Is Djokovic now in the tier with Becker, Wilander, Edberg?

[5555]

What do you think?

[hoodjem]

I was wondering this same thing myself.

I figured I had procrastinated long enough in putting Djokovic on my all-time list.

So right now he has 5 majors total, plus I have to factor in that triple from last year.

Can he keep it up? Right now, he looks unstoppable (except for his own injuries).

Interesting that Trabert who also has five, also had a triple.

[pc1]

Originally Posted by hoodjem

I was wondering this same thing myself.

I figured I had procrastinated long enough in putting Djokovic on my all-time list.

So right now he has 5 majors total, plus I have to factor in that triple from last year.

Can he keep it up? Right now, he looks unstoppable (except for his own injuries).

Interesting that Trabert who also has five, also had a triple.

One thing that Djokovic over those other guys is that he has already had one dominant year. Wilander's year in 1988 was great but he really didn't win too many tournaments that year.

[SusanDK]

It's odd how Djokovic has seemingly done so much in such a short time, relative to Edberg, Becker and Wilander.

Wilander's first GS title was in 1982, last in 1988, with a total of 7 over seven years, and his 3 in one year were his last.

Edberg's first GS title was in 1985, last in 1992, for a total of 6 over eight years.

Becker's first GS title was in 1985, last in 1996, for a total of 6 over eleven years.

Djokovic doesn't look like he's done winning majors yet, so if he's not in the tier with these three yet, I have little doubt he will be.

[hoodjem]

Originally Posted by SusanDK

It's odd how Djokovic has seemingly done so much in such a short time, relative to Edberg, Becker and Wilander.

Wilander's first GS title was in 1982, last in 1988, with a total of 7 over seven years, and his 3 in one year were his last.

Edberg's first GS title was in 1985, last in 1992, for a total of 6 over eight years.

Becker's first GS title was in 1985, last in 1996, for a total of 6 over eleven years.

Djokovic doesn't look like he's done winning majors yet, so if he's not in the tier with these three yet, I have little doubt he will be.

All good points.

Djoker's present dominance seems to have certainly put him on a fast track.

[corners]

Yeah, Djoker is level with those guys and it looks extremely probable he will surpass them this year, barring injury.

[Limpinhitter]

How do you compare a near Grand Slam year with a HoF career? It's close. I'm tempted to even put him above those guys on the expectation that he'll continue to win championships for the next few years.

[NadalAgassi]

I think it is silly to group him with the likes of Courier and Vilas at this point. So yes I definitely think he is part of that group, despite that he is a major or two behind at this point.

[bluetrain4]

If not, he's just on the cusp. You can definitely make a strong argument that he belongs in that group who all won 6 (Becker, Edberg) or 7 (Wilander) Slams. He's beaten the top guys of his era, he's achieved No. 1.

One thing differentiating him from that group, other than, obviously, the lower Slam count is:

(1) longevity. While I assume he will continue to win Slams, so far he has won Slams over a 4 year period (2008-2012), while Edberg (1985-1991 six years), Becker (1985-1996 11 years) and Wilander (1982-1988 six years) have shown Slam caliber tennis over longer period.s Obviously, Novak has the skills and the opportunity to do the same, but he's not there yet.

(2) Slam finals - again, he'll probably get there shortly, but including wins he's been to 7 slam finals, while Becker (10), Edberg (11) and Wilander (11) have more.

But, obviously, in Novak's favor of being included in that group NOW is that he had dominant 2011 year. True, Wilander won 3 of 4 in 1988, but he wasn't as dominant in the non-Slams that year.

All have won Davis Cups for their country. I supposed you could look at overall tournament wins, etc.

But, the fact is you can make arguments for being included now or having to achieve just a bit more. No one is going to agree.

I'd put him in that group now despite having "only" 5 slams.

[NadalAgassi]

Novak has dominated tennis in the last over a year now in a way none of those ever have. Even Wilander's 3 slam year was nothing overall like Djokovic's 2011, especialy hardly losing a match for over 8 months. Heck he barely edged slamless Lendl for the #1 ranking that year if I recall. Becker and Edberg between them had a combined 1 multi slam year between them.

You could also easily argue Novak is more consistent than any of them. He has been in the year end top 3 for 5 years running now. He was winning Masters titles (or atleast 1), and making slam semis or finals everyone of those years.

Not to mention he is playing in an era with 2 of the very greatest players of all time. Becker, Edberg, and Wilander were the leaders and of an era between the McEnroe/Lendl era and the Sampras era to come. Almost something of a long transitional era with no dominant dog, and Wilander, Becker, Edberg, Courier all shining at #1 for awhile, mostly in brief stints. Which wasnt a weak era, but they hardly had a Federer and Nadal combo in their way on all surfaces. Should be noted of course Becker, Wilander, and to a lesser extent Edberg had also shown brightly in the Lendl era prior to that. Someone like Wilander though might be hard pressed to win more than 1 or 2 majors in something like a Federer/Nadal era.

[jean pierre]

I think it's not only a question of number. Becker and Edberg, and even McEnroe, won more Grand Slams than Vilas and Courier, but they won only on fast courts, they didn't win the French. Vilas, Courier, Wilander won on fast courts (grass or hard) and on clay. I think they're greater than the others, for this reason.

[SusanDK]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

You could also easily argue Novak is more consistent than any of them.

Not sure one can argue about consistency until Djokovic has played more years. Edberg, for example, had a very consistent career, with 5 years in the top 3, 9 years in the top 5, 10 years in the top 10, and his entire career - 13 years - in the top 25.

Djokovic can still get there, but I wouldn't rank him more consistent just yet.

[hoodjem]

Tennis may be more "physical" today, but that simple observation does not mean it is better or of higher quality.

[5555]

Weeks at number 1:

Edberg 72
Djokovic 32
Wilander 20
Becker 12

[Satch]

Originally Posted by 5555

What do you think?

according to 90% of people from this forum from 1 year ago, Djoker is just one slam wonder, on the same side with Safin.

[kiki]

Originally Posted by 5555

What do you think?

Becker won 6 GS, Edberg also...Djokovic remains still lower ( and not considering how weak is Djokovic era¡¡¡)

He is no better than Vilas.

[matchmaker]

Short answer: no, not yet, but he is on his way to enter that tier, and may even surpass it. But common, give it some time, his carreer isn't over yet. Time will tell.

[norcal]

Originally Posted by 5555

Weeks at number 1:

Edberg 72
Djokovic 32
Wilander 20
Becker 12

How many more weeks till Djoker can mathematically be knocked from #1? I imagine he will be near Edberg's total at a minimum.

[abmk]

Originally Posted by kiki

Becker won 6 GS, Edberg also...Djokovic remains still lower ( and not considering how weak is Djokovic era¡¡¡)

He is no better than Vilas.

another clueless statement from the clueless kiki ...

Djokovic >>>>> Vilas

Djoker's era is weak ???????? LOL, that's as much as a joke as Vilas's draws to win the AOs were !!!! ha ha .....

Vilas had one "legit" GS win, in a full field ....USO in 77 ....... FO 77 win was only because borg didn't play ..... And of course Vilas' AO wins were against joke, weakened fields ....

Djoker has beaten either/both of federer/nadal in his GS wins ......5 of them, all against full fields .......

[jean pierre]

Originally Posted by abmk

another clueless statement from the clueless kiki ...

Djokovic >>>>> Vilas

Djoker's era is weak ???????? LOL, that's as much as a joke as Vilas's draws to win the AOs were !!!! ha ha .....

Vilas had one "legit" GS win, in a full field ....USO in 77 ....... FO 77 win was only because borg didn't play ..... And of course Vilas' AO wins were against joke, weakened fields ....

Djoker has beaten either/both of federer/nadal in his GS wins ......5 of them, all against full fields .......

Vilas is more more more charismatic than Djoko, Vilas is a legend, and he's better too. He won on clay and on grass, he won 62 tournaments, he makes incredible records in 1977 : tournaments won in one year (14), and matches won consecutively (46). I think that saying "because borg didn't play" is absurd : who knows ? + that's not Vilas's problem.
About AO, a lot of people say that Vilas wins are not great victories, beacause he didn't beat top ten players, and especially Borg or Connors. I think it's absurd too. First, AO is a Grand Slam, you have to win several matches in 5 sets, so it's a great tournament. Second, it's not Vilas's problem if Borg and Connors prefered staying with their families for Christmus, while Vilas trained 7 hours/day on australian grass with only Ion Tiriac. And third, Vilas beated in AO great grass players of this era, like McNamara, Chris Lewis (Wimbledon finalist), Amaya ... And in 1978, it's not his fault if Marks beated Ashe in semi-final (it's sure that Vilas-Ashe would be a greater final than Vilas-Marks). And, last point, on january 75, in the Masters, on australian grass, Vilas beated Borg, Nastase and Newcombe !!