Has Djokovic underachieved at the Australian Open?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by serbiavic, Apr 7, 2014.

  1. serbiavic

    serbiavic New User

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2013
    Messages:
    39
    Djokovic has 4 AO titles, but he could have earned up to 6-7 right now. 2014 AO was very doable, 2010 AO the competition was weak, and 2009 AO was tougher but he still could have won as the defending champion. Any thoughts?
     
    #1
  2. cork_screw

    cork_screw Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    2,569
    :roll::roll::roll::roll:
     
    #2
  3. SStrikerR

    SStrikerR Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2010
    Messages:
    2,045
    Location:
    Not Fantasy Land
    No. 2009 and 2010 were not doable, as he had not fully matured and figured out how to consistently compete with and beat the best at majors. 2014 is also a no, as wawrinka was playing amazing. That's like saying federer should've won wimbledon last year since he was defending champ. Sometimes the other guy is too good. Saying he underachieved there is stupid imo
     
    #3
  4. MichaelNadal

    MichaelNadal Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    Messages:
    28,966
    Location:
    Tuning Up The Band...
    And he's lucky he won 2012. Have several seats :lol:
     
    #4
  5. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,450
    How?

    He has been the 3rd most successful guy at the Australian Open in the Open era (Behind Federer & Agassi).....how can he possibly be thought of as an underachiever.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2014
    #5
  6. Tenez101

    Tenez101 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    3,639
    This guy is playing on house money after 2012 AO.
     
    #6
  7. PMChambers

    PMChambers Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2013
    Messages:
    883
    No, Nadal has probably been the one to under achieve due to injury, luck, etc. The Nadal v Djokovic 2013 5 setter was brilliant, both could have won it, both where worthy. I watched the Nadal v Federer 2009 last night and though Nadal was luck that Federer got intimidated, Fed was winning most of that match. The surface is a touch slower than USO so I'd say Nadal should be 40% chance, equal with Djokovic with Federer 20% (IE Nadal v Fed 3 matches 2-1)
     
    #7
  8. Vensai

    Vensai Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2014
    Messages:
    1,195
    Location:
    Mortis
    Has Nadal underachieved at the French Open? This is a silly question.
     
    #8
  9. helloworld

    helloworld Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Messages:
    4,672
    Explain how Federer and Agassi is more successful than Djokovic at AO. They all share a record of 4 titles there. Don't be biased.
     
    #9
  10. powerangle

    powerangle Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    5,188
    A few people post.

    The rest of us poast.
     
    #10
  11. Maximagq

    Maximagq Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2013
    Messages:
    6,555
    Yes, every Australian Open since 1988 should have been gifted to Novak since he is the son of god. Brilliant logic.
     
    #11
  12. chjtennis

    chjtennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2013
    Messages:
    4,388
    He could've won it but he just ran into the hottest player of the moment.
     
    #12
  13. tacou

    tacou Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,999
    He got outhustled by Roddick in the 4th round 2009, and you are penciling that in as a major for him?
     
    #13
  14. FreeBird

    FreeBird Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,452
    Location:
    Avatar in memory of TheF1Bob
    I saw 'Has Djokovic underachieved at' and thought that it was one of those Djokovic at USO threads...Only to realize rhat it was australian open.

    5555 is that you? :lol:
     
    #14
  15. David Brent

    David Brent New User

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Federer has a runners up and 11 consecutive semi-finals, Aggasi has the best winning percentage and didn't lose a match there between 2000-2004 (missed 2002) so they both are greater so far, Djokovic may surpass them both yet.

    It's a bizarre question, if your barometer is their success at other versions of the same tournament, then any grand slam winner surely underachieved at every other version of that event in the surrounding years? Did Nadal underachieve at 09 French, Federer at Wimbledon 08, 10,11,13?
     
    #15
  16. serbiavic

    serbiavic New User

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2013
    Messages:
    39
    I apologize

    Sorry if this question perplexed some of you guys, but I was thinking along the lines that Federer has 7 majors at his best event, Nadal has 8 majors at his best event, and wondering if Djokovic could have won more than 4 majors at his best event. I know Federer and Nadal are at a hugely different league, but I thought this would be an interesting question.

    I was thinking: AO 2009 would have been very hard for Djokovic to win, having to beat Federer in the semis and then Nadal in the final. However, in AO 2010, Djokovic would have had to beat (a slightly worser) Federer in the semis and then (unexperienced and nervous) Murray in the final. In addition, in AO 2014, Djokovic would have had to beat Berdych in the semis and then injured Nadal in the final. I meant that had Djokovic gotten past those QF matches, then what would have happened. I think that AO 2009 would be tremendously hard, AO 2010, although much more doable, would also have been a huge step, although certainly more possible. AO 2014, however, was doable.

    Sometimes I am curious to what other people think, but sorry if this question bothered you, once again.
     
    #16
  17. FreeBird

    FreeBird Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2013
    Messages:
    8,452
    Location:
    Avatar in memory of TheF1Bob
    Mate, no point in living in the past. THere could be a lot of ifs and buts. Also, Novak is still in his prime. He can win 6 or 7 AO imo. :)

    But, if there is an issue of grave concern, that should be USO. Five freaking finals and only 1 won. That's not good.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2014
    #17
  18. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,450
    There is no bias. It is just fact.

    Federer - 4 Wins, 1 Final, 6 Semi-finals

    Agassi - 4 Wins, 2 Semi-finals

    Djokovic - 4 Wins, 3 Quarter-finals.

    Making 1 final and 6 semi-finals is a greater achievement than 3 Quarter finals - it is just a fact...there is no bias.
     
    #18
  19. PMChambers

    PMChambers Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2013
    Messages:
    883
    Yes it certainly is, so why pose it!!! Troll.

    However, Nadal only has 1 AO and it's quiet well suited to his style of play.
     
    #19
  20. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,450
    Federer 2010 vs Federer 2009 AO

    What evidence is there that Federer was stronger in 2009 than 2010? I would have thought it was the other way around. Federer was carrying around back issues in 2009 (from a late 2008 injury), in 2010 the write up after his 2010 win over Murray was that he was playing excellently. If you are saying this on the basis of age alone (28 years old isn't that much different that 27).
     
    #20
  21. PMChambers

    PMChambers Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2013
    Messages:
    883
    Federer - 4 Wins, 1 Final, 6 Semi-finals, 4/15, W/L 73–11 %Win 86.90

    Agassi - 4 Wins, 2 Semi-finals, 4/9 Attempts, W/L 48/5

    Djokovic - 4 Wins, 3 Quarter-finals. 4/10 Attempts W/L 43/6 %Win 88.63

    Does that look better? He's doing a little bit better than Federer and only a touch behind Agassi. Agassi gets the benefit of only playing the AO when he was in form, he did not attend the first 8 years when he'd likely make 1-2 finals based on US & FO record at the time.
     
    #21
  22. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,450
    Achievement much more important than percentage

    Are you saying that Djokovic losing 5 less matches than Federer compares to Federer winning 40 more matches? If you put yourself out there more often you are going to lose more.

    I go on tennis achievement rather than %age. Players who play longer inevitably come down in their winning %age. Also if you went by percentage - then Albert Costa has the greatest winning percentage in Slam finals (100%). It really is a metric that is misleading.
     
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2014
    #22
  23. PMChambers

    PMChambers Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2013
    Messages:
    883
    Yes, the % indicates that for Djokovic to loss another 5 matches he'd win another 40. Therefore he would still have a better win/loss record than Federer. Both players put themselves out there as much as their careers have allowed, they don't skip GS like Agassi and Sampras. Theoretically Djokovic's average should still be increasing as his quality of play is still increasing and the field is about the same or a touch weaker now with Federer aging, Nadal injury, DelPo injury, the Top 10 basically the same the last 6 years, Murray recovering, etc.

    You could argue Federer won his AO when Djokovic was a developing player and the stats would be different if they where closer age, but that adds too much speculation.

    Albert Costa win loss at grand slams is 51–36 or 58.62% which is significantly lower than any of the three identified. Not even close. 50% means you make it to 2nd round on average.

    The %Win is important to indicate average progression through a slam, it's a good sign of consistency and often looked at to identify trends in surface play ability.
     
    #23
  24. tacou

    tacou Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,999
    Luckily there is no need for any speculation, because all of these tournaments already happened. Novak won 4 of them.
     
    #24
  25. mike danny

    mike danny Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,992
    The real question is whether Federer underachieved at the AO. He reached 11 consecutive semis but only won it 4 times.
     
    #25
  26. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,450
    Question - would him having lost in the first round in those 11 events constituted a superior performance?
     
    #26
  27. Chanwan

    Chanwan Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,350
    Imo, there's a better case for each and everyone of the rest of the Big 4 as 'underachievers' at the AO:
    Fed: 2005 and 2009 are matches, he came a whole lot closer to winning than Djoko came to winning any of those three AO titles. He would have been heavily favored vs. Hewitt in 05. And I wouldn't say he was further away than Djokovic in 2009-2010 in 08, 11, 12 and 14.

    Murray: 3 RU's, no wins. Plus he came very close to beating Djoko in the 2012-semi as well.

    Nadal: 2011-injury (but don't think he could have beaten Djoko that year), 2012, very close, 2014, very close.
     
    #27
  28. cc0509

    cc0509 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2010
    Messages:
    14,554
    NO! He has the record at the AO tied with Agassi and Federer, how could he have underachieved there? He has underachieved at other slams but not the AO.
     
    #28
  29. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    12,823
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    I think it's a tad perverse to try to argue that Djokovic underperformed at the Australian Open.

    Djokovic's Slam finals:

    Australian Open: 4-0.
    French Open: 0-1.
    Wimbledon: 1-1.
    US Open: 1-4.

    The stats clearly show that the Australian Open is the only Slam where he has played multiple finals and won every single one of them. It is rather the US Open where he has most underperformed having played in multiple finals there and lost all but one of them!
     
    #29
  30. tennis_pro

    tennis_pro G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    16,674
    Location:
    Poland, eating bigos and żeberka
    2010 AO the competition was weak? Are you out of your mind? That was the most open Slam in years we had like 7-8 players with a legit chance to win!
     
    #30
  31. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,450
    3rd best

    Djokovic being the third best in the Open era so far at the AO (Behind Federer and Agassi) is not unperforming. 3rd is very high. He probably will end up in the number 1 position.
     
    #31
  32. dr325i

    dr325i Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,237
    Location:
    TX
    Good math...
    Anyway, those tears from Fed should count at least as one Final?
     
    #32
  33. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,450
    I will always insist that making 1 final and making 6 semi-finals (Federer's best performances at the AO outside his 4 wins) is a better performance than making 3 Quarter finals (Djokovic's best performances at the AO outside his 4 wins). Some people think the opposite - but I will never understand that.
     
    #33
  34. Chico

    Chico Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2013
    Messages:
    9,204
    Djokovic has underachieved in other 3 slams, he should have won 2 FOs, 2 Ws and 3 USOs by now, but he didn't underachieve on AO.
     
    #34
  35. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,039
    Sounds like those slams are at the expense of Nadal and Murray.

    That would have Nole sitting on 11 slams, Nadal 10 slams, and Murray is still slamless.
     
    #35
  36. mike danny

    mike danny Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,992
    No. But that's not what i meant. I meant that he went so deep in the AO so many times that winning it only 4 times really seems like he underachieved there. Much more than any player in history at AO IMO.Nobody was as consistent as him at the AO
     
    #36
  37. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,301
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    He's achieved what he should. He wasn't going through Nadal and Federer in 2009 considering he only just made it through a worse Nadal and Murray in 2012. In 2010 he probably should have been in the finals or semi's (depending on if he was on Federer's side of the draw). If he was at his best perhaps he should have squeaked through that match, debatable though as Federer was in fine form.
     
    #37
  38. Bukmeikara

    Bukmeikara Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    1,696
    So Nadal after incredible seasons in 2010-2011 is weaker than Nadal in 2009?
     
    #38
  39. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,301
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    No. I'm talking about performance at the Australian Open only. I think Nadal in 2009 played his best tournament there. He actually won it as well which supports me. He was very good in 2012 also but I think his 2009 level of play was slightly higher.
     
    #39
  40. abmk

    abmk G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2008
    Messages:
    15,706
    Location:
    U.S
    djokovic was in federer's half in AO 10 ... tsonga took him out in the QF in 5 sets ....had he met federer there, federer would've dominated him like he crushed tsonga & later murray ....
     
    #40
  41. Fiji

    Fiji Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,008
    Yup. He is about to turn 27. It's his most successful slam and his best surface. He should have 6 AO by now.
     
    #41
  42. dr325i

    dr325i Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Messages:
    5,237
    Location:
    TX
    Maybe in your village pills look like that. For the rest of us, it was obvious there was no pill in question on that video...
    And again -- Nadal fan talking about illegal stuff is just too funny...

    Oh, and 0:3 last three matches ;)
     
    #42
  43. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,870
    I don't think so. Djokovic isn't a goat contender who should have 5 or more wins at his pet slam.

    I would say Fed underachieved at AO. For a 17 GS champion and a guy who has 11 consecutive semis, being tied with Nole is underachieving a lot.
     
    #43
  44. The Green Mile

    The Green Mile Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2014
    Messages:
    8,417
    Location:
    New Zealand
    Fully agree with your post.
     
    #44
  45. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,870
    Fed's from in semis and finals was incredible at AO 10. I think that was the last tournament Fed was in his prime form.

    Fed defeated Murray/Tsonga in straight sets. He even bageled Davy. That was unreal.

    Also at AO 10 his backhand was in top form. I remember vs Murray a few rallies. Fed wanted to step to his forehand, then he changed his mind thinking, hey my backhand is working, why bother if I can hit winners.
     
    #45
  46. mike danny

    mike danny Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,992
    Yeah it was impressive to see how Fed demolished Murray in that AO final. It erased every single thought of Andy being Fed's second tormentor after Rafa. I recal people talking like this after Murray at one point won 4 straight matches against Roger from Madrid 2008 to IW 2009
     
    #46
  47. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    12,823
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    Well, if you want to call coming back from 5-2 down in the 3rd set and winning it on a tie-breaker by 11 points to 9 as demolishing Murray, fair enough. Murray had plenty of chances to win that 3rd set including set points but couldn't convert. We all know how nervous and mentally screwed up he used to get at Slam finals. Although Fed was at his best, that 2010 AO final proved to be no exception!
     
    #47
  48. mike danny

    mike danny Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Messages:
    4,992
    I have nothing with Murray. I actually wish him to come back to his best level pre-surgery.

    But it sure felt good to see Federer shut people up of Murray being his second kryptonite just because of a streak of 4 consecutive wins and a 6-3 H2H lead (at that time).
     
    #48
  49. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    12,823
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    I didn't say you had but I always feel Murray isn't given enough credit for making the 3rd set of that match competitive. Everybody talks as if it were a complete beatdown like the 2008 USO final.

    But you can understand why people might have thought that at the time. Federer had played in many more Slam finals than Murray and was very good at reminding him of that fact. He played mind games with him on the eve of the match saying how nervous Murray must be feeling and the pressure of expectation he must be constantly under from the British press and so on. Of course, it worked. Djokovic copied Federer's mind-game tactics the following year when he played Murray in the final and got similar results. As we know, it wasn't until Lendl came on the scene that Murray finally learned how to cope with this kind of mental pressure in Slam finals.
     
    #49
  50. jg153040

    jg153040 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    11,870
    Fed didn't say this to Murray. Murray wasn't even on court at the time.
    Hey, I doubt Murray even heard it because guys don't even follow newspapers and the news at the time to protect themselves from negative mindset of the press.
     
    #50

Share This Page