Djokovic will have to do it himself - Winning RG

[Spider]

I don't think he will be as lucky as Federer was in 2009. Who could be the Soderling for Djokovic? We all know beating Nadal at RG is probably the biggest challenge in all of sports today.

He is getting closer and closer and in my opinion he has already surpassed Federer as the seconde best clay court player of this era.

He just needs to believe he can do it and be very consistent for over 5 hours. He might just do it next time.

 

[Magnus]

I don't think he will be as lucky as Federer was in 2009. Who could be the Soderling for Djokovic? We all know beating Nadal at RG is probably the biggest challenge in all of sports today.

He is getting closer and closer and in my opinion he has already surpassed Federer as the seconde best clay court player of this era.

He just needs to believe he can do it and be very consistent for over 5 hours. He might just do it next time.

Seriously? Nole has 0 RG and Fed has 1.

Fed has more MS titles on clay than Nole.

Fed has made 5 RG finals, Nole has made 1.

Nole has the potential to become the superior player on clay, but a better record with Nadal does no equal one being better than the other on the surface. Fed at his prime was a far more natural mover on the dirt than Nole. Fed also beat Nole on clay in Nole's unstoppable year where he nearly won all 4 slams, and ended his undefeated streak.

 

[Spider]

Seriously? Nole has 0 RG and Fed has 1.

Fed has more MS titles on clay than Nole.

Fed has made 5 RG finals, Nole has made 1.

Nole has the potential to become the superior player on clay, but a better record with Nadal does no equal one being better than the other on the surface. Fed at his prime was a far more natural mover on the dirt than Nole. Fed also beat Nole on clay in Nole's unstoppable year where he nearly won all 4 slams, and ended his undefeated streak.

I am sure the statistics say that, however, I am not going with that for now. I mean, it is unfair for Djokovic that he has not had an opportunity like Roger had in 09. Give him the same players and the draw, and he could have won it too.

Djokovic is trying everything to win it and may do it next year or the one after that but I don't think he will have the luck Roger has had in 09. He might have to do it himself.

 

[Gandalf]

Federer was lucky?

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

If Djokovic can do what Federer did, and reach many RG finals, then he'll have a shot at RG. If he does that, he may even win more than 1 RG because we are to presume that Nadal's best days on a clay court are behind him (in reality they are of a similar age and I think Nadal will just continue to crush his dreams at RG in future matches there).

The key for Djokovic is to try and be as truly great at RG as Federer has been. If he can manage that and consistently be there in the finals then he can sneak a RG title. The point is that if you reach 5 RG finals then you might just get a chance to win the tournament. Via accumulation of opportunity, Roger snagged a French Open win. Good luck to Novak Djokovic, may the force be with him because he's going to need it.

 

[Spider]

Federer was lucky?

Of course I don't mean lucky in the true sense, however, lucky in the sense that he was able to get one year where Nadal failed to make it to the final. He was lucky in that sense as compared to Djokovic who has not had the same opportunity so far.

If Djokovic can do what Federer did, and reach many RG finals, then he'll have a shot at RG. If he does that, he may even win more than 1 RG because we are to presume that Nadal's best days on a clay court are behind him (in reality they are of a similar age and I think Nadal will just continue to crush his dreams at RG in future matches there).

The key for Djokovic is to try and be as truly great at RG as Federer has been. If he can manage that and consistently be there in the finals then he can sneak a RG title. The point is that if you reach 5 RG finals then you might just get a chance to win the tournament. Via accumulation of opportunity, Roger snagged a French Open win. Good luck to Novak Djokovic, may the force be with him because he's going to need it.

Djokovic has been very consistent for the last three years. Not sure how much more consistent can he get. It is about executing his game plan on that day and hope Rafa is not having a great day.

It would be easier and karma though if a Gulbis or say Brands beat Nadal and Djokovic has to face someone else in the final.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Of course I don't mean lucky in the true sense, however, lucky in the sense that he was able to get one year where Nadal failed to make it to the final. He was lucky in that sense as compared to Djokovic who has not had the same opportunity so far.




Djokovic has been very consistent for the last three years. Not sure how much more consistent can he get. It is about executing his game plan on that day and hope Rafa is not having a great day.

It would be easier and karma though if a Gulbis or say Brands beat Nadal and Djokovic has to face someone else in the final.

He can get more consistent by continuing to go deep into the tournament as the years roll by. If he's able to do this to the degree that Federer did, I almost guarantee you he will snag a RG title. In short, if Nole reaches 4 - 5 RG finals, I suspect he will win 1 final (and that Rafa won't be the opponent).

 

[mistik]

Fed was lucky in 09,but when you look at the big picture Fed is the one who is very unlucky as well. As ı said before the Rafa you guys see on clay not at his peak anymore and he isnt invincible anymore.Prime Fed 06 would love to meet 2013 Rafa on clay.People shouldnt forget that Roger was playing so well in 06,07 but Rafa was nearly invincible.

 

[Apun94]

Federer was lucky?

SO you're saying he wasnt? How was not playing Nadal in the final, instead facing Soderling who chose to play the worst tennis of his life in the final. Federer was lucky not to be beaten by Haas who mentally folded after winning the first 2 sets.
WHat's next? That Fed did not play in the weakest era of all time beating nobodies like Hewitt, Phillipouses, Baghdatis etc.
Still stung by the Fed beatdown by Tsonga, no?

 

[Antonio Puente]

Prime Fed 06 would love to meet 2013 Rafa on clay.

It's amazing how well Fed always plays against Nadal... in the hypothetical.

Had Djoker been playing at this level for the past six years, he would have won at least one RG. He's the greatest threat Nadal has ever seen on clay.

 

[Magnus]

I am sure the statistics say that, however, I am not going with that for now. I mean, it is unfair for Djokovic that he has not had an opportunity like Roger had in 09. Give him the same players and the draw, and he could have won it too.

Djokovic is trying everything to win it and may do it next year or the one after that but I don't think he will have the luck Roger has had in 09. He might have to do it himself.

Did you even watch FO 09? Fed was anything but lucky. You can only face who's in front of you and its not Fed's fault Nadal lost that year. Fed nearly lost to Haas in straights and was very close to losing to Del Potro.

 

[Gandalf]

SO you're saying he wasnt?
Still stung by the Fed beatdown by Tsonga, no?

You seem to have somehow concluded that I am one of the Federer goat/fans/t**ds or whatever they're called. I am not stung by that 'beatdown'.

Federer was not teleported into that year's RG final, nor was he any other of the 4 times he got there. So, no, he wasn't lucky. And of course, some crystal ball showed that were Nadal in the final instead of Soderling, Federer would lose, no? Maybe, maybe even probably. But 5 finals and one title is not lucky.

 

[Magnus]

Of course I don't mean lucky in the true sense, however, lucky in the sense that he was able to get one year where Nadal failed to make it to the final. He was lucky in that sense as compared to Djokovic who has not had the same opportunity so far.

Fed is so good on clay, he was pretty much unlucky that in his era his main opponent on the surface was the clay GOAT. If Nadal wasn't there, Fed would have had 5-6 FOs.

 

[Spider]

Fed is so good on clay, he was pretty much unlucky that in his era his main opponent on the surface was the clay GOAT. If Nadal wasn't there, Fed would have had 5-6 FOs.

I am not so sure about that. I think he definitely wins 06 and 07 (apart from 09) but I think Puerta beats him in 05, And Djokovic in 08 and 11 (if they played in the final).

 

[Bender]

Did you even watch FO 09? Fed was anything but lucky. You can only face who's in front of you and its not Fed's fault Nadal lost that year. Fed nearly lost to Haas in straights and was very close to losing to Del Potro.

Didn't you say Nadal was lucky that Federer took out Djokovic in 2011?

Or am I confusing you for monfed?

 

[mike danny]

I am not so sure about that. I think he definitely wins 06 and 07 (apart from 09) but I think Puerta beats him in 05, And Djokovic in 08 and 11 (if they played in the final).

federer beat djokovic in 2011 period. it does not matter if it was the final or not.

 

[Cfidave]

The key for Djokovic winning the French is for the Umpire to stop giving key points to Nadal, that Novak has already won.

 

[tudwell]

He is getting closer and closer and in my opinion he has already surpassed Federer as the seconde best clay court player of this era.

It's 2013. Federer's clay peak was in 2006. I think they're different eras.

 

[tudwell]

Of course I don't mean lucky in the true sense, however, lucky in the sense that he was able to get one year where Nadal failed to make it to the final. He was lucky in that sense as compared to Djokovic who has not had the same opportunity so far.

What? Djokovic was in the 2009 French Open. He had the same opportunity as Federer. He squandered it in the third round.

 

[Steve0904]

I am not so sure about that. I think he definitely wins 06 and 07 (apart from 09) but I think Puerta beats him in 05, And Djokovic in 08 and 11 (if they played in the final).

What? Puerta beats him in 2005? In what universe? Not to mention that Federer beat Djokovic 2011 in the SF, doesn't matter if it wasn't the final.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

I am sure the statistics say that, however, I am not going with that for now. I mean, it is unfair for Djokovic that he has not had an opportunity like Roger had in 09. Give him the same players and the draw, and he could have won it too.

Djokovic is trying everything to win it and may do it next year or the one after that but I don't think he will have the luck Roger has had in 09. He might have to do it himself.

Djokovic was there in 2009. He was a clear number 3, he had already won a slam, reached another final, won the WTF, several masters 1000, including on clay, lost some very close matches against Nadal on clay. He was already a great clay courter.

Of course, he was very unlucky to be beaten by Philipp Kohlschreiber, when he could have taken the opportunity to meet and sweep Soderling in the final instead.

The next year, he missed a semi-final meeting after losing to Melzer. But I admit he wasn't himself in 2010.

In 2011, he was riding a 40 matches winning streak. He just had won the davis cup, the AO, IW, Miami, Rome, Madrid, all that by crushing Nadal. Here again, he missed the meeting by losing to Fed in the SF.

He had an opportunity last year and especially this year, but he offered Nadal a free set instead, failed to succeed one overhead (oh sorry, he did one alright, just before touching the net), failed in general to take the opportunity to end the point at the net.

So don't tell me that Djoko is unlucky. He had one nice occasion to beat Nadal, but he failed. I'm still mad about it.

 

[Spider]

Djokovic was there in 2009. He was a clear number 3, he had already won a slam, reached another final, won the WTF, several masters 1000, including on clay, lost some very close matches against Nadal on clay. He was already a great clay courter.

Of course, he was very unlucky to be beaten by Philipp Kohlschreiber, when he could have taken the opportunity to meet and sweep Soderling in the final instead.

The next year, he missed a semi-final meeting after losing to Melzer. But I admit he wasn't himself in 2010.

In 2011, he was riding a 40 matches winning streak. He just had won the davis cup, the AO, IW, Miami, Rome, Madrid, all that by crushing Nadal. Here again, he missed the meeting by losing to Fed in the SF.

He had an opportunity last year and especially this year, but he offered Nadal a free set instead, failed to succeed one overhead (oh sorry, he did one alright, just before touching the net), failed in general to take the opportunity to end the point at the net.

So don't tell me that Djoko is unlucky. He had one nice occasion to beat Nadal, but he failed. I'm still mad about it.

Djokovic in 2009 was not the version 2.0. He was his former self so I wouldn't count that year. For Djokovic, it has been since 2011, therefore, I would only count three RG's so far. Federer played great in 2011, however, had Djokovic beaten him, he still would have had to beat Nadal in the final.

The point of this thread is that Djokovic has been unlucky with other players not able to beat Nadal for him, and therefore, it is that much more difficult for him to win RG. Federer on the other hand took the opportunities presented to him in 09 (all credit to him). Djokovic needs that luck as well.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Exactly. There's this borderline pathetic constant El Nolio only prime 2011 business. Nole peaked in 2011, his prime started way before and so he has no reasonable excuse for not having found more ultimate consistency at RG, otherwise maybe he could have taken it in 09. Now watch as Nadal takes year-end no.1 and watch Nole as his dominant days come to an end (no more year-end no.1 rankings for him after this year, if he does it at all).

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Djokovic in 2009 was not the version 2.0. He was his former self so I wouldn't count that year. For Djokovic, it has been since 2011, therefore, I would only count three RG's so far. Federer played great in 2011, however, had Djokovic beaten him, he still would have had to beat Nadal in the final.

The point of this thread is that Djokovic has been unlucky with other players not able to beat Nadal for him, and therefore, it is that much more difficult for him to win RG. Federer on the other hand took the opportunities presented to him in 09 (all credit to him). Djokovic needs that luck as well.

Give it up, bud. Nole was ranked no.3 during this year and was one of the best players on tour. Just as Nole's problems with a mostly lower ranked Roddick can't be discounted as hogwash, neither can the virtual fact that Nole has been prime since 2008 and peak from 2011 - 2013 (doubt it will go beyond 2013 I expect a steady decline to be perfectly honest). For Fed, his prime was 03 - 10 ish and his peak 04-07. Nadal, prime 2005 - now (yes even now) and peak of 08 - 12 ish.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Djokovic in 2009 was not the version 2.0. He was his former self so I wouldn't count that year. For Djokovic, it has been since 2011, therefore, I would only count three RG's so far. Federer played great in 2011, however, had Djokovic beaten him, he still would have had to beat Nadal in the final.

The point of this thread is that Djokovic has been unlucky with other players not able to beat Nadal for him, and therefore, it is that much more difficult for him to win RG. Federer on the other hand took the opportunities presented to him in 09 (all credit to him). Djokovic needs that luck as well.

Then be patient. Fed had to wait a fifth year (2005, 2006, 2007, 2008) before someone beat Nadal for him. If Djokovic can give himself as many chances than Fed and reach the final until 2015, either Nadal will lose to someone else, or to himself. Unlike Federer, Djokovic's game is as well suited to beat Nadal as a game can be (i.e: not much). He just have to be patient.

 

[The Dark Knight]

I don't think he will be as lucky as Federer was in 2009. Who could be the Soderling for Djokovic? We all know beating Nadal at RG is probably the biggest challenge in all of sports today.

He is getting closer and closer and in my opinion he has already surpassed Federer as the seconde best clay court player of this era.

He just needs to believe he can do it and be very consistent for over 5 hours. He might just do it next time.

I agree with this .

Rafa won on pure heart.....

He almost pulled if off at the AO against Joker as well.

 

[zagor]

I don't think he will be as lucky as Federer was in 2009. Who could be the Soderling for Djokovic? We all know beating Nadal at RG is probably the biggest challenge in all of sports today.

He is getting closer and closer and in my opinion he has already surpassed Federer as the seconde best clay court player of this era.

He just needs to believe he can do it and be very consistent for over 5 hours. He might just do it next time.

Yeah, but following the same logic you could say that Soderling is better than both Novak and Fed then, he actually beat Nadal at the FO and has an additional FO final compared to Novak.

Of course if Novak wins FO beating Nadal in the process I agree that his FO would have more weight than Fed's but he hasn't done that yet, he came close sure but at the end of the day it wasn't a win.

Also while I agree that Novak wasn't in his prime in 2009, he was the 2nd best CC player going into FO that year, he was going toe-to-toe with Nadal in MC, Rome and Madrid, it was his shot in 2009 as much as it was Fed's, he just blew it and Fed didn't.

That said, with the depth out of the top 4 being so poor I agree that Novak will very likely have to go through Nadal to get the FO title.

 

[rosewallGOAT]

Seriously? Nole has 0 RG and Fed has 1.

Fed has more MS titles on clay than Nole.

Fed has made 5 RG finals, Nole has made 1.

Nole has the potential to become the superior player on clay, but a better record with Nadal does no equal one being better than the other on the surface. Fed at his prime was a far more natural mover on the dirt than Nole. Fed also beat Nole on clay in Nole's unstoppable year where he nearly won all 4 slams, and ended his undefeated streak.

It depends if you mean career or present ability. Djokovic has been the 2nd best clay courter for atleast 3 years, not Federer, and it isnt changing anytime soon.

For career he needs the RG title to surpass Federer though.

 

[zagor]

I agree with this .

Rafa won on pure heart.....

He almost pulled if off at the AO against Joker as well.

Oh for Pete's sake, are you that clueless? Do you people always repeat these tired cliches regardless of the reality of what actually happened during the match? It's beyond hilarious to see time and again some of Nadal's own fans being oblivious to his main qualities.

If anyone showed heart in that match it was Novak, Nadal was outplaying him for most of the match (something that I didn't expect to happen personally beforehand) yet it still went to 5, Nadal was blasting winners all over the court in the 5th set while Novak was hanging for his dear life in almost of his service games & was visibly more tired than Nadal and yet despite all that he still came close to winning.

Nadal won like 20 more points in the end, do you realize how rare it is for winner to be in 20 point deficit in the end (which is what would have been the case if Novak won)? I can remember Sampras-Goran 1995 Wimbledon SF being similar (If I'm not mistaken) but point is it's very rare.

 

[Steve0904]

Oh for Pete's sake, are you that clueless? Do you people always repeat these tired cliches regardless of the reality of what actually happened during the match? It's beyond hilarious to see time and again some of Nadal's own fans being oblivious to his main qualities.

If anyone showed heart in that match it was Novak, Nadal was outplaying him for most of the match (something that I didn't expect to happen personally beforehand) yet it still went to 5, Nadal was blasting winners all over the court in the 5th set while Novak was hanging for his dear life in almost of his service games & was visibly more tired than Nadal and yet despite all that he still came close to winning.

Nadal won like 20 more points in the end, do you realize how rare it is for winner to be in 20 point deficit in the end (which is what would have been the case if Novak won)? I can remember Sampras-Goran 1995 Wimbledon SF being similar (If I'm not mistaken) but point is it's very rare.

Yeah, that's another Nadal fan-ism. Some of them like to pretend he has no talent so that when he wins he does it on pure grit and determination. Such a humble warrior. Just another hilarious way to pump up Nadal's wins when they don't need to be whatsoever. If he had an ounce of talent he would be GOAT for sure.

 

[Warmaster]

On the bright side he is getting closer and closer at beating Nadal at RG. Also Nadal was unable to win 5 in a row in 2009, hope for next year!


I don't see how Federer was more lucky than Djokovic though. They've both lost 5 times to Nadal and like others have said if not for Nadal, Federer would have most likely won in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011. Djokovic would likely have won in 2013, 2012 and possibly 2008. Soderling in 2010.

Anyway, all of this doesn't matter, what's done is done. Let's hope Novak wins next year, he deserves it.

 

[RafaIsBack]

It's a five-setter but rafa should've won in 4 sets.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Oh for Pete's sake, are you that clueless? Do you people always repeat these tired cliches regardless of the reality of what actually happened during the match? It's beyond hilarious to see time and again some of Nadal's own fans being oblivious to his main qualities.

If anyone showed heart in that match it was Novak, Nadal was outplaying him for most of the match (something that I didn't expect to happen personally beforehand) yet it still went to 5, Nadal was blasting winners all over the court in the 5th set while Novak was hanging for his dear life in almost of his service games & was visibly more tired than Nadal and yet despite all that he still came close to winning.

Nadal won like 20 more points in the end, do you realize how rare it is for winner to be in 20 point deficit in the end (which is what would have been the case if Novak won)? I can remember Sampras-Goran 1995 Wimbledon SF being similar (If I'm not mistaken) but point is it's very rare.

It wouldn't have been the case... think about it, The gap would then have likely only been roughly 10. Nonetheless, that is still rare.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I don't think he will be as lucky as Federer was in 2009. Who could be the Soderling for Djokovic? We all know beating Nadal at RG is probably the biggest challenge in all of sports today.

He is getting closer and closer and in my opinion he has already surpassed Federer as the seconde best clay court player of this era.

He just needs to believe he can do it and be very consistent for over 5 hours. He might just do it next time.

I think someone who is just in the top 50 now, or just out of it could have a miracle run taking out Nadal and reaching the final again. As odd as it sounds, it is possible as something very similar has happened before.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

It's a five-setter but rafa should've won in 4 sets.

True enough.

 

[RafaIsBack]

Seriously? Nole has 0 RG and Fed has 1.

Fed has more MS titles on clay than Nole.

Fed has made 5 RG finals, Nole has made 1.

Nole has the potential to become the superior player on clay, but a better record with Nadal does no equal one being better than the other on the surface. Fed at his prime was a far more natural mover on the dirt than Nole. Fed also beat Nole on clay in Nole's unstoppable year where he nearly won all 4 slams, and ended his undefeated streak.

Your numbers are right but you have to take into account that Fed and Rafa could never meet before the final for many years because they were #1 and #2. So it was easier for Fed to reach the final than Djoko. As of today, Djoko has approx the same win/loss record against Rafa than Fed.

 

[RafaIsBack]

As of today, Djoko has approx the same win/loss record against Rafa than Fed.

I mean on clay. Even if Nole is getting very dangerous since 2011.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

I mean on clay. Even if Nole is getting very dangerous since 2011.

However, what we can't look past is that since Nole has been in his prime, he has lost at RG to Melzer and Kohlschreiber. In hindsight, RG 2009 was a golden missed opportunity. Djokovic needs to produce another 3 or so years of great clay court tennis I think, because Nadal might just hang around and be great on the surface for that much longer.

 

[Apun94]

You seem to have somehow concluded that I am one of the Federer goat/fans/t**ds or whatever they're called. I am not stung by that 'beatdown'.

Federer was not teleported into that year's RG final, nor was he any other of the 4 times he got there. So, no, he wasn't lucky. And of course, some crystal ball showed that were Nadal in the final instead of Soderling, Federer would lose, no? Maybe, maybe even probably. But 5 finals and one title is not lucky.

I am sure had Nadal or any other player not defeated Federer to win Wimbledon, people would have said that he isnt the true Wimbledon champ (and rightly so). The same case should be when anyone really wins RG.
If reaching finals and SF is a true measure, then people like Henman or Ferrer deserve/deserved to win finals. Imagine Ferrer winning a major without beating any of the top 4. This board would be filled with protestors

 

[single_handed_champion]

I am sure the statistics say that, however, I am not going with that for now. I mean, it is unfair for Djokovic that he has not had an opportunity like Roger had in 09. Give him the same players and the draw, and he could have won it too.

Don't. Not everyone can handle logic, so don't sweat it. Roger only lost to Nadal at RG for 4 straight years, and another time as well. Djokovic, after winning his 1st Slam, lost to Kohlschreiber and Melzer. Enough said. He has made 1 final there, compared to 5 by Roger.

 

[Djokodal Fan]

I agree with this .

Rafa won on pure heart.....

He almost pulled if off at the AO against Joker as well.

Djokovic almost pulled it off against Rafa in FO 2013 ....would you agree?

Please stop with these Rafa almost won against Djokovic AO2012 BS. The match is not won unless it is won.

Period

 

[ScottleeSV]

I am sure the statistics say that, however, I am not going with that for now. I mean, it is unfair for Djokovic that he has not had an opportunity like Roger had in 09.

Yes he did. He lost to Kohlschreiber. He blew it.

 

[single_handed_champion]

Yes he did. He lost to Kohlschreiber. He blew it.

\thread, 'nuff said.

 

[single_handed_champion]

Djokovic was there in 2009. He was a clear number 3, he had already won a slam, reached another final, won the WTF, several masters 1000, including on clay, lost some very close matches against Nadal on clay. He was already a great clay courter.

Of course, he was very unlucky to be beaten by Philipp Kohlschreiber, when he could have taken the opportunity to meet and sweep Soderling in the final instead.

So he was 'unlucky' to lose to Kohlschreiber in STRAIGHT sets and yet would have made the final to sweep Soderling :lol:? If Roger had lost at 2009 RG, you can bet people would have gone on and on about how he failed to take the golden opportunity etc and written countless obituaries. He was just not good enough to make the most of the opportunity and has been beaten by Nadal on a further 2 occasions, beside clayGOAT Melzer :lol:

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

I think this thread has been officially owned without even quite staying on topic of the original premise.

Novak Djokovic, a man who has had a splendid career and and reached his prime in 2008, which is ongoing until now, has lost to Kohlschreiber and Melzer within that period. Novak Djokovic is currently at his peak, but how long will it last for? He's a fine clay court player, no doubt about it, and he will have to earn it just like Roger did -- Nadal or no Nadal -- to get the job done at RG. Good luck to him.

 

[Gandalf]

I am sure had Nadal or any other player not defeated Federer to win Wimbledon, people would have said that he isnt the true Wimbledon champ

You are talking about the people on the board. You should think outside of the board. People on the board are mostly different from the serious people outside of the board.

You win a slam, noone can take it away from you, no matter what the freagin board says. Goes for Roger's RG, and would go for Nadal's Wimbledon, even if he beat say Ferrer in the final without meeting Roger in the tournament. Slams exist and are to be won no matter the competition.

But you stick to your board

 

[Polaris]

I am sure the statistics say that, however, I am not going with that for now. I mean, it is unfair for Djokovic that he has not had an opportunity like Roger had in 09. Give him the same players and the draw, and he could have won it too.

Translation: I know the facts, but I'm not going with facts for now. It's unfounded opinions that I'm interested in.

Ok. Type away. We're (not) listening.

 

[egn]

So Djokovic did not have the chance in 2009 either? I'd like to point out some ******** in this claim. First of all Federer made two clay court finals in master series and the semis in the third all three of those losses was to Nadal. He was regarded as the second best clay courter in 2008 after being the only person to even make Nadal sweat on clay. Djokovic also was picked by everyone to beat Federer that year and make it to the finals against Nadal. So ******** to that claim that Fed was gifted and Djokovic wasn't, 09 Djokovic was probably just as good as 09 Federer (if not better) on clay. 09 Djokovic screwed up his chances and consistency matters. Frankly 2009 was only Fed's year because Djok got bounced earlier than Nadal. However everyone was calling the Nadal/Djokovic final.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

The question is, how grotesquely owned does one wish to become before they feel satisfied and emotionally fulfilled through their inhumane torture and suffering?

 

[veroniquem]

I don't think he will be as lucky as Federer was in 2009. Who could be the Soderling for Djokovic? We all know beating Nadal at RG is probably the biggest challenge in all of sports today.

He is getting closer and closer and in my opinion he has already surpassed Federer as the seconde best clay court player of this era.

He just needs to believe he can do it and be very consistent for over 5 hours. He might just do it next time.

The good news for Djoko is that he has a slightly better chance than Fed. After pushing Rafa to 9-7 in the 5th, he can reasonably hope to get a win one day. The only Fed hope would have to be total delusion (even when he was younger).