Can Djokovic reach 400 weeks at no 1?

H

Hyde

Semi-Pro
He would need about 2,5 more years at #1. He is 32 now.
Who would push him from the top spot? Nadal is not consistent enough apart from clay. Federer plays light schedules and will likely retire in 2020. The young players are still far away from Fedalovic level.

400 weeks may sound unrealistic but this generation does impossible things on a regular basis. There was a time when 40 Masters 1000 or 20 slams seemed absurd, too.
 
StrongRule said:
If we are being realistic...Who will really take the number 1 spot from him?
Click to expand...

He's 32 now. Being #1 for 2 and a half more years means he will be 34 and a half. He will lose the ranking before then because he has to slow down at some point. He's not superhuman. The longest he ever held the ranking consecutively was 2 years and 4 months, and that was at his peak.
 
StrongRule said:
If we are being realistic...Who will really take the number 1 spot from him? I don't see anybody doing that in the next few years.
Click to expand...

Same question was asked back in 2015-16. And someone took it from him not long after.

Things can happen. For now Djokovic looks to be a lock for #1 rest of the year but he can't hold it forever. I guess we just have to wait and see.
 
He needs 140 weeks. So 2 years and 8 months. That means he needs to be number 1 continuously until just after the AO 2022. It's not happening
 
NoleFam said:
He's 32 now. Being #1 for 2 and a half more years means he will be 34 and a half. He will lose the ranking before then because he has to slow down at some point. He's not superhuman.
Click to expand...
Slowing down is one thing, but there needs to be somebody who can take advantage. Right now the younger players are only losing early at slams, so none of them will get enough points.
 
RF-18 said:
Same question was asked back in 2015-16. And someone took it from him.

Things can happen. For now Djokovic looks to be a lock for #1 rest of the year but he can't hold it forever. I guess we just have to wait and see.
Click to expand...
Not forever, but very long time will pass until then.
 
StrongRule said:
Slowing down is one thing, but there needs to be somebody who can take advantage. Right now the younger players are only losing early at slams, so none of them will get enough points.
Click to expand...

It only takes one injury or someone to have some big title wins while he defending and he will lose it. It happened in 2016.
 
NoleFam said:
He's 32 now. Being #1 for 2 and a half more years means he will be 34 and a half. He will lose the ranking before then because he has to slow down at some point. He's not superhuman.
Click to expand...
Federer would have reached 400 weeks if he wouldn’t had younger greats like Nadal and Djokovic in his way.
Djokovic doesn‘t have young all-time greats in his way in the next 2 years.
 
Hyde said:
Federer would have reached 400 weeks if he wouldn’t had younger greats like Nadal and Djokovic in his way.
Djokovic doesn‘t have young all-time greats in his way in the next 2 years.
Click to expand...

Djokovic is not reaching 400 weeks. I don't think he will get close to that number.
 
NoleFam said:
He's 32 now. Being #1 for 2 and a half more years means he will be 34 and a half. He will lose the ranking before then because he has to slow down at some point. He's not superhuman. The longest he ever held the ranking consecutively was 2 years and 4 months, and that was at his peak.
Click to expand...
If the field is weak, he can still do it even if he slows down, so it's not true that he needs to sustain his level to do it.
 
JackGates said:
If the field is weak, he can still do it even if he slows down, so it's not true that he needs to sustain his level to do it.
Click to expand...

These guys will be nipping his heels by then. There is just no way this will happen. Let's focus on 300 weeks for now. Lol.
 
Hyde said:
Maybe Fedalovic will suprise you once again.
Two and a half years is not out of reach. Federer was no 1 at age 36 (with players like Nadal and Djokovic around).
Click to expand...

OK man. If it happens you can bump this thread and say "I told you so"...:p
 
Also look at WTA. Serena Williams was a comfortable no 1 deep into her 30‘s (until her pregnancy). If the field is weak, it is possible.
 
Where is this myth that Nadal isn't strong enough off of clay coming from?
He may not be winning every event, but isn't reaching the AO final 2017, USO win 17, AO QF 18, Wimby SF 18, USO SF 18, AO Final 19, and Wimby SF, not prove that hes as close as most ?
There isn't anyone with that kind of consistency not named Djokovic.
 
I think there has to be a decent chance of this happening. Federer holds the record at 310 weeks. There's no doubt Djokovic is chasing that record, but he'll pass that before reaching Federer's slam tally at the current rate so will remain motivated. If Djokovic passes Federer's slam tally there has to be a good chance of being near 400 weeks at that time. Perhaps near enough for Djokovic to retain his motivation and go for it.
 
RF-18 said:
Same question was asked back in 2015-16. And someone took it from him not long after.

Things can happen. For now Djokovic looks to be a lock for #1 rest of the year but he can't hold it forever. I guess we just have to wait and see.
Click to expand...

He's not a lock for the rest of the year yet. In fact, he loses on Sunday, he would be in a three-way battle. If he wins, he does go into a 500-point lead in the race, but that's hardly unassailable.
 
What if I told you that I think he can do it. Does that make me insane? He's going to generally last in a way that allows him to score more points over a season than Nadal and Federer, and it could be a long time before new contenders have the consistency to rack up such totals.


I don't think this is so mad.
 
He realistically can, but if he does is another matter entirely. The odds of Federer or Nadal being #1 ever again though are not great (albeit not impossible, probably requiring another drop off from Djokovic), and there isnt an upcoming potential #1 on the horizon soon. Thiem is nowhere close, he has to be winning RG before he even thinks about getting to #1. And he is the best of the rest ATM.
 
kevaninho said:
Where is this myth that Nadal isn't strong enough off of clay coming from?
He may not be winning every event, but isn't reaching the AO final 2017, USO win 17, AO QF 18, Wimby SF 18, USO SF 18, AO Final 19, and Wimby SF, not prove that hes as close as most ?
There isn't anyone with that kind of consistency not named Djokovic.
Click to expand...

Yeah but Djokovic is posting better results everywhere but clay. And that would have to change for Nadal to ever get to #1 again.
 
helterskelter said:
He's not a lock for the rest of the year yet. In fact, he loses on Sunday, he would be in a three-way battle. If he wins, he does go into a 500-point lead in the race, but that's hardly unassailable.
Click to expand...

It is a 500-point lead on Nadal though, who is very unlikely to outdo him the remainder of the year. Federer is a bigger threat if he somehow got in striking distance (aka would have to win the final Sunday or it is probably over).
 
Hyde said:
He would need about 2,5 more years at #1. He is 32 now.
Who would push him from the top spot? Nadal is not consistent enough apart from clay. Federer plays light schedules and will likely retire in 2020. The young players are still far away from Fedalovic level.

400 weeks may sound unrealistic but this generation does impossible things on a regular basis. There was a time when 40 Masters 1000 or 20 slams seemed absurd, too.
Click to expand...

He will get 650 weeks no 1 and at least 25-40 slams
 
Last edited:
chimneysweep said:
It is a 500-point lead on Nadal though, who is very unlikely to outdo him the remainder of the year. Federer is a bigger threat if he somehow got in striking distance (aka would have to win the final Sunday or it is probably over).
Click to expand...

To me, saying it's a lock means saying he barely needs to do anything further to guarantee it, and that is far from being the case. I do agree that he's the favorite, especially if he wins on Sunday, but that's a different thing entirely. Actually, until today at least, Nadal was in with a very good chance of overtaking at some point this year. If he'd won Wimbledon, he'd have taken a lead of 1,600 points or so in the race, and in that eventuality, he could end up #1 even if Djokovic outperformed him from here on out.
 
No one likes Noel. The general public has no idea who he is. The general tennis playing public can’t stand him. The tour players can’t stand him. He could win ever major for the next 5 years and would still not be acknowledged. Sorry. Well, not really.
 
Not just no but hell no. The #1 rank will be the first thing to go when Djoker truly declines. Someone else will fill the void. It happens
 
Hyde said:
Federer would have reached 400 weeks if he wouldn’t had younger greats like Nadal and Djokovic in his way.
Djokovic doesn‘t have young all-time greats in his way in the next 2 years.
Click to expand...
Mr. Hyde, you are making an untestable claim, therefore irrelevant. By that logic, I can also make untestable claims and assert that Federer would have less than 200 weeks as #1 if he were same age as Nadal and Djokovic. In effect, since Djokovic first attached the #1 in 2011, Federer has only been #1 24 weeks. I repeat, 24 weeks as #1 since 2011. Federer spent around 80% of his weeks as #1 in 2004-2007, when Nadal was a teenager in Grand Slams on hard courts and Djokovic was a non-factor.
 
He now stands at 324 weeks. With grass and hc season ahead he put himself in a good position to defend his #1 spot until year end, which would put him at around 350 weeks.

Unfortunately, Covid-19 stole 22 weeks at #1 from him but the 400 is still in reach for him.
 
Hyde said:
He now stands at 324 weeks. With grass and hc season ahead he put himself in a good position to defend his #1 spot until year end, which would put him at around 350 weeks.

Unfortunately, Covid-19 stole 22 weeks at #1 from him but the 400 is still in reach for him.
Click to expand...
Covid stole 1 slam from him too.
 
Hyde said:
He would need about 2,5 more years at #1. He is 32 now.
Who would push him from the top spot? Nadal is not consistent enough apart from clay. Federer plays light schedules and will likely retire in 2020. The young players are still far away from Fedalovic level.

400 weeks may sound unrealistic but this generation does impossible things on a regular basis. There was a time when 40 Masters 1000 or 20 slams seemed absurd, too.
Click to expand...

No one will surpass Steffi's 377 weeks as #1, especially not Djokovic.
Hey, he even failed when it was about winning the Golden or at least the Grand Slam (Steffi won the Golden one in 1988).
 
R. Schweikart said:
No one will surpass Steffi's 377 weeks as #1, especially not Djokovic.
Hey, he even failed when it was about winning the Golden or at least the Grand Slam (Steffi won the Golden one in 1988).
Click to expand...

Come on, lets not compare him to Graf, two different tours. Steffi would have zero weeks at number one if she played in a field which included all professional tennis players, Djokovic would still have the exact same amount of weeks.
 
R. Schweikart said:
No one will surpass Steffi's 377 weeks as #1, especially not Djokovic.
Hey, he even failed when it was about winning the Golden or at least the Grand Slam (Steffi won the Golden one in 1988).
Click to expand...
Just wow :D. How can you compare this record, which purely demonstrates someones longetivity to CYGS. And lets compare WTA to ATP, 1988 to 2021, media then and today. This post is salty as an post can get... In reality Djokovic has no real challenge for #1 till RG 2022, so 365 weeks is almost locked for him. You forgot that he played like 5 tournaments before RG, and two of those being 250 Belgrades. He only defends AO and Rome final.
 
After Med's loss unless Novak completely skips rest of season and AO I think he'll get it. Would really suck if he lost the ranking because of vaccination protocol and never got it back.
 
NoleFam said:
He's 32 now. Being #1 for 2 and a half more years means he will be 34 and a half. He will lose the ranking before then because he has to slow down at some point. He's not superhuman. The longest he ever held the ranking consecutively was 2 years and 4 months, and that was at his peak.
Click to expand...

Without the covid frozen weeks, Djokovic would be pushing around ~370 weeks right now. 400 would have been a real possibility. I was wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lew II
  • Poll Poll
Will Djokovic reach 400 weeks at #1?
2 3
Replies
133
Views
7K
nolefam_2024
nolefam_2024
T
Djokovic to reach 500 weeks at No. 1
2 3
Replies
103
Views
4K
BGod
BGod
L
Frozen ranking + 0 Wim' point... how many weeks at No1 was Nole stolen?
Replies
5
Views
424
nolefam_2024
nolefam_2024
5555
Djokovic has moved past McEnroe for most weeks at No. 1
Replies
1
Views
419
Noleberic123
Noleberic123
Doflamingo
Djokovic surpasses McEnroe for Weeks at No.1
Replies
3
Views
560
Noleberic123
Noleberic123
Back
Top