Djokovic is a dominant #1

  • Thread starter Deleted member 307496
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Djokovic has put together two of the best seasons I've seen from a player in a long time. He's better than McEnroe and Lendl. He's a level above everybody up until Sampras, in my honest opinion.

For all the talk of Djokovic being a subpar #1 and not dominant, he's put those questions to rest. Can he repeat this feat in 2016? Who knows.. But one thing is for sure is that Nole is not going away any time soon.
 
S

scotus

G.O.A.T.
After Novak's 2011 run, I thought he would for sure pocket 2 slams a year, but you know how that went down.

But this time around, I am more convinced that he can do just that: at least 2 slams a year for the next 2 years.
 
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Sabratha said:
Djokovic has put together two of the best seasons I've seen from a player in a long time. He's better than McEnroe and Lendl. He's a level above everybody up until Sampras, in my honest opinion.

For all the talk of Djokovic being a subpar #1 and not dominant, he's put those questions to rest. Can he repeat this feat in 2016? Who knows.. But one thing is for sure is that Nole is not going away any time soon.
Click to expand...
He may go away next year, as Fed did at age 29. Fed had a similar year at age 28.

Look at Nadal at the start of 2014 vs this year. Then 2013 vs 2014.

But in this era no one has put together two years with 3 slams except for Fed.

A nightmare for other players:

Novak with a better net game.

That would be a dream for me, and if it happened, I would be a fan. ;)
 
Last edited:
S

scotus

G.O.A.T.
Novak's unsurpassed flexibility will make it possible for him to stay dominant for a longer duration.

Did you see the guy roll his ankle in the first set when he slipped and fell? It would have injured most other players but his gumby flexibility protected him from harm.

Similarly, his dedication to yoga and flexibility training will help him resist back and shoulder injuries. I am concerned about his hips because of all the hardcourt sliding he does, but if anyone can remain relatively injury-free past the "prime age," Novak can.
 
Last edited:
chjtennis

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
I see Novak keeping his dominance next year, but he will be challenged more times by more players than just Federer or Wawrinka or Murray. In 2016, I'm sure we'll see a lot of new faces in the top 20 and top 10, who can genuinely match Djokovic and other big 4s on a consistent basis. Still, Djokovic will continue to be quite dominant (of course, not as dominant as 2015), but from 2017, I think things will change and we will see a new YE no.1.
 
S

scotus

G.O.A.T.
chjtennis said:
I see Novak keeping his dominance next year, but he will be challenged more times by more players than just Federer or Wawrinka or Murray. In 2016, I'm sure we'll see a lot of new faces in the top 20 and top 10, who can genuinely match Djokovic and other big 4s on a consistent basis. Still, Djokovic will continue to be quite dominant (of course, not as dominant as 2015), but from 2017, I think things will change and we will see a new YE no.1.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't see that happening. Who do you have in mind for the new #1?

I see Novak remaining at #1 at the end of 2017.
 
chjtennis

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
scotus said:
Sorry, I don't see that happening. Who do you have in mind for the new #1?

I see Novak remaining at #1 at the end of 2017.
Click to expand...

It will get more clear during the course of 2016 who will take no. 1 in 2017. But I am quite positive it won't be Djokovic.
 
chjtennis

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
scotus said:
Ok, so you're not sure at all who would rise to the top but you're sure Novak will decline. Is that it?
Click to expand...

You are right. Djokovic's level is bound to decline after this year, but he should be fine until next year. After that, he will have same problem as all the aged players have - being unable to maintain focus throughout the whole match or tournament. It's just something natural and it doesn't matter how great you are, it will hit you.

Also, there are a group of candidates who can take over the no.1 position in 2017. You know who they are. In 2016, some players from that group will break away and will mount some serious challenge, I believe.
 
S

scotus

G.O.A.T.
chjtennis said:
You are right. Djokovic's level is bound to decline after this year, but he should be fine until next year. After that, he will have same problem as all the aged players have - being unable to maintain focus throughout the whole match or tournament. It's just something natural and it doesn't matter how great you are, it will hit you.

Also, there are a group of candidates who can take over the no.1 position in 2017. You know who they are. In 2016, some players from that group will break away and will mount some serious challenge, I believe.
Click to expand...

No, I don't know who they are.

What, you think Dimitrov, Nishikori, Raonic, etc would rise high enough, especially in slams? Don't see it happening.
 
Fiero425

Fiero425

Legend
chjtennis said:
You are right. Djokovic's level is bound to decline after this year, but he should be fine until next year. After that, he will have same problem as all the aged players have - being unable to maintain focus throughout the whole match or tournament. It's just something natural and it doesn't matter how great you are, it will hit you.

Also, there are a group of candidates who can take over the no.1 position in 2017. You know who they are. In 2016, some players from that group will break away and will mount some serious challenge, I believe.
Click to expand...

It's gonna take time and these guys will have to become a lot more resilient! So far they're about as weak as balsa wood! How many seasons has any of the new blood stay on court more than a few months; if that! Kei, Raonic, and all the rest are nursing their own injuries! Nole has that added sweetener of being rather flexible! He avoids more serious problems and has been the most consistent getting out there and winning over the last 5 years! ;-)
 
D

Deleted member 369227

Guest
Gary Duane said:
A nightmare for other players:

Novak with a better net game.

That would be a dream for me, and if it happened, I would be a fan. ;)
Click to expand...

Novak used to go to the net much more when he was younger (don't forget - his tennis idol was Pete Sampras). In a filmed conversation with late Jelena Gencic, his very first coach, she criticized him for not going to the net more, but he responded politely to her that balls are so fast and making passing shots is so easy with todays' modern racquets and strings, that he has to stay at the baseline.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
I'm not Nole's biggest fan, but he is just getting more and more impressive. I am not disappointed with the results at the slam level this year -- I am happy that tennis has another dominating figure once again.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
scotus said:
Novak's unsurpassed flexibility will make it possible for him to stay dominant for a longer duration.

Did you see the guy roll his ankle in the first set when he slipped and fell? It would have injured most other players but his gumby flexibility protected him from harm.

Similarly, his dedication to yoga and flexibility training will help him resist back and shoulder injuries. I am concerned about his hips because of all the hardcourt sliding he does, but if anyone can remain relatively injury-free past the "prime age," Novak can.
Click to expand...
Nole will be a top player for quite some time to come. Whether he is No. 1 or not is the question.

I can easily see Nole still being a top 5 player when he's 31 or 32.
 
Zoolander

Zoolander

Hall of Fame
Nole is a great player, i certainly rate him higher than Nadal and think he shouldnt have too many problems catching Rafa on 14 GS if he stays healthy.

Hes also benefitting from a transition period in tennis. Fed is 34 and cant beat him at GS level, Nads is a spent force, Murray has gone back to being a headcase since splitting with Lendl, his biggest threat at GS level is Stanimal, whos also older than him. This next 2 years should be his to win as much as he can. Lets hope he does.
 
M

Murrayjuannow

Banned
If he is so dominant as number one, how come he has not won one same grand slam title at least 5 times in a row?
 
Last edited:
Russeljones

Russeljones

Talk Tennis Guru
Sabratha said:
Djokovic has put together two of the best seasons I've seen from a player in a long time. He's better than McEnroe and Lendl. He's a level above everybody up until Sampras, in my honest opinion.

For all the talk of Djokovic being a subpar #1 and not dominant, he's put those questions to rest. Can he repeat this feat in 2016? Who knows.. But one thing is for sure is that Nole is not going away any time soon.
Click to expand...
I think the non-dominant #1 part is relevant only to the hairline lead he had at the end of some of his YE #1 seasons.
 
jelle v

jelle v

Hall of Fame
Djokovic is a very dominant number 1.

Very confusing times for me.. I have been a long time Federer fan, but since 2008 or so also a Djokovic fan. Like his game very much too.

So although I primarily am a Federer fan, I am less saddened when he loses to Djokovic.

Djokovic seems so in control all the time, it is really impressive. I think he is especially mentally more in control of matches than Federer ever was, which is pretty impressive.
 
heninfan99

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
shiddy era. Nadal is gone, fed is a senoir yet Djoker loses to 30 yr old Stan in slam finals?
Crazy world
 
randomtoss

randomtoss

Semi-Pro
Sabratha said:
- I am happy that tennis has another dominating figure once again.
Click to expand...

I'm not personally. I would really like to see a more uncertain era, with more players in a position to win big tournaments. Those last 15 years, with only some players dominating, has certainly brought lots of money to sponsors and tournament organisers, and maybe has increased the number of tennis followers, but now it's becoming kind of boring...
 
Djokovic2011

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
Well he's the holder of 3/4 majors, the WTF and 5 Masters 1000s, has over 16,0000 ranking points and in the last 12 months has won 80 matches and lost just 6. If that's not a dominant #1 I don't know what is!
 
uscwang

uscwang

Hall of Fame
chjtennis said:
It will get more clear during the course of 2016 who will take no. 1 in 2017. But I am quite positive it won't be Djokovic.
Click to expand...
Funny that you say that. The Big 3 have set the bar for No. 1 very high. Only Murray is consistent enough to be close. But he is of the same age as Novak.
 
C

ChanceEncounter

Professional
Gary Duane said:
He may go away next year, as Fed did at age 29. Fed had a similar year at age 28.
Click to expand...
The difference is that Fed had a rival who was 5 years younger and already getting the better of him at a specific surface/slam.

There is no younger rival for Djokovic. All of his top rivals are older. They'll likely decline before he does.

Basically Djokovic needs to seriously regress, and a younger player needs to make that quantum leap in order for Djokovic to have a Federer-like 29th age year.
 
The_18th_Slam

The_18th_Slam

Hall of Fame
ChanceEncounter said:
The difference is that Fed had a rival who was 5 years younger and already getting the better of him at a specific surface/slam.
Click to expand...
Except Federer didn't lose to Nadal at the Slams in 2010. He didn't even face Nadal. Instead, he lost to:

Soderling (who he was 12-0 against) at the French Open
Berdych (who he was 8-2 against) at Wimbledon
Djokovic (who hadn't beaten a top 10 player all year) at the US Open
 
Enga

Enga

Hall of Fame
chjtennis said:
I see Novak keeping his dominance next year, but he will be challenged more times by more players than just Federer or Wawrinka or Murray. In 2016, I'm sure we'll see a lot of new faces in the top 20 and top 10, who can genuinely match Djokovic and other big 4s on a consistent basis. Still, Djokovic will continue to be quite dominant (of course, not as dominant as 2015), but from 2017, I think things will change and we will see a new YE no.1.
Click to expand...


The thing about being younger, and standing on the shoulders of giants, is that you know the previous man's accomplishments, and only have to set your goals to surpassing that, as long as it is withing human possibility.

Djokovic can see that Federer, and many before him, declined around age 29. All he has to do is focus, and prevent his own decline, knowing its possible. If he has the desire, it isnt as simple as havig a birthday, waking up, and being inept.

The reason we see players accomplishments get better with every generation is that previous players have already shown how to do it.

I dont suspect Djokovic will surpass 17 slams, but I do suspect he will decline later in life than Federer and Nadal already has.
 
M

mattosgrant

Banned
ChanceEncounter said:
The difference is that Fed had a rival who was 5 years younger and already getting the better of him at a specific surface/slam.

There is no younger rival for Djokovic. All of his top rivals are older. They'll likely decline before he does.

Basically Djokovic needs to seriously regress, and a younger player needs to make that quantum leap in order for Djokovic to have a Federer-like 29th age year.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The people making Federer comparisions are stupid since if you break it down Djokovic's situation looking at who is in the current top 5, how far down the players born in the 1990s are, and so forth, are nothing alike. It is wishful thinking more than anything.
 
M

mattosgrant

Banned
The_18th_Slam said:
Except Federer didn't lose to Nadal at the Slams in 2010. He didn't even face Nadal. Instead, he lost to:

Soderling (who he was 12-0 against) at the French Open
Berdych (who he was 8-2 against) at Wimbledon
Djokovic (who hadn't beaten a top 10 player all year) at the US Open
Click to expand...

and had he reached Nadal at those 3 slams, he would have lost all 3 times anyway, so it really is moot isnt it.
 
The_18th_Slam

The_18th_Slam

Hall of Fame
mattosgrant said:
and had he reached Nadal at those 3 slams, he would have lost all 3 times anyway, so it really is moot isnt it.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't. If he was losing to Nadal, your argument that Federer didn't win because he had rivals 5 years younger would have relevance. But he was losing to Soderling and Berdych. So the problem was with him. Not with the competition. I'm saying the same could happen to Djokovic.
 
M

mattosgrant

Banned
The_18th_Slam said:
No, it isn't. If he was losing to Nadal, your argument that Federer didn't win because he had rivals 5 years younger would have relevance. But he was losing to Soderling and Berdych. So the problem was with him. Not with the competition. I'm saying the same could happen to Djokovic.
Click to expand...

The middle aged type "younger" players (even Berdych and Soderling were 4 years younger than Federer, so in relative terms younger) today arent even of the level of Berdych and Soderling. Peak Soderling, peak Tsonga, and peak Berdych >>>>>> Nishikori (unless he starts to stay healthy and get fitter, then he has real potential), servebot Raonic, and Dmitrov.
 
The_18th_Slam

The_18th_Slam

Hall of Fame
mattosgrant said:
The middle aged type "younger" players (even Berdych and Soderling were 4 years younger than Federer, so in relative terms younger) today arent even of the level of Berdych and Soderling. Peak Soderling, peak Tsonga, and peak Berdych >>>>>> Nishikori (unless he starts to stay healthy and get fitter, then he has real potential), servebot Raonic, and Dmitrov.
Click to expand...
And Djokovic << Federer. It won't take peak Soderling, peak Tsonga, and peak Berdych to take declining Djokovic out.
 
M

mattosgrant

Banned
The_18th_Slam said:
And Djokovic << Federer. It won't take peak Soderling, peak Tsonga, and peak Berdych to take declining Djokovic out.
Click to expand...

Whether Djokovic << Federer is something we will learn in the next 3 or 4 years. Djokovic could well be aging better than Federer though. Federer was never really the worlds best again after age 26. Even in late 2009 when he briefly got back on top, it felt like a stopgap due to Nadal's injuries, and Nadal was still the one to beat and his return to the top soon once he sorted out his own problems was inevitable. Djokovic at 28 is dominating, so based on that seems to be aging better than Federer. At 26/27 he wasnt being totally owned by another player like Federer was already by Nadal.
 
The_18th_Slam

The_18th_Slam

Hall of Fame
mattosgrant said:
Whether Djokovic << Federer is something we will learn in the next 3 or 4 years.
Click to expand...
And whether Tsonga, Berdych, Soderling >>>> Nishikori, Dimitrov, and Raonic is also something we will learn in the next 3 or 4 years, don't you think?

Djokovic could well be aging better than Federer though.
Click to expand...
Or not.

Federer was never really the worlds best again after age 26. Even in late 2009 when he briefly got back on top, it felt like a stopgap due to Nadal's injuries
Click to expand...
Yeah, is that why he made 6 consecutive Slam finals from the 2008 US Open to the 2010 Australian Open, winning 4, and losing the other two in the 5th sets?

and Nadal was still the one to beat and his return to the top soon once he sorted out his own problems was inevitable.
Click to expand...
That is irrelevant to Federer, because Federer didn't even face Nadal in 2010 at the Slams. What did Nadal have to do with Federer's Slam results in 2010?

Djokovic at 28 is dominating, so based on that seems to be aging better than Federer.
Click to expand...
Except Federer had better Slam results than Djokovic at the same age. Federer made 6 consecutive Slam finals, winning 4. Djokovic made just 5 Slam finals, winning 4.

At 26/27 he wasnt being totally owned by another player like Federer was already by Nadal.
Click to expand...
Yes, he was instead getting owned by Murray in Slam finals :D
 
M

mattosgrant

Banned
The_18th_Slam said:
And whether Tsonga, Berdych, Soderling >>>> Nishikori, Dimitrov, and Raonic is also something we will learn in the next 3 or 4 years, don't you think?
Click to expand...

While Soderling was a rare type of late bloomer, those others in that group were making an impact quite a bit younger. I have already seen enough to be convinced Raonic, Dmitrov, Tomic, are well inferior to that group. If any of them prove me wrong then good for them, it is better for the game, but I am pretty confident they wont. Kei is the one possible exception I am still holding out some hope for, but he has to make a move now.

Yeah, is that why he made 6 consecutive Slam finals from the 2008 US Open to the 2010 Australian Open, winning 4, and losing the other two in the 5th sets?
Click to expand...

It was still already the Nadal era IMO. Basically other than a half year blip in the 2nd half of 2009 where Nadal dealt with his own issues (injuries, parents divorce, confidence loss from the shock RG loss) Nadal was the best the whole 2008-2010 period, and it always felt like Federer briefly returning to the top was just a stopgap until Nadal found his form again, which proved true. The 2008 French-2009 Australian stretch made it clear Federer would probably never beat Nadal in a slam again, let alone be favored to should they meet.

Djokovic is facing nothing like that with anyone, and this entirely feels like the Djokovic era still ongoing, which it did not feel for Federer even after the 2010 Australian Open.
 
The_18th_Slam

The_18th_Slam

Hall of Fame
mattosgrant said:
While Soderling was a rare type of late bloomer, those others in that group were making an impact quite a bit younger. I have already seen enough to be convinced Raonic, Dmitrov, Tomic, are well inferior to that group. If any of them prove me wrong then good for them, it is better for the game, but I am pretty confident they wont. Kei is the one possible exception I am still holding out some hope for, but he has to make a move now.
Click to expand...
And I have already seen enough to be convinced Djokovic isn't close to the same caliber of player that Federer is.

It was still already the Nadal era IMO. Basically other than a half year blip in the 2nd half of 2009 where Nadal dealt with his own issues (injuries, parents divorce, confidence loss from the shock RG loss) Nadal was the best the whole 2008-2010 period, and it always felt like Federer briefly returning to the top was just a stopgap until Nadal found his form again, which proved true. The 2008 French-2009 Australian stretch made it clear Federer would probably never beat Nadal in a slam again, let alone be favored to should they meet.
Click to expand...
IT DOES NOT MATTER whose era it was. Federer was losing to Soderling, Tsonga, and Berdych.

Djokovic is facing nothing like that with anyone, and this entirely feels like the Djokovic era still ongoing, which it did not feel for Federer even after the 2010 Australian Open.
Click to expand...
Hindsight is 20/20. 2010 felt like the Federer era, too, with everyone predicting him to get to 20 Slams. We know how that worked out.
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
I do think this will be his zenith though and that he might follow thru for the next 2 Slams. After that, I still expect him to be very strong but to not quite hit these dizzying heights again. I also expect that he could contend strongly into his 30s.
 
M

mattosgrant

Banned
The_18th_Slam said:
Hindsight is 20/20. 2010 felt like the Federer era, too, with everyone predicting him to get to 20 Slams. We know how that worked out.
Click to expand...

I never felt that way and felt he would win 18 max. I always felt like we were still in the Nadal era which began in early 2008, and Nadal's return to #1 was inevitable that year, once he worked through his late 2009 problems which had absolutely nothing to do with Federer (and obviously Federer himself was never a roadblock for Nadal at that point, while the reverse was always true if Nadal was playing decent).

Just as I feel Djokovic will reach 16-19 slams, and always felt Serena would reach 20+. Like always I will probably end up right. It is just the way things always go.
 
The_18th_Slam

The_18th_Slam

Hall of Fame
mattosgrant said:
I never felt that way and felt he would win 18 max. I always felt like we were still in the Nadal era which began in early 2008, and Nadal's return to #1 was inevitable that year.
Click to expand...
What you felt doesn't prove anything. The general perception was that Federer would get to 20. Just because you were right before doesn't mean you will be right again.

Just as I feel Djokovic will reach 16-19 slams, and always felt Serena would reach 20+. Like always I will probably end up right. It is just the way things always go.
Click to expand...
:D:D:D
 
  • Like
Reactions: gn
Gary Duane

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
ChanceEncounter said:
The difference is that Fed had a rival who was 5 years younger and already getting the better of him at a specific surface/slam.

There is no younger rival for Djokovic. All of his top rivals are older. They'll likely decline before he does.

Basically Djokovic needs to seriously regress, and a younger player needs to make that quantum leap in order for Djokovic to have a Federer-like 29th age year.
Click to expand...
True, but it is inevitable that younger players are going to get stronger.
 
duaneeo

duaneeo

Legend
He's been a very dominant #1 for two years (2011, 2015), and a subpar #1 for two years (2012, 2014). That puts Djokovic at par as a #1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GabeT
  • Poll
Novak’s third dominant run
Replies
34
Views
2K
Red Rick
Red Rick
BrooklynNY
Is Nadal a fluke #1?
Replies
22
Views
2K
tlm
tlm
Lew II
Djokovic the only player that dominated different eras?
Replies
20
Views
639
Beckerserve
Beckerserve
jm1980
Ferrer: "Djokovic is unbeatable. Without a doubt he's making history"
2
Replies
70
Views
4K
donquijote
donquijote
TripleATeam
  • Poll
Who will be the top #1 in the 2020s?
2
Replies
69
Views
2K
jackson vile
jackson vile
Top