the more he won....the more haters he developed
Djokovic: "My Mistakes Are Less Forgiven"
- Thread starter Krish872007
- Start date
clayqueen
Bionic Poster
You have to appreciate that tennis had split down the middle between Fedal before Djokovic joined them at the very top so there was no room left for him to occupy unless he attracted new fans. With Roger's insane popularity when Rafa started he developed his own fan base and for some time the pundits were all still sold on Federer but Rafa has the charisma and x-factor that is hard to ignore and even Roger said he came to appreciate the rivalry, which he wasn't keen on in the beginning, because it gave his career more dimension.
ScentOfDefeat
G.O.A.T.
Hey, thanks for your reply.
I don't really have time to respond in a similar or comparable way, so I'll just say a few things and then hopefully we can end the conversation, because I have a feeling we just have different interpretations and probably won't ever agree (which is ok), so there's really no point in prolonging it any further.
My assessment is also based on his behaviour, but I try to put emphasis on both the circumstances and his own, idiosyncratic reaction to them (which, to me, is an assessment that goes beyond judgement and into the sphere of a more objective understanding), rather than privileging one of these domains to the exclusion of the other. Solely ascribing victimhood of circumstances to Djokovic is exactly what I am not doing, although I had to emphasise that side of my argument in response to your dismissal of any contextual/historical framework. I would have emphasised the notion of victimhood as a victim complex, which he abundantly uses to both his advantage and detriment, if you were arguing from the standpoint of pure context and no agency (which is what you ascribed to me).
Analogy is, of course, not saying two things are the same, but that you can find comparable elements within two different contexts. The example of slavery, though admittedly in poor taste, was used to demonstrate it is not advisable to see effects as causes, or to see present-day phenomena detached both from their history and their dynamic relationship with other phenomena. I'm sure being Federer and being Nadal presents specific kinds of challenges, but not challenges of the same kind as being in Djokovic's skin.
I tried to put forth an explanation that may (or may not, but at least I tried) withstand the test of time, as context changes and so does the status quo. If in the future this trio came to be reinterpreted, and the majority opinion became "Djokovic is the GOAT and the hero who broke the duopoly when most people were against him", with people looking at the exact same behaviours you see today but interpreting them from a radically opposite point of view ("it is what it is, can't you see?"), my current interpretation would still hold as a more complex and balanced assessment. It's not just about "what we can see" that is so obvious to us, otherwise Kyrgios wouldn't split tennis fandom down the middle, or Nadal wouldn't be seen, simultaneously, as extremely talented and/or just a grinder (why not both, I ask both fans and detractors?).
I'm not saying you're a bad faith actor, I'm just saying you're playing the fandom game, which is perfectly legitimate in a tennis forum. A Djokovic fan would point out his ability to show "humility, control negative emotions, care for the well-being of others and not just self, etc" and the moments Federer and Nadal were shown lacking in these categories (you can find just about anything, they're human after all). I don't think there's anything especially humble/generous/sportsmanlike about Federer or Nadal, as I don't think there's anything particularly arrogant/angry/unsportsmanlike about Djokovic; nothing (outside of a specific historical context) that would objectively warrant Federer to win the Edberg sportsmanship award more times than Edberg himself (when you never saw Edberg angry or showing unsportsmanlike conduct to any degree ever, whereas you can easily point to angry and borderline unsportsmanlike behaviour in Federer), or that would warrant Nadal to be seen as the humblest player to ever grace a court. All these characteristics are exaggerated and an effect of their achievements against one another at the top of the game.
And of course, I never said Djokovic shouldn't be held accountable. I just don't think these things make him especially villainous, in the same way I'm sceptical about Federer's or Nadal's inherent virtue. You mistake my position of "these are normal people under extraordinary circumstances, caught inside a narrative that extends beyond themselves" for Djokovic favouritism. Under my interpretation, Djokovic is neither the hero he is for a smaller (compared to the other two) fanbase nor the villain he is for a considerable amount of people, and the same applies to the other two, even though the supporters/detractors ratio is reversed.
I'm sceptical about the exaggerated representation of all top players, whether it's for good or for bad: there's nothing to suggest, except if you eliminate any contextual-historical analysis and only look at the virtues of X and Y (Federer and Nadal) and compare them to the flaws of Z (Djokovic), that they're anything but average people whose good actions and mistakes have been interpreted through the lens of the halcyon days of duopoly, their specific arrival to the game, the way they present themselves, but also common stereotypes about nationality, temperament, etc.
I won't discuss head-to-head or their overlapping careers, as I don't see how it connects to this subject. All I wanted to show is how the mainstream story that is told about Djokovic and his relationship to the other members of the "big three" seems to be internalised by Djokovic himself, in such a way that it is both his strength and his weakness. I think that was made clear in my first (short) intervention where I described the two dynamics (one external, the other internal). Head-to-heads and who should be considered best or worst, I'll leave that to specialised fan wars.
Last edited:
chrischris
G.O.A.T.
His father was a real gentleman. So Nole maybe is a bit influenced by him...
Thriller
Hall of Fame
With respect, it is not about your feelings. Or mine for that matter. It is about the rules that are in place before the tournament starts that the players agree to abide by.
Djokovic clearly broke the rules by hitting a line judge in anger. It clearly wasn't intentional but that makes no difference. He had to go and any player would have gone in the same circumstances.
6-10 losing record against Nadal in slams is dominating? LOL!
Nadal owns Djokovic in slams. That is what GOATs prize most and fight for. Beating Nadal in mostly meaningless 3 set matches does little for his legacy. Nadal dominates Novak in the big ones.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
Nadal owns baby gluten Djokovic and at RG overall
Since 2011, Djokovic has destroyed Nadal on HC and grass surfaces,and kept clay respectable.
Nadal beat the alleged Hardcourt Goat in 2 US Open Finals. One of them in 2013 (so you can't even use "since 2011" for that.LOL).
That's embarrassing for Novak, who would never sniff a victory against Rafa in the final of the clay slam.
Rafa is the the superior big match, BO5 player. That is just reality
IMHO there can be no comparison with Mcenroe as far as on court behavior is concerned. JMac was obnoxious in his behavior.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
The USO h2h is circumstance only. For example Nadal ducking Djokovic in 2015, 2016, 2018 and Djokovic being injured in 2017 and 2019. He destroyed Nadal on any non clay surface , what is it, 15-0 in HC sets won since 2013?
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...adal-since-2011-9-years-of-domination.667234/
It looks similar to Nadal's domination of Federer till 2015
The USO h2h is circumstance only. For example Nadal ducking Djokovic in 2015, 2016, 2018 and Djokovic being injured in 2017 and 2019. He destroyed Nadal on any non clay surface , what is it, 15-0 in HC sets won since 2013?
Actually in between Novak had following run against Nadal: 6-3 6-3; 7-5 6-3 6-1; 6-2 6-2; 6-3 6-3;6-1 6-2; 7-6(5) 6-2; 7-5 7-6(4)
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
Djokovic has thoroughly destroyed Nadal off clay since 2011, and dominated him on clay in his 2 best seasons. No amount of vultured weak USO titles will change that fact.
10-6.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
14-4
clayqueen
Bionic Poster
Which word would you use to describe Djokovic's behaviour?
Is of no historical importance. History will judge things like slam count and 10-6.
Your guy needs to catch up!
LOL!
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
Born in 1956. Came out in 1981 and turned 25 in October.
I don't know where you live or how old you are, but this time you are flat out wrong.
Moment #2: Martina Navratilova comes out - Outsports
Part of Outsports’ series on our 100 most important moments in gay sports history.Tennis, 1981. You know her by one word: Martina. She is not only one of
www.outsports.com
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
Nadal will never be the GOAT, he lacks in too many areas except clay. Djokovic is ahead of him right now as he has mastered tennis.
Outright silly. Behavior born out of Attention deficit e.g. eating grass, drawing heart on clay, tearing up clothes, asking ball boy to sit with him while he holds the umbrella, victory speech going like "Thank you for letting me win .." His useless obsession to be loved as much as Fedal around the globe ends up in him trying to do things that don't seem natural at all. And I guess it rebounds back in equal measures when he cannot keep up with this overtly good act often ending up receiving negative attention.
IMHO if he had not got into this image building business and just remained true to himself he would have been much better off with people who don't like him.
As a fan of both Novak and Rafa, I find this statement rather misleading. You may well feel that Rafa outshines Novak in the GOAT stakes. Fair enough. I might not agree fully there, but there certainly are points to support the contention- just as there are to support the reverse.
But what is illogical is to throw around terms like "Awful H2H v Nadal at Majors" per your statement above.
Nadal leads 5--4 in GS finals, 10--6 in all GS matches overall. Out of these, the h2h at Roland Garros, which is clearly Rafa's most dominant surface, stands at 7--1. The h2h in the other slams is 5--3 in Novak's favour. How on earth can this qualify as an "awful" h2h in majors?
And if one gets into breaking down Novak--Federer's h2h pre and post 2011, well, it could then be argued that a lot of the earlier advantage Fed had. was when he was at his peak and Novak was still coming into his own as a big match player. It cuts both ways. I still don't understand why one can't root for one's favourite without denigrating his chief rival(s).
Similar threads
