Djokovic is the only one, who can save men's tennis

Xavier G

Professional
Rafa has a good chance of beating Fed's 20 Slams total now and if he does, well and good. Look at the totals of Fed's total Slam match wins, mind, they're incredible too.

Records are made to be broken in sports though.
Novak might get there too.

Fed doesn't have a divine right to be Slam leader and 20 is an astonishing total already.
What it won't do is take away from Fed's greatness if his total IS surpassed, because Fed, Rafa and Novak are three of the greatest ever, so I don't really understand all the fuss about it myself.

It's the fan-atics and fan-antics. :)
 

RP68

New User
Because "talent" is a word that, as we normally use it, only encapsulates some of the skills needed for success in tennis - in particular, the racket-based ones. Federer has much, much higher tennis-specific skills than does Nadal. But Nadal is much more mentally strong, much more focused, much more disciplined, much fitter, and much stronger. His overall athletic skills are much better than Federer's. And the skills at which Nadal surpasses Federer are ones that are just as difficult to change as are tennis-specific ones, so it's not really the case that Federer should have just knuckled down and tried harder. He did try hard. He just wasn't as "talented" at the less flashy and less obvious skills. Same with McEnroe and Lendl.

I agree that they are all caught in a negative loop. They must be very obsessed with it.
Talent? Please look Nadal 17y vs Federer 22y and number one:

Nadal would have been unstoppable if no injuries on foot and knees.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
What needs saving?

This is all about personal preferences. What we would like to see.
I’d like to see Rafa having the most as I like him the most. Of course a fan of another player don’t think that. They want their player to have the most.

I feel no need to try to talk others into thinking the same as it doesn’t work.

Vamos Rafa!
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Federer's chances of keeping a record in the number of GS titles are lost after the 2019 US Open final. Federer is 38 years old, the hopes of expanding his collection of GS titles are small and and Nadal thanks triumph at the US Open approached him on the difference at only one GS title. It is very unlikely that Nadal will no longer add a GS title, and on the contrary what is very likely is that Nadal will make every effort to break the Federer's record.

The only one who can prevent Nadal from setting a record in the number of GS titles for many years ahead is Djokovic. Nole has 16 GS titles, 3 less than Nadal and 4 less than Federer, but is the youngest of the Big 3. Like Rafa, Nole has the ambition to reach the GS record. Now the race about GS record is only in their hands. Who wins this race it will keep the record for many years. I estimate that Medvedev, Tsitsipas or FAA can will reach into the 5-10 GS gained titles range, but no more.

Nadal is a very divisive person on the tennis scene. At the competitive tennis forum MTF Nadal has won many times a poll 'Most Disliked Player'. Djokovic is not more popular than Nadal, but will be more acceptable to the tennis world as a GS all-time leader.
Nadal haters are the funniest people in the universe.

RF haters are funny too.

Novak haters especially.

This thread seems to be like a plea for all of us to join hands in a Kumbaya-like prayer to prevent Rafa from winning the most slams.

And no, Rafa is not disliked. He is tremendously popular. Novak is by far the least popular of the three. By about a light-year.
 
Talent? Please look Nadal 17y vs Federer 22y and number one:

Nadal would have been unstoppable if no injuries on foot and knees.
Sadly, your hatred for Bull leads you to sell him tragically short. To put it morally, you ought to say, "Bull has been unstoppable in spite of injuries to foot, knees, back, nose, eye, ear, elbow, shoulder, hip, hair, and neck." ;)
 

DismalFuture

Semi-Pro
Save it from what? What good is gonna do, to the game for Djokovic or any of the big 3 to keep piling up slams? Some cracks are starting to appear though, maybe next year finally there will be a new narrative in the men's game.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
The only ones that need saving are Federer fans because when their hero retires, these folks will need to find a new sport ... or hope the Aussie whiner, with Malaysian roots, does something worth following because a lot of them seem to be in love with him :p
They will love Kyrgilose but only as long as he doesn't inflict a devastating defeat on RF. When that happens, they'll be all over him.
 
Next gen has to save us from the inflation era. ATP needs to regulate racquet and string tech and bring back variety of court speeds. Media needs to let players breathe and be themselves instead of robots.

All 3 need to occur to save tennis
 
Last edited:

crazyups

Professional
Next gen has to save us from the inflation era. ATP needs to regulate racquet and string tech and bring back variety of court speeds. Media needs to let patients breathe and be themselves instead of robots.

All 3 need to occur to save tennis
If the lost generation "saves" us that would shut down the biggest story in tennis in the last 20 years, if the ATP regulates racquet and string tech then another organization will allow it and the ATP will die.
 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
Djokovic is the only one, who can save men's tennis
Federer's chances of keeping a record in the number of GS titles are lost after the 2019 US Open final. Federer is 38 years old, the hopes of expanding his collection of GS titles are small and and Nadal thanks triumph at the US Open approached him on the difference at only one GS title. It is very unlikely that Nadal will no longer add a GS title, and on the contrary what is very likely is that Nadal will make every effort to break the Federer's record.

The only one who can prevent Nadal from setting a record in the number of GS titles for many years ahead is Djokovic. Nole has 16 GS titles, 3 less than Nadal and 4 less than Federer, but is the youngest of the Big 3. Like Rafa, Nole has the ambition to reach the GS record. Now the race about GS record is only in their hands. Who wins this race it will keep the record for many years. I estimate that Medvedev, Tsitsipas or FAA can will reach into the 5-10 GS gained titles range, but no more.

Nadal is a very divisive person on the tennis scene. At the competitive tennis forum MTF Nadal has won many times a poll 'Most Disliked Player'. Djokovic is not more popular than Nadal, but will be more acceptable to the tennis world as a GS all-time leader.
I do not think you mean "save tennis."

I believe that you mean "save Fed's record."
They are not the same.
 
If the lost generation "saves" us that would shut down the biggest story in tennis in the last 20 years, if the ATP regulates racquet and string tech then another organization will allow it and the ATP will die.
ATP tour is basically a monopoly, it’s not so easy to create a parallel tour or league. Has been tried and failed in many sports.
 

Zara

Legend
You make a good point, and probably we ought to use the word "talent" more holistically. But plenty of users (and commentators) do in fact use it to refer to racket skills. Personally, I have a preference for players whose skills are mostly racket-based, and a strong negative preference against players whose success relies heavily on general athletic prowess. I'm somewhere in the middle for players whose success relies significantly on mental strength, whether that be in the form of tactics or nervelessness. If we used a broader definition of talent, it would still be the case that there is some luck involved in success, so it doesn't necessarily follow that the person who has better results is by definition more talented.

Certainly, the fans are often unhealthily obsessed. And probably the players are, too.
It's funny you say that because all this time you had a great liking of Monica while you simply detested Steffi. And Monica actually falls more under that bolded part than Graf. Or perhaps something changed in you but I do trust that you'd go with someone whose skills would be more racket-based.

This then poses this interesting question - what about Pete who had a bit of both (both tennis skills and mental clutchness, athletic power, etc.)? And given your preference, you should have been a fan but from what I recall, you're rather neutral. Or what about Del Potro? I wouldn't say he is exactly Sampras, Federer or McEnroe caliber skill-wise and yet you are a big fan.

Quick question - when Federer experienced that crushing defeat at Wimbledon, what do you think was going on in his mind? What do you think crushed him the most? Would this have been just as much crushing if it had happened in the semi-final?
 

Zara

Legend
What unhealthy feelings exactly, can you elaborate? I find your posts very insightful.
One can't deny that these players are obsessed with the slam record and it has gotten to the point where things are more painful than fun. Ask yourself this question - is Federer happy with the way things are right now? helterskelter himself admitted that it would make Federer happy if he were to win one more. That does imply he's not happy (and he is not). And what would this extra slam bring? We all know. It would create a bit more distance for the other two who are chasing it.

For similar reasons, it won't make Nadal or Djokovic happy either if they are not able to break the record. Most fans of the big three are all suffering as a result because they just got so caught up in the game and there now doesn't seem to be a way out of it either. It's a very unhealthy obsession that must have done more damages than good.

It's funny that people seek immortality through all these records - to be known forever - even though eventually all of this will fade away as nothing lasts forever.

I could have elaborated better but I am rather tired after a long day.
 

tonylg

Hall of Fame
I don't think Federer is unhappy. If he is, he certainly doesn't show it. He has a natural tendency to get grumpy sometimes and would have certainly been disappointed after each of his crushing Wimbledon final losses (there has been more than one), but if he can play and wants to .. why shouldn't he?

I do think fans are obsessed, particularly younger ones. I was a tennis fan before Federer was born and I'll hopefully be a fan after he retires. I say hopefully, because I don't watch clay court tennis and frankly, the thing tennis needs saving from is not the stupid slam race, but the fact that all tennis looks like clay court tennis these days.
 

Enceladus

Hall of Fame
I do not think you mean "save tennis."

I believe that you mean "save Fed's record."
They are not the same.
You are wrong. The postscript of thread's name is to - save men's tennis ahead of Nadal's gain of record in number of GS titles and settings this record for many years forward. For part of tennis fans like me or @vive le beau jeu !, Nadal's gain of record in number of GS titles will been a bad news. Federer's chances of keeping the record are lost, and Djokovic is the only one who can keep Nadal from keeping this record for many years.
 

hoodjem

G.O.A.T.
There was men's tennis before Fed and his record number of slams. There will be men's tennis after.


There is no equation between "men's tennis" and "Nadal's gain of record in number of GS titles".
 
Last edited:

Backspin1183

G.O.A.T.
You are wrong. The postscript of thread's name is to - save men's tennis ahead of Nadal's gain of record in number of GS titles and settings this record for many years forward. For part of tennis fans like me or @vive le beau jeu !, Nadal's gain of record in number of GS titles will been a bad news. Federer's chances of keeping the record are lost, and Djokovic is the only one who can keep Nadal from keeping this record for many years.
Then let's hope Nadal breaks the Slam record soon. Online forums are so much more interesting with salty whiny "tennis fans."
 

Zara

Legend
Btw, I meant to write this before since we're talking about unhealthy obsession and what not.

It's very clear to me that out of these big 3 players, Nadal is the happiest and most likely to end up being the Goat. He is never supremely crushed no matter how big the losses are and has this amazing ability to forget about things and bounce back in a steady manner. Even Sampras mentioned it in one of his interviews. He said, you can't dwell on bad points, bad losses etc. as Sampras wouldn't and he somehow saw the same ability in Nadal. This is a unique and not to mention, a rare quality.

Federer is unhappy because he wanted to be the GOAT but with both Nadal and Djokovic chasing it and one of them being so darn close doesn't really give you the satisfaction. And it doesn't really help either when every day things are getting slowly and yet, steadily out of your reach as you grow older and older. I bet though a part of him is still happy because these two players also took him to new heights and I am sure he's very grateful for that.

Djokovic's challenge is, not only he is still a few slams behind but also, he is not as much loved as Federer and Nadal and he has to deal with it on court during a match and that's just downright rough. We will never know really as to what goes on in his mind when he sees such opposition but I can feel how tough it is, so a big part of me always sends him complete unconditional love. But it's not his fault. By the time he surfaced as a true Goat contender, most fans were taken by Fedal and they didn't like this one bit and mostly supported him as they saw fit with a certain agenda, but these are not true supporters. I am sure he still has a big fanbase but what he experiences in big matches is another matter. I just don't see how that can make one happy.

And it's especially crushing when some posters have the audacity to point out from time to time how much he is unloved or how much he tries to be loved. If things are to be just and fair; balanced and equal then there will be answers for those too. I don't think the Universe supports even one bit of the negative support. It's there for a reason, yes but it's not to promote it as it's to guide you in the right direction.
 
Last edited:
It's funny you say that because all this time you had a great liking of Monica while you simply detested Steffi. And Monica actually falls more under that bolded part than Graf. Or perhaps something changed in you but I do trust that you'd go with someone whose skills would be more racket-based.

This then poses this interesting question - what about Pete who had a bit of both (both tennis skills and mental clutchness, athletic power, etc.)? And given your preference, you should have been a fan but from what I recall, you're rather neutral. Or what about Del Potro? I wouldn't say he is exactly Sampras, Federer or McEnroe caliber skill-wise and yet you are a big fan.

Quick question - when Federer experienced that crushing defeat at Wimbledon, what do you think was going on in his mind? What do you think crushed him the most? Would this have been just as much crushing if it had happened in the semi-final?
So, I would generally divide skills into three main types: technical (these are the ones I referred to as "tennis specific), strategic/mental (how prone to nerves is the player and how good at rethinking their strategy), and finally general athletic (how fit and strong is the player). In my view, both Seles and Del Potro are weakest in the third set, as neither is a great athlete. Sure, Del Potro doesn't have anything like the wide range of racket skills as the players you mentioned but he has very good groundstroke technique and can hit a forehand like almost nobody. Seles, also, had excellent groundstroke technique that combined power and accuracy, but she was rather slow, especially later in her career. By contrast, Graf was far quicker around the court. So, it seems to me that Seles and Del Potro fit what I said better than you suggested. For all that, though, we all know that our views of players are mostly non-rational and emotional and not the product of reasoning. We can after the fact attempt to justify them, but it's never the real reason. And, for me at least, I'll likely never again like a player as much as I liked the ones who I first knew of in my childhood.

For both Sampras and Federer, I agree that they are players I would ordinarily like, and I do quite like both of them - I would say I'm slightly more positive than neutral about both - but I find it really hard to cheer for someone who wins all the time. I was most fond of Seles after her stabbing.

Since you bring up Graf, I should note for the record that one of the reasons I am such a big fan of hers is that she is very much the Bull of the women's circuit. They are both exemplary sportspeople, who have delightful and modest demeanors, and handle their defeats with a dignity and grace that is very rarely seen. Not only are they exceptionally unwilling to engage in gamesmanship of any sort, but they also always refuse ever to admit that their few "defeats" were in fact moral victories caused by the cruel and unending list of injuries that unfairly afflicted both of them throughout their entire careers. It is only thanks to the stellar work of their fans that mere mortals such as you and I even know how debilitating both Graf and Bull's injuries were. For example, I used to post on a message board in which another poster was called Tomoaki. He once produced a long list of injuries that Graf had suffered that amounted to more than 100. However, Graf was so gracious in defeat that she had never once revealed any of them. I'm not quite sure how he uncovered this rare and precious information. Thankfully, many of Bull's fans have done similarly stellar work on his behalf, so we all know now that, much though Bull tries to hide it, he is in fact both unbeaten and unbeatable.
 
When djokovic keeps winning they say someone needs to save tennis when Rafa wins they save Djokovic needs to save tennis.I am sensing all this is coming from some FANboys from a certain group.
 

Start da Game

Professional
Rafa has a good chance of beating Fed's 20 Slams total now and if he does, well and good. Look at the totals of Fed's total Slam match wins, mind, they're incredible too.

Records are made to be broken in sports though.
Novak might get there too.

Fed doesn't have a divine right to be Slam leader and 20 is an astonishing total already.
What it won't do is take away from Fed's greatness if his total IS surpassed, because Fed, Rafa and Novak are three of the greatest ever, so I don't really understand all the fuss about it myself.

It's the fan-atics and fan-antics. :)
he won’t even save his own arse at AO next year......that title will be under 3-way attack by med-rafa-berrettini......
 

Zara

Legend
So, I would generally divide skills into three main types: technical (these are the ones I referred to as "tennis specific), strategic/mental (how prone to nerves is the player and how good at rethinking their strategy), and finally general athletic (how fit and strong is the player). In my view, both Seles and Del Potro are weakest in the third set, as neither is a great athlete. Sure, Del Potro doesn't have anything like the wide range of racket skills as the players you mentioned but he has very good groundstroke technique and can hit a forehand like almost nobody. Seles, also, had excellent groundstroke technique that combined power and accuracy, but she was rather slow, especially later in her career. By contrast, Graf was far quicker around the court. So, it seems to me that Seles and Del Potro fit what I said better than you suggested. For all that, though, we all know that our views of players are mostly non-rational and emotional and not the product of reasoning. We can after the fact attempt to justify them, but it's never the real reason. And, for me at least, I'll likely never again like a player as much as I liked the ones who I first knew of in my childhood.

For both Sampras and Federer, I agree that they are players I would ordinarily like, and I do quite like both of them - I would say I'm slightly more positive than neutral about both - but I find it really hard to cheer for someone who wins all the time. I was most fond of Seles after her stabbing.

Since you bring up Graf, I should note for the record that one of the reasons I am such a big fan of hers is that she is very much the Bull of the women's circuit. They are both exemplary sportspeople, who have delightful and modest demeanors, and handle their defeats with a dignity and grace that is very rarely seen. Not only are they exceptionally unwilling to engage in gamesmanship of any sort, but they also always refuse ever to admit that their few "defeats" were in fact moral victories caused by the cruel and unending list of injuries that unfairly afflicted both of them throughout their entire careers. It is only thanks to the stellar work of their fans that mere mortals such as you and I even know how debilitating both Graf and Bull's injuries were. For example, I used to post on a message board in which another poster was called Tomoaki. He once produced a long list of injuries that Graf had suffered that amounted to more than 100. However, Graf was so gracious in defeat that she had never once revealed any of them. I'm not quite sure how he uncovered this rare and precious information. Thankfully, many of Bull's fans have done similarly stellar work on his behalf, so we all know now that, much though Bull tries to hide it, he is in fact both unbeaten and unbeatable.
First, I need to tell you that I liked your post for the first two paragraphs but there were some elements to like in the third one as well. You said it best that our views of players are mostly non-rational and emotional. For reasons why I took a 180 when I liked Murray (or even Hewitt) after Sampras. This was clearly an emotional choice. This is now no longer hard to understand, isn't it?

I liked Graf because of her forehand (also her slices) and she seemed quite fluid around the court but I dug Seles' game too (strong and powerful that gave it a nice contrast. Does Bianca somehow reminds you of Seles btw?). Although admittedly I never saw her when she was threatening Graf a great deal early on and only caught the end of it. In any case, I feel I got too influenced and started disliking Graf to the point I ended up cheering for Hinigs in that notorious FO match against Graf. Even Graf's mother emailed me and asked me why I took such a vicious turn. I don't know if I ever disclosed this before. In my defense, however, I had a genuine likings of Hingis. Loved her game and found her too adorable.

But of course, both you and Tomoaki took things to a new level (almost artistic) with your disliking of Graf and Agassi (I paid more attention to Tomoaki's bashing of Agassi than Graf I must admit and you can't blame me given the fact that I was a fan of Sampras and Agassi was our main rival).

I still feel you should go a bit easy on the 'bull'. He's not as terrible as, say, Agassi. :p
 

tonylg

Hall of Fame
Well then the ATP will lose a lot of fans if they regulate racquet and string tech.
Totally disagree. Most will never know and players will adapt. A lot of leagues regulate tech. Aluminum bats in baseball or goalie pads in hockey for instance
Spot on. The majority of fans would have no idea. The people having a cry are mostly under 30s who grew up not learning how to play inside the service line and seem to hate anyone with the skill to do so.

The powers that be have sat on their hands and let tennis devolve into slogging. They were quite active in ensuring equipment didn't change the character of the game until 20 years ago and since then they've dropped the ball.


It's import to note that the ITF saw this coming back in 1978 and basically banned string savers that grabbed the ball. Here's the rationale:

The spirit of this rule is to prevent undue spin on the ball that would result in a change in the character of the game

Undue spin is here thanks to poly strings .. and it's no different to aluminium baseline bats or cricketers using sandpaper.
 
First, I need to tell you that I liked your post for the first two paragraphs but there were some elements to like in the third one as well. You said it best that our views of players are mostly non-rational and emotional. For reasons why I took a 180 when I liked Murray (or even Hewitt) after Sampras. This was clearly an emotional choice. This is now no longer hard to understand, isn't it?

I liked Graf because of her forehand (also her slices) and she seemed quite fluid around the court but I dug Seles' game too (strong and powerful that gave it a nice contrast. Does Bianca somehow reminds you of Seles btw?). Although admittedly I never saw her when she was threatening Graf a great deal early on and only caught the end of it. In any case, I feel I got too influenced and started disliking Graf to the point I ended up cheering for Hinigs in that notorious FO match against Graf. Even Graf's mother emailed me and asked me why I took such a vicious turn. I don't know if I ever disclosed this before. In my defense, however, I had a genuine likings of Hingis. Loved her game and found her too adorable.

But of course, both you and Tomoaki took things to a new level (almost artistic) with your disliking of Graf and Agassi (I paid more attention to Tomoaki's bashing of Agassi than Graf I must admit and you can't blame me given the fact that I was a fan of Sampras and Agassi was our main rival).

I still feel you should go a bit easy on the 'bull'. He's not as terrible as, say, Agassi. :p
Tomoaki liked Graf - hence he kept the list of her terrible injuries.

Andreescu does remind me a bit of Seles, yes.
 
Top