer, Sampras, Borg they all have done it.

Seriously, it's getting absurd the way you are equating Jimmy Connors 77 vs Nadal's 2013! There is no comparison other than you trying to indicate there is, which is faulty logic. Nadal rose from #5 to number 1, beating # 1 in 2 GS, as well as a Masters. Novak beat Nadal in 2 Masters and WTF.

My point is this: the fact that Nadal is ATP year-end No. 1 does not mean he is the best player in 2013.

Don't really agree with you on that, but then again, perhaps we don't have the same definition of dominating.

ITF says that Djokovic has dominated the last three years http://www.itftennis.com/about/world-champions/men.aspx

Backspin1183
12-28-2013, 08:34 AM
Nadal may be the world #1, but Djokovic is the real #1 for us Brethren 3.0
Idemo!

#nolefam

LazyNinja19
12-28-2013, 08:36 AM
ITF says that Djokovic has dominated the last three years http://www.itftennis.com/about/world-champions/men.aspx

Vajda bribed ITF, no? :roll:

jg153040
12-28-2013, 08:38 AM
Vajda bribed ITF, no? :roll:

If anyone, it was Fed. Djokovic doesn't have that much prize money to offer them more than Rafa.

Roddick85
12-28-2013, 08:42 AM
ITF says that Djokovic has dominated the last three years http://www.itftennis.com/about/world-champions/men.aspx

Heck ITF could say Milos Raonic is the most dominant player ever, they wouldn't have any more credibility in my book. Anyone with decent tennis knowledge knows 2012/2013 Djokovic wasn't dominant. Consistent, perhaps, dominant? Nope

Sentinel
12-28-2013, 09:07 AM
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/images/misc/navbits_finallink_ltr.gif (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=406629) Vajda: Djokovic will be able to dominate for another 4 or 5 years

Forecast of Doom :)

Forehand Of Doom
12-28-2013, 11:26 AM
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/images/misc/navbits_finallink_ltr.gif (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=406629) Vajda: Djokovic will be able to dominate for another 4 or 5 years

Forecast of Doom :)
HAHAHAHA. Well played, sir. I tip my hat to you. :)

Time to change my signature...

ksbh
12-28-2013, 02:16 PM
Herr Sentinel!

I was shaking so bad, I could barely hold my glass of scotch! I wondered, was it Alzheimers or was it Parkinsons or maybe it was something far less harmful? :)

If there's one thing that's for certain, Herr Sentinel ... it's that Mayiru Vajda is just not significant enough! :)

Marian Vajda is only making you shake in your Christmas stockings, Senor Ksbh, haha. Nice to see your camp rattled in the holiday season ;)

ksbh
12-28-2013, 02:17 PM
ROFL! Outstanding, Herr Sentinel!

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/images/misc/navbits_finallink_ltr.gif (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=406629) Vajda: Djokovic will be able to dominate for another 4 or 5 years

Forecast of Doom :)

driscoll
12-28-2013, 02:19 PM
Being dominant means being higher ranked than all others. So, Djokovic was truly dominant in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

You are clueless beyond belief. Djokovic spent about half of both 2011 and 2012 not ranked #1 and didnt even end 2013 at #1, so by that logic Djokovic was in no way dominant. Whatever helps you sleep at night though.

octobrina10
12-28-2013, 02:52 PM
2010 was a good year for Nadal, but did he really dominate that much? I mean, he retired in the QF at the Australian Open which Federer ended up winning. Did his usual clay court season, weak opposition at Wimbledon and the US Open, then once again disappeared into oblivion in Fall

Rafa got injured in the QF of the AO. He retired.
It's strange that he disappeared for you after the USO. He skipped only one mandatory event - the Paris Masters (due to a shoulder problem).
He played:
ATP-250 Bangkok, 27.09.2010; SF
ATP 500 Tokyo, 04.10.2010; Won
Masters 1000 Shanghai, 10.10.2010; R16
WTF 21.11.2010, Final

octobrina10
12-28-2013, 03:06 PM
2010 was a good year for Nadal, but did he really dominate that much? ...Did his usual clay court season, weak opposition at Wimbledon and the US Open....

Yeah, at Wimbledon he defeated "a weak" opponent Tomas Berdych , who had defeated "very weak" opponents - Federer and Djoko.
At the USO Open he defeated "a weak" opponent Djoko, who had defeated "a very weak" opponent - Federer. Who would have been stronger opponents than these ones?

NADALRECORD
12-28-2013, 03:15 PM
When is Djokovic going to start dominating?
Or does Vaj mean dominating the AO?
Or is it not even tennis-related?
Dominating with imitations of Sharapova?
Dominating with shirt-rips and net-glares?
If Vaj means tennis, the problem is Nadal has robbed Djokovic of 13 slams, and that's surely very hard to get over.

octobrina10
12-28-2013, 03:23 PM
I wouldn't call 2013 a total Nadal domination either...He then disappeared in fall...

Rafa played after the USO Open: in Beijing (F) , Shanghai (SF), Paris (SF), London (F).

Enigma
12-28-2013, 04:06 PM
He'll always dominate Bye. When Bye faces Djokovic in the first round of tournaments, Bye doesn't stand a chance.

5555
12-29-2013, 06:37 AM
Anyone with decent tennis knowledge knows 2012/2013 Djokovic wasn't dominant.

So, according to your logic ITF does not have decent tennis knowledge. Stop talking nonsense.

You are clueless beyond belief. Djokovic spent about half of both 2011 and 2012 not ranked #1 and didnt even end 2013 at #1, so by that logic Djokovic was in no way dominant. Whatever helps you sleep at night though.

"...Novak Djokovic has dominated the last three years."
http://www.itftennis.com/about/world-champions/men.aspx

NADALRECORD
12-29-2013, 06:58 AM
^ I wonder what the thought process was behind posting that link :lol:

"Ummm how can I make a case for Djokovic being dominant? I know! I'll post the assessment of the ITF"....

I mean the ITF just named Djokovic Player of the Year, while every other award went to Nadal- ATP Player of the Year, USA Sports Academy Athlete of the Year, L'Equipe Athlete of the Year etc..

ITF not exactly credible....and funnily enough Nadal finished #1 in 2013 in both the Race and the Entry Ranking.

What did Djokovic dominate?

Roddick85
12-29-2013, 07:47 AM
So, according to your logic ITF does not have decent tennis knowledge. Stop talking nonsense.

Come on, who was the most dominant player of 2013? Based on the number of tournaments he won and finals he made, there's not a single doubt that this goes to Nadal. The guy is ranked #1, was #1 in the race, 2 slams, 5 MS-1000, what else do you need to be the player of the year? The fact that the ITF ignores all of this and gives the award to Djokovic shows a lack of credibility. Djokovic had a good Fall, but the fact remains that Nadal won the important tournaments/matches in 2013 and that's why he's currently ranked #1,.

5555
12-30-2013, 10:28 AM
I mean the ITF just named Djokovic Player of the Year, while every other award went to Nadal- ATP Player of the Year, USA Sports Academy Athlete of the Year, L'Equipe Athlete of the Year etc..

Djokovic is not ITF Player of Year but ITF World Champion. There is a difference between "player of year" and "best player of year". In 2013 Nadal is the player of year but Novak is the best player.

ITF not exactly credible

ITF is the governing body of world tennis.

The fact that the ITF ignores all of this and gives the award to Djokovic shows a lack of credibility.

ITF has more credibility than an anonymous poster on TW (yourself)

octobrina10
12-30-2013, 11:30 AM
In 2013 Nadal is the player of year

Rafa is the 2013 ATP World Tour No.1. He was crowned on Nov.9, 2013.
The ATP (Association of Tennis Professionals) represents interests of male professional tennis players and organizes the worldwide tennis tour for men - the ATP World Tour.
NADAL CROWNED NO. 1 AT THE O2
by ATP Staff | 09.11.2013
Rafael Nadal was crowned year-end World No. 1 in the Emirates ATP Rankings and also received the ATP World Tour Comeback Player of the Year award in a special ceremony at The O2 on Saturday.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2013/Moet-ATP-Awards/2013-ATP-Awards-Nadal.aspx

Chico
12-31-2013, 08:58 AM
Good prediction by Vajda.
So far we have 3 years of Novak's domination and counting.

He was obviously a bit cautious. 4 years seem to be on the low side looking at it now, though.

Chico
12-31-2013, 09:21 AM
3 times, losing all of them. Delpo remains the only man to beat Fedal back to back in a slam.

Please go back and watch USO 2011 SF and Final.

TheTruth
01-02-2014, 11:33 AM
Heck ITF could say Milos Raonic is the most dominant player ever, they wouldn't have any more credibility in my book. Anyone with decent tennis knowledge knows 2012/2013 Djokovic wasn't dominant. Consistent, perhaps, dominant? Nope

That's it.

Consistent, but not dominant.

heninfan99
01-03-2014, 01:10 PM
If being #2 or #3 is dominant, then absolutely. His flexibility should protect him from many potential injuries.

octobrina10
01-03-2014, 03:05 PM
A player who does not win a single match in two (AO and W) out of 4 slams, got humiliated several times in the last couple of months (Beijing, Shanghai, WTF)...

Rafa couldn't win at the AO because he wasn't there at all! Rafa skipped the Australian Open that is a non-mandatory event for the ATP players.
Rafa accomplished more in a shorter period of time than Djoko! Rafa won 2 GS tourneys (out of 3 he entered), Djoko won only one tourney out of 4 he entered. This is a big bright spot in Rafa's season! Poor performance from Djoko!

Rafa reached at least the semifinals at every Masters he entered. Djoko got humiliated at 2 Masters: he lost in R4 in Miami and in the opening round of the Madrid Masters. Again poor performance from Djoko!

Rafa fulfilled his commitments towards the ATP, Djoko didn't. Djoko played fewer ATP-500 tourneys than needed. A commitment player must play a minimum of four ATP-500 events during the ATP season. Djoko entered only 3 events, and he got a zero-point penalty that will expire on October 27, 2014. Again poor performance from Djoko!

Rafa is the ATP World No.1 according to the ATP rules. Nobody doubts.

5555
01-08-2014, 05:43 AM
Rafa couldn't win at the AO because he wasn't there at all! Rafa skipped the Australian Open that is a non-mandatory event for the ATP players.
Rafa accomplished more in a shorter period of time than Djoko! Rafa won 2 GS tourneys (out of 3 he entered), Djoko won only one tourney out of 4 he entered. This is a big bright spot in Rafa's season! Poor performance from Djoko!

Rafa reached at least the semifinals at every Masters he entered. Djoko got humiliated at 2 Masters: he lost in R4 in Miami and in the opening round of the Madrid Masters. Again poor performance from Djoko!

Rafa fulfilled his commitments towards the ATP, Djoko didn't. Djoko played fewer ATP-500 tourneys than needed. A commitment player must play a minimum of four ATP-500 events during the ATP season. Djoko entered only 3 events, and he got a zero-point penalty that will expire on October 27, 2014. Again poor performance from Djoko!

Rafa is the ATP World No.1 according to the ATP rules. Nobody doubts.

It can be argued that Nadal has a too big hole in his resume to be the best player as he has nothing at Wimbledon and Australian Open. Only Djokovic haters and fanatical Nadal fans can say it's a fact that the Spaniard is the best player in 2013.

It's a matter of opinion.

TheTruth
01-08-2014, 08:10 AM
It can be argued that Nadal has a too big hole in his resume to be the best player as he has nothing at Wimbledon and Australian Open. Only Djokovic haters and fanatical Nadal fans can say it's a fact that the Spaniard is the best player in 2013.

It's a matter of opinion.

And the press, all but one of the governing bodies, and those that dole out the awards.

The statistics in this case don't lie, and no one should have any issues with who is best player, when it's backed by quality of wins, numbers of points amassed, length of time, etc.

Had Djokovic won either the French, Wimbledon, or the USO, the honor would have gone to him.

He didn't, so now a new year is upon us and we all wait with baited breath to see who will rise to the challenge.

sam_p
01-08-2014, 08:29 AM
It can be argued that Nadal has a too big hole in his resume to be the best player as he has nothing at Wimbledon and Australian Open. Only Djokovic haters and fanatical Nadal fans can say it's a fact that the Spaniard is the best player in 2013.

It's a matter of opinion.

It can be argued that you will argue any position as long as it supports Djokovic?

Is it a fact or an opinion? I say fact.

jg153040
01-08-2014, 08:35 AM
It can be argued that you will argue any position as long as it supports Djokovic?

Is it a fact or an opinion? I say fact.

Is it a fact that there is difference between opinions and facts? Or is it only an opinion that there is a difference?

There are no absolutes. Are you absolutely sure?

Is there a difference between reality and perceptions of reality?

FAITH IS EVIDENCE!

sam_p
01-08-2014, 10:00 AM
Is it a fact that there is difference between opinions and facts? Or is it only an opinion that there is a difference?

There are no absolutes. Are you absolutely sure?

Is there a difference between reality and perceptions of reality?

FAITH IS EVIDENCE!

My gut says you're right and that what you say is very truthy (ie sounds true).

octobrina10
01-08-2014, 10:41 AM
Only Djokovic haters and fanatical Nadal fans can say it's a fact that the Spaniard is the best player in 2013.
It's a matter of opinion.

It's a fact:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bdel_53CAAA5HLi.jpg

MichaelNadal
01-08-2014, 10:57 AM
5555 lives in the land of illusia :lol:

http://marygreer.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/callisto-fool.jpg

5555
01-09-2014, 05:08 AM
And the press, all but one of the governing bodies, and those that dole out the awards.

ITF is the proof that Nadal is disputed number one in 2013.

The statistics in this case don't lie, and no one should have any issues with who is best player, when it's backed by quality of wins, numbers of points amassed, length of time, etc.

It's debatable who was the best player in 2013. It's reasonable to say that either Djokovic or Nadal was the best.

It can be argued that you will argue any position as long as it supports Djokovic?

Is it a fact or an opinion? I say fact.

Your post is off topic.

It's a fact

Can you prove that No. 1 in the ATP rankings is always the best player?

5555 lives in the land of illusia :lol:

The governing body of word tennis has declared Djokovic the best player in 2013 http://www.itftennis.com/news/163361.aspx

Backspin1183
01-09-2014, 05:26 AM
If being #2 or #3 is dominant, then absolutely. His flexibility should protect him from many potential injuries.

This. Novak will continue to dominate the tour as #2 or #3 ranked player.

octobrina10
01-09-2014, 05:42 AM
....

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BdirRwuCMAAlrXP.jpg

jg153040
01-09-2014, 06:07 AM
This. Novak will continue to dominate the tour as #2 or #3 ranked player.

The same as Rafa. I mean they both have 100 weeks compared to Fed's 302.

They are dominating the tour as nr.2. And that's only because Fed declined a lot.

jg153040
01-09-2014, 06:11 AM
ITF is the proof that Nadal is disputed number one in 2013.



It's debatable who was the best player in 2013. It's reasonable to say that either Djokovic or Nadal was the best.



Your post is off topic.



Can you prove that No. 1 in the ATP rankings is always the best player?



The governing body of word tennis has declared Djokovic the best player in 2013 http://www.itftennis.com/news/163361.aspx

Actually this is quite reasonable post. I mean it's not like Djokovic fans dispute Rafa. Official governing body disputed him.

This means it's obviously reasonable to say they were close.

But disputing crazy TW members is not that reasonable. Do it at your own peril. If you do, your children will end up being born naked and illiterate. So be careful!

5555
01-10-2014, 05:40 AM
Only Djokovic haters and fanatical Nadal fans can say it's a fact that the Spaniard is the best player in 2013.

It's a matter of opinion.

It's a fact:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bdel_53CAAA5HLi.jpg
Can you prove that No. 1 in the ATP rankings is always the best player?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BdirRwuCMAAlrXP.jpg

octobrina10, you've lost the argument.

Roddick85
01-10-2014, 06:09 AM
It's debatable who was the best player in 2013. It's reasonable to say that either Djokovic or Nadal was the best.


Why is it up for debate? I mean you just look at the number of tournaments won by Nadal vs Djokovic, it's pretty clear to me. It's not like Nadal didn't earn his #1 spot in 2013, he backs it up with how many slams, MS-1000 he's won.
Now, Djokovic did have a better Fall than Nadal, I'll give you that, but if you look at the big picture in 2013, I don't see why it's up for debate?

Djokovic
1 Slam (AO)
1 WTF
3 MS-1000 (Monte-Carlo/Shanghai/Paris)
3 ATP 500 (Dubai/Beijing)

Nadal
2 Slam (FO, USO)
5 MS-1000 (IW, Madrid, Rome, Montreal, Cincinnati)
2 ATP 500 (Barcelona, Acapulco)
1 ATP 250 (So Paulo)

It's not like Djokovic had a bad year, he's won his share of tournaments, but from an objective stand point, it goes to Nadal. Heck if I were to start a thread and replace the name aboves with Player A and Player B and ask who's had the better year between the 2, everyone would pick the Nadal record. Math wise, he's won more tournaments, and more big tournaments. The debate between the 2 seems to have more to do with fans of either players arguing than pure logic/math.

sam_p
01-10-2014, 06:11 AM
Why is it up for debate? I mean you just look at the number of tournaments won by Nadal vs Djokovic, it's pretty clear to me. It's not like Nadal didn't earn his #1 spot in 2013, he backs it up with how many slams, MS-1000 he's won.
Now, Djokovic did have a better Fall than Nadal, I'll give you that, but if you look at the big picture in 2013, I don't see why it's up for debate?

Djokovic
1 Slam (AO)
1 WTF
2 MS-1000 (Monte-Carlo/Shanghai)
3 ATP 500 (Dubai/Beijing/Paris)

Nadal
2 Slam (FO, USO)
5 MS-1000 (IW, Madrid, Rome, Montreal, Cincinnati)
2 ATP 500 (Barcelona, Acapulco)
1 ATP 250 (So Paulo)

It's not like Djokovic had a bad year, he's won his share of tournaments, but from an objective stand point, it goes to Nadal. Heck if I were to start a thread and replace the name aboves with Player A and Player B and ask who's had the better year between the 2, everyone would pick the Nadal record. Math wise, he's won more tournaments, and more big tournaments.

5555 will argue any position as long as it supports Djokovic...

He is a troll.

Steve0904
01-10-2014, 06:17 AM
Why is it up for debate? I mean you just look at the number of tournaments won by Nadal vs Djokovic, it's pretty clear to me. It's not like Nadal didn't earn his #1 spot in 2013, he backs it up with how many slams, MS-1000 he's won.
Now, Djokovic did have a better Fall than Nadal, I'll give you that, but if you look at the big picture in 2013, I don't see why it's up for debate?

Djokovic
1 Slam (AO)
1 WTF
2 MS-1000 (Monte-Carlo/Shanghai)
3 ATP 500 (Dubai/Beijing/Paris)

Nadal
2 Slam (FO, USO)
5 MS-1000 (IW, Madrid, Rome, Montreal, Cincinnati)
2 ATP 500 (Barcelona, Acapulco)
1 ATP 250 (So Paulo)

It's not like Djokovic had a bad year, he's won his share of tournaments, but from an objective stand point, it goes to Nadal. Heck if I were to start a thread and replace the name aboves with Player A and Player B and ask who's had the better year between the 2, everyone would pick the Nadal record. Math wise, he's won more tournaments, and more big tournaments. The debate between the 2 seems to have more to do with fans of either players arguing than pure logic/math.

Not that I disagree, but Djokovic won 3 MS 1000. Paris is a 1000.

octobrina10
01-10-2014, 06:40 AM
...#176...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BcmVhkcCUAAJCza.jpg

Roddick85
01-10-2014, 07:34 AM
Not that I disagree, but Djokovic won 3 MS 1000. Paris is a 1000.

Thanks for pointing it out, small correction :).

octobrina10
01-10-2014, 08:06 AM
Thanks for pointing it out, small correction :).

And Djoko won 2 ATP-500 tourneys (not 3). See your #177

kishnabe
01-10-2014, 08:07 AM
It can be argued that Nadal has a too big hole in his resume to be the best player as he has nothing at Wimbledon and Australian Open. Only Djokovic haters and fanatical Nadal fans can say it's a fact that the Spaniard is the best player in 2013.

It's a matter of opinion.

As a Nadal hater....I disagree. Nadal had the better year unfortunately.

Djokovic has plenty of positives(Hope he wins the FO this year and AO is expected) coming into this year with the Shanghai, Paris and WTF steam run.

5555
01-11-2014, 12:46 PM
Why is it up for debate? I mean you just look at the number of tournaments won by Nadal vs Djokovic, it's pretty clear to me. It's not like Nadal didn't earn his #1 spot in 2013, he backs it up with how many slams, MS-1000 he's won.
Now, Djokovic did have a better Fall than Nadal, I'll give you that, but if you look at the big picture in 2013, I don't see why it's up for debate?

Djokovic
1 Slam (AO)
1 WTF
3 MS-1000 (Monte-Carlo/Shanghai/Paris)
3 ATP 500 (Dubai/Beijing)

Nadal
2 Slam (FO, USO)
5 MS-1000 (IW, Madrid, Rome, Montreal, Cincinnati)
2 ATP 500 (Barcelona, Acapulco)
1 ATP 250 (So Paulo)

It's not like Djokovic had a bad year, he's won his share of tournaments, but from an objective stand point, it goes to Nadal. Heck if I were to start a thread and replace the name aboves with Player A and Player B and ask who's had the better year between the 2, everyone would pick the Nadal record. Math wise, he's won more tournaments, and more big tournaments. The debate between the 2 seems to have more to do with fans of either players arguing than pure logic/math.

ITF is the proof that Nadal is disputed number one in 2013.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BcmVhkcCUAAJCza.jpg

http://www.itftennis.com/news/163361.aspx

As a Nadal hater....I disagree.

But you can be a Djokovic hater too.

Forehand Of Doom
01-11-2014, 01:24 PM
Even if Djokovic had as much merit as Nadal to be #1 (which he doesn't) it is clear that he didn't dominate in 2013 (or 2012 for that matter). You can't dominate the tour by just winning 1 slam a year and losing to your main opponent where it counts most.

Backspin1183
01-11-2014, 01:38 PM
Even if Djokovic had as much merit as Nadal to be #1 (which he doesn't) it is clear that he didn't dominate in 2013 (or 2012 for that matter). You can't dominate the tour by just winning 1 slam a year and losing to your main opponent where it counts most.

RG '13 it was Pascal Maria who cost him the coveted title. And they didn't water the court in 5th set.

USO '13 lost focus in 3rd set and self destructed in 4th set.

Wimbledon '13 Was spent after the Delpo semi final. Not enough in the tank when he took on Murray.

USO '12 was lost due to wind which hurt his game.

Forehand Of Doom
01-11-2014, 01:41 PM
RG '13 it was Pascal Maria who cost him the coveted title. And they didn't water the court in 5th set.

USO '13 lost focus in 3rd set and self destructed in 4th set.

Wimbledon '13 Was spent after the Delpo semi final. Not enough in the tank when he took on Murray.

USO '12 was lost due to wind which hurt his game.

You forgot to thank me very much indeed. ;)

octobrina10
01-11-2014, 04:47 PM
...#184...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BdvXMuPCUAAFORA.jpg

jg153040
01-11-2014, 05:22 PM
It's funny, how good Rafa looks in a suit. Much better than on a tennis court.

5555
01-12-2014, 05:08 AM
Even if Djokovic had as much merit as Nadal to be #1 (which he doesn't) it is clear that he didn't dominate in 2013 (or 2012 for that matter).

Is it a fact or an opinion?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BdvXMuPCUAAFORA.jpg

http://www.itftennis.com/news/163361.aspx

octobrina10
01-12-2014, 05:45 AM
...#190...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BaQPxMACUAEbO8u.jpg:large

ScottleeSV
01-12-2014, 09:38 AM
With such a weak era I would be surprised if he didn't dominate for the next 4-5 years. He has no competition so it will be easy for him to do it.

With murray, nadal, and del potro likely to play for the same amount of time? Ridiculous comment

jg153040
01-12-2014, 10:02 AM
With murray, nadal, and del potro likely to play for the same amount of time? Ridiculous comment

But they don't. They all have consistently problems with injuries.

Forehand Of Doom
01-12-2014, 11:41 AM
Is it a fact or an opinion?


An absolute fact. Domination requires at least being 25% above your main competitor.

2012: This year had 4 different slam winners, so no domination from anyone.
2013: Nadal won 2 slams and 5 masters, so he was the dominant player.

ITF is a Mickey Mouse award.

TheAnty-vic
01-12-2014, 11:53 AM
An absolute fact. Domination requires at least being 25% above your main competitor.

2012: This year had 4 different slam winners, so no domination from anyone.
2013: Nadal won 2 slams and 5 masters, so he was the dominant player.

ITF is a Mickey Mouse award.

What's a 'Mickey Mouse' award/tournament? :roll:

http://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/274422_gcMzFxVIETlIFeogjVbQLJQVl.jpg

Forehand Of Doom
01-12-2014, 12:04 PM
What's a 'Mickey Mouse' award/tournament? :roll:

http://s3images.coroflot.com/user_files/individual_files/274422_gcMzFxVIETlIFeogjVbQLJQVl.jpg

LOL. Dope smoking Mickey.

A Mickey Mouse award means a very unimportant award.

kishnabe
01-12-2014, 12:38 PM
ITF is the proof that Nadal is disputed number one in 2013.



http://www.itftennis.com/news/163361.aspx



But you can be a Djokovic hater too.

I like Djokovic for your information....and I hope he stops the Nadal!

Even fanboys should learn that facts are not to be messed with. Fact that Nadal is number of 2013.....that no going to change even If like Federer and Djokovic and hate the Nadal!

5555
01-13-2014, 03:31 AM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BaQPxMACUAEbO8u.jpg:large

http://www.itftennis.com/news/163361.aspx

An absolute fact. Domination requires at least being 25% above your main competitor.

Can you prove that domination requires at least being 25% above your main competitor?

ITF is a Mickey Mouse award.

ITF is the governing body of world tennis so its award is very, very important.

Fact that Nadal is number of 2013.

It can not be fact because Nadal is disputed number one in 2013.

Forehand Of Doom
01-13-2014, 03:39 AM
Can you prove that domination requires at least being 25% above your main competitor?


That's a reasonable standard. What percentage do you think is best?

And no, the ITF award means almost nothing. It's the #1 ranking and ATP award that is meaningful. ITF is meaningless.

5555
01-14-2014, 05:34 AM
That's a reasonable standard. What percentage do you think is best?

Can you prove that domination requries at least being 25% above your main competitor?

And no, the ITF award means almost nothing. It's the #1 ranking and ATP award that is meaningful. ITF is meaningless.

It's irrational to say that the award by the governing body of world tennis is meaningless.

TheAnty-vic
01-14-2014, 05:47 AM
Can you prove that domination requries at least being 25% above your main competitor?
It's irrational to say that the award by the governing body of world tennis is meaningless.

You asked people their opinion, and they told you they don't consider Djokovic as the best in 2013.
If you believe otherwise, then it's also totally fine - Djokovic was the best last year, alright?

What's the point of bringing it up over and over again, posting the ITF link again and forcing people to agree with your opinion?

You asked our opinion, we gave you one. End of story! No need to ask for people's approval again and again.
The people who think Nadal being the real no.1 because of YEN1 are right in their view and If you consider Djokovic was the one dominant because of ITF's trophy, then good for you and Djokovic. :roll:

Roddick85
01-14-2014, 05:50 AM
It can not be fact because Nadal is disputed number one in 2013.

But explain to me how it can be disputed when you look at the numbers? Numbers are FACTS and you can try to spin it around all you want, Nadal won more slams and MS-1000 than Djokovic in 2013.

I can understand your a Djokovic fan, but your reasoning is not rational. If I tell you person A makes 80k a year and person B makes 100k a year, logic would say person B is indisputably richer. No one would say B is disputably richer than A which is pretty much what your saying between Nadal-Djokovic.

tennisfan87
01-14-2014, 06:27 AM
Roddick85 - please don't argue with this severely biased poster :roll: There's no reasoning with him.

Despite all the most important numbers and stats supporting Nadal as the world's best tennis player in 2013 and all the awards of most tennis experts (actually all of them except ITF) being given to him, 5555 will still argue that Djokovic somehow has the case for being the best.

He wants to tell us that we should disregard all of the things in Nadal's favor and chose Djokovic just based on the ITF award, an award that has been proven to be severely controversial in the past with their choices.

The ITF even tends to be vindictive to the players who didn't play their tournaments and missed them, even if it was because of injury. For example look at the Edberg - Lendl 1990 case.

Even Rafa thinks that they might have been penalizing him because some of the comments he made towards them in the past criticising them. I can find the quote about his opinion on this matter.

So why should we trust the ITF award? And 1 award is not enough to overlook all that Nadal has over Djokovic in 2013. And no, Nadal doesn't have a hole in his resume, that's your opinion, 5555.

Stop pushing this topic on so many forums (even MTF). People disgree with you :) Honestly, it's enough already. 2013 is gone and it's time to move away from this.

I just hope you won't be spending the whole 2014 trying to push your agenda.

sam_p
01-14-2014, 08:18 AM
But explain to me how it can be disputed when you look at the numbers? Numbers are FACTS and you can try to spin it around all you want, Nadal won more slams and MS-1000 than Djokovic in 2013.

I can understand your a Djokovic fan, but your reasoning is not rational. If I tell you person A makes 80k a year and person B makes 100k a year, logic would say person B is indisputably richer. No one would say B is disputably richer than A which is pretty much what your saying between Nadal-Djokovic.

5555 will argue any position to support Djokovic, no point entering a discussion with it, I'm starting to think it's a bot...let's call it the FactOpinionBot

Forehand Of Doom
01-14-2014, 08:47 AM
Can you prove that domination requries at least being 25% above your main competitor?



It's irrational to say that the award by the governing body of world tennis is meaningless.

Prove it? Very few things are provable. That doesn't stop normal people from reaching acceptable conventions.

Can you prove saying the ITF award is meaningless is irrational?

Everytime something comes your way that you have no satisfactory answer for, you start this proving fact crap.

Dedans Penthouse
01-14-2014, 08:53 AM
555555555555 = zzzzzzzzzzzzz

6-1 6-3 6-0
01-14-2014, 09:16 AM
Prove it? Very few things are provable. That doesn't stop normal people from reaching acceptable conventions.

Can you prove saying the ITF award is meaningless is irrational?

Everytime something comes your way that you have no satisfactory answer for, you start this proving fact crap.

Here's the response you're going to get:

Your post is off-topic. I've reported you.

Throw in a few amateur bolding and underlining for emphasis, and there you have it- our very own keyboard warrior.

Forehand Of Doom
01-14-2014, 09:29 AM
Here's the response you're going to get:



Throw in a few amateur bolding and underlining for emphasis, and there you have it- our very own keyboard warrior.

Yeah, you are right.

sam_p
01-14-2014, 09:39 AM
Yeah, you are right.

It is the clear MO of the FactOpinionBot, don't let it get you riled.

Forehand Of Doom
01-14-2014, 10:23 AM
It is the clear MO of the FactOpinionBot, don't let it get you riled.

I think I'm going to join the club of people ignoring 5555. He's just such a waste of time.

5555
01-15-2014, 05:26 AM
You asked people their opinion

Forehand of Doom has made an allegation of fact and therefore he has put burden of proof on himself.

But explain to me how it can be disputed

ITF declared that Djokovic is the best player in 2013. That's the proof that Nadal is disputed number one.

Prove it? Very few things are provable. That doesn't stop normal people from reaching acceptable conventions.

Can you prove that domination requries at least being 25% above main competitor?

Can you prove saying the ITF award is meaningless is irrational?

Yes, I can. ITF is the governing body of world tennis.

Everytime something comes your way that you have no satisfactory answer for, you start this proving fact crap.

Not true.

Forehand Of Doom
01-15-2014, 08:44 AM
Can you prove that domination requries at least being 25% above main competitor?


It is an acceptable convention. Conventions are reached on consensus and are not subject to proof.

What percentage do you propose?

jg153040
01-15-2014, 10:18 AM
It is an acceptable convention. Conventions are reached on consensus and are not subject to proof.

What percentage do you propose?

Also, how can you prove that being dominated is a negative thing?

I mean Sampras would be lucky to be "dominated" in FO finals :).

Nadal would kill for 1 WTF and 5 WTF finals.

5555
01-16-2014, 05:28 AM
It is an acceptable convention. Conventions are reached on consensus and are not subject to proof.

In the post #185 you've stated it's a fact that Djokovic did not dominate in 2012. That's an allegation of fact so you must prove it. To be proven, it must be supported by facts. Therefore, you must prove that domination requries at least being 25% above main competitor.

What percentage do you propose?

Burden of proof is on yourself.

Forehand Of Doom
01-16-2014, 07:26 AM
In the post #185 you've stated it's a fact that Djokovic did not dominate in 2012. That's an allegation of fact so you must prove it. To be proven, it must be supported by facts. Therefore, you must prove that domination requries at least being 25% above main competitor.


Djokovic did not dominate 2012 because he only won 1 slam. It is that simple.

5555
01-17-2014, 07:19 AM
Djokovic did not dominate 2012 because he only won 1 slam. It is that simple.

Can you prove that Djokovic did not dominate due to winning 1 slam?

Forehand Of Doom
01-17-2014, 08:23 AM
Also, how can you prove that being dominated is a negative thing?

I mean Sampras would be lucky to be "dominated" in FO finals :).

Nadal would kill for 1 WTF and 5 WTF finals.

That's a good point. It put things in a more relative light.

Forehand Of Doom
01-17-2014, 08:24 AM
Can you prove that Djokovic did not dominate due to winning 1 slam?

Of course, because other 3 people also won 1 slam that year.

jg153040
01-17-2014, 11:36 AM
Can you prove that Djokovic did not dominate due to winning 1 slam?

He already did. You didn't respond, therefore you lost the argument.

bullfan
01-17-2014, 11:41 AM
Does Vadja mean 2014-2018 or 2019? Cause Novak didn't dominate in 2012 or 2013. Well if Novak dominates for the next 4-5 years, then good for him. I tend to doubt it.

5555
01-18-2014, 05:19 AM
Of course, because other 3 people also won 1 slam that year.

Was Djokovic was the best player in 2012? If so, can you prove that being better that others does not mean being dominant.

He already did. You didn't respond, therefore you lost the argument.

I have not lost the argument. He stated that Djokovic won 1 slam but he did not explain why that fact proves Novak did not dominate in 2012.

Cause Novak didn't dominate in 2012 or 2013.

Is it a fact or an opinion?

octobrina10
01-18-2014, 06:19 AM
....

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BeRKjYOCYAE-NXq.jpg

Forehand Of Doom
01-18-2014, 06:42 AM
Was Djokovic was the best player in 2012? If so, can you prove that being better that others does not mean being dominant.


Of course, it's not the same concept. You can be better without being dominant. Dominance implies a large margin of superiority. If you are dominant you necessarily are better. But you can be better without being dominant.

ScottleeSV
01-18-2014, 07:22 AM
Djoko has won just 1 of the last 7 slams, which just happened to be a slam with no nadal in. That's not dominent.

sam_p
01-18-2014, 08:02 AM
Djoko has won just 1 of the last 7 slams, which just happened to be a slam with no nadal in. That's not dominent.

Great point, that's quite a drought really. Have to go back two years for the last Djoko win with Nadal in the draw in a GS, and that was a 6 hour grindathon that Djoko was absolutely lucky to win.

Forehand Of Doom
01-18-2014, 08:08 AM
Great point, that's quite a drought really. Have to go back two years for the last Djoko win with Nadal in the draw in a GS, and that was a 6 hour grindathon that Djoko was absolutely lucky to win.

And somehow most people don't give Nadal a chance against Djokovic.

TheAnty-vic
01-18-2014, 08:21 AM
With a body like this, why wouldn't he dominate :rolleyes:

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdlud2YkDL1rudhzvo1_400.jpg

Forehand Of Doom
01-18-2014, 08:25 AM
^^:shock: :? :lol:

phnx90
01-18-2014, 09:10 AM
I strongly doubt this.

I mean yeah, Djokovic doesn't get injured much and all that, but his game is taxing on the body and he relies heavily on speed and movement.

In my opinion he's even more reliant on his speed than Nadal is, who - based on my observations - seems to have more firepower than does Djokovic.

5555
01-19-2014, 09:48 AM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BeRKjYOCYAE-NXq.jpg

http://www.itftennis.com/news/163361.aspx

Dominance implies a large margin of superiority.

Can you prove that dominance implies a large margin of superiority?

Forehand Of Doom
01-19-2014, 10:16 AM
Can you prove that dominance implies a large margin of superiority?

Do you have a dictionary in your data banks?

5555
01-20-2014, 05:10 AM
Do you have a dictionary in your data banks?

Can you prove, using a dictionary, that dominance implies a large margin of superiority?

Forehand Of Doom
01-20-2014, 07:16 AM
Can you prove, using a dictionary, that dominance implies a large margin of superiority?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dominate

AbsoluteZero
01-20-2014, 03:24 PM
There are two claims here:

1.) Djokovic did not display a large margin of superiority over his competitors in 2012, in the sense that he was not 25% better, did not win the majority of the slams etc.

2.) The term dominate is used to describe situations of type 1.)

The truth or falsity of claim 2.) has no bearing on the truth or falsity of claim 1. It is just a claim about what we mean when say certain words, and this is a spectacularly uninteresting thing to debate.

Forehand Of Doom should reject all claim to 2.), but keep claim 1.). Doing this loses little anyway, as 5555 can't even prove that Forehand Of Doom was "wrong" to claim this, without putting the burden of proof back on himself.

5555
01-21-2014, 09:20 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dominate

Can you quote the text which says that dominance implies a large marging of superiority? I can not find it.

There are two claims here:

1.) Djokovic did not display a large margin of superiority over his competitors in 2012, in the sense that he was not 25% better, did not win the majority of the slams etc.

2.) The term dominate is used to describe situations of type 1.)

The truth or falsity of claim 2.) has no bearing on the truth or falsity of claim 1. It is just a claim about what we mean when say certain words, and this is a spectacularly uninteresting thing to debate.

Forehand Of Doom should reject all claim to 2.), but keep claim 1.). Doing this loses little anyway, as 5555 can't even prove that Forehand Of Doom was "wrong" to claim this, without putting the burden of proof back on himself.

Burden of proof is on person assering a claim http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof. Therefore, Forehand of Doom must prove both claims.

Nathaniel_Near
01-21-2014, 09:25 AM
More of this burden of proof utter bull. Some rigid and uncreative, not to mention utterly unintelligible, rubbish coming out in a lot of these threads regarding attempts at logic and reason that turn into a befuddling farce of irrevocable mediocrity.

AbsoluteZero
01-21-2014, 10:36 AM
Burden of proof is on person assering a claim http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof. Therefore, Forehand of Doom must prove both claims.
Sure, if he asserts both claims. I was suggesting that he only assert claim 1.

Forehand Of Doom
01-21-2014, 10:42 AM
Sure, if he asserts both claims. I was suggesting that he only assert claim 1.

To tell you the truth, I don't even know why I keep talking with T5555. It's worse than talking to a wall.

If Djokovic dominated 2013, he would be Year End ATP #1.

Domination =======> Year End #1
Year End #1 ====/==> Domination

Forehand Of Doom
01-21-2014, 10:43 AM
More of this burden of proof utter bull. Some rigid and uncreative, not to mention utterly unintelligible, rubbish coming out in a lot of these threads regarding attempts at logic and reason that turn into a befuddling farce of irrevocable mediocrity.

http://d2tq98mqfjyz2l.cloudfront.net/image_cache/1384990993521902_animate.gif

Nathaniel_Near
01-21-2014, 10:45 AM
http://d2tq98mqfjyz2l.cloudfront.net/image_cache/1384990993521902_animate.gif

Ty very much.

Recommend me pls.

THUNDERVOLLEY
01-21-2014, 11:16 AM
Vajda: Djokovic will be able to dominate for another 4 or 5 years

Oops.......

5555
01-22-2014, 05:57 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dominate
Can you quote the text which says that dominance implies a large marging of superiority? I can not find it.
T5555, you lack common sense.

And, Djokovic's ruthless domination era continues. :)

Forehand Of Doom, you've lost the argument.










T5555, you lack common sense.

This is a personal attack. I've reported you.

More of this burden of proof utter bull. Some rigid and uncreative, not to mention utterly unintelligible, rubbish coming out in a lot of these threads regarding attempts at logic and reason that turn into a befuddling farce of irrevocable mediocrity.

Can you refute my arguments?

Sure, if he asserts both claims. I was suggesting that he only assert claim 1.

In the post #194 he has made the claim that domination requries at least being 25% above the main competitor.

If Djokovic dominated 2013, he would be Year End ATP #1.

Is it a fact or an opinion?