Djokovic actually beat this guy

Better_Call_Raul said:
The withdrawals in the earlier rounds gave the elderly aching Djoker rest and produced a match that was as close to a Time Machine as you will ever get.
What did it tell us?
It proved that Prime Djoker > Prime Sinner.
Click to expand...
That doesn't prove anything. Nothing is factual about that statement.
Would I bet on Prime Djokovic beating Prime Sinner? Likely based on my opinion that he would outlast Sinner in 5 set matches like he did to so many others and because Sinner tends to struggle closing out long matches (mostly against Carlos) but that's my opinion not fact.

I do think people underrated how good Sinner is though. His baseline game is right up there with the best of all time on backhand and forehand, he moves extremely well for his size and he has more variety than given credit for, also one of the best returners of serve of all time. He's mainly had a Carlos problem otherwise he'd be cleaning up just about all the slams and Masters and I don't care about competition, that's very impressive in any era.
 
NYTennisfan said:
That doesn't prove anything. Nothing is factual about that statement.
Would I bet on Prime Djokovic beating Prime Sinner? Likely based on my opinion that he would outlast Sinner in 5 set matches like he did to so many others and because Sinner tends to struggle closing out long matches (mostly against Carlos) but that's my opinion not fact.

I do think people underrated how good Sinner is though. His baseline game is right up there with the best of all time on backhand and forehand, he moves extremely well for his size and he has more variety than given credit for, also one of the best returners of serve of all time. He's mainly had a Carlos problem otherwise he'd be cleaning up just about all the slams and Masters and I don't care about competition, that's very impressive in any era.
Click to expand...

Do not sell Sinner's stamina short.
Sinner appeared fresh as a daisy at the end of the match and ready to play for hours more.
Fatigue was not a factor, particularly as Sinner had a relatively easy run up to that point.

As for Djoker, he obviously benefits from the extra rest far more than a younger player, but he is still playing with an older, slower body; no amount of rest offsets that.

Sinner was an 8 to 1 favourite. A 15 to 1 favourite after dominating the first set.

The elder Djoker did not 'outlast' the young fit and healthy Prime Sinner in this match.

It was won with better strokes, strategy, and sheer willpower and determination.
 
Last edited:
Next we will hear Sjokovic always had it in him to mount the comeback against Musetti and him getting injured had nothing to do with Sjokovic reaching finals .

The FO collapse will be used as a data point not for Musetti laying an egg but for Sjokovic incredible mental fortitude
 
Hitman said:
It was Djokovic.

Everyone needs luck to succeed.
Click to expand...

Nobody has been blessed with this much luck.

Djokovic fortunes changing from 2014 (18 slams out of his 24) has been because of 3 reasons

01. Becker making Djokovic better
02. Decline of Federer and Nadal. Federer was 33 and Nadal even though was only 28 his body lost more speed...
03. Biggest reason, the 1990s gen not having anyone emerging ... this became evident after 2015 when Novak's level was lower when he returned but no youngster to fight him, losers like Thiem and later Zverev/Medvedev were the gatekeepers of the 1990s playing the role of the submissive until Alcaraz arrived in 2023 as rightfully it was the time of the 2000s born to make their mark in 2023.
 
NYTennisfan said:
That doesn't prove anything. Nothing is factual about that statement.
Would I bet on Prime Djokovic beating Prime Sinner? Likely based on my opinion that he would outlast Sinner in 5 set matches like he did to so many others and because Sinner tends to struggle closing out long matches (mostly against Carlos) but that's my opinion not fact.

I do think people underrated how good Sinner is though. His baseline game is right up there with the best of all time on backhand and forehand, he moves extremely well for his size and he has more variety than given credit for, also one of the best returners of serve of all time. He's mainly had a Carlos problem otherwise he'd be cleaning up just about all the slams and Masters and I don't care about competition, that's very impressive in any era.
Click to expand...
After watching the 2026 match, what gives you the impression it's even going 5? Do you really think 2011, 2012, 2016, etc. version is going to need 5 sets to get it done?
 
weakera said:
Many tennis players have proven they can win matches in which their opponent outplays them. It's true Djokovic is far better than average at this, saving and conserving his energy for the biggest points. However the numbers in this match were so extreme that even for Djokovic it is 3-sigma event.
Click to expand...

You are exaggerating a bit, Djokovic was very clutch, but you can find many other matches where someone had a terrible BP conversion.
 
NoleFam said:
After watching the 2026 match, what gives you the impression it's even going 5? Do you really think 2011, 2012, 2016, etc. version is going to need 5 sets to get it done?
Click to expand...
Yes, do you think Sinner is some kind of pushover?

The 2026 match was a total anomaly, look at their head to head the previous 4 matches in which Sinner won 11 sets to 1 with only 2 of those even going to a tiebreak with Djokovic's one set win being in a tiebreak. Sinner is many levels above Djokovic now outside of the one big outlier match.
 
Razer said:
Reality is that

Sinner is a Jim Courier level player, not a true ATG, he might win far more than courier did because this era is too homogenized and the field is poor

Djokovic getting help from 2 walkovers has beaten Sinner but that is not something we would not expect from a Federer in his shoes at 38 or someone like Connors who beat Edberg at uso or rosewall beating 20 years younger defending aus open champion mark edmondson
Click to expand...
He's Jim Courier level now? Why did you make that what if thread about Djokovic being lucky then?
 
NYTennisfan said:
Yes, do you think Sinner is some kind of pushover?

The 2026 match was a total anomaly, look at their head to head the previous 4 matches in which Sinner won 11 sets to 1 with only 2 of those even going to a tiebreak with Djokovic's one set win being in a tiebreak. Sinner is many levels above Djokovic now outside of the one big outlier match.
Click to expand...
Do you think 37-38 year old Djokovic is peak level right now? 2011 Djoker would blow him out if he's having a hard time with his old version.
 
NYTennisfan said:
Yes, do you think Sinner is some kind of pushover?

The 2026 match was a total anomaly, look at their head to head the previous 4 matches in which Sinner won 11 sets to 1 with only 2 of those even going to a tiebreak with Djokovic's one set win being in a tiebreak. Sinner is many levels above Djokovic now outside of the one big outlier match.
Click to expand...
What do the four matches before that have to do with anything? This one was probably the most important one they played, considering what was on the line. Had he won, he would have had a chance to 3 peat and potentially stop Alcaraz from getting the career Slam. Was it an anomaly that he got flat outgunned forehand to forehand, lost the overall rallies that went 5 shots or more, and was hitting his forehand like 5 mph less than Djokovic?

As good as he is, he's not that multi dimensional like Federer or Nadal that made Djokovic readjust and use different strategies. With the athleticism he had in his mid to late 20s, his shot tolerance, his clutchness in long matches, and mental toughness, he would be a monster matchup for Sinner, especially in Australia. If he's losing to a near 39 year old Djokovic in 5 sets, I don't know why you think 24 year old Djokovic would need 5 sets across multiple matches against him.
 
NoleFam said:
What do the four matches before that have to do with anything? This one was probably the most important one they played, considering what was on the line. Had he won, he would have had a chance to 3 peat and potentially stop Alcaraz from getting the career Slam. Was it an anomaly that he got flat outgunned forehand to forehand, lost the overall rallies that went 5 shots or more, and was hitting his forehand like 5 mph less than Djokovic?

As good as he is, he's not that multi dimensional like Federer or Nadal that made Djokovic readjust and use different strategies. With the athleticism he had in his mid to late 20s, his shot tolerance, his clutchness in long matches, and mental toughness, he would be a monster matchup for Sinner, especially in Australia. If he's losing to a near 39 year old Djokovic in 5 sets, I don't know why you think 24 year old Djokovic would need 5 sets across multiple matches against him.
Click to expand...
2011 Djoker had one of the best return stats ever. He would not be tanking on Sinner's serve like he did in AO 2026.
 
btsjungkook said:
2011 Djoker had one of the best return stats ever. He would not be tanking on Sinner's serve like he did in AO 2026.
Click to expand...
The return alone would cause all kinds of problems for Sinner. That's before we even get to the groundstrokes and the peak Djokovic backhand. His backhand at 24 was at its most devastating of his career. Then he doesn't fizzle out at the 4 hour mark like Sinner does.
 
NoleFam said:
The return alone would cause all kinds of problems for Sinner. That's before we even get to the groundstrokes and the peak Djokovic backhand. His backhand at 24 was at its most devastating of his career. Then he doesn't fizzle out at the 4 hour mark like Sinner does.
Click to expand...
Sinner was afraid of rallying with old Novak, just imagine him playing 2011-2018 versions. He hit with a lot of depth and went for the corners, not to mention how easily he redirected the ball both sides. He'd really destroy his legs including Alcaraz just like what they're doing to him now at 39.
 
btsjungkook said:
It feels like you're backpeddling after your thread resulted with a loss in the poll of the narrative you were trying to sell.
Click to expand...

loss in poll? narrative selling?

Ohh buddy, we make threads for timepaas, nobody is looking to win results or sell narratives etc
 
btsjungkook said:
Sinner was afraid of rallying with old Novak, just imagine him playing 2011-2018 versions. He hit with a lot of depth and went for the corners, not to mention how easily he redirected the ball both sides. He'd really destroy his legs including Alcaraz just like what they're doing to him now at 39.
Click to expand...
Sinner and Alcaraz would be pushed to the limit. They don't know what it's like to actually play in a really strong era like we saw from the late 2000s until 2014 or so. Players that forced the big 3 to be on their toes or they could be upset in a Slam, and then the big 3 had to deal with each other. Right now, it's just Sinner, Alcaraz and 39 yesr old Djokovic.
 
NoleFam said:
Sinner and Alcaraz would be pushed to the limit. They don't know what it's like to actually play in a really strong era like we saw from the late 2000s until 2014 or so. Players that forced the big 3 to be on their toes or they could be upset in a Slam, and then the big 3 had to deal with each other. Right now, it's just Sinner, Alcaraz and 39 yesr old Djokovic.
Click to expand...
That's why these threads of what if they're born earlier makes no sense. If he's troubling them now in his late 30's, what do you think a younger version would do? I'm not too sure if even Fedal would trouble them this much at their late 30's had they not retired to injury.
 
NoleFam said:
What do the four matches before that have to do with anything? This one was probably the most important one they played, considering what was on the line. Had he won, he would have had a chance to 3 peat and potentially stop Alcaraz from getting the career Slam. Was it an anomaly that he got flat outgunned forehand to forehand, lost the overall rallies that went 5 shots or more, and was hitting his forehand like 5 mph less than Djokovic?

As good as he is, he's not that multi dimensional like Federer or Nadal that made Djokovic readjust and use different strategies. With the athleticism he had in his mid to late 20s, his shot tolerance, his clutchness in long matches, and mental toughness, he would be a monster matchup for Sinner, especially in Australia. If he's losing to a near 39 year old Djokovic in 5 sets, I don't know why you think 24 year old Djokovic would need 5 sets across multiple matches against him.
Click to expand...
What do you mean what do they have to do with anything. He destroyed Djokovic 4 straight matches, 3 in slams on 3 different surfaces btw and 1 being the ATP Finals which are pretty important matches wouldn't you say? It's a larger sample size of his dominance over Novak as opposed to the one, as I said, anomaly in which he had a very fortunate draw of hardly playing any tennis leading up to the semi and Sinner playing below his normal level. It's absolutely relevant that Sinner has owned Djokovic outside of that one outlier match.

My point being that just because Djokovic won this one match that doesn't indicate that Sinner would automatically be easy fodder for Prime Djokovic because the larger sample size shows that Sinner is generally miles better than this older version of Djokovic.
 
btsjungkook said:
That's why these threads of what if they're born earlier makes no sense. If he's troubling them now in his late 30's, what do you think a younger version would do? I'm not too sure if even Fedal would trouble them this much at their late 30's had they not retired to injury.
Click to expand...
Yea and they are 11-10 versus 34-38 year old Djokovic. If they're having that much trouble with mid to late 30s Djokovic, it's not difficult to see his peak version would be too much for them more times than not.
 
NYTennisfan said:
What do you mean what do they have to do with anything. He destroyed Djokovic 4 straight matches, 3 in slams on 3 different surfaces btw and 1 being the ATP Finals which are pretty important matches wouldn't you say? It's a larger sample size of his dominance over Novak as opposed to the one, as I said, anomaly in which he had a very fortunate draw of hardly playing any tennis leading up to the semi and Sinner playing below his normal level. It's absolutely relevant that Sinner has owned Djokovic outside of that one outlier match.

My point being that just because Djokovic won this one match that doesn't indicate that Sinner would automatically be easy fodder for Prime Djokovic because the larger sample size shows that Sinner is generally miles better than this older version of Djokovic.
Click to expand...
And that has absolutely nothing with the match on the day. If you have to go back to matches before that to make a point, then you already are grasping for straws. Nadal destroyed Soderling in 2009 Rome and only lost 1 game. What relevance was that when he played him in RG a few weeks later? None. And Sinner played below his usual level? Yea serving 75% and hitting more aces in this match than ever his career, and having way more winners than errors doesn't signal him being below his usual level.

Sinner didn't even beat Djokovic until he was 36 and a half, and you're acting like that's some flex. Then he got wins over post surgery Djokovic and when he injured himself right before their match at Wimbledon last year. The one time Djokovic came into a match with fresh legs and actually fit, he beat him. Accept that instead of saying it's some anomaly and acting like he doesn't only have a 6-5 record over Djokovic, despite all these wins happening when he was 36 years or older.

You are blind if you think peak Djokovic wouldn't beat Sinner more times than not, and he definitely isn't going to need 5 sets over multiple matches in Australia where he's at his strongest. Recency bias seems really strong here.
 
Last edited:
NoleFam said:
Sinner and Alcaraz would be pushed to the limit. They don't know what it's like to actually play in a really strong era like we saw from the late 2000s until 2014 or so. Players that forced the big 3 to be on their toes or they could be upset in a Slam, and then the big 3 had to deal with each other. Right now, it's just Sinner, Alcaraz and 39 yesr old Djokovic.
Click to expand...
i.m still mad novak ran out of energy after 1st set in final . Novak with more mobility destroys both like in 23 atp finals
 
It proves Sinner and Alcaraz isn’t better than big 3 era. Roger Rafa Novak will beat them 70% of times unless in their weakest surface.

Take Sinner’s serve, its crap. More often than not he will attack Sinner serve more. Federer will reset the rally with low slice once Sinner go backhand to backhand, traditionally lanky people lost to his slice.

Alcaraz: Federer will be able to rush him.

Nadal will routine them on clay.

Their matchup is more favourable against Djokovic as they play almost same style, both sides balanced. During his prime he will be able to slide and redirect, play aggressive once Sinner start pushing. Both Sinner and Alcaraz lack rally tolerance.
 
Last edited:
This defeat will likely make Sinner a more successful player late his thirties...

Age-wise his serve and attacking game is more developed than Novak's was. We never had this serve/return strength in a single package, he is speed running the tennis evolution of the GOAT.
 
Last edited:
RossiBhoy said:
I think it's already made him a better player now. He's came out of AO an absolute wrecking machine.
Click to expand...

This forum is quite limited and people love to argue cheaply. Sometimes I think some have never picked up a racket. Against the clamor of many here I was very confident in early 2024 Alcaraz. He played very well in AO apart against a serving spectacle of Zverev + his numbers were excellent.

In Italy you also had/have a stupid focus on quick results in the youth sector, not only in tennis but in football. The Spanish are better in this regard, more eye on technique and learning.
 
RossiBhoy said:
This thread is a prime example of that. 2011 Novak vs current top 2? Really don't understand the argument or why it has any relevance to AO semi final or potential meeting at RG.
Click to expand...

Frankly we have too little discussion about tennis itself. I love stats more than most but people should enjoy the sport first of all.

Hardly anybody is writing about Blockx who made his first semifinal. Mensik seems forgotten. I was fascinated by Federer and then Nadal and afterwards Djokovic and found Sinner and Alcaraz very early, but there is more to tennis than that...

P.S: I will also go to more live tennis events this year. ;)
 
Rovesciarete said:
Frankly we have too little discussion about tennis itself. I love stats more than most but people should enjoy the sport first of all.

Hardly anybody is writing about Blockx who made his first semifinal. Mensik seems forgotten. I was fascinated by Federer and then Nadal and afterwards Djokovic and found Sinner and Alcaraz very early, but there is more to tennis than that...
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I see too many people complaining about the state of mens tennis but we have an exciting crop of late teen early 20s players who have been taking top 10/20 scalps this season. I think we'll see a real impact from a few this season, potentially at RG. Exciting times ahead.
 
RossiBhoy said:
Totally agree. I see too many people complaining about the state of mens tennis but we have an exciting crop of late teen early 20s players. who have been taking top 10/20 scalps this season. I think we'll see a real impact from a few this season, potentially at RG. Exciting times ahead.
Click to expand...

Yeah, love to watch boys becoming pros. I do think tennis is moving too much towards serve+forehand, but on the other hand slower balls would make the sport even more physical and wear them out faster...
 
NoleFam said:
And that has absolutely nothing with the match on the day. If you have to go back to matches before that to make a point, then you already are grasping for straws. Nadal destroyed Soderling in 2009 Rome and only lost 1 game. What relevance was that when he played him in RG a few weeks later? None. And Sinner played below his usual level? Yea serving 75% and hitting more aces in this match than ever his career, and having way more winners than errors doesn't signal him being below his usual level.

Sinner didn't even beat Djokovic until he was 36 and a half, and you're acting like that's some flex. Then he got wins over post surgery Djokovic and when he injured himself right before their match at Wimbledon last year. The one time Djokovic came into a match with fresh legs and actually fit, he beat him. Accept that instead of saying it's some anomaly and acting like he doesn't only have a 6-5 record over Djokovic, despite all these wins happening when he was 36 years or older.

You are blind if you think peak Djokovic wouldn't beat Sinner more times than not, and he definitely isn't going to need 5 sets over multiple matches in Australia where he's at his strongest. Recency bias seems really strong here.
Click to expand...
Speak about recency bias you seem to be putting all the stock into their last match and ignoring the last 4 in which Sinner beat him 11 sets to 1. That's the definition of recency bias. Sinner didn't beat Djokovic until then because he was too young and inexperienced to beat him. Once he figured out Djokovic he was lights out against him until the one outlier match this season. Medvedev also owned Sinner before Sinner figured him out and turned the tables, same thing applies to Djokovic.

You're also acting like I said Sinner would beat Peak Djokovic. I literally said in my first post that I'd favor Peak Djokovic but that I don't think it would be the blowout that some seem to think it would be. If you think Peak Djokovic would blow Sinner off the court you're vastly underrating Sinner IMO.

I'm not even a Sinner fan but this new sucks, old invincible talk gets to be too hyperbolic around here.
 
NYTennisfan said:
Speak about recency bias you seem to be putting all the stock into their last match and ignoring the last 4 in which Sinner beat him 11 sets to 1. That's the definition of recency bias. Sinner didn't beat Djokovic until then because he was too young and inexperienced to beat him. Once he figured out Djokovic he was lights out against him until the one outlier match this season. Medvedev also owned Sinner before Sinner figured him out and turned the tables, same thing applies to Djokovic.

You're also acting like I said Sinner would beat Peak Djokovic. I literally said in my first post that I'd favor Peak Djokovic but that I don't think it would be the blowout that some seem to think it would be. If you think Peak Djokovic would blow Sinner off the court you're vastly underrating Sinner IMO.

I'm not even a Sinner fan but this new sucks, old invincible talk gets to be too hyperbolic around here.
Click to expand...
Yea he was too young and inexperienced yet Alcaraz was beating Djokovic at 19. It took Sinner 3+ more years and you're trying to flex like that's special or something. Once he figured out Djokovic? He was almost 37. At that point, the decline in Djokovic's game was evident and you're trying to compare this to the Medvedev rivalry like he and Djokovic are the same caliber of players? Ridiculous take.

You don't seem to understand that Djokovic is now 2 years older than he was when Sinner turned around the rivalry and started beating him consistently. That's 2 more years of decline and loss of movement. He's almost 39 and he shouldn't get close to beating Sinner, who is at his peak right now, but he beat him in 5. Yet you're trying to minimize the importance of that result.

It's the fact you're trying to equate this 39 year old version of Djokovic to his peak at 24-29 when you're saying it would be multiple matches that goes 5 sets and Djokovic just edges it. No one said it would be a blowout but Djokovic would be a solid favorite at his pet Slam in Australia. I don't know how you think otherwise.
 
NoleFam said:
Yea he was too young and inexperienced yet Alcaraz was beating Djokovic at 19. It took Sinner 3+ more years and you're trying to flex like that's special or something. Once he figured out Djokovic? He was almost 37. At that point, the decline in Djokovic's game was evident and you're trying to compare this to the Medvedev rivalry like he and Djokovic are the same caliber of players? Ridiculous take.

You don't seem to understand that Djokovic is now 2 years older than he was when Sinner turned around the rivalry and started beating him consistently. That's 2 more years of decline and loss of movement. He's almost 39 and he shouldn't get close to beating Sinner, who is at his peak right now, but he beat him in 5. Yet you're trying to minimize the importance of that result.

It's the fact you're trying to equate this 39 year old version of Djokovic to his peak at 24-29 when you're saying it would be multiple matches that goes 5 sets and Djokovic just edges it. No one said it would be a blowout but Djokovic would be a solid favorite at his pet Slam in Australia. I don't know how you think otherwise.
Click to expand...
Wow man, you're totally missing my point. I never compared Medvedev to Djokovic as players, I'm using the Medvedev example to show that Sinner wasn't ready to beat any top players at that time. Part of it was Djokovic getting older and part of it was Sinner coming of age. You should know as a Djokovic fan that it's rare for a player to be a phenom in their teens and very early 20s like Alcaraz and Nadal were. Sinner, like Djokovic and Federer for that matter, didn't find his prime form until his early to mid 20s so, again, he wasn't the same player that Djokovic beat up years prior nor was Djokovic for that matter compared to his '23 self.

Again, you're twisting my words. I never compared old Djokovic to Peak Djokovic, how did you possibly get that from my previous posts?
I'm saying, and it's proven by a larger sample size, that Djokovic's win over Sinner in Australia was a freak occurrence based on the fact that Sinner had dominated every match between the two the prior two years. Here were the scorelines... 2024 AO - 6-1, 6-2, 6-7, 6-3, 2024 Shanghai - 7-6, 6-3, 2024 French Open - 6-4, 7-5, 7-6, 2024 Wimbledon - 6-3, 6-3, 6-4. The 2026 AO match was an outlier, again, and not indicative of the player Sinner has been against Djokovic in general. Djokovic earned that win no doubt, he was phenomenal especially in the last two sets, but I'm not using that match as some kind of benchmark of how Sinner would fare in the Peak Djokovic era. Would 2011 or 2015 Djokovic be favored over Sinner at Australia? Yeah he would but Sinner would make a battle of it. That's all I'm saying. If Wawrinka was able to trouble him so would Sinner who is a better version.
 
NYTennisfan said:
Wow man, you're totally missing my point. I never compared Medvedev to Djokovic as players, I'm using the Medvedev example to show that Sinner wasn't ready to beat any top players at that time. Part of it was Djokovic getting older and part of it was Sinner coming of age. You should know as a Djokovic fan that it's rare for a player to be a phenom in their teens and very early 20s like Alcaraz and Nadal were. Sinner, like Djokovic and Federer for that matter, didn't find his prime form until his early to mid 20s so, again, he wasn't the same player that Djokovic beat up years prior nor was Djokovic for that matter compared to his '23 self.

Again, you're twisting my words. I never compared old Djokovic to Peak Djokovic, how did you possibly get that from my previous posts?
I'm saying, and it's proven by a larger sample size, that Djokovic's win over Sinner in Australia was a freak occurrence based on the fact that Sinner had dominated every match between the two the prior two years. Here were the scorelines... 2024 AO - 6-1, 6-2, 6-7, 6-3, 2024 Shanghai - 7-6, 6-3, 2024 French Open - 6-4, 7-5, 7-6, 2024 Wimbledon - 6-3, 6-3, 6-4. The 2026 AO match was an outlier, again, and not indicative of the player Sinner has been against Djokovic in general. Djokovic earned that win no doubt, he was phenomenal especially in the last two sets, but I'm not using that match as some kind of benchmark of how Sinner would fare in the Peak Djokovic era. Would 2011 or 2015 Djokovic be favored over Sinner at Australia? Yeah he would but Sinner would make a battle of it. That's all I'm saying. If Wawrinka was able to trouble him so would Sinner who is a better version.
Click to expand...
It's not that rare to be great at 19-21. Sampras and Djokovic also won Slams during these years. Lots of players show promise before they reach 22, which has been peak age for a lot of ATGs, but this is besides the point. You said he figured out Djokovic, as if it was the same Djokovic he was getting throttled by for 2+ years. Anyone could see Djokovic played terrible in that match in 2024 AO, nowhere near his level in 2023, and then had an injury that year, which significantly affected his movement in their match in Shanghai.

Ok, so 39 year old Djokovic beating him in 5 sets tells you that 24 year old Djokovic would also need 5 sets to beat him? Yea you're kind of indirectly comparing them like it's not as much of a difference in their level. The RG match was the one that was the most impressive because Djokovic actually played well there. At Wimbledon he clearly was injured but you're just glazing over these like he beat a well playing Djokovic in all of them.

Wawrinka and Sinner are two different types of players. No need to try to draw a correlation there. So a guy that before this year's AO and who had won 10 out of 20 AOs, which is half, had a 90+% win percentage there after 20 years, and had an 18-4 record against top 5 players (82%), including multiple wins over ATGs (7 in fact including Alcaraz) needed a freak occurrence to beat Sinner, a guy with a 3-3 record against 35-38 year old Djokovic in Slams? LOL. Ok, I think we're done here.
 
NoleFam said:
It's not that rare to be great at 19-21. Sampras and Djokovic also won Slams during these years. Lots of players show promise before they reach 22, which has been peak age for a lot of ATGs, but this is besides the point. You said he figured out Djokovic, as if it was the same Djokovic he was getting throttled by for 2+ years. Anyone could see Djokovic played terrible in that match in 2024 AO, nowhere near his level in 2023, and then had an injury that year, which significantly affected his movement in their match in Shanghai.

Ok, so 39 year old Djokovic beating him in 5 sets tells you that 24 year old Djokovic would also need 5 sets to beat him? Yea you're kind of indirectly comparing them like it's not as much of a difference in their level. The RG match was the one that was the most impressive because Djokovic actually played well there. At Wimbledon he clearly was injured but you're just glazing over these like he beat a well playing Djokovic in all of them.

Wawrinka and Sinner are two different types of players. No need to try to draw a correlation there. So a guy that before this year's AO and who had won 10 out of 20 AOs, which is half, had a 90+% win percentage there after 20 years, and had an 18-4 record against top 5 players (82%), including multiple wins over ATGs (7 in fact including Alcaraz) needed a freak occurrence to beat Sinner, a guy with a 3-3 record against 35-38 year old Djokovic in Slams? LOL. Ok, I think we're done here.
Click to expand...
Honestly, you're not even paying attention to what I'm saying and twisting it into a different narrative so it's making this exchange unnecessarily difficult which is too bad because I consider you to be one of the better posters here but it is what it is, we can just agree to disagree and move on.
 
NYTennisfan said:
Honestly, you're not even paying attention to what I'm saying and twisting it into a different narrative so it's making this exchange unnecessarily difficult which is too bad because I consider you to be one of the better posters here but it is what it is, we can just agree to disagree and move on.
Click to expand...
I don't understand what I'm twisting tbh because you seem to have made it kind of clear. We just have a difference of opinion and it's fine. We just disagree and it's no issue, and you're a good poster too. It's no worries.
 
Last edited:
accidental said:
Imagine if Nadal lost to Pete Sampras or Andre Agassi at a slam in 2010 when they were 39 and he was 24.

What a hilarious situation that would be
Click to expand...

It is shocking and unparalleled in modern tennis history.

The Peak Connors thrashed the aging champion, the 39-year-old Rosewall, in 1974.
The Peak Courier thrashed the aging champion, the 39-year-old Connors, in 1994.

Everyone was expecting a similar result when the Peak Sinner, on a red hot streak, took on the elder fading Djoker.

This is a match that will forever taint Sinner's legacy.
It does not matter if Sinner goes on to win 20+ slams.
This shocking loss in Australia will forever haunt him.
 
Rovesciarete said:
This defeat will likely make Sinner a more successful player late his thirties...

Age-wise his serve and attacking game is more developed than Novak's was. We never had this serve/return strength in a single package, he is speed running the tennis evolution of the GOAT.
Click to expand...
Disagree man, i think Sinner will be better in his 20s. His stamina will be a permanent issue, older age will expose him. After 2 hours Sinner game is often weakened even during his prime. He don’t have Djokovic’s elasticity and tolerance. Same like Carlos they will fade away in early 30s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GrassMasters
Istomin actually beat this guy
Replies
4
Views
177
accidental
A
weakera
Mensik actually beat this guy
Replies
13
Views
374
Federer and Del Potro
Federer and Del Potro
FatHead250
Small moments define greatness.
Replies
40
Views
1K
GabeT
GabeT
Backspin1183
Djokovic. What an athlete!
Replies
17
Views
909
DSH
DSH
Jokervich
They should rename the Australian Open men's singles trophy 'The Djokovic Cup'
Replies
14
Views
1K
Dedans Penthouse
Dedans Penthouse
Back
Top