"Realistically, it’s over for Novak Djokovic"

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
A truly visceral article about the demise of Djokovic:

World reacts to Novak Djokovic’s disaster in Paris
JUNE 8, 201711:46AM


THE most telling part of Novak Djokovic’s French Open flame-out didn’t come in the crucial first-set tiebreak against Dominic Thiem, one in which Djokovic lost five of six service points and fell 7-5.

It didn’t come in the second set, when Djokovic was seemingly just going through the motions, stuck on the last set he let get away. And it didn’t even come in the third set, when Djokovic pathetically quit on the match, getting bageled to cap off a dismal 7-6 (7-5) 6-3 6-0 quarter-final defeat. It was his first 0-6 set in a grand slam since 2005 — more than 900 sets ago — when he was an on-the-rise teenager instead of a down-on-his-luck 30-year-old.

No, it happened when Djokovic, the former world No. 1 who’s been in a tennis tailspin ever since winning last year’s French Open to hold all four majors at once, was in a press conference and asked a softball question about whether he’d like to play through his issues or take a break to recalibrate. Instead of lobbing back a half-hearted answer, Djokovic took the bait and said he’d been pondering a break and implied that his presence at Wimbledon might not even be a sure thing.

Should it?

Djokovic hit rock bottom during the Australian Open and has been floundering there for five months. (Thus countering the old adage that once you hit rock bottom, there’s nowhere to go but up. You can move side-to-side all you’d like.) He’s completely lost — an athlete without purpose, hope or fortitude. His game isn’t nearly as bad as the results suggest but his mind is everywhere but the tennis court. That’s how you go from battling in a first-set tiebreak to walking off the courtembarrassed just 63 minutes later.

Losing to Thiem wasn’t the problem — the Austrian has been the world’s second-best clay-court player this season. It’s the way he lost, without showing any improvement upstairs despite the drastic steps he’s taken to clear his mind, There’s the dippy “peace and love” mentality he’s learning from player-turned-guru Pepe Imaz. There was the gutting of his entire backroom staff, including his longtime coach Marian Vajda. There was the surprise hire of Andre Agassi and the announcement that Agassi would be a drive-through coach, attending tournaments when it was convenient.

It all stunk of desperation.

Realistically, it’s over for Novak Djokovic, at least for the Djokovic we’ve known for the last six years. There’s no grand second act for tennis players once they’ve lost their grip atop the sport — only occasional flashes of brilliance. Roger Federer won 16 of 27 grand slams between 2003-2010. He’s won two since then. Rafael Nadal won eight of 15 slams from 2010-14. That 2014 French Open title was his last (until Sunday, perhaps). Djokovic will win more slams (though catching Federer seems, for the moment, to be out of the question) but going four-for-four and playing in three major finals per year? Those days are gone.

He’ll fall to No. 3 in next week’s rankings (maybe even No. 4 if Stan Wawrinka can pull another monumental grand slam finals upset), the first time he’ll be out of the top two since 2011.

He went from being the reigning champion at all four slams to posting pedestrian 3R/F/2R/QF results in his title defences, defending those 8000 rankings points with just 1695, less than he got for any one of those four majors. Ever since the loss to journeyman Denis Istomin in the second round of the Australian Open, this has been the logical path for Djokovic but it doesn’t make the situation any less jarring.

There’s no silver lining to his latest defeat and nothing to build upon from the tournament, which wouldn’t have been the case had he not wilted after the first set and phoned in the third. There would have been something to take away from a close loss. Somehow though, Djokovic comes out of Paris an even bigger mess than before.

Tennis legend John McEnroe fired up at Djokovic, accusing him of giving up in the third set.

“It looks right now as if Djokovic doesn’t want to be on the court. This is tank city. I’m very surprised — especially with the way how it ended. That last set was really strange,” McEnroe said in commentary.

“When have you seen Djokovic lose 0-6 in a grand slam quarter-final? There are question marks for me over where Novak is — especially after that performance.”

McEnroe continued on that train of thought when speaking to the BBC. “Inexplicable. I don’t remember seeing a time in the last six to eight years when Novak mailed it in,” he said. “He basically gave up.

“It looked in the third set like he just didn’t want to be out there, couldn’t compete anymore, and that’s shocking for a guy that’s won as much as he has and prides himself on competition.”

Djokovic said after the match: “All in all, it was decided I think in the first set. You know, I tried. I lost that crucial break in the beginning of the second, and he started serving better, backing it up with the first shot.”

That’s an unbelievable statement from a player who’s won 12 slams by grinding for every point. Djokovic once won a five hour, 53 minute Australian Open final against Rafael Nadal. He came back from two sets down at the US Open to Roger Federer. Now he was calling it quits after 74 minutes and one break of serve at the hands of a kid he’d just dominated 6-1 6-0 in Rome?

He got a return bagel — the third time in 271 grand slam matches and the first time in more than 900 sets. It’s only the second time in the last seven years he lost in straight sets at a major (the other was to Andy Murray in that predestined 2013 Wimbledon final). And it caps Djokovic’s worst year-long stretch of majors since 2006.

It’s way too soon to deem the pairing with Andre Agassi a failure but Agassi’s absence from the Djokovic box against Thiem was conspicuous. (It had been announced that Agassi would be leaving the French Open early.) How can a loose arrangement in which Agassi will essentially be a drop-in coach help Djokovic clear whatever tennis demons he has?

The upside of the Agassi pairing was that Andre had been through a similar dip in his career, when he went for a mental walkabout. Maybe he’d be able to impart some of what he’d learned onto Djokovic.

Or maybe Agassi’s priorities are vastly different than Djokovic’s. If he’s not going to be a full-time coach, he shouldn’t be a coach at all. If Djokovic wants someone to call and talk about tennis and life, then Andre should give him his number (and suggest a donation to his charter schools as a thank you). If he has any intention of using tennis to break out of his mental funk instead of vice-versa, then he needs somebody who’s there day in, day out.

So, should he skip Wimbledon?

Though the British tabloids ran with headlines about Djokovic possibly missing this month’s grass-court event in London, Djokovic’s actual quotes on the subject said otherwise.

“Trust me, I’m thinking about many things, especially in the last couple months. I’m just trying to sense what’s the best thing for me now. Obviously it’s not an easy decision to make, but I will see how I feel after Roland Garros.”

He’s thinking about maybe thinking about it. As well he should.

Djokovic needs a break, like the multiple ones Nadal had as he recovered from injury, the various ones taken by Serena Williams during her lengthy career and the one that Federer took after last year’s Wimbledon, which left him fresh to win 2017’s first three big hard-court tournaments. Off-season for a top tennis player lasts about five weeks. About 80 matches per year for 11 years with only a college student’s winter break off? It builds up.

But taking a break during Wimbledon makes little sense unless Djokovic feels his tennis and mind are in such futile states that he can’t win matches to get him deep into the tournament. Djokovic needs time off and skipping the All England Club buys him about six weeks before the North American hard-court season begins. That’s not a long enough break.

And if he’s not going to skip Wimbledon, then he shouldn’t skip the U. Open — that’d be silly. Even in his diminished state last year, Djokovic still made the final.

What makes the most sense is a break after the Open, resting from September to January, getting four months before heading to Melbourne for the Australian Open to recuperate his body, soul and mind with some amor y paz away from the tennis court.

Or, who knows, maybe he gets to the Wimbledon quarter-finals, wins his first-set tiebreak, catches fire like Thiem did and holds up the trophy for the third time in four years, leaving all the self-doubt and rock bottoms behind.

John McEnroe’s brother Patrick and various tennis writers were among those shocked by Djokovic’s alarming defeat.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/tennis...s/news-story/0a8073d553334aed937538fdf83a66ef
 

ibbi

G.O.A.T.
Realistically, it’s over for Novak Djokovic, at least for the Djokovic we’ve known for the last six years. There’s no grand second act for tennis players once they’ve lost their grip atop the sport — only occasional flashes of brilliance. Roger Federer won 16 of 27 grand slams between 2003-2010. He’s won two since then. Rafael Nadal won eight of 15 slams from 2010-14. That 2014 French Open title was his last (until Sunday, perhaps). Djokovic will win more slams (though catching Federer seems, for the moment, to be out of the question) but going four-for-four and playing in three major finals per year? Those days are gone.
This is an amazing paragraph. If you don't go four-for-four, or play three major finals a year then 'it's over'? I'm sure Federer and Nadal have both enjoyed their existence in nothingness this year.
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
I don't see how anyone could "realistically" say it's over for Djokovic. He's in the same boat as Nadal was just two years ago. People were saying the same thing about Nadal. The big question is, is Djock motivated and hungry to get back into top form.
The difference is that Nadal has shown in the past that he can fall off a cliff then come back roaring. Federer has now shown it too.

Djokovic, not yet, so there's a bit more doubt than there was for Nadal and Federer.
 
A

Attila_the_gorilla

Guest
I think Djokovic has realized it doesn't really matter. His mind may be willing, but deep down in his guts he is just not desperate enough to succeed at all costs any more. Fair enough too.
 

dr325i

G.O.A.T.
You can't reinvent yourself if you don't have the necessary skill set.

Djokovic can only play one style. If that doesn't work he gets beaten.
Your knowledge of tennis is...
I assume others play different styles and always find the way not to get beaten, ever?
Novak has figured out MANY times to come back from a brink of a loss to a great win (against greats like Federer, Murray, etc., and against, for example Anderson a few years back). It took a strong physical condition, will and mind to do that, not changing styles.
Novak has lost all three of these - his physical condition is not where top 10 player should be, he lost the fire to fight and his mind has been somewhere else since early 2016.
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
Strange article. The title says it's over. But then you read this:

"Djokovic will win more slams (though catching Federer seems, for the moment, to be out of the question) but going four-for-four and playing in three major finals per year? Those days are gone."

So Nole, who already has more slams than all other players except three in the Open Era, including holding all four at the same time, will continue winning slams but "it's over"?
 

reaper

Legend
Strange article. The title says it's over. But then you read this:

"Djokovic will win more slams (though catching Federer seems, for the moment, to be out of the question) but going four-for-four and playing in three major finals per year? Those days are gone."

So Nole, who already has more slams than all other players except three in the Open Era, including holding all four at the same time, will continue winning slams but "it's over"?

What does "Catching Federer seems for the moment to be out of the question" mean? It's either out of the question or it isn't...it can't be temporarily impossible.
 

Meles

Bionic Poster
A truly visceral article about the demise of Djokovic:

World reacts to Novak Djokovic’s disaster in Paris
JUNE 8, 201711:46AM


THE most telling part of Novak Djokovic’s French Open flame-out didn’t come in the crucial first-set tiebreak against Dominic Thiem, one in which Djokovic lost five of six service points and fell 7-5.

It didn’t come in the second set, when Djokovic was seemingly just going through the motions, stuck on the last set he let get away. And it didn’t even come in the third set, when Djokovic pathetically quit on the match, getting bageled to cap off a dismal 7-6 (7-5) 6-3 6-0 quarter-final defeat. It was his first 0-6 set in a grand slam since 2005 — more than 900 sets ago — when he was an on-the-rise teenager instead of a down-on-his-luck 30-year-old.

No, it happened when Djokovic, the former world No. 1 who’s been in a tennis tailspin ever since winning last year’s French Open to hold all four majors at once, was in a press conference and asked a softball question about whether he’d like to play through his issues or take a break to recalibrate. Instead of lobbing back a half-hearted answer, Djokovic took the bait and said he’d been pondering a break and implied that his presence at Wimbledon might not even be a sure thing.

Should it?

Djokovic hit rock bottom during the Australian Open and has been floundering there for five months. (Thus countering the old adage that once you hit rock bottom, there’s nowhere to go but up. You can move side-to-side all you’d like.) He’s completely lost — an athlete without purpose, hope or fortitude. His game isn’t nearly as bad as the results suggest but his mind is everywhere but the tennis court. That’s how you go from battling in a first-set tiebreak to walking off the courtembarrassed just 63 minutes later.

Losing to Thiem wasn’t the problem — the Austrian has been the world’s second-best clay-court player this season. It’s the way he lost, without showing any improvement upstairs despite the drastic steps he’s taken to clear his mind, There’s the dippy “peace and love” mentality he’s learning from player-turned-guru Pepe Imaz. There was the gutting of his entire backroom staff, including his longtime coach Marian Vajda. There was the surprise hire of Andre Agassi and the announcement that Agassi would be a drive-through coach, attending tournaments when it was convenient.

It all stunk of desperation.

Realistically, it’s over for Novak Djokovic, at least for the Djokovic we’ve known for the last six years. There’s no grand second act for tennis players once they’ve lost their grip atop the sport — only occasional flashes of brilliance. Roger Federer won 16 of 27 grand slams between 2003-2010. He’s won two since then. Rafael Nadal won eight of 15 slams from 2010-14. That 2014 French Open title was his last (until Sunday, perhaps). Djokovic will win more slams (though catching Federer seems, for the moment, to be out of the question) but going four-for-four and playing in three major finals per year? Those days are gone.

He’ll fall to No. 3 in next week’s rankings (maybe even No. 4 if Stan Wawrinka can pull another monumental grand slam finals upset), the first time he’ll be out of the top two since 2011.

He went from being the reigning champion at all four slams to posting pedestrian 3R/F/2R/QF results in his title defences, defending those 8000 rankings points with just 1695, less than he got for any one of those four majors. Ever since the loss to journeyman Denis Istomin in the second round of the Australian Open, this has been the logical path for Djokovic but it doesn’t make the situation any less jarring.

There’s no silver lining to his latest defeat and nothing to build upon from the tournament, which wouldn’t have been the case had he not wilted after the first set and phoned in the third. There would have been something to take away from a close loss. Somehow though, Djokovic comes out of Paris an even bigger mess than before.

Tennis legend John McEnroe fired up at Djokovic, accusing him of giving up in the third set.

“It looks right now as if Djokovic doesn’t want to be on the court. This is tank city. I’m very surprised — especially with the way how it ended. That last set was really strange,” McEnroe said in commentary.

“When have you seen Djokovic lose 0-6 in a grand slam quarter-final? There are question marks for me over where Novak is — especially after that performance.”

McEnroe continued on that train of thought when speaking to the BBC. “Inexplicable. I don’t remember seeing a time in the last six to eight years when Novak mailed it in,” he said. “He basically gave up.

“It looked in the third set like he just didn’t want to be out there, couldn’t compete anymore, and that’s shocking for a guy that’s won as much as he has and prides himself on competition.”

Djokovic said after the match: “All in all, it was decided I think in the first set. You know, I tried. I lost that crucial break in the beginning of the second, and he started serving better, backing it up with the first shot.”

That’s an unbelievable statement from a player who’s won 12 slams by grinding for every point. Djokovic once won a five hour, 53 minute Australian Open final against Rafael Nadal. He came back from two sets down at the US Open to Roger Federer. Now he was calling it quits after 74 minutes and one break of serve at the hands of a kid he’d just dominated 6-1 6-0 in Rome?

He got a return bagel — the third time in 271 grand slam matches and the first time in more than 900 sets. It’s only the second time in the last seven years he lost in straight sets at a major (the other was to Andy Murray in that predestined 2013 Wimbledon final). And it caps Djokovic’s worst year-long stretch of majors since 2006.

It’s way too soon to deem the pairing with Andre Agassi a failure but Agassi’s absence from the Djokovic box against Thiem was conspicuous. (It had been announced that Agassi would be leaving the French Open early.) How can a loose arrangement in which Agassi will essentially be a drop-in coach help Djokovic clear whatever tennis demons he has?

The upside of the Agassi pairing was that Andre had been through a similar dip in his career, when he went for a mental walkabout. Maybe he’d be able to impart some of what he’d learned onto Djokovic.

Or maybe Agassi’s priorities are vastly different than Djokovic’s. If he’s not going to be a full-time coach, he shouldn’t be a coach at all. If Djokovic wants someone to call and talk about tennis and life, then Andre should give him his number (and suggest a donation to his charter schools as a thank you). If he has any intention of using tennis to break out of his mental funk instead of vice-versa, then he needs somebody who’s there day in, day out.

So, should he skip Wimbledon?

Though the British tabloids ran with headlines about Djokovic possibly missing this month’s grass-court event in London, Djokovic’s actual quotes on the subject said otherwise.

“Trust me, I’m thinking about many things, especially in the last couple months. I’m just trying to sense what’s the best thing for me now. Obviously it’s not an easy decision to make, but I will see how I feel after Roland Garros.”

He’s thinking about maybe thinking about it. As well he should.

Djokovic needs a break, like the multiple ones Nadal had as he recovered from injury, the various ones taken by Serena Williams during her lengthy career and the one that Federer took after last year’s Wimbledon, which left him fresh to win 2017’s first three big hard-court tournaments. Off-season for a top tennis player lasts about five weeks. About 80 matches per year for 11 years with only a college student’s winter break off? It builds up.

But taking a break during Wimbledon makes little sense unless Djokovic feels his tennis and mind are in such futile states that he can’t win matches to get him deep into the tournament. Djokovic needs time off and skipping the All England Club buys him about six weeks before the North American hard-court season begins. That’s not a long enough break.

And if he’s not going to skip Wimbledon, then he shouldn’t skip the U. Open — that’d be silly. Even in his diminished state last year, Djokovic still made the final.

What makes the most sense is a break after the Open, resting from September to January, getting four months before heading to Melbourne for the Australian Open to recuperate his body, soul and mind with some amor y paz away from the tennis court.

Or, who knows, maybe he gets to the Wimbledon quarter-finals, wins his first-set tiebreak, catches fire like Thiem did and holds up the trophy for the third time in four years, leaving all the self-doubt and rock bottoms behind.

John McEnroe’s brother Patrick and various tennis writers were among those shocked by Djokovic’s alarming defeat.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/tennis...s/news-story/0a8073d553334aed937538fdf83a66ef
Until Djokovic recommits himself to a full out schedule and practicing he's not going to win anything big. Once he drops out of the top 4 it will get worse. His game is still very good, but he's about on par with Goffin right now who was having his best year.
 

SQA333

Hall of Fame
Your knowledge of tennis is...
I assume others play different styles and always find the way not to get beaten, ever?
Novak has figured out MANY times to come back from a brink of a loss to a great win (against greats like Federer, Murray, etc., and against, for example Anderson a few years back). It took a strong physical condition, will and mind to do that, not changing styles.
Novak has lost all three of these - his physical condition is not where top 10 player should be, he lost the fire to fight and his mind has been somewhere else since early 2016.
He doesn't adapt his style when he's losing. He just stops making errors while keeping the ball deep in the middle of the court. Boring as watching paint dry..

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
 

Defcon

Hall of Fame
He doesn't adapt his style when he's losing. He just stops making errors while keeping the ball deep in the middle of the court. Boring as watching paint dry..

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Well that is usually a strategy that will work vs 99.99% of players. Its how we won all his marathon matches vs Nadal, vs Muzza, so why would he change?
 

Luckydog

Professional
If you want to judge whether Djoker can fight bakc,the first step is checking what's wrong with him.But in fact,we all don't have any idea about that exactly.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Fed being the GOAT he is has won 2 past his peak

Rafa being the epic guy he is is trying to win his first major after 2014. Not that he won anything already.

And how do some feel here that Novak can add few more slams ?

When you start losing to Thiem, Istomin and Querrey , it is danger time
 

kaninfaan

Rookie
Thus countering the old adage that once you hit rock bottom, there’s nowhere to go but up. You can move side-to-side all you’d like.

Whoever penned the article forgot about some other popular ways to go when hitting rock bottom. The always popular trying to dig a hole with nothing but your hands and, what Djokovic did in that final game vs Thiem; bringing out the explosives and blowing to bits...
I do hope he can put himself together again.
 
S

Stupendous1HBH

Guest
The tanking display in that 3rd set was absolutely pathetic. Defending champ and eating a bagel. Nole is done.
 
Who the hell are you and what is your mission here? :eek:
The Joker?

original.gif
 

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
These old guys still have the skills, hearts, knowledge and experience to do well when their bodies allow them to. They will be inconsistent but when the body and mind is in good mood, they can win anything. I wouldn't be surprised if these guys keep switching between looking like world-beaters one moment and then a total flop the next.
 
Top