Djokovic - can he become greater than Federer on two surfaces?

Can Djokovic become greater on 2/3 surfaces?

  • Yes, he has a very good chance

    Votes: 9 50.0%

  • No, he will have drastic decline next year so he won't make up for it

    Votes: 3 16.7%

  • Djokovic will never win FO, therefore this discussion is invalid

    Votes: 6 33.3%
  • Total voters
    18
  • Poll closed .
abmk said:
you could say that for 3 of the 4 SPs that federer saved in that breaker.
The last one was on roddick's racquet, not on federer's.

I'm not saying federer didn't deserve to win that match, I'm saying he had some luck on his side.
Click to expand...
Im saying Roddick choked that volley away, Federer didnt. Thats why Federer deserved to win.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I'd regard his 13/15 finals as going through hell too considering both matches were against a guy whose defense is on a par with Djokovic's and that both lasted close to three and a quarter hours. Also his SF against Wawrinka, even if it wasn't as good a version as the two previous years. I'm sorry but Fed's draw in '04 just wasn't on the same level.
Click to expand...

fed's 04 draw was way tougher than djoko's 15 draw.

you place too much emphasis on the time rather than on the quality of tennis ..murray just wasn't there after 2 sets and a bit in both matches - due to injury in 13 and mentally AWOL in 15 ...that's decent/good, but not hellish at all ..

besides I already 13 was tough due to stan alone ..
 
abmk said:
fed's 04 draw was way tougher than djoko's 15 draw.

you place too much emphasis on the time rather than on the quality of tennis ..murray just wasn't there after 2 sets and a bit in both matches - due to injury in 13 and mentally AWOL in 15 ...that's decent/good, but not hellish at all ..

besides I already 13 was tough due to stan alone ..
Click to expand...
The time is important as well because obviously the longer you're out on court, the more it means your opponent is pushing you.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
You seem to be forgetting that Novak beat the 2005-2009 version of Federer at the AO as well. And don't give me Agassi, Del Potro or Soderling(did Fed even play him there?) 'cos Djokovic's competition was stronger than the lot of them.
Click to expand...
The only time that Nole beat Federer at down under was in 2008 when Federer had mono, but you already knew that already. Agassi was one of the AO goat and it was played on rebound ace. Safin, Gonzo 2007, Nadal 2009 were tougher than Nole's competition.

Djokovic2011 said:
Try being objective for once, it might do you some good.
Click to expand...
That's rich coming from you.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
The time is important as well because obviously the longer you're out on court, the more it means your opponent is pushing you.
Click to expand...

no, it just means the rallies are longer ....

borg-vilas matches had lots of long rallies too ..didn't mean vilas was tough for borg ..

obviously not an exact comparision, but still ...
 
Last edited:
TMF said:
The only time that Nole beat Federer in down under was in 2008 when Federer had mono, but you already knew that already. Agassi was one of the AO goat and it was played on rebound ace. Safin, Gonzo 2007, Nadal 2009 were tougher than Nole's competition.
Click to expand...
A win is a win and unfortunately for you Djokovic defeated your hero in his prime(and likely would've done anyway even if playing a fully fit Federer). I know it hurts but that's just something you're gonna have to deal with TMF.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Which means you're not winning the points easily which means your opponent's pushing you.
Click to expand...

no, it just means you're not that offensive enough to end points earlier vs that opponent ( something someone like federer/stan could vs murray, but not djokovic ) ...atleast some of them ..

doesn't mean he's tougher ..
 
Noleberic123 said:
You are not aware of how hard it is to play against Djokovic and Murray do you.
Click to expand...

well, only if they play well, its a tough draw for djokovic, isn't it ?

its also hard to defend against a hitter like safin or gonzalez or a play vs a machine like davydenko .....its not exclusive to defenders , you know ...
 
abmk said:
how about stan playing well and or not Murray going AWOL after 2 sets and a bit (losing 11 out of 12 games in the end ) in 15 ?
Click to expand...
I take it you think both guys would've beaten Djokovic had they played better? Btw can you give me some examples of which top players underperformed in GS matches against Federer during his prime? This is your golden opportunity to show that you can be objective where your favourite's concerned after all abmk.
 
abmk said:
no, it just means you're not that offensive enough to end points earlier vs that opponent ( something someone like federer/stan could vs murray, but not djokovic ) ...atleast some of them ..

doesn't mean he's tougher ..
Click to expand...
Easier said than done against a guy like Murray who gets practically everything back.
 
Noleberic123 said:
Im saying Roddick choked that volley away, Federer didnt. Thats why Federer deserved to win.
Click to expand...

Actually, this isn't true; It was a difficult volley to make. A lot of competent net players would have struggled to have put that away. Roddick was decent at the net, but was always going to struggle with that.


I think it was deserved to go 1-1 sets, Roddick did get lucky in the first set. Took the one chance he had and Federer gave him the game to be fair. Where Roddick could have done better was the fifth set; If he would have played like he did in Miami 2010 against Nadal, he would have taken that fifth set.
 
****igrade said:
Actually, this isn't true; It was a difficult volley to make. A lot of competent net players would have struggled to have put that away. Roddick was decent at the net, but was always going to struggle with that.


I think it was deserved to go 1-1 sets, Roddick did get lucky in the first set. Took the one chance he had and Federer gave him the game to be fair. Where Roddick could have done better was the fifth set; If he would have played like he did in Miami 2010 against Nadal, he would have taken that fifth set.
Click to expand...
Lol comparing the slow HCs of Miami to Wimbledon :p
 
abmk said:
it was obvious he wasn't well during the match
Click to expand...

Were you the one to take his body temperature? Be honest.

abmk said:
umpire misses a call that'd have given stan a BP late in the 5th set in AO 13 final (IIRC), stan doesn't challenge. that's luck.
federer's sick in AO 08, otherwise would've been the fav in their AO 08 match, that's luck.
nadal misses a sitter pass up 4-2 , 30-15 in the 5th set in AO 12 final, that's luck
hits 100 UEs in a match ( vs simon AO 16 ), still wins, that's luck
Click to expand...

I'll tell you what luck at AO looks like:

1. Winning 4 AOs while beating only 1 single player ranked higher than #5 in the process (which is JC Ferrero)
2. Winning 4 AOs, with only 1 single win vs Djokodal, that against a 19yo Djokovic
3. Playing someone like Kiefer and Baghdatis in SFs and Finals of a singe tournament
4. Having a injured Nadal not able to defend his title in 2010, just before Djokovic came into his own.

Now that I think of it, Federer is a freaking lottery winner.
 
user said:
Were you the one to take his body temperature? Be honest.



I'll tell you what luck at AO looks like:

1. Winning 4 AOs while beating only 1 single player ranked higher than #5 in the process (which is JC Ferrero)
2. Winning 4 AOs, with only 1 single win vs Djokodal, that against a 19yo Djokovic
3. Playing someone like Kiefer and Baghdatis in SFs and Finals of a singe tournament
4. Having a injured Nadal not able to defend his title in 2010, just before Djokovic came into his own.

Now that I think of it, Federer is a freaking lottery winner.
Click to expand...
Oh God. Your making me laugh :D:D
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I take it you think both guys would've beaten Djokovic had they played better? Btw can you give me some examples of which top players underperformed in GS matches against Federer during his prime? This is your golden opportunity to show that you can be objective where your favourite's concerned after all abmk.
Click to expand...

wawrinka would have given djoko's form in that match
murray could have ..not sure ...

given their respective forms in the tournament ,

AO 04 - safin in the final -- tired from the draw ...played decent in the first 2 sets ..went away after that

USO 04 - hewitt in the final

USO 05 - nalby in the QF

AO 07 - roddick in the SF - he was actually playing well before the SF

AO 10 - murray in the final

USO 08 - murray in the final


......these are the ones on top of my head ....
 
abmk said:
as far as the AO is concerned, prime wawrinka showed up twice vs djoko, prime safin showed up once vs federer
Click to expand...

When you obviously can decide who was in prime form or not, what form was Federer in Wimbledon and USO las year?
 
abmk said:
wawrinka would have given djoko's form in that match
murray could have ..not sure ...

given their respective forms in the tournament ,

AO 04 - safin in the final -- tired from the draw ...played decent in the first 2 sets ..went away after that

USO 04 - hewitt in the final

USO 05 - nalby in the QF

AO 07 - roddick in the SF - he was actually playing well before the SF

......these are the ones on top of my head ....
Click to expand...
Federer of 07 AO was unbelievable though
 
Djokovic2011 said:
You seem to be forgetting that Novak beat the 2005-2009 version of Federer at the AO as well. And don't give me Agassi, Del Potro or Soderling(did Fed even play him there?) 'cos Djokovic's competition was stronger than the lot of them. Try being objective for once, it might do you some good.
Click to expand...


Wow, that's a pretty hefty statement to make when it comes to Agassi. Looking back, Agassi could have been on way higher numbers, he was too busy taking drugs and doing other things. Truly, Agassi was the last player to win all slams prior to homogenisation, in an era filled with specialists.
 
Didn't you guys have this discussion about the Australian Open before?

home-running-in-circles-o.gif
 
user said:
Were you the one to take his body temperature? Be honest.
Click to expand...

no, I wasn't and neither were you.

What I said was based on seeing what happened in the match ...

one of things which was federer losing 9 out of 10 games at one stage...yeah, sure that had everything to do with djokovic :rolleyes:


user said:
I'll tell you what luck at AO looks like:

1. Winning 4 AOs while beating only 1 single player ranked higher than #5 in the process (which is JC Ferrero)
2. Winning 4 AOs, with only 1 single win vs Djokodal, that against a 19yo Djokovic
3. Playing someone like Kiefer and Baghdatis in SFs and Finals of a singe tournament
4. Having a injured Nadal not able to defend his title in 2010, just before Djokovic came into his own.

Now that I think of it, Federer is a freaking lottery winner.
Click to expand...

again, ignorance at its finest ...

1. murray was beating nadal even before the injury in AO 10 ..

2. winning AO does not mean having to play vs djokodal or we have to void every title before that ..

3. AO had plenty of surprise players making deep runs into the SF/Fs before 2010 ..which is why federer has less # of top 4 victories ...he has had plenty of top 10 victories though ..

4. as far as 2006 is concerned, he had already played a very much in-form davydenko in the QF. baghdatis in the final wasn't a pushover either ...
 
Last edited:
Djokovic2011 said:
Djokovic deserved every bit of that luck he had at the AO considering how he had to go through hell to win some of his titles there, unlike Federer whose victories were a walk in the park in comparison.
Click to expand...
No. Just no. I hope you are trolling.

That's the same as weak era arguments. Please don't fall to that level.

Anyone who has won more than 10 slams has faced his share of hard slams. Only fanbois say slams are hard for their guys and easy for the guys they don't like.
 
Gary Duane said:
No. Just no. I hope you are trolling.

That's the same as weak era arguments. Please don't fall to that level.

Anyone who has won more than 10 slams has faced his share of hard slams. Only fanbois say slams are hard for their guys and easy for the guys they don't like.
Click to expand...
Thats not the debate. The debate is whos competition was better at the AO. Not overall. Feds competition at FO/Wimby/even USO was tougher than at the AO
 
****igrade said:
Wow, that's a pretty hefty statement to make when it comes to Agassi. Looking back, Agassi could have been on way higher numbers, he was too busy taking drugs and doing other things. Truly, Agassi was the last player to win all slams prior to homogenisation, in an era filled with specialists.
Click to expand...
My point was that Djokovic's competition at the AO was tougher overall than Federer's. I can't understand why Fed fans won't just acknowledge it instead of going all round the houses bringing up players that obviously aren't on the same level as the ones I've been referencing.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I'd regard his 13/15 finals as going through hell too considering both matches were against a guy whose defense is on a par with Djokovic's and that both lasted close to three and a quarter hours. Also his SF against Wawrinka, even if it wasn't as good a version as the two previous years. I'm sorry but Fed's draw in '04 just wasn't on the same level.
Click to expand...
There we go with hard and easy draws. I'm used to Fed fans leveling that against Novak. Now you are using it in reverse. I expected better from you. :(
 
abmk said:
wawrinka would have given djoko's form in that match
murray could have ..not sure ...

given their respective forms in the tournament ,

AO 04 - safin in the final -- tired from the draw ...played decent in the first 2 sets ..went away after that

USO 04 - hewitt in the final

USO 05 - nalby in the QF

AO 07 - roddick in the SF - he was actually playing well before the SF

AO 10 - murray in the final

USO 08 - murray in the final


......these are the ones on top of my head ....
Click to expand...
It still really bothers you that Wawrinka didn't play as well in that '15 SF as he did the two previous years. ;) Bloody hell mate, it's been 18 months now - you need to get over it already! :p
 
Djokovic2011 said:
It still really bothers you that Wawrinka didn't play as well in that '15 SF as he did the two previous years. ;) Bloody hell mate, it's been 18 months now - you need to get over it already! :p
Click to expand...

no, it doesn't bother me anymore, I just answered your question .

what actually bothered me was that djokovic played well below par and got away with it vs wawrinka ...
 
Gary Duane said:
There we go with hard and easy draws. I'm used to Fed fans leveling that against Novak. Now you are using it in reverse. I expected better from you. :(
Click to expand...
I only ever talk about the draws/competition when someone else brings it up first Gary(usually a Federer/Nadal fan). I do think Novak had it tougher than Roger at the AO though and there's nothing wrong in my saying that.
 
abmk said:
no, it doesn't bother me anymore, I just answered your question .

what actually bothered me was that djokovic played well below par and got away with it vs wawrinka ...
Click to expand...
Wawrinka played below par. Djokovic played below par. Djokovic played better than Wawrinka. Djokovic won. Pack your bags, close the factory and get on with your life.
 
RF-18 said:
When you obviously can decide who was in prime form or not, what form was Federer in Wimbledon and USO las year?
Click to expand...

he could play prime level tennis for a 2 sets and a bit ( maybe upto 2 hrs or so ) ...but not more than that ...

so I'd say , no , if the match went to 4 sets or more than 2 hrs or so ...
 
abmk said:
no, it doesn't bother me anymore, I just answered your question .

what actually bothered me was that djokovic played well below par and got away with it vs wawrinka ...
Click to expand...
Has it occurred to you that if Wawrinka had increased his level in that match, Djokovic probably would've done too?
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I only ever talk about the draws/competition when someone else brings it up first Gary(usually a Federer/Nadal fan). I do think Novak had it tougher than Roger at the AO though and there's nothing wrong in my saying that.
Click to expand...

you think that about every slam ...blah blah blah blah ...
 
Djokovic2011 said:
My point was that Djokovic's competition at the AO was tougher overall than Federer's. I can't understand why Fed fans won't just acknowledge it instead of going all round the houses bringing up players that obviously aren't on the same level as the ones I've been referencing.
Click to expand...

Federer probably has had tougher competition overall than Djokovic; Remember, Federer has had to go through a lot of players to win his AO titles or make a title challenge; Agassi, Murray, Djokovic, Nadal, Nalbandian, Wawrinka, Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero, Roddick, Haas, Gonzalez, Davydenko.


Djokovic has had to face Wawrinka a few times, Nadal, Federer and Murray.




Noleberic123 said:
He didnt get his tactics wrong. Thats just the way 2009 Roddick played
Click to expand...

??????????


Is this guy for real?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

metsman
Djokovic-can he become greater than Federer on three surfaces?
Replies
14
Views
831
metsman
metsman
mike danny
  • Poll Poll
Can Djokovic become the greatest HC player of all time?
5 6 7
Replies
339
Views
12K
Hitman
Hitman
Lew II
  • Poll Poll
Djokovic greater than any other player on 2/3 surfaces?
2 3 4
Replies
175
Views
6K
Sudacafan
Sudacafan
DjokoGOAT
Djokovic is the best ever on 2 surfaces and top 2 another
2
Replies
50
Views
2K
Third Serve
Third Serve
Hitman
Djokovic v Federer - The biggest titles on HC
Replies
21
Views
825
NeutralFan
NeutralFan
Back
Top