All-Surface Novak: Learn Why Djokovic Is In A Class Of His Own

Lozo1016

Lozo1016

Hall of Fame
www.atptour.com

All-Surface Novak: Learn Why Djokovic Is In A Class Of His Own | ATP Tour | Tennis

Novak Djokovic is historically efficient on grass, clay and hard courts. An Infosys ATP Beyond The Numbers analysis shows why as the Serbian gets set to pursue his seventh Wimbledon title.
www.atptour.com www.atptour.com

He is the one and only Mr. 54 per cent.

Novak Djokovic is in a class of his own competing on the three outdoor surfaces in our sport. An Infosys ATP Beyond The Numbers analysis of the highest achievers when playing outdoors identifies Djokovic is the only player to push through the 54 per cent threshold of points won on grass, hard and clay. The data set goes back to 1991 when official records began and includes all players who have competed in a minimum of 10 matches on each surface.

The following breakdown includes only players to have broken through the 54 per cent threshold for points won on each of the three outdoor surfaces.


Grass
1. Pete Sampras = 54.64%
2. Roger Federer = 54.59%
3. Novak Djokovic = 54.16%

Hard
1. Novak Djokovic = 55.04%
2. Roger Federer = 54.43%
3. Rafael Nadal = 54.06%

Clay
1. Rafael Nadal = 56.28%
2. Novak Djokovic = 54.10%

First on hard. Second on clay. Third on grass. It’s a ubiquitous record that finds Djokovic as the only player in 30-plus years to break through the 54 per cent barrier with points won on all three outdoor surfaces. It speaks to his longevity and adaptability to thrive on slow, medium and fast courts.
Click to expand...
 
He's not in a class of his own, but this is incredibly impressive.

If I had to choose someone to win a tennis match, not knowing what surface, or how old the player would be, my choice would 100% be Djokovic.

Other ATGs are too limited on other surfaces or had shorter prime/peaks. Djoko is the consistency monster.
 
TheNachoMan said:
This is surprising coming from you. lol
Click to expand...
well, tennis matches are played on specific surfaces against specific players which is why Novak doesn't have 35 Slams.

He has weaknesses, one might argue his prime years of 12-14 were big disappointments in Slams, and I would argue other players have higher peaks than him. Thus why he is not the greatest of all time.

but overall start to finish, I would say that he has brought the most consistently high year-round level of anyone in tennis history. Federer very very close, but him being MIA on clay in his 30s gives Djokovic the slightest edge to me. Nadal has just been injured way too often and put in too many crap performances on grass and HC, he isn't as consistent as the other two.

This is reflected in his weeks at #1.
 
Kralingen said:
He's not in a class of his own, but this is incredibly impressive.

If I had to choose someone to win a tennis match, not knowing what surface, or how old the player would be, my choice would 100% be Djokovic.

Other ATGs are too limited on other surfaces or had shorter prime/peaks. Djoko is the consistency monster.
Click to expand...
I like it when you praise Djokovic. It makes a nice change haha! Although I feel you do reverse psychology as you deep down prefer Djoko to Rafa (except this year as you have CYGS bet) haha!
 
Kralingen said:
He's not in a class of his own, but this is incredibly impressive.

If I had to choose someone to win a tennis match, not knowing what surface, or how old the player would be, my choice would 100% be Djokovic.

Other ATGs are too limited on other surfaces or had shorter prime/peaks. Djoko is the consistency monster.
Click to expand...
Good points. I don’t think there is a GOAT but the “choose the guy to win when surface is unknown” definition comes close to what the greatest of the sport should be
 
GabeT said:
Good points. I don’t think there is a GOAT but the “choose the guy to win when surface is unknown” definition comes close to what the greatest of the sport should be
Click to expand...
I consider Nadal the greatest as the numbers reflect that but Djokovic is the most consistent player across all surfaces and I agree with @Kralingen about if I had no clue what surface a match was going to be on but I had to pick a player to play for me it would be Djokovic for now. Alcaraz in about 3 years though
 
PUSB said:
I consider Nadal the greatest as the numbers reflect that but Djokovic is the most consistent player across all surfaces and I agree with @Kralingen about if I had no clue what surface a match was going to be on but I had to pick a player to play for me it would be Djokovic for now. Alcaraz in about 3 years though
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone is the greatest but why would playing god like in clay mean you are the greatest in the sport as a whole?
 
Kralingen said:
He's not in a class of his own, but this is incredibly impressive.

If I had to choose someone to win a tennis match, not knowing what surface, or how old the player would be, my choice would 100% be Djokovic.

Other ATGs are too limited on other surfaces or had shorter prime/peaks. Djoko is the consistency monster.
Click to expand...
That's also because surfaces are homogenized today compared to back then. That's why you see so many players making deep runs on all surfaces today.
 
Kralingen said:
If I had to choose someone to win a tennis match, not knowing what surface, or how old the player would be, my choice would 100% be Djokovic.
Click to expand...
Just keep him away from blue clay because he'll fall all over the place and whine and moan and cry about it :p
 
Mike Sams said:
That's also because surfaces are homogenized today compared to back then. That's why you see so many players making deep runs on all surfaces today.
Click to expand...
Is it the surface or the tech changes to racquet and string (plus changes in physical training)?
 
A non-clay player like Andy Murray made RG finals and semis consistently. It shows that surfaces don't vary much. Anyone can play on any surface today.
 
Djokovic_is_the_best#1 said:
I like it when you praise Djokovic. It makes a nice change haha! Although I feel you do reverse psychology as you deep down prefer Djoko to Rafa (except this year as you have CYGS bet) haha!
Click to expand...
How could I not like Rafa with all the money he's made me?

I do confess that Djoko winning this would be better for the Slam race and more interesting of a timeline overall. Alcaraz even better though :love:
Mike Sams said:
That's also because surfaces are homogenized today compared to back then. That's why you see so many players making deep runs on all surfaces today.
Click to expand...
This is undoubtedly true, to say nothing of the medical advancements and racquet tech (the guy does yoga, sleeps in an egg, slides on hard courts) allowing his longevity.

I don't think Big 3 are meaningfully better or more talented than Borg, Sampras, Laver, Rosewall, Pancho were for their time.

On the other hand, you actually have to go out there and do it, day after day, week after week, year after year. Novak has actually done it, and I think that deserves more respect than it gets.
 
GabeT said:
I don’t think anyone is the greatest but why would playing god like in clay mean you are the greatest in the sport as a whole?
Click to expand...
Because hitting those god heights on top of being sensational on other surfaces for me makes him the Greatest. Rafa will be remembered for his 14 FOs than being the slam leader or the golden career slam. That 14 RG gets other professional sports people in awe.
However it is subjective. Some people will value consisten brilliance on any surface and any conditions so its horses for courses really. People have different things they look at.
I think for many Rafa fans like me the beauty of the slam lead is the satisfaction of perhaps rubbing it in to certain journalists who 25 years ago sort of disrespected the sport by making it all about slams. I am of course referring to American journalists in the main when Sampras broke the record then of course Roger came along who played a style those same journalists loved.
So it's a bit like take that guys. Rafa now has it what have you got to say about it now.
Novak is such a great guy. Not just is brilliant game but his views on many things such as it is not just about slams. He has said many times the game needs to be expanded to places like India and why should the biggest events be in the same country and why should events that stand still (wimbledon) be automatically bigger than innovative expanding modern fan friendly events like Inidian Wells. He is spot on.
The more Rafa and Novak keep defying belief the less bothered I get about who is greater as it's getting to the stage where it's just jaw dropping and a privilege to see both playing. They are arguably along with Roger the greatest sports people in history if you really look at what they have done.
It is why I'm investing a lot of time in Alcaraz as he really looks like might be sort of at least near their god like ability one day. He is not there yet nowhere near but the raw talent I think is so it should be enjoyable watching him over the next few years develop potentially into a true ATG.
 
Kralingen said:
On the other hand, you actually have to go out there and do it, day after day, week after week, year after year. Novak has actually done it, and I think that deserves more respect than it gets.
Click to expand...
Of course. That's why he's an ATG. His consistency is incredible. And he barely suffers any injuries because he's basically made of rubber :-D
 
GabeT said:
I don’t think anyone is the greatest but why would playing god like in clay mean you are the greatest in the sport as a whole?
Click to expand...

You answered your question, he is at least a GOD somewhere, other sportsmen are not GODs anywhere on any surface.

So being a GOD somewhere is better than not being a GOD at all, thats Nadal's case for being greatest.
 
Mike Sams said:
Just keep him away from blue clay because he'll fall all over the place and whine and moan and cry about it :p
Click to expand...
That blue clay was a good idea but that particular event back then they had problems with the base apparently due to the weather which meant it didn't set properly. So blue clay could have worked had it been put down earlier.
 
Marco Rotim said:
You answered your question, he is at least a GOD somewhere, other sportsmen are not GODs anywhere on any surface.

So being a GOD somewhere is better than not being a GOD at all, thats Nadal's case for being greatest.
Click to expand...
If Alcaraz won 30 Wimbledons and nothing else would you place him above Nadal?
 
GabeT said:
If Alcaraz won 30 Wimbledons and nothing else would you place him above Nadal?
Click to expand...
Funnily enough the British media definitely would!!
The problem in your question would be the 0s at the other Majors. But many would say 30 beats 22. Not me as I think a player has to win all 4 to be in the conversation. But people put McEnroe and Connors and Borg above Agassi often. Agassi won the Golden Super Career Slam. Only player ever to do that .
 
GabeT said:
If Alcaraz won 30 Wimbledons and nothing else would you place him above Nadal?
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

But that is not possible, because winning always on 1 surface is contagious, it affects other surfaces too.

If you are good enough to win 14 Slams on Clay, you end up with 8 slams outside it as well over the period of 17 years.

So if you are good enough to win 30 Slams on wimbledon then you will end up with 45 slams overall, extra 15 slams outside it will also come on HC and once in a while of Clay as well since your serve would too much ?? Like 7000 RPMs?? How else are you winning 30 slams ? lol
 
Kralingen said:
He's not in a class of his own, but this is incredibly impressive.

If I had to choose someone to win a tennis match, not knowing what surface, or how old the player would be, my choice would 100% be Djokovic.

Other ATGs are too limited on other surfaces or had shorter prime/peaks. Djoko is the consistency monster.
Click to expand...
I agree that I would pick him too. But if it is in a country that requires vaccinations to enter, he won’t be available to play:eek:

Levity aside, he should have won 25 Slams by now if he trusted Western medicine. He didn’t get his allergies to be treated by specialists to get his gluten sensitivity diagnosed early. He lost two prime years of his career from 2H2016-1H2018 because he put off elbow injury and wanted ‘Amor e Paz’ to cure him. He has screwed up his late career by not taking COVID seriously or taking a vaccine for it. So, his superiority across surfaces is matched by his propensity for self-sabotage.
 
PUSB said:
That blue clay was a good idea but that particular event back then they had problems with the base apparently due to the weather which meant it didn't set properly. So blue clay could have worked had it been put down earlier.
Click to expand...
Federer, Berdych, and Serena didn't have any issue with it.
 
GabeT said:
The players he is compared to are also ATGs. But both Federer and Novak have a better record than Nadal in 2 of the 3 surfaces including the most relevant one today
Click to expand...

They don't dominate any surface like Nadal does. And this reflects in their number of Slams won. 22 Slams from 30 finals!
 
Marco Rotim said:
You answered your question, he is at least a GOD somewhere, other sportsmen are not GODs anywhere on any surface.

So being a GOD somewhere is better than not being a GOD at all, thats Nadal's case for being greatest.
Click to expand...
PUSB said:
Because hitting those god heights on top of being sensational on other surfaces for me makes him the Greatest. Rafa will be remembered for his 14 FOs than being the slam leader or the golden career slam. That 14 RG gets other professional sports people in awe.
However it is subjective. Some people will value consisten brilliance on any surface and any conditions so its horses for courses really. People have different things they look at.
I think for many Rafa fans like me the beauty of the slam lead is the satisfaction of perhaps rubbing it in to certain journalists who 25 years ago sort of disrespected the sport by making it all about slams. I am of course referring to American journalists in the main when Sampras broke the record then of course Roger came along who played a style those same journalists loved.
So it's a bit like take that guys. Rafa now has it what have you got to say about it now.
Novak is such a great guy. Not just is brilliant game but his views on many things such as it is not just about slams. He has said many times the game needs to be expanded to places like India and why should the biggest events be in the same country and why should events that stand still (wimbledon) be automatically bigger than innovative expanding modern fan friendly events like Inidian Wells. He is spot on.
The more Rafa and Novak keep defying belief the less bothered I get about who is greater as it's getting to the stage where it's just jaw dropping and a privilege to see both playing. They are arguably along with Roger the greatest sports people in history if you really look at what they have done.
It is why I'm investing a lot of time in Alcaraz as he really looks like might be sort of at least near their god like ability one day. He is not there yet nowhere near but the raw talent I think is so it should be enjoyable watching him over the next few years develop potentially into a true ATG.
Click to expand...
Posts like this are why I love the tennis debates so much.

it really all is a matter of perspective and what you value. You’ve got 3 incredibly great players, 4 more historical ones who could be argued to be on their level, and a ton of subjective analysis about what achievements you believe matter most, competition strength, plus you have to account for the various list of incredibly important factors like injury, court speed, racquet tech, medical technology, etc. tennis has changed as a game so much across the past 100 years. In tennis, the eye test does actually matter, a lot - not every win is equal, not every loss is equal.

My view is that from a certain perspective you could argue for any of them as GOAT and makes quite convincing case. For this reason I don’t believe I will ever know, I will never have the answer to the Big Question. I do know all 3 guys are incredible and have provided millions with so many moments of magic over the years, and that’s all you can ask for as a fan of sport.
 
Mike Sams said:
LOL If he only won on grass and couldn't win anywhere else, there'd be a serious problem somewhere. He'd be winning on other surfaces too in reality.
Click to expand...
Sure but the purpose of an extreme hypothetical such as this one is to create, and answer, a very specific thought experiment.
 
GabeT said:
Agree. But tennis has, today, 3 surfaces. And nadal is ahead of the Fedovic only in one.
Click to expand...

I find your lack of faith in Nole a little disturbing. If he's truly the best, he will break the Slam record too. Or at least tie Nadal. And that should be enough for majority of us to consider him greater than Nadal.
 
Backspin1183 said:
I find your lack of faith in Nole a little disturbing. If he's truly the best, he will break the Slam record too. Or at least tie Nadal. And that should be enough for majority of us to consider him greater than Nadal.
Click to expand...
he’s so good he decided make it more difficult for himself by playing only half the slams! ;)
 
Backspin1183 said:
He should have gotten the jab last year. But after another spectacular 3 Slam season, and Nadal not playing half the season, Djokovic probably felt overconfident at some point. If he knew how 2022 would turn out, maybe he would have gotten himself vaxxed.
Click to expand...
I would have just gotten a fake certificate! :eek: :cool:
 
Backspin1183 said:
Which is one of the four Grand Slams.
Click to expand...

Not saying it's not an impressive record but I would be interested in seeing that stat on the flipside with Federer playing them 16 times at Wimbledon instead of 8 or Djokovic playing them 16 times at AO instead of 7.
 
GabeT said:
I would have just gotten a fake certificate! :eek: :cool:
Click to expand...

Or done that and kept quiet about it. He didn't have to challenge the system when you're still competing to be the greatest (so far) in history. But again, I can't blame him. I wouldn't have seen Nadal coming this strong (in Slams) in 2022 either. At the end of 2021, Nadal looked like he would be joining Federer soon in retirement.
 
Kralingen said:
He's not in a class of his own, but this is incredibly impressive.

If I had to choose someone to win a tennis match, not knowing what surface, or how old the player would be, my choice would 100% be Djokovic.

Other ATGs are too limited on other surfaces or had shorter prime/peaks. Djoko is the consistency monster.
Click to expand...

Will lose in straights against Nadal on Sunday week.
 
It works because there's no difference between the surfaces almost. Back in the day there was a big difference between the surfaces.

So Novak is really only the best allround player of his era.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Novak, in a class of his own
Replies
10
Views
691
Hitman
Hitman
Tennease
Djokovic dismantled Nadal’s baseline game by going hard after his forehand.
Replies
39
Views
3K
nolefam_2024
N
I
All-time players’ top performance by surface (with a constant update) (general methodology + clay)
Replies
28
Views
2K
Ivan69
I
I
All-time players’ top performance by surface (with a constant update) (grass)
Replies
23
Views
2K
Ivan69
I
Hitman
Why Djokovic's serve kept him at the top of the game
Replies
35
Views
2K
Mustard
Mustard
Back
Top