Djokovic has shown he can win in any era

Oceans II

Oceans II

Professional
RG: 2016, 2021, 2023
USO: 2011, 2015, 2018, 2023

without even getting to AO and W

RG defeated Murray, Nadal, Tsitsipas, Alcaraz and even Berdych, baby Thiem, Berrettini, Khachanov, Ruud.
USO defeated 2011 Federer, Nadal, Cilic, 2015 Federer, Nishikori, Del Potro, Medvedev.

Well spaced out triumphs showing he can win in any period. Raises no question marks if say he won a cluster of slams in one single (or two) period/s.

Maybe only period he has not won is between 2011-14 at RG where there was obviously peak Nadal.

Discuss.
 
Hypo Crisis said:
Only thing comical is you being so salty all the time. You will never learn.
Term vulture btw, came out with Fedal. Fed vulturing 2004-2007 and Nadal vulturing RG only.
So you better check your facts before coming here with pain in your behind.
Click to expand...
Dude - at least be honest. Even coaches are saying it. It is the weakest generation of all time.

The only player closer to Djok is Alcaraz but even he's a level below.
 
People should get over this vulture crap. Yea we all know this isn’t really the strongest era of all times, but it is still incredibly impressive what Novak is doing at age 36. To blame all of it on generation useless is unfair, especially since we now have a new ATG talent in Alcaraz and nevertheless Novak is still No.1.
 
Oceans II said:
RG: 2016, 2021, 2023
USO: 2011, 2015, 2018, 2023

without even getting to AO and W

RG defeated Murray, Nadal, Tsitsipas, Alcaraz and even Berdych, baby Thiem, Berrettini, Khachanov, Ruud.
USO defeated 2011 Federer, Nadal, Cilic, 2015 Federer, Nishikori, Del Potro, Medvedev.

Well spaced out triumphs showing he can win in any period. Raises no question marks if say he won a cluster of slams in one single (or two) period/s.

Maybe only period he has not won is between 2011-14 at RG where there was obviously peak Nadal.

Discuss.
Click to expand...

But he came pretty damn close to beating Nadal, the by far greatest clay player of all time, at RG in 2013 and dominated him on clay outside of RG in 2011. the other years he also had great matches against nadal at RG and was a bit unlucky (rain delay for example).

He then beat him in straights at RG in 2015. of course, nadal was objectively not in form in 2015 … but who knows maybe 2015 Djokovic could have even beaten an in Form Nadal at RG
 
ScentOfDefeat said:
If it's all so easy why can't the others do it?
Could it be because he's... the best?
Click to expand...
It's because his main rivals have retired and semi-retired. He's been vulturing for two years.

No one is close to Nadal or Fed's or Djokovic's level in this generation. Alcaraz will get there in a few years.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
People should get over this vulture crap. Yea we all know this isn’t really the strongest era of all times, but it is still incredibly impressive what Novak is doing at age 36. To blame all of it on generation useless is unfair, especially since we now have a new ATG talent in Alcaraz and nevertheless Novak is still No.1.
Click to expand...
Vulturing is completely the wrong term anyway.

Vultures are animals that usually only eat if others do the kill for them. But Djokovic is the complete opposite. He never relies on who is beaten by others in the draw, he beats everyone in front of him, without having a current nemesis in Slams. Or, in other words, he always makes the "kill" himself.

Alcaraz beating him ONE time in an admittedly not so great match for Djokovic (bad serving and too many errors) doesn’t mean from now on Djokovic must hope to avoid him. I think in his form of yesterday he would have won the Wimbledon final. People underrate Medvedev and his relentless rallying on this US Open court. That Djokovic overcame it in 3 sets certainly showed his greatness. Even with a slightly erroneous performance he could have lost a decisive majority of long rallys.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
People should get over this vulture crap. Yea we all know this isn’t really the strongest era of all times, but it is still incredibly impressive what Novak is doing at age 36. To blame all of it on generation useless is unfair, especially since we now have a new ATG talent in Alcaraz and nevertheless Novak is still No.1.
Click to expand...
Not all, but most. There's no way he's 3 times the player in his 30's Fed was.

And he lost to Alcaraz this year, so not sure what your point is.
 
mike danny said:
Not all, but most. There's no way he's 3 times the player in his 30's Fed was.

And he lost to Alcaraz this year, so not sure what your point is.
Click to expand...
He also beat Alcaraz that year and as results show we are far from a passing of the torch. He is still the man to beat.
 
mike danny said:
And do we have a reason to not underrate him? He is 1-4 in slam finals against 33-36 year old's.
Click to expand...
That those two are better than him is certainly not in doubt. However, at the US Open Medvedev is very close to them, and that's what I meant. He is maybe today's biggest niche player though, because he is really useless at the highest level on clay and grass.

In my stream the commentators yesterday got it right when they said "All the hype about Alcaraz is well-deserved, but if there is one player you don't want to play against if you are tired or if you are nervous like Djokovic in 2021, then it's Medvedev on a court like this."
 
mike danny said:
And do we have a reason to not underrate him? He is 1-4 in slam finals against 33-36 year old's.
Click to expand...
You will never prove anything to this guy. He thinks 36 years old Djokovic is at his absolute peak right now. While the truth is, 2023 is just a totally new level of vulturing.
 
Win in any era? LMAO. He only managed to win RG when Nadal was at the absolute worst stage of his career, when he avoided Wawrinka and when he finally got an extremely easy draw without even one half decent opponent, with Murray who collapsed after 40 minutes in the final. But sure, he could have won it in any era. :-D :-D :-D :-D

After that he wasn't even relevant in RG, until the organizers decided to turn it into DO. And 2023 is not even serious to discuss.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
People should get over this vulture crap. Yea we all know this isn’t really the strongest era of all times, but it is still incredibly impressive what Novak is doing at age 36. To blame all of it on generation useless is unfair, especially since we now have a new ATG talent in Alcaraz and nevertheless Novak is still No.1.
Click to expand...
Not the strongest era? Dude, this is without doubt the weakest era in history, and 2023 brought vulturing to an absolutely new level. Djokovic basically won 3 challengers this year, where he just had to show up. During his prime/peak he found it much harder to win these slams, but at age 36 he just collects the trophies for free, without trying.
 
mike danny said:
He beat a cramping Alcaraz when the match was evened out. Doesn't tell us anything.
Click to expand...
Well they are 2-2 and against the field, Novak is still more successful. This weak era talk is blown way out of proportion. Sure it is a weak era but it is nevertheless impressive how Novak is still dominating.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
People should get over this vulture crap. Yea we all know this isn’t really the strongest era of all times, but it is still incredibly impressive what Novak is doing at age 36. To blame all of it on generation useless is unfair, especially since we now have a new ATG talent in Alcaraz and nevertheless Novak is still No.1.
Click to expand...
People should start being honest for once.

Replace Djokovic with Nadal now - Results would be the same.
Replace Djokovic with Fed - Results would be the same.


Alcaraz is a baby. He showed us his potential at W once. Please don't pretend he's in the big 3 league now. He will get there in a few years. This is vulture fest going on for two years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSH
ChrisRF said:
Vulturing is completely the wrong term anyway.

Vultures are animals that usually only eat if others do the kill for them. But Djokovic is the complete opposite. He never relies on who is beaten by others in the draw, he beats everyone in front of him, without having a current nemesis in Slams. Or, in other words, he always makes the "kill" himself.

Alcaraz beating him ONE time in an admittedly not so great match for Djokovic (bad serving and too many errors) doesn’t mean from now on Djokovic must hope to avoid him. I think in his form of yesterday he would have won the Wimbledon final. People underrate Medvedev and his relentless rallying on this US Open court. That Djokovic overcame it in 3 sets certainly showed his greatness. Even with a slightly erroneous performance he could have lost a decisive majority of long rallys.
Click to expand...
From the horse's mouth:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1701053380662034811

Big 3 play like that everytime.
 
fedfan24 said:
they never got a chance to. Nadal is defacto retired and federer had peak djokovic as a roadblock rather than Ruud, tsitispas and Medvedev.
Click to expand...
Well, too bad right? They should have made it this far then. Djokovic himself is planning to play at the 2028 Olympics.
Why can't they keep up with him? He can keep up with younger players.
 
Last edited:
tex123 said:
It's because his main rivals have retired and semi-retired. He's been vulturing for two years.

No one is close to Nadal or Fed's or Djokovic's level in this generation. Alcaraz will get there in a few years.
Click to expand...
So the only way someone can be the greatest is if every player is the same age and plays the same matches under the same conditions and one of them wins more than the others?
This resistance to the idea that Djokovic is the greatest is becoming farcical. People are now arguing tennis should be played under hypothetical lab conditions. I hadn't heard that argument before.
 
ScentOfDefeat said:
So the only way someone can be the greatest is if every player is the same age and plays the same matches under the same conditions and one of them wins more than the others?
This resistance to the idea that Djokovic is the greatest is becoming farcical. People are now arguing tennis should be played under hypothetical lab conditions. I hadn't heard that argument before.
Click to expand...
The resistance to the idea that he has been benefiting from a weakest field in history is farcical. Anyone without a fanboy goggles on can see it.
 
tex123 said:
The resistance to the idea that he has been benefiting from a weakest field in history is farcical. Anyone without a fanboy goggles on can see it.
Click to expand...
You didn't address my point. According to your logic, how can we determine a player is more accomplished than others? Do we need to create them in labs and make them have the exact same careers? How could you be convinced Djokovic is greater than Federer and Nadal? Would he have to hop in a time machine?
 
tex123 said:
He came in at Fed's peak. Nole developed much later. You probably don't even know what Fed's peak was. Battling two of the best of all times and accumulating 22 Slams is going to take a toll. A difference of 1 year does not tell the story.
Click to expand...
I do know what feds peak is. I watched tennis before Fed came on scene in late 90s to early 2000’s.

Djokovic was still playing in the time Nadal was battling peak Fed and going deep in tournaments himself. Yeah he’s wasn’t as good as Nadal early doors but it’s not like he showed up years later. He only turned pro a couple of years after him. He was putting a lot of mileage on himself and was already no3 by end of 2007.
 
tex123 said:
He came in at Fed's peak. Nole developed much later. You probably don't even know what Fed's peak was. Battling two of the best of all times and accumulating 22 Slams is going to take a toll. A difference of 1 year does not tell the story.
Click to expand...
Your favourite was a victim of circumstances he couldn't change. And Djokovic benefited from circumstances. I understand your argument, but I can tell you neither Nadal nor Djokovic believe in this kind of determinism. You make your own destiny, is what they would tell you. Djokovic just made his destiny in tennis a little bit brighter overall.
 
Tennfan123 said:
He was a tad quiet from 2006-2010.
Click to expand...
Players develop at different times. Federer also spent a few years on tour with modest results before breaking through.
Again, a lot of tennis "fans" here seem to deal with the idea of difference and ambiguity very poorly. If some of you were in charge of the game, tennis players would be created in factories. Their "peaks" would all be at the same time. And results would be foregone conclusions based on metrics.
 
tex123 said:
The resistance to the idea that he has been benefiting from a weakest field in history is farcical. Anyone without a fanboy goggles on can see it.
Click to expand...
If it’s so weak then Nadal should be able to comeback off his sick bed next year and win 2-3 slams. No excuses for him. Let’s see.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
People should get over this vulture crap. Yea we all know this isn’t really the strongest era of all times, but it is still incredibly impressive what Novak is doing at age 36. To blame all of it on generation useless is unfair, especially since we now have a new ATG talent in Alcaraz and nevertheless Novak is still No.1.
Click to expand...

In general that is true but we have to slide on this one given the draw of Muller, Zapata , Djere, Gojo, Fridge, Phone Boy and a weakedev
 
I mean this thread would make sense if he was beating the likes of Federer and Nadal now instead of Tsitsipas and Ben freaking Shelton.

So we really needed to see him beat Fritz to conclude that he can actually do it?
 
tennis_pro said:
I mean this thread would make sense if he was beating the likes of Federer and Nadal now instead of Tsitsipas and Ben freaking Shelton.

So we really needed to see him beat Fritz to conclude that he can actually do it?
Click to expand...
He’s already beaten Fedal multiple times and Murray and wawrinka. He leads the H2H against them all.

He’s proved he can dominate every era.
 
ND-13 said:
In general that is true but we have to slide on this one given the draw of Muller, Zapata , Djere, Gojo, Fridge, Phone Boy and a weakedev
Click to expand...
You can only beat what’s in front of you. It could have been Nadal with that draw if only he’d looked after his body better. Oh well …
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Megafanoftennis100
Part 2 of What if the Big Three retained their peak level of tennis throughout their entire career without any decline? 2011 Djokovic's turn now
Replies
9
Views
626
BorgTheGOAT
BorgTheGOAT
Hitman
The Big 3 and the different combos of consecutive slam wins as it stands
2
Replies
70
Views
6K
Fiero425
Fiero425
Hitman
How many times the big 3 came back from 0-2 sets down in a slam match and went onto win the slam title
2
Replies
62
Views
2K
DSH
DSH
Hitman
Djokovic has won at least 27 slam matches out of 27 slam matches he played in, four different times
Replies
7
Views
608
lud
lud
Razer
  • Poll Poll
Did Djokovic's Presence Benefit Federer's legacy or Harm Federer's legacy ?
Replies
34
Views
1K
SonnyT
S
Back
Top