Djokovic reportedly opts out of Paris Masters, doubtful for ATP Finals

Better_Call_Raul said:
The Djoker wants to win more Majors. That's it. Not Masters. Just Majors. That is his standard. He believes that he still has a chance against Sincaraz in Majors.
He is not going to hang around just for fun like Murray. If Sincaraz starts beating him badly, he will immediately retire.
Click to expand...
I disagree. He will aim for even a 250/500 tournament if he can win it. Majors might be most important but I think he will take anything he gets even if it a small title. He has the major record anyway so whether he wins another or not is just an added bonus now. He enjoys playing still and being hears his first priority.
 
NeutralFan said:
Who's the third one?Z or med?
Click to expand...
Alcaraz is 2nd favourite. Yeah he might have struggled this season in both HC majors but for me he’s clearly the biggest threat to sinner in draw. He does get upset early though sometimes but if he goes deep into draw we know he can turn into a monster and win it. Zverev/Meddy don’t have it to win a slam in my view. That why I still might have a 37 and half year old Djokovic ahead of them which isn’t a great reflection on them! lol
 
Hitman said:
Alcaraz did win two slams this year, and has shown he can win on all surfaces. I think Sinner is the more solid consistent player of the two, so will likely be the guy who dominates the number one ranking, but Alcaraz will be right there, and it will be hard to stop him from going slamless season to season.
Click to expand...
I think they could split the slams again unless another young contender emerges.
 
Hitman said:
How many hip injuries did Wawrinka who won as many slams as Guga have at the time. LMAO at 3 slam winner being a journeyman.
Click to expand...
Stan was a journeyman up until his very late 20s and Djokovic lost a slam final to him. Kuerten is a clay ATG who rolled back the years, hip or no hip.
 
fedfan24 said:
Stan was a journeyman up until his very late 20s and Djokovic lost a slam final to him. Kuerten is a clay ATG who rolled back the years, hip or no hip.
Click to expand...
Rolled back the years....you mean the way Federer and Nadal turned back the years but still lost to Djokovic? OK. I'll take that.

And it is complete nonsense to call Wawrinka a journeyman by the time 2013 came around, his RG 2015 has been ranked in some polls as the toughest win. So journeyman wins three slams, makes another final, and makes numerous semi finals also. Your Djokovic hate is ridiculous, he won the race, get it over it.
 
Hitman said:
Rolled back the years....you mean the way Federer and Nadal turned back the years but still lost to Djokovic? OK. I'll take that.

And it is complete nonsense to call Wawrinka a journeyman by the time 2013 came around, his RG 2015 has been ranked in some polls as the toughest win. So journeyman wins three slams, makes another final, and makes numerous semi finals also. Your Djokovic hate is ridiculous, he won the race, get it over it.
Click to expand...

I think Wawa arrived at AO 2013, he should have won 2013 AO
 
NeutralFan said:
I think Wawa arrived at AO 2013, he should have won 2013 AO
Click to expand...
He was most certainly on the scene as the Stanimal in 2013. That AO 2013 was his coming out party. He became a legit slam contender from that point on, until his injury in 2017.
 
Hitman said:
Rolled back the years....you mean the way Federer and Nadal turned back the years but still lost to Djokovic? OK. I'll take that.

And it is complete nonsense to call Wawrinka a journeyman by the time 2013 came around, his RG 2015 has been ranked in some polls as the toughest win. So journeyman wins three slams, makes another final, and makes numerous semi finals also. Your Djokovic hate is ridiculous, he won the race, get it over it.
Click to expand...
The only time Federer turned back the clock post racket change would be likes of Shanghai 14, Cincy 15, IW 17…. Tournaments he comfortably won going through Djokovic or Nadal.

No prime version of Nadal or Federer loses to a Wawrinka calibre player on clay. He’s a step below Kuerten, Soderling and so on. Djokovic simply isn’t as good as the other two at their best, regardless of how many 250 level slams he’s won in recent years.
 
It's not like Novak hasn't said the opposite of what he will actually do regarding tournament participation. After his rg 2018 qf loss to cechinato - described on rg.com as a pulsating rollercoaster match- he said he may not even play Wimbledon. He of course played.
 
inflation_era said:
yes, mentally Fed can be bad at times, and it cost him a lot. But tenniswise alone, he's the greatest player to ever pick up a racquet.

But Fed was right with what he said afterwards, it was a lucky shot. Just like Djokovic was lucky to win W2019.
Click to expand...

Still living in denial?

He could be your personal favorite best player ever, no problem, enjoy.

But according to all tennis reality, records, stats, facts and all that stuff, Djokovic is the goat, case closed.
 
Bastion said:
Yes, Fed was such a great player, no doubt, but not the best.

24 > 20

428 > 310

72 > 54

40 > 28

27 > 23

7 > 6

8 > 5
Click to expand...
When you consider that Federer was playing with perhaps the biggest disadvantage in the modern baseline game, i.e., playing with a one-handed back, these numbers look pretty good for fedr. Relative to everyone who played with the one-handed backhand in the modern era, Federer is far and away ahead of everyone.
 
Hitman said:
Rolled back the years....you mean the way Federer and Nadal turned back the years but still lost to Djokovic? OK. I'll take that.

And it is complete nonsense to call Wawrinka a journeyman by the time 2013 came around, his RG 2015 has been ranked in some polls as the toughest win. So journeyman wins three slams, makes another final, and makes numerous semi finals also. Your Djokovic hate is ridiculous, he won the race, get it over it.
Click to expand...
Before he won his first slam, Stan won practically nothing. Even now he has won fewer than 20 total titles. True, when he was on especially after he won his first slam, he could be awesome. Certainly, his 2015 FO was an all-time great win.
 
thrust said:
Before he won his first slam, Stan won practically nothing. Even now he has won fewer than 20 total titles. True, when he was on especially after he won his first slam, he could be awesome. Certainly, his 2015 FO was an all-time great win.
Click to expand...
That's mean he was a career journeyman. When he beat Djokovic, he was one of the most dominant players on the planet for several years. 2013 to 2017 he was right up in the mix on all surfaces, he even made multiple Wimbledon quarter finals and it took guys like Federer to stop him. Three slams, MC, Davis Cup, Olympic Doubles Gold, several masters finals, and RG RU is not journeyman. Journeyman is someone like Rosol.
 
Hitman said:
That's mean he was a career journeyman. When he beat Djokovic, he was one of the most dominant players on the planet for several years. 2013 to 2017 he was right up in the mix on all surfaces, he even made multiple Wimbledon quarter finals and it took guys like Federer to stop him. Three slams, MC, Davis Cup, Olympic Doubles Gold, several masters finals, and RG RU is not journeyman. Journeyman is someone like Rosol.
Click to expand...
He’s still a good tier below Kuerten on clay, at RG especially. Pretty bad to lose a slam final. Federer in prime form destroyed the same player in 2011.
 
fedfan24 said:
He’s still a good tier below Kuerten on clay, at RG especially. Pretty bad to lose a slam final. Federer in prime form destroyed the same player in 2011.
Click to expand...
Del Potro is several tiers lower and he beat Federer and smacked him off the court in what was Federer's most iconic year and where he was still very much the best player on the planet. And i don't care about all this tier talk, one guy had a broken hip, and was well past his prime, Guga's best days were three to four years earlier, you know this with all the peak and prime talk you keep coming up with, how about holding yourself accountable to your own measuring of things. It was a terrible loss for Federer to be crushed in straights, he couldn't even take one set to a tie break in his peak year. At least Djokovic lost to healthy players. So, no.
 
Hitman said:
Del Potro is several tiers lower and he beat Federer and smacked him off the court in what was Federer's most iconic year and where he was still very much the best player on the planet. And i don't care about all this tier talk, one guy had a broken hip, and was well past his prime, Guga's best days were three to four years earlier, you know this with all the peak and prime talk you keep coming up with, how about holding yourself accountable to your own measuring of things. It was a terrible loss for Federer to be crushed in straights, he couldn't even take one set to a tie break in his peak year. At least Djokovic lost to healthy players. So, no.
Click to expand...
Kuerten played prime tennis that day. You would know had you watched the match and not starting your tennis viewing from 2011.

Del potro on HC is about the same as losing to Stan in 2014 and 2013 without the cheating. Kuerten is a step above both as an actual clay ATG.
 
Hitman said:
That's mean he was a career journeyman. When he beat Djokovic, he was one of the most dominant players on the planet for several years. 2013 to 2017 he was right up in the mix on all surfaces, he even made multiple Wimbledon quarter finals and it took guys like Federer to stop him. Three slams, MC, Davis Cup, Olympic Doubles Gold, several masters finals, and RG RU is not journeyman. Journeyman is someone like Rosol.
Click to expand...
I was primarily referring to Stan's career before he won his first slam. True, he could be very dangerous, but he was too inconsistent which is why he hasn't won many tournaments. Sure, it is great to reach quarters and semis, but winning finals is what makes a player an all-time great player.
 
fedfan24 said:
Kuerten played prime tennis that day. You would know had you watched the match and not starting your tennis viewing from 2011.

Del potro on HC is about the same as losing to Stan in 2014 and 2013 without the cheating. Kuerten is a step above both as an actual clay ATG.
Click to expand...
Ah, so what you are saying is that players can play prime level well past their prime, even with broken hips.....Good. Because with almost 100 winners, Federer played prime level tennis at W 2019. Thank you for confirming.
 
Hitman said:
Ah, so what you are saying is that players can play prime level well past their prime, even with broken hips.....Good. Because with almost 100 winners, Federer played prime level tennis at W 2019. Thank you for confirming.
Click to expand...
Well if you say Fed played prime tennis in W19 you wouldn't be the only one. Some clearly think so.
 
thrust said:
I was primarily referring to Stan's career before he won his first slam. True, he could be very dangerous, but he was too inconsistent which is why he hasn't won many tournaments. Sure, it is great to reach quarters and semis, but winning finals is what makes a player an all-time great player.
Click to expand...
Well, Federer was a bit of a bum before W 2003 also. The good thing for him is, he picked it up much earlier in his career and became the legend that he is. Wawrinka always had the talent, but it wasn't until Norman got him with him that it all came together.
 
RS said:
Well if you say Fed played prime tennis in W19 you wouldn't be the only one. Some clearly think so.
Click to expand...
Sure, you can't have it both ways. Either we have periods of peak and prime play, or we have peak and prime performances that can happen at various times over the career, depending on how things happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
I figured that he wouldn't play in Paris but I'm a bit surprised that he's likely opting out of the ATP Finals, those are almost like a 5th slam.

In any event, he should probably focus his efforts on being fresh for the 2025 season and the AO. I wonder if Nadal officially retiring has gotten into his head and he's starting to realize that his time is near as well.
 
NYTennisfan said:
I figured that he wouldn't play in Paris but I'm a bit surprised that he's likely opting out of the ATP Finals, those are almost like a 5th slam.

In any event, he should probably focus his efforts on being fresh for the 2025 season and the AO. I wonder if Nadal officially retiring has gotten into his head and he's starting to realize that his time is near as well.
Click to expand...
I hope he skips Turin.
 
Hitman said:
Ah, so what you are saying is that players can play prime level well past their prime, even with broken hips.....Good. Because with almost 100 winners, Federer played prime level tennis at W 2019. Thank you for confirming.
Click to expand...
Of course. Federer played prime tennis at Shanghai 14, Cincy 15, IW 17 for example.

W19 was good but he was as slow as a truck by then.
 
ghostofMecir said:
When you consider that Federer was playing with perhaps the biggest disadvantage in the modern baseline game, i.e., playing with a one-handed back, these numbers look pretty good for fedr. Relative to everyone who played with the one-handed backhand in the modern era, Federer is far and away ahead of everyone.

OK, then the same could be said about Sampras far ahead of Federer ... and Borg far ahead of Sampras ... Laver far ahead of Sampras... and on we go.
Click to expand...
 
Zardoz7/12 said:
Novak Djokovic, the defending champion at the Rolex Paris Masters, has reportedly decided that he will not be defending his title while his participation in the ATP Finals is also in doubt.
Although he played in the Six Kings Slam last weekend in Riyadh, including a final clash with Rafael Nadal, Djokovic has withdrawn from the defence of his title at the final Masters 1000 of the season, the Rolex Paris Masters, which begins next Monday, according to Serbian media outlet Sport Klub.

Article

Last year, Djokovic, the tournament's record winner, claimed his seventh title by beating Grigor Dimitrov in the final.

No particular reason has been given, but Sport Klub reports that the Serb, although in a strong position to qualify for the ATP Finals in Turin, may not compete there either. He could also miss the ATP 250 tournament in Belgrade.
Click to expand...
Too bad for him, as his only chance to win his 100th title will be in best-of-three-set tournaments.
 
inflation_era said:
No, slams are most important but you can't lump them altogether else you might mistakingly think a clay courter is GOAT.
Click to expand...
No GS titles are the most important, you cannot just pick and choose certain GS events to determine the best.

24 > 22 > 20

End of debate ... again.
 
Bastion said:
No GS titles are the most important, you cannot just pick and choose certain GS events to determine the best.

24 > 22 > 20

End of debate ... again.
Click to expand...

No. If Nadal were to add 5 more RG to his haul and Djokovic none, I would still say Djokovic > Nadal overall on all surfaces.

Therefore, Federer is GOAT. End of debate.
 
inflation_era said:
No. If Nadal were to add 5 more RG to his haul and Djokovic none, I would still say Djokovic > Nadal overall on all surfaces.

Therefore, Federer is GOAT. End of debate.
Click to expand...
Fedrer is third best only. If you are trying to say 20>22 and 20>24 sorry to say you are going on wrong direction. It don't matter you are fan of rafa or roger or novak....but if you are saying rafa cant be GOAT player because he has acheived more on clay then you are not giving credit for hard work.
 
gamelovergold said:
Fedrer is third best only. If you are trying to say 20>22 and 20>24 sorry to say you are going on wrong direction. It don't matter you are fan of rafa or roger or novak....but if you are saying rafa cant be GOAT player because he has acheived more on clay then you are not giving credit for hard work.
Click to expand...

I would say 4 CYGS > 20 FOs.
 
inflation_era said:
I would say 4 CYGS > 20 FOs.
Click to expand...
And what about 20 WB or 20 USO or 20 AO . Your asking only for FO hints something.
4 CYGS equals 16 slams but for the unique acheivement lets add 1 bonus slam for acheiving CYGS. That makes 4 CYGS= 2O SLAMS. But you are forgetting to win 20 F0 you need to play 20 years of peak tennis .(in clay)
4 CYGS can be acheived in 4 years.
20 FO means 20×7=140 match
4CYGS means 16×7= 112 match.
28 match gap will not help your CYGS case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rattie
Paris Masters 2025: Court will be slowed down.
Replies
45
Views
2K
DSH
DSH
Homeboy Hotel
Pathetic October/November 2012 ATP scheduling - Paris/London Finals suffer the most.
Replies
4
Views
1K
not_federer
N
M
Inane Achievements of Federer and Djokovic at 2014 Paris Masters
Replies
18
Views
2K
Smasher08
Smasher08
Winner Sinner
Novak Djokovic will play the 2025 ATP Finals. Binaghi: "We have confirmation" "
2
Replies
74
Views
2K
DSH
DSH
L
Time to Restore Some Masters finals to 5 sets?
2
Replies
82
Views
12K
Sentinel
Sentinel
Back
Top