Red Rick
Bionic Poster
A third reason why his decline isn't worrying his fans too much right now is simply that while he's declining, it's the slowest of the Big 3, and the nextgen doesn't seem to make the big leaps that would are frightening.
Djokovic is in a slow decline, but his fans don't acknowledge it yet
- Thread starter Gary Duane
- Start date
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
His improved service and declined return are mainly due to his significant change in racquet specs a few years ago.Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life
www.dropbox.com
Here is the data, and it shows his fading ability to return compensated for improving service. This is not a troll thread, an attack or an attempt to invalidate any of his accomplishments.
In fact, the way he is losing some of his defensive ability is very slow, very subtle and may be the slowest decline we've ever seen in the history of tennis.
Aside from 2006, when he was just breaking into the ATP, his worst year ever for serving on hard was 2010, where he barely got over 82% of service game for the year. In 2011, his miracle returning year, he was very close to 85%. This year, so far, he is at very close to 91%. That's a 6% net gain on the service game, which is amazing. But his return game percentage is currently at 28%.
28% would be a dream come true for most top players, but for him it's not only a 13% drop from 2011, his miracle returning year, it's 4% below his career average.
He will have to raise that this year to keep the same dominance he's had in the past. Does that mean he's no longer the best hard court player in the world? No, because there is so far no one who is approaching that magic 60% number for all games, so he's still the guy to beat.
But keep in mind that his career average on hard is 59.76% of all games, and that average includes not only 2017, his worst year since 2006, but also every year up to 2010. So when his yearly average fall below his career average, that's a decline. Please be aware that a decline for Djokovic is at the point mostly superior to everyone else out there, so keep it in perspective.
Just remember that anything under 30% of games won on return is well below his career average, a whopping 32%. So look carefully this year to see if that number goes up, or if it goes lower.
Remember: all aging players have a decline in defensive skills. It's just a matter of how fast it happens, and now long it takes before they fall to a point they can no longer compensate.
In 2011-2016, he used a slightly shortened frame (26.9”) with 370sw that was excellent for return. The ability to return in tennis for pros is roughly proportional to the effective mass of the racquet. Effective mass goes up with increasing sw and goes up with shorter length.
From 2018-2021, he has used a slightly extended frame (27.1”) with longer length, and also lower swingweight (360). Both the 0.2” longer length and the lower swingweight compounded to give significantly lower effective mass.
Converting his effective mass to standard length equivalent swingweight units for his 95” head size, he was at about 375 during 2011-2016, and at 355 from 2018 to 2021. A 20 unit drop, which in a sport where inches matter, is huge.
These changes (going to longer and lighter) had an offsetting beneficial effect by improving his ability to serve offensively.
Last edited:
CYGS
Legend
There’s a difference between declining at 26 vs 33
Sport
G.O.A.T.
I disagree with your notion that Djokovic is declining slower than Nadal. Nadal at RG seems to be declining equally slow as Novak at the AO, if not even slower, for Nadal won the last 4 RG losing only 3 sets while Djokovic lost 5 sets in the AO 2021 alone. At the USO they seem to be declining equally, based on their post-2016 performances.
Novak did reach the RG 2020 final, but he looked so helpless as Nadal in the AO 2019 final.
Last edited:
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
I did not make this thread about what has happened so far. I believe I very clearly said that IF those numbers remain around 28% at the end of the year, that's something to look at.
I'll remember you said that because it is almost 100% likely that you are wrong. The numbers I posted are only for hard. He has never served above 89.32% of games for the year. He's currently at 90.91%. I'm guessing he tops out at around 88%, 89% at the highest.
Druss
Hall of Fame
I have noticed his serve has gotten better, as well as his net game...i guess that's compensating for his decline everywhere else. I believe his diet and unorthodox methods that have been the subject of ridicule these last few years, play a huge role in his slower-than-usual decline.
TheAssassin
Legend
It's acknowledged for the most part. Drop in consistency means he is no longer a heavy favorite in long rallies, drop in depth means he is not forcing opponents to hit baseline half volleys as often as he used to, which combined with his longer reaction time now makes it less difficult for the opponents to put him on the back foot during the point. Fortunately most of his qualities are a force even now in today's form, and the serving is as good as ever. One or two more minor adjustments (and obviously maintaining good health) and he can extend the period of Slam-winning level of play further...
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
His best year was 2013, 89.13%. 2012-2015 were all good serving years on hard. So I don't see an improvement, only continued good serving. Let's see what it is at the end of this year.
For me, the best match I watched Nadal ever to play was FO2020 final. I don't think that Djokovic played badly at all. I would give Djokovic 8/10 for that match, while Nadal was off the charts.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
The other thing you will find. Go back and watch vid clips of Djokovic from 2005, when he was still using swingweight in the 330 range. You will notice his swing is much faster (swinging out of his shoes), but his ball doesn’t go any faster. Compare to clips of 2011 Djokovic (his first slam with 370sw), where his swing is slow and fluid, but his ball is massively heavy.Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life
Here is the data, and it shows his fading ability to return compensated for improving service. This is not a troll thread, an attack or an attempt to invalidate any of his accomplishments.
In fact, the way he is losing some of his defensive ability is very slow, very subtle and may be the slowest decline we've ever seen in the history of tennis.
Aside from 2006, when he was just breaking into the ATP, his worst year ever for serving on hard was 2010, where he barely got over 82% of service game for the year. In 2011, his miracle returning year, he was very close to 85%. This year, so far, he is at very close to 91%. That's a 6% net gain on the service game, which is amazing. But his return game percentage is currently at 28%.
28% would be a dream come true for most top players, but for him it's not only a 13% drop from 2011, his miracle returning year, it's 4% below his career average.
He will have to raise that this year to keep the same dominance he's had in the past. Does that mean he's no longer the best hard court player in the world? No, because there is so far no one who is approaching that magic 60% number for all games, so he's still the guy to beat.
But keep in mind that his career average on hard is 59.76% of all games, and that average includes not only 2017, his worst year since 2006, but also every year up to 2010. So when his yearly average fall below his career average, that's a decline. Please be aware that a decline for Djokovic is at the point mostly superior to everyone else out there, so keep it in perspective.
Just remember that anything under 30% of games won on return is well below his career average, a whopping 32%. So look carefully this year to see if that number goes up, or if it goes lower.
Remember: all aging players have a decline in defensive skills. It's just a matter of how fast it happens, and now long it takes before they fall to a point they can no longer compensate.
His serve in 2005 was also different with the lower swingweight. He tended to serve flatter second serves then. In 2011 AO, you will notice that he is laboring to hit second serves because his arm is not used to the high swingweight yet. But it usually didn’t matter because his high effective mass let him dominate.
Watching the tape, it appears he used an intermediate swingweight in 2006-2010.
I
But there is your answer. If you focus mastering nee skill
He is in slow decline in one segment of gis game. Not in the decline overall, as he compensates his decline in ROS by wastly improved serve and net game. He is just wisely adapting his game to stay relevant for many years to come. Overall he is now more complete player than he ever was.Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life
Here is the data, and it shows his fading ability to return compensated for improving service. This is not a troll thread, an attack or an attempt to invalidate any of his accomplishments.
In fact, the way he is losing some of his defensive ability is very slow, very subtle and may be the slowest decline we've ever seen in the history of tennis.
Aside from 2006, when he was just breaking into the ATP, his worst year ever for serving on hard was 2010, where he barely got over 82% of service game for the year. In 2011, his miracle returning year, he was very close to 85%. This year, so far, he is at very close to 91%. That's a 6% net gain on the service game, which is amazing. But his return game percentage is currently at 28%.
28% would be a dream come true for most top players, but for him it's not only a 13% drop from 2011, his miracle returning year, it's 4% below his career average.
He will have to raise that this year to keep the same dominance he's had in the past. Does that mean he's no longer the best hard court player in the world? No, because there is so far no one who is approaching that magic 60% number for all games, so he's still the guy to beat.
But keep in mind that his career average on hard is 59.76% of all games, and that average includes not only 2017, his worst year since 2006, but also every year up to 2010. So when his yearly average fall below his career average, that's a decline. Please be aware that a decline for Djokovic is at the point mostly superior to everyone else out there, so keep it in perspective.
Just remember that anything under 30% of games won on return is well below his career average, a whopping 32%. So look carefully this year to see if that number goes up, or if it goes lower.
Remember: all aging players have a decline in defensive skills. It's just a matter of how fast it happens, and now long it takes before they fall to a point they can no longer compensate.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Nadal looks exhausted the moment the match starts to go beyond three sets, to me he is declining more. I can see Djokovic playing multiple five setters in a slam, I cannot see that of Nadal. Declining isn't just about form and how good your timing is, it is also about the endurance side.
Krish0608
Legend
Novak is in a decline. In fact, his decline is not any different from Federer's decline post 2012. I would say Federer played at a higher level at a similar age (Mid 2014- mid 2016). There was a peak Novak Djokovic who stopped that Federer from racking up multiple slams. There is nobody like that for Djokovic. That's the only difference. Thiem could have potentially played that role of taking over and dominating the slams. But he is way too happy with that fluke slam.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
So he's not declining at all. Just tweaked his racquet and game. And that has led to a slight shift in the statistics.
alexio
Legend
you shouldn't have, nadal is no longer a serious contender/threat for the title at 3 out of 4 slams (roughly speaking), whereas it can't be said same about serbian machine..so i guess hitman is way closer to truth here
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Do think taking a full season gives sampling issues considering how Djoko started in 2018, as well as there being a decline in return stats across the entire field over the last few years.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
Of course he's more complete. He has to be at this age. That's not the point. Sooner or later that's not enough, and if you study tennis history you'll see it. The fans of all aging ATGs think that those players can compensate forever with more complete games, until they can't.
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
Federer made a similar spec change in 2014. Prior to that (with his 90), he was at 355sw. Since then (with his 98), he’s at 340sw.
Federer’s return stats took a big hit when he dropped his swingweight, but it allowed him to maintain serving at a high level as he aged and his arm weakened. This eventually paid off with 3 slam wins on fast courts (Djokovic noticed).
Djokovic made his change right after Fed’s 3-slam run. He has also had better success on the fast courts of AO and W since his switch to a spec favoring serve at the expense of his return.
Last edited:
Crazy Finn
Hall of Fame
I must agree with this. As you said, we’ll have to see how it plays out, but this looks to be the case.
Interesting.
I was going to say this.
So, you’re saying that the older Novak gets, the more he is playing like Federer?
(I‘m mostly kidding)
I can’t disagree, though we haven’t seen it at RG. I guess people don’t take him past three sets often. It’ll happen eventually, I suppose.
Nadal is still a fairly serious contender on grass. He hasn’t gotten titles, but he’s been in the semis the last two Wimbledons - and they were hard fought. Also, it seems no one under 30 can be successful on grass, at least, yet. Even, if he isn’t at the same level as he was in 2018 and 2019, it‘s possible he’s better than almost anyone that isn’t Novak or Fed.
D
Deleted member 771911
Guest
How could he have slams he was DQed from and which never took place?
I don't get it. I get he could have won a slam in which say he was leading 2-0 in the final and then he got injured or fell ill. Yeah, he could have won it being that close. Or maybe he could have won it if he held championship point but double faulted.
However, how could he win a slam which he was DQed in the QF and one which was never held? Where was the actual possibility there? He literally got thrown out of the USO by the officials a set into the QF! What the hell possibility did he have of winning it when he was asked by the officials to leave? Wimbledon was not even held!
I don't get it. I get he could have won a slam in which say he was leading 2-0 in the final and then he got injured or fell ill. Yeah, he could have won it being that close. Or maybe he could have won it if he held championship point but double faulted.
However, how could he win a slam which he was DQed in the QF and one which was never held? Where was the actual possibility there? He literally got thrown out of the USO by the officials a set into the QF! What the hell possibility did he have of winning it when he was asked by the officials to leave? Wimbledon was not even held!
ADuck
Legend
Do you mind if I can get those stats, do you store them in a file? I understand if no is the answer.
aldeayeah
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic was playing human tennis, while Nadal was doing the Nadal thing for a couple sets (although he came back to earth in the 3rd set, but Djokovic was too rattled for it to matter)
InsideOut900
Hall of Fame
Except you should compare 2020-2021 Djoker with 2013-2014 Federer agewise.
Of course Djokovic has aged better. Except for his slump he has played better than Fed at the same age. A
Beckerserve
Legend
I have been saying it for months. He knows this and has developed a much more attacking game to keep him top dog at 2 of the 4 Majors. On slower courts expect to see inconsistent results.Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life
Here is the data, and it shows his fading ability to return compensated for improving service. This is not a troll thread, an attack or an attempt to invalidate any of his accomplishments.
In fact, the way he is losing some of his defensive ability is very slow, very subtle and may be the slowest decline we've ever seen in the history of tennis.
Aside from 2006, when he was just breaking into the ATP, his worst year ever for serving on hard was 2010, where he barely got over 82% of service game for the year. In 2011, his miracle returning year, he was very close to 85%. This year, so far, he is at very close to 91%. That's a 6% net gain on the service game, which is amazing. But his return game percentage is currently at 28%.
28% would be a dream come true for most top players, but for him it's not only a 13% drop from 2011, his miracle returning year, it's 4% below his career average.
He will have to raise that this year to keep the same dominance he's had in the past. Does that mean he's no longer the best hard court player in the world? No, because there is so far no one who is approaching that magic 60% number for all games, so he's still the guy to beat.
But keep in mind that his career average on hard is 59.76% of all games, and that average includes not only 2017, his worst year since 2006, but also every year up to 2010. So when his yearly average fall below his career average, that's a decline. Please be aware that a decline for Djokovic is at the point mostly superior to everyone else out there, so keep it in perspective.
Just remember that anything under 30% of games won on return is well below his career average, a whopping 32%. So look carefully this year to see if that number goes up, or if it goes lower.
Remember: all aging players have a decline in defensive skills. It's just a matter of how fast it happens, and now long it takes before they fall to a point they can no longer compensate.
uscwang
Hall of Fame
I see this differently. All that matters to Novak now, and essentially his whole career, is majors. And it boils down to big matches.
From the start to 2014 FO, he won 6 out of 13 major finals, lost 7 F and 9 SF (winning 59% SF, 46% F).
From 2014 WB (when he turned a corner) to 2016 USO, he won 6 out of 8 major finals, lost only 2 F and 1 SF (winning 89% SF, 75% F).
From 2018 WB (when he returned) to 2021 AO, he won 6 out of 7 major finals, lost only 1 F and 1 SF (winning 88% SF, 86% F).
Career wise, he has won 72% SF, 64% F.
Novak is at the peak of career in terms of big matches. When these numbers dip below average, I'll start to worry.
Federer, 1st 6 titles, out of 6 finals (100% F); 2nd 6 titles, out of 8 finals (75% F); 3rd 6 titles (post mono), out of 14 finals (43% F). Career 65% F.
Nadal, 1st 6 titles, out of 8 finals (75% F); 2nd 6 titles, out of 9 finals (67% F); 3rd 6 titles, out of 9 finals (67% F). Career 71% F.
Conclusion, Federer is in decline. Nadal is fine. Djokovic is fantastic.
From the start to 2014 FO, he won 6 out of 13 major finals, lost 7 F and 9 SF (winning 59% SF, 46% F).
From 2014 WB (when he turned a corner) to 2016 USO, he won 6 out of 8 major finals, lost only 2 F and 1 SF (winning 89% SF, 75% F).
From 2018 WB (when he returned) to 2021 AO, he won 6 out of 7 major finals, lost only 1 F and 1 SF (winning 88% SF, 86% F).
Career wise, he has won 72% SF, 64% F.
Novak is at the peak of career in terms of big matches. When these numbers dip below average, I'll start to worry.
Federer, 1st 6 titles, out of 6 finals (100% F); 2nd 6 titles, out of 8 finals (75% F); 3rd 6 titles (post mono), out of 14 finals (43% F). Career 65% F.
Nadal, 1st 6 titles, out of 8 finals (75% F); 2nd 6 titles, out of 9 finals (67% F); 3rd 6 titles, out of 9 finals (67% F). Career 71% F.
Conclusion, Federer is in decline. Nadal is fine. Djokovic is fantastic.
Biotic
Hall of Fame
I do think he declined, as in not being able to play that 2011 - 2016 game anymore. The problem with the post 2016 sample is that he obviously sucked in 2017 and half of 2018. 2020 does not give as much data, which leaves us with 2019 only, which is above that magic number of 60%.
I think we should look at Aug 2018 - Feb 2020 only.
Anyway, as long as he has that other gear in return games (see last game of the 1st set), he's good to go. You numbers are good indicators, but don't tell the whole story. I mean, he won 50% of return games in the 2021 AO final.
I think we should look at Aug 2018 - Feb 2020 only.
Anyway, as long as he has that other gear in return games (see last game of the 1st set), he's good to go. You numbers are good indicators, but don't tell the whole story. I mean, he won 50% of return games in the 2021 AO final.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
Gary doesn’t need to be “seen as objective,” since he’s quite obviously the most objective and calm, rational poster in the entire forum. @RaulRamirez is another such poster.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Of course he's declining and he himself even acknowledges it publicly. There is meaning behind him saying "I'm not 22 anymore" after winning AO again the other day and "I have to choose my schedule more wisely". I would think a lot of his fans know this but it's not common for them, at least from what I have seen, to use that as an excuse or crutch for him losing because it's up to him to overcome that and find ways to still be great in other areas while not quite as great in some areas as he was 10 years ago.
Last edited:
threehandedbackhand
Legend
As it stands Djokovic hasn't won any Slam since 2021/02/21, right?
Decline proven.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Of course he's declining.
The issue is, he's facing the weakest young generation the game has ever known, so he's still able to pick up slams.
The issue is, he's facing the weakest young generation the game has ever known, so he's still able to pick up slams.
AlexM
Rookie
IMO gary duane is one of the best posters on TTW. This makes me question that statementDropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life
Here is the data, and it shows his fading ability to return compensated for improving service. This is not a troll thread, an attack or an attempt to invalidate any of his accomplishments.
In fact, the way he is losing some of his defensive ability is very slow, very subtle and may be the slowest decline we've ever seen in the history of tennis.
Aside from 2006, when he was just breaking into the ATP, his worst year ever for serving on hard was 2010, where he barely got over 82% of service game for the year. In 2011, his miracle returning year, he was very close to 85%. This year, so far, he is at very close to 91%. That's a 6% net gain on the service game, which is amazing. But his return game percentage is currently at 28%.
28% would be a dream come true for most top players, but for him it's not only a 13% drop from 2011, his miracle returning year, it's 4% below his career average.
He will have to raise that this year to keep the same dominance he's had in the past. Does that mean he's no longer the best hard court player in the world? No, because there is so far no one who is approaching that magic 60% number for all games, so he's still the guy to beat.
But keep in mind that his career average on hard is 59.76% of all games, and that average includes not only 2017, his worst year since 2006, but also every year up to 2010. So when his yearly average fall below his career average, that's a decline. Please be aware that a decline for Djokovic is at the point mostly superior to everyone else out there, so keep it in perspective.
Just remember that anything under 30% of games won on return is well below his career average, a whopping 32%. So look carefully this year to see if that number goes up, or if it goes lower.
Remember: all aging players have a decline in defensive skills. It's just a matter of how fast it happens, and now long it takes before they fall to a point they can no longer compensate.
Jokervich
Hall of Fame
Interesting. How do you know all of this? lol
RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
Obviously Djokovic is gonna manage his schedule more carefully and you can see the past couple of years he is playing lesser and lesser. But I like ucswang post with those big match numbers. Djokovic gets better and better every year when it comes to winning big encounters and peaking at the right time. I think this has to do with his maturity and experience, but also his continuation of making his game better.
I think Djokovic is a more skilled player these days and his maturity and experience aswell as his mental strength along with being able to still move the way he does is what is keeping him at the top still. Without all these adjustments and refining of his game Djokovic wouldn't be as dominant as he still is.
I think Djokovic is a more skilled player these days and his maturity and experience aswell as his mental strength along with being able to still move the way he does is what is keeping him at the top still. Without all these adjustments and refining of his game Djokovic wouldn't be as dominant as he still is.
Last edited:
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
I disagree. I think it's very hard to be a fan and to be realistic at the same time, and I've been watching the reactions of Fed fans for many years now, but since he is 6 years older his decline is much further along. For Fed, in my opinion, there has been a bit of a reverse denial. Very obviously his peak was from the end of 2003 to 2007. But 2006 was his absolute peak in numbers. Both 2004 and 2005 were close. Remember, the highest numbers do not guarantee slams. They just show when they are more likely. 2005 was stronger than 2007, but he did not have peak Safin in 2007.
2008 and 2009 was a decline period for returning. Returning here is not about a couple top opponents. It's against the field for a year.
2011 on paper was not a decline year. His level was not as high as in 2006, so I think he had a good shot at a hard slam in 2011 at his absolute peak level - his serve was down a bit - but in my mind he was unfortunate to improve, again, the year that Djokovic was absolutely on fire.
2015 was similar. On paper he was on fire again, so once again he ran into peak Djokovic. Djokovic over the age of 30 has never run into anyone 6 years younger who was on fire the way Fed was in 2011 and 2015. What this means is that Fed was very fortunate at his peak but has been very unfortunate later in his career.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
I knew when I made this thread I would be accused of being a biased Fed fan attacking Djokovic and his fans. The idea is that in this forum you can't be a fan and remain objective.
www.dropbox.com
For what it's worth, here is the same idea with Fed. My conclusions: Fed was not in decline in 2011 and 2015. The reasons why don't really matter. He was not at his absolute peak, and I think it's a bit unfair to expect any player over age 30 to bounce back in best of 5 situations the same way as at age 24, but my conclusion is that he really was very close to peak performances in those two years on hard. As a fan I just regret that he chose those two years to get close to back on top, because they coincided with Djkovic's best years. My other conclusion is also that Fed could have had an even higher peak early in his career with the racket he now uses, but fans will probably disagree. There has been a further evolution at the top of tennis since his early days, but that evolution (for many reasons) has not been capitalized by younger players.
At any rate, the reasoning here is the same. Look at the years he was above his career average, and below.
Note that although a player is almost a lock for a slam when at 60% or very close to it, there is a caveat. When another player is equally high or higher, all bets are off. So 2015 and 2011 stand out as years that Fed, without Djokovic, would at least been back on top for hard court play.
This is not about who is the better player or who has had the best career. It just shows when the players were most dominant against the field and it strongly suggests years when players decline. That decline can be permanent, in which there is no return, or it can end for awhile with another rise.
Note that 2017, the year in which Fed won another hard slam, he was not overall as strong as in 2011 or 2015. This also suggests that Edberg deserves a lot more credit for his near return to the top.
Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life
www.dropbox.com
For what it's worth, here is the same idea with Fed. My conclusions: Fed was not in decline in 2011 and 2015. The reasons why don't really matter. He was not at his absolute peak, and I think it's a bit unfair to expect any player over age 30 to bounce back in best of 5 situations the same way as at age 24, but my conclusion is that he really was very close to peak performances in those two years on hard. As a fan I just regret that he chose those two years to get close to back on top, because they coincided with Djkovic's best years. My other conclusion is also that Fed could have had an even higher peak early in his career with the racket he now uses, but fans will probably disagree. There has been a further evolution at the top of tennis since his early days, but that evolution (for many reasons) has not been capitalized by younger players.
At any rate, the reasoning here is the same. Look at the years he was above his career average, and below.
Note that although a player is almost a lock for a slam when at 60% or very close to it, there is a caveat. When another player is equally high or higher, all bets are off. So 2015 and 2011 stand out as years that Fed, without Djokovic, would at least been back on top for hard court play.
This is not about who is the better player or who has had the best career. It just shows when the players were most dominant against the field and it strongly suggests years when players decline. That decline can be permanent, in which there is no return, or it can end for awhile with another rise.
Note that 2017, the year in which Fed won another hard slam, he was not overall as strong as in 2011 or 2015. This also suggests that Edberg deserves a lot more credit for his near return to the top.
Last edited:
I would not look at it as you explained it simply because for people like Thiem to repeat what Djok did to Fedr he/they had to go through at least 2 guys from the Big 3 to win a GS. Djok rarely had to go through both Nadl and Fedr to win it. Imagine if any of the NG had to play Fedr first, then Djok in the SF and then Nadl in the F plus add possible tough matches in the first 3 or 4 rounds. NO WONDER no one won it!
Thiem won USO only because these guys were not there. Period. Take it as a video game with 0, 1, 2, 3 obstacles.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
It's all about how long those return stats can drop for a whole year without causing a fatal weakness in slams. It's common sense to conclude that when return goes down, serve has to go up to compensate.
There is another thing that is even more important to me. The very top of the game can evolve even faster than the rest of the tour for awhile, or the top can maintain a gap. This is not the first time we've seen this. When the evolution is generated by a change in equipment, generally the young players are most favored. When it's just a tweaking of tech already in place, the older players may benefit more.
At the beginning of the open era the former touring pros had already developed a higher level and it took years for the younger players to beat them. And that was when age was a larger factor. The reason may be that there were no significant changes in rackets or training.
When Fed burst upon the scene poly was still pretty new, and they young players were changing the game. And some old ones, like Agassi. But the main thing is that there was an evolution going on in equipment and other things.
Things have been quite static for a few years. Perhaps the last big change was Fed's change to the newer racket, but that was not evolution. It was his late move to getting on board with what everyone else was already doing, mainly bigger racket heads and other advances. That's how he raised his stats so much in 2015, back to where he was in 2011. That's not normal.
It seems that when the tech is static, it takes longer for the young guys to break through. That's not all of it. There are other factors, but I do believe it is part of it.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
Right. The typical fan response. "We". As if anyone else but Djokovic won those slams. There have been some intelligent responses here. Yours is not one of them.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
Whatever the next chapter is, I don't think Thiem is going to be a big part of it. The assumption now is that players have forever to go on improving, so now 30 is the new 24. I think this is an exaggeration, so unless almost all slam winners in the future are over 30, or close to 30, I think this idea is premature.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
More than anything else Djokovic has advanced training. He has set the bar. He has challenged a lot of idea, and his stretching should be something the whole world looks at. If you are loose, your body performs as if it is much younger than it is. This slower aging is not just in sports. It's everywhere, and it's prolonging careers in all sorts of areas. Never before have we seen so many old musicians still at the top of their game, which includes not only performers but also composers and conductors. In my view it's just the start of what we will see in coming decades.
Fabresque
Legend
What do you want me to say? You keep pulling up all these stats saying he’s in decline and how his return game has been declining yet Djokovic keeps winning? He’s won 6 slams since his return from injury in 2018 and hasn’t stopped yet. All this stuff about statistics and the numbers, it’s all garbage. Wanna know when he’s declining? When one of the next genners beats him in a semifinal/final. There’s a reason the guy’s favored to reach every single slam final this year and win 2 out of those remaining 3.
So yes, keep pulling up stats. And us as Novak fans, we’ll keep enjoying the tears when he continues to tack on slams.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
When the stats and the results don't match up, the answer usually lies in competition.
