Did Novak Djokovic mostly major in minors?

[TheFifthSet]

Laver won the CYGS twice, not the NCYGS. There's a difference.

Again, the NCYGS is an excellent achievement and a rare one but there's a reason the media didn't focus heavily on it, i.e. it's not the gold standard CYGS!

You, Novak's parents and some people in Serbia can salivate about the achievement but most other people don't care.

Who cares if people who don't like the guy care? How is that relevant to the nature of the achievement?

 

[cc0509]

Who cares if people who don't like the guy care? How is that relevant to the nature of the achievement?

What I'm saying is the nature of the achievement while great is definitely not treated the same as a CYGS by the media,fans,etc. If Djokovic achieved the actual CYGS, there would have been much more of a fuss made of it by the media,commentators,fans,etc.

 

[TheFifthSet]

CC is in major dick mood today and is trying to walk it back. We all can hear the "dog whistle" being blown when we see words like "Serbians salivating".

I'm not buying his walk-back, which is John Spicer like.

I agree that he's marginalizing Djokovic's incredible achievement, but that was not necessarily a hate comment. You don't know what his intentions were. Reflexively making the most uncharitable assumption is not the way to go, even for (arguably especially for) emotionally charged subjects. And this is coming from a Serbian Djokovic fan that has had many a heated discussion with people on this forum regarding xenophobic remarks I've heard.

 

[cc0509]

Hmm, who are talking about. Not BB, not DD, must be...

Well, if he`s talking about me and I know he is (even though he swears up and down he has me on ignore),he`s got me dead wrong. It makes no sense that I would be bitter about Djokovic for achieving something Federer hasn`t when I am a fan of Nadal, a guy who was much more threatening to the thing that counts the most in tennis, the slam race and Federer`s slam total for many years.

It has nothing to do with whether a player threatens Federer`s achievements but more to do with the fact that I am not very fond of Djokovic for his nauseating antics on court over the years, i.e his countless retirements earlier in his career and non-stop fake injuries and illnesses, his obnoxious need for special attention from fans who couldn`t warm to him, his constant devious gamesmanship which continues to this day, etc.etc.

Also, as I`ve posted ad nauseam, I don`t value a NCYGS the same way I do a CYGS and newsflash for you, the tennis world doesn`t either as that`s why there wasn`t very much ink on the Djokovic NCYGS feat.

 

[TheFifthSet]

What I'm saying is the nature of the achievement while great is definitely not treated the same as a CYGS by the media,fans,etc. If Djokovic achieved the actual CYGS, there would have been much more of a fuss made of it by the media,commentators,fans,etc.

True. Rest assured, though, Djokovic's achievement got plenty of coverage and undoubtedly would have gotten more had it been Federer in his place.

As for the CYGS/NCYGS comparison, the CYGS is more statistically improbable, and thus a little more impressive. But four in a row is four in a row, without question a massive, historic accomplishment, better than any 12 month period Federer had.

 

[TheFifthSet]

non-stop fake injuries and illnesses,

Which fake injuries and illnesses?

 

[Gary Duane]

Terrific, ok, so with R128 out, Fed's numbers are closer to his Masters numbers, which were:

I was terribly busy again today, but I finally had time to run some numbers.

There are several things we may want to consider:

1. When we look at the first round of any group of tourneys, included in that first round will be a lot of early losses also early in careers. Looking at all tourneys, Fed lost 7 times in R128. 6 of those times were at major - where else would be find R128? But it turns out that somehow he lost at Miami in R128. I didn't know that this tournament ever HAD a Round 128. BUT: all of those losses were June of 2003. He never lost in that round again, ever.

2. The same thing happens in R64. At the majors this is round 2, so when we look at this round Fed has only one loss in majors, to:
Sergiy Stakhovsky [UKR] d. Federer

That's a famous loss, so everyone know about it.

But because this was round 2, apparently by the second round he built up some steam and never lost when he was young.

In contrast, he has a LOT of losses early in his career in R64 at masters. But only one loss in 2007, at IW. Another at Cincinnati in 2004. That's it in masters. But SEVENTEEN losses in R64 before 2003. Now, R64 is not a round. It's a level.

3. R32
At this point we are well into big tournaments but only in the 1st round of smaller tourneys. We can expect some losses in majors, early. By R32 a young player is hitting his limit. He washed out 3 times in 2001 and 2000. But after that only twice, once in 2015, AO, Seppi. And Kuerten got him at RG, 2004.

In contrast, he's gone out quite a few times in R32 at M1000s. Wouldn't we expect a better record here than in masters? But more seeds may still be in M1000s at this point.

Now, here is the kicker. R32 in M500s and M250s. Seems like it should be a lock. Smaller fields, fewer top players. Pretty much true, only one loss in Dubai to Murray, 2008. 12 more losses, through to 2003, mostly in very early years. That's when he would have been breaking into the ATP.

 

[Gary Duane]

Time for numbers:

4. R16

M250s
59.8513
86.8421

M500s
59.5816
90.5660

M1000s (games, matches)
59.0728
82.4176

Majors:

58.0508
85.1852

The reason for the lower match% for the 250s is probably because the majority of them were before 2004. Once Fed moved close to #1 he began to cut them out of his schedule. For the rest of the tourneys there is a clear drop, as we would expect, in games. but match% stays amazingly constant.

This MIGHT suggest that margins go down in later rounds, pretty obvious, but the will to win goes up and a good deal of clutch play starts to take over.

My conclusion so far is that at least for Fed the amount of effort he put into winning tourneys was/is pretty uniform. But when we look only at matches and games, it appears as if he plays way better in majors, and to some extent maybe this is a bit true. However, match% and game% is also skewed by number of rounds.

All 250s, all matches, career:
57.5919
80.9211

500s:

58.0442
84.5833

1000s:

57.1813
77.3243

majors:

59.4534 314 51 365 86.0274

Davis Cup:

59.2994
83.3333

Finally, WTFs/Masters Cup

57.8776
81.2500

I'd have to run these numbers on a LOT of players to get a feel for what is happening. This is inconclusive, but I have noticed that quite a few players have amazing Davis Cup records, and his is actually a bit low.

I am most interested in 1000s vs majors, because for top players the bulk of their efforts are in these two categories. It seems at least likely that stats seem lower for 1000s because of one less round, and I think we should at least test out this idea.

However, I feel very strongly that the clear drop in match% and game% back in the 50s is directly linked to small fields and fierce competition.

 

[Meles]

CC is in major dick mood today and is trying to walk it back. We all can hear the "dog whistle" being blown when we see words like "Serbians salivating".

I'm not buying his walk-back, which is John Spicer like.

LOL. Awesome thread GD; you're getting the hang of titles. Hope you give cc another chance.

 

[Meles]

I never said Djokovic's NCYGS wasn't an excellent achievement, I said it's not the same thing in terms of prestige as the CYGS(which Laver and Graf have achieved) and obviously the media agrees with me because how much attention did Djokovic's NCYGS receive? Look at how much press and attention Serena received for almost completing the CYGS until she lost at the USO.

You nailed it, but holding all 4 trophies on your mantle at he same time is no joke. The media loves fake news.

 

[6august]

Even Murray acknowledged the greatness of Nole's achievement:

Don't tell me it's just because they've known each other since 13 y-o.

 

[Vanhool]

There was a time when that was the case. After 2013 AO and unil 2014 Wimb, Djokovic was doing so poorly in the slams and so well in the masters, that people were right in believing that he was majoring in minors.

This. I don't necessarily agree with it but the argument could be made for it. Obviously, no one could accuse him of #MajoringInMinors now.

AngieB was unrelenting in harassing @Djokovic2011 with #Don'tMajorIn Minors and accusing Novak of driving a brown Pinto down Minor Alley instead of a muscle car down Major Highway. I think she mostly did it for the laughs. She liked to wind everyone up. Sometimes it was too much, but I actually miss her...she made me laugh. Great homage @Gary Duane!

And LOL at people thinking she left the forum because she was embarrassed by Djokovic's success. I don't think embarrassment was in her emotional vocabulary! She was well earned ban was for harrassing another poster....she crossed a line and wouldn't stop. For some reason, it took a couple of years for them to change her status label to "banned" but her abrupt disappearance was definitly a ban. I was hoping she would go out in a Harper Valley PTA blaze of glory but, as her nemesis would say, "Hey ho."

 

[Mr.Lob]

Banned I see.

Yes. FudgeControl had no control. RIP wit Chico and grannyb.