Megafanoftennis100
Professional
To address the many tennis fans, who consider the current era the weakest ever:
OK, so 2019-2023 is maybe as weak as the 2001-2007 era, but unlike Federer who had full access to his youthful athleticism and was at the peak of his powers during his era, Djokovic was already 32-36 years old during the supposed “second weak era” - ironically, this range of age is, according to many Fed fans, what nerfed Roger so significantly.
And yet, they say that Djokovic is supposed to be in his “prime” now. This is already one noticeable flaw in the argument.
Moreover, let’s examine the toughest players in the Slams that Djokovic won for each year of the supposed “2nd weak era”:
2019
AO - faces Medvedev & Nadal
WB - faces Federer. I know Roger was 37 at that time, but then, Djokovic was 32, which is still a very old age. Besides, compare this win to Federer facing the likes of 20-year-old clay specialist Nadal or Mark Philippoussis in Wimbledon finals. I am pretty sure that 2019 Federer is better than 2003 Philippoussis on grass.
2020
AO - faces Federer & Thiem. I know that Federer was injured and nearly retired, but Thiem was in a very good shape and in fact, 2020 is (sadly) the last year in which we see a good Thiem.
2021
AO - faces Zverev & Medvedev (both having the season of their life)
RG - faces Nadal himself (Nadal is literally only 1 year older than Djokovic)
WB - OK, this was actually weak, but still, not as weak as Federer’s 2006 AO win or Nadal’s 2017 USO win, so I guess that evens things out.
2022
WB - OK, this was also weak, but don’t forget that this year, he was unjustly deported from a Slam that we would have most certainly won. (And no, it was not him breaking the rules by lying about his visa. This is a false rumour spread by his malicious haters. Already many people have debunked it. And don't forget, Nadal was infected with COVID within less than 14 days before entering Australia when it was technically against the rules.)
So we can look at it this way: Djokovic was rewarded a relatively easy draw by fate to compensate for the AO Slam that was unjustly stolen from him through politics. In contrast, Federer & Nadal were never banned from any ATP tournament in their entire careers (even though the latter entered Australia with COVID).
Hypothetically, can you imagine what people’s reaction would be if Federer, during the mid-2000s, was banned from Wimbledon and then, in the next Grand Slam tournament, he was handed a super easy draw to win? I assure you, that no matter how easy the draw is, none of his fans would be complaining about weak competition - instead, they would endlessly shout and cry about how much Federer deserved the win to make up for the stolen Wimbledon title.
2023
AO - faces Rublev & Tsitsipas (both top 5 players at the time of January). Besides, he was confirmed to be injured (3 cm tear in hamstring), yet still ended up dominating the tournament, dropping only 1 set (even that, in a close tiebreak) and winning half of his sets with a score of 6-0, 6-1 or 6-2.
RG - faces Carlos Alcaraz (the new poster-boy of the tennis establishment) & Ruud (whom Nadal also had to face in last year’s RG final)
USO - defeats Medvedev, who had just played a phenomenal match to dismantle Alcaraz in the semis. Honestly, this somewhat reminds me of the 2015 Wimbledon, where Federer lost to an unstoppable Djokovic in the final, despite his masterclass performance in the previous round against Andy Murray.
So overall, apart from 2021 and 2022 Wimbledon, Djokovic faced very tough competition across all the GS tournaments that he won. At least as tough as the 2001-2007 field for sure. Not to mention that he did all of this whilst being over 30 years old, unlike 2004-2007 Federer or 2008-2013 Nadal.
What do you guys think? Do you still consider Djokovic a weak era champion?
OK, so 2019-2023 is maybe as weak as the 2001-2007 era, but unlike Federer who had full access to his youthful athleticism and was at the peak of his powers during his era, Djokovic was already 32-36 years old during the supposed “second weak era” - ironically, this range of age is, according to many Fed fans, what nerfed Roger so significantly.
And yet, they say that Djokovic is supposed to be in his “prime” now. This is already one noticeable flaw in the argument.
Moreover, let’s examine the toughest players in the Slams that Djokovic won for each year of the supposed “2nd weak era”:
2019
AO - faces Medvedev & Nadal
WB - faces Federer. I know Roger was 37 at that time, but then, Djokovic was 32, which is still a very old age. Besides, compare this win to Federer facing the likes of 20-year-old clay specialist Nadal or Mark Philippoussis in Wimbledon finals. I am pretty sure that 2019 Federer is better than 2003 Philippoussis on grass.
2020
AO - faces Federer & Thiem. I know that Federer was injured and nearly retired, but Thiem was in a very good shape and in fact, 2020 is (sadly) the last year in which we see a good Thiem.
2021
AO - faces Zverev & Medvedev (both having the season of their life)
RG - faces Nadal himself (Nadal is literally only 1 year older than Djokovic)
WB - OK, this was actually weak, but still, not as weak as Federer’s 2006 AO win or Nadal’s 2017 USO win, so I guess that evens things out.
2022
WB - OK, this was also weak, but don’t forget that this year, he was unjustly deported from a Slam that we would have most certainly won. (And no, it was not him breaking the rules by lying about his visa. This is a false rumour spread by his malicious haters. Already many people have debunked it. And don't forget, Nadal was infected with COVID within less than 14 days before entering Australia when it was technically against the rules.)
So we can look at it this way: Djokovic was rewarded a relatively easy draw by fate to compensate for the AO Slam that was unjustly stolen from him through politics. In contrast, Federer & Nadal were never banned from any ATP tournament in their entire careers (even though the latter entered Australia with COVID).
Hypothetically, can you imagine what people’s reaction would be if Federer, during the mid-2000s, was banned from Wimbledon and then, in the next Grand Slam tournament, he was handed a super easy draw to win? I assure you, that no matter how easy the draw is, none of his fans would be complaining about weak competition - instead, they would endlessly shout and cry about how much Federer deserved the win to make up for the stolen Wimbledon title.
2023
AO - faces Rublev & Tsitsipas (both top 5 players at the time of January). Besides, he was confirmed to be injured (3 cm tear in hamstring), yet still ended up dominating the tournament, dropping only 1 set (even that, in a close tiebreak) and winning half of his sets with a score of 6-0, 6-1 or 6-2.
RG - faces Carlos Alcaraz (the new poster-boy of the tennis establishment) & Ruud (whom Nadal also had to face in last year’s RG final)
USO - defeats Medvedev, who had just played a phenomenal match to dismantle Alcaraz in the semis. Honestly, this somewhat reminds me of the 2015 Wimbledon, where Federer lost to an unstoppable Djokovic in the final, despite his masterclass performance in the previous round against Andy Murray.
So overall, apart from 2021 and 2022 Wimbledon, Djokovic faced very tough competition across all the GS tournaments that he won. At least as tough as the 2001-2007 field for sure. Not to mention that he did all of this whilst being over 30 years old, unlike 2004-2007 Federer or 2008-2013 Nadal.
What do you guys think? Do you still consider Djokovic a weak era champion?
