kramer woodie
Professional
OhYes
You really had me excited for a brief moment. I thought some guy 80 years old was able to clean everyone off the tennis court.
Then I noticed the percentage sign and realize it was another fan thread. So, out of boredom, I just had to comment. Yawn!!!
Shalom
Tenacity
Hall of Fame
Not sure about that one, but at this year's Australian Open he sure did wipe the floor with your Rafa.Was Djokovic playing at 79.99% at the 2016 OG?
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
Tenacity
Hall of Fame
Oh, so he wasn't 100% in AO? Well ofc, what am I saying, when Rafa loses he was injuried.
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
It's well documented that he was coming off ankle surgery in November 2018 and hadn't had time to train properly.
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
Come on. You're better than that.
Since Stan woke up in 2013:
5 sets in Australia and US Open 13, with Novak winning both.
Stan beat Novak in 5 sets in AO14, to win the title.
Novak won AO in 5 in 2015, and then Stan won RG final in 4.
Stan won in 4 USO 16 final.
Stan won in 3 USO19 (injury).
Stan has won 2/2 finals, which seems to matter a whole lot when other rivalries are debated.
N01E
Hall of Fame
Or 2013 USO... or 2015 AO... or 2012 USO if we're bringing 2019 USO up. But this is talk tennis we're talking about. We have to ignore all the evidence against our point. It's hard to take someone seriously when they're mentioning Rome '19. And then the super motivated Djokovic during the USO13 final...
TearTheRoofOff
G.O.A.T.
You mean argument from authority, right? Ad hominem is attacking the person. Not disagreeing, btw.
Tenacity
Hall of Fame
That's why he steamrolled every opponent coming into the final, only to become injured there. Btw, when was the last time Nadal beat Djokovic in a Grand Slam match?
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Exactly. That's why Djokovic has 16 and Stan has 3. Lol. If clinging to a Stanimal myth is all you've got, after he beat an injured Djokovic and got wiped off the court by Medvedev, then you are really grasping at straws. Djokovic beat Stan like 15 times in a row at one point.
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
We will have to dig for days to find it.
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
You have to laugh about all this Stan stuff. When that is the argument people are clinging onto, then you can see how little people have to go on. It's hilarious actually.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
It actually is. I would say as a fan I am disappointed in how Djokovic has played Stan after 2012 but he still leads that head to head 19-6 and they are even in Slam matches. 6-19 is horrendous no matter how you cut it, so yea it does show little they have to go on. Lol
Mike Sams
G.O.A.T.
Stan gets wiped off the court by Federer too 99.999% of the time. So what? Stan still beats Novak regardless because Novak plays the style of game that doesn't bother Stanimal.
Fedforever
Hall of Fame
I don't see how the claim that at his best he's better than anyone on ALL surfaces stands up.
The clay HtoH against Nadal is 17 - 7. Are we to assume that in 17 of those matches he just couldn't be bothered?
The clay HtoH against Nadal is 17 - 7. Are we to assume that in 17 of those matches he just couldn't be bothered?
upchuck
Hall of Fame
This isn't complicated. When everyone is healthy and showing good enough form to reach the latter rounds of a tournament, Djokovic is the one you most expect to be the last man standing at the end of the event because of his peak abilities, not Nadal, not Federer. We've seen it happen enough times to know that it is true.
Consider the current context. Medvedev has made many consecutive finals, showing tremendous consistency. Nadal won the US Open and has the best win-loss percentage of the year. But does anyone think either of them is the de facto best player in the world or the sport's most fearsome prospect? No, and the reason why is Djokovic.
O
OhYes
Guest
O
OhYes
Guest
1 win when he beat not injured Djokovic was AO 14. That was only legit win.
RG win came after Novak playing Murray in 2 days, after 1st set he was gassed.
UO 16 Novak was injured (elbow remember)
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Except those 19 times when he didn't beat Djokovic, and those 15 times in a row because you know Djokovic's game never bothered him. Lol
O
OhYes
Guest
Lower.Was Djokovic playing at 79.99% at the 2016 OG?
I am pretty tired of reminding people when his elbow started to cause him problems.
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
clayqueen
Talk Tennis Guru
Is it OK now?
O
OhYes
Guest
I dont know. At UO2019 I had an opinion that he is covering up his elbow with shoulder injury, but I am not that sure of that anymore.
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
RG was a legit win.
US 16 was not an obvious injury, it was a long term thing which he continued to play with for a long time.
My point was they play each other very closely in the slams, since Stan became a top dog.
Tommy Haas
Hall of Fame
Novak was 100% at AO 2019 and made Nadal look like a rec player. That was the most painful beating I've seen Nadal take in a very long time.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Wilander is so clueless. I agree Djokovic at his best is almost unbeatable in the fall season, but overall? LOL. There are enough tournaments where he is vulnerable, even on hardcourt. And only somebody really ignorant might say he has the highest peak on clay. Forget about Nadal, even Federer and Wawrinka outplayed peak Djokovic in RG.
Yugram
Legend
Seems like Wilander is always clueless about everything. When it’s AO he picks Nadal for the win, when it’s RG he picks Djokovic, when it’s Thiem in the final against Nadal and not Djokovic he picks Thiem LOL.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Same as always. During the tournaments after USO Djokovic fans always start writing such stuff. Especially now when Nadal withdrew from Shanghai and basically gifted their hero another YE#1.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
He might be right? Yeah, so Djokovic lost so many times to Nadal on clay because he wasn't at his best every time? And in general-in every match he ever lost in his career he wasn't anywhere near his best?
junior74
Talk Tennis Guru
Agree, but there is no doubt 80% Djokovic is better than 80% Federer, for instance.
Players who rely on consistency relies less on their top level than the aggressors.
O
OhYes
Guest
It was a legit win but Novak could've really used 1 day of rest instead playing him right after Murray.
UO 16 was hillarious. Novak got such easy draw that he just walked injured pass all of them, I think he even got one retirement in the process. He never ever got such easy draw.
My point is that we are talking about levels. Novak has unprecedented level of game when he is on peak of his powers, rested, healthy, motivated. Stan didnt have an opportunity to play against such Djokovic in recent years.
NatF
Bionic Poster
So you're taking what I said and extrapolating your own meaning? That makes sense.
Obviously on clay Nadal is better, likewise I would say definitively that Federer/Sampras were tops on grass - I was talking generally. Personally I'd give the edge to Federer on HC in a hypothetical at 100% match but I don't think the idea that Djokovic is the best all round player ever is far fetched.
RS
Bionic Poster
Djokovic peaked at RG was 2013/16 with 2011 being a little worse IMO but still prime. So Federer beat Djokovic at prime level but not Stan. Djokovic was passive a times and a bit tight in RG15.
Federer is close to Djokovic depending on the event and court speed indoors.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Such pathetic excuses. So Djokovic playing one hour practice session against his pigeon made him gassed for RG 2015 final?
He played well enough in the final, Wawrinka was simply better. It was a great win, more impressive than AO 2014.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't see how Djokovic in RG 2016 played better than in 2015. He won, but let's not forget he faced a much, MUCH weaker opponent in the final compared to RG 2015. In 2015 he faced an in-form opponent who has the game and mentality to beat him. In 2016 he faced Murray who totally collapsed after 40 minutes.
O
OhYes
Guest
Would you call RBA Novaks pigeon too ? He leads 8-3 but RBA alway makes him go distance.Such pathetic excuses. So Djokovic playing one hour practice session against his pigeon made him gassed for RG 2015 final?
He played well enough in the final, Wawrinka was simply better. It was a great win, more impressive than AO 2014.
Only thing pathetic here are your constant attacks on Nole and his fanbase.
RS
Bionic Poster
Murray was not great sure but the level Djokovic played at after set 1 was very high. I think he was more rested in RG 16 and played more aggressive. Even if you disagree with that i would still say 11 and 13 were better.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Agut is just a tough matchup for him, just like Wawrinka is. Thing is Djokovic fans really like to bring Wawrinka down and hype Murray.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Djokovic is not giving back his RG 2016 title or his NCYGS. I think you would like that but it's never going to happen no matter how much you whine about it.
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
I would say I agree that overall in 2015 RG that Djokovic level was a bit higher than in the 2016 tournament.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Do you even read comments before replying to them?
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
O
OhYes
Guest
No. Thing is some ppl really like to put down Murray bcs of Djokovic. Murray is better player than Agut and Stan combined, but he is considered as Novaks pigeon ?
He is hyped as member of big 4 which is clear hype since big 4 shouldnt exist. But at the same time Murray is not like any other player below big 3. He won enough and gave much more fight and resistance to big 3 than any other player. Other players might be just bad matchup for particular big3 member, Murray was tough for all of them.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Not because of Djokovic, but because how bad Murray usually plays in big matches. Do you honestly believe Murray in RG 2016 played better than Wawrinka did in RG 2015? Do you actually believe Murray GAVE A FIGHT in that final?No. Thing is some ppl really like to put down Murray bcs of Djokovic. Murray is better player than Agut and Stan combined, but he is considered as Novaks pigeon ?
He is hyped as member of big 4 which is clear hype since big 4 shouldnt exist. But at the same time Murray is not like any other player below big 3. He won enough and gave much more fight and resistance to big 3 than any other player. Other players might be just bad matchup for particular big3 member, Murray was tough for all of them.
Obviously by career results and consistency Murray is much better than Wawrinka. But by peak level? Hell no. Wawrinka reached much higher peak level at all slams except Wimbledon. He pushed Djokovic in slams in 2014-2016 and had a few wins over him. What did Murray do in these years? Not only he never beat Djokovic in a slam, he also totally collapsed in almost all of their meetings. Even in AO 2015, who gave a better fight?
O
OhYes
Guest
He didnt play better than Stan in RG that year, but he took No.1 spot from Novak when all people thought it would be impossible.Not because of Djokovic, but because how bad Murray usually plays in big matches. Do you honestly believe Murray in RG 2016 played better than Wawrinka did in RG 2015? Do you actually believe Murray GAVE A FIGHT in that final?
Obviously by career results and consistency Murray is much better than Wawrinka. But by peak level? Hell no. Wawrinka reached much higher peak level at all slams except Wimbledon. He pushed Djokovic in slams in 2014-2016 and had a few wins over him. What did Murray do in these years? Not only he never beat Djokovic in a slam, he also totally collapsed in almost all of their meetings. Even in AO 2015, who gave a better fight?
And he did gave a fight at RG 2016.
I wish Nadal has some player outside of big 3 that could beat him on regular basis so we could call that player better than Nadal. Maybe you wouldnt jump on to Stanimal bandwagon so easily then.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Except that nobody ever said Wawrinka is better than Djokovic. And there are more than enough players who are beating Nadal. Even Thiem now beats him every year on clay.
Similar threads
