Djokovic - Winning 2015 Miami - 12 of last 20 "big tournaments" - record

[McEnroeisanartist]

Big Tournament is defined as Grand Slam, Year End Championship, and Tennis Masters Series.

In the last 20 big tournaments, Djokovic has won 12 tournaments. 2 Grand Slams, 2 Year End Championships, and 8 Tennis Masters Series. This is a higher total than Federer and Nadal ever had (Federer had 11 of 20 in one stretch, but won 5 Grand Slams, 1 Year End Championship, and 5 Tennis Masters Series)

For the first time in his career, he has won 5 consecutive big tournaments - Paris, Year End, Australian Open, Indian Wells, and Miami.

Nadal won 5 in a row from 2010 Monte Carlo to 2010 Wimbledon. Federer has never won more than 3 in a row.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Nice stats but this isn't actually the first time Djokovic has won 5 tier 1 titles in a row. He also did it in 2011 when he won AO, IW, Miami, Madrid and Rome( he didn't play MC which is non-mandatory anyway).

 

[Gazelle]

MS 1000 is minor tournament, at least for guys trying to claim goathood. You're putting Djokovic at the same level as Berdych or Tsonga.

 

[tennisaddict]

MS 1000 is minor tournament, at least for guys trying to claim goathood. You're putting Djokovic at the same level as Berdych or Tsonga.

Agree.

Masters are good for ranking points and playing into form for majors. Nothing more to be read from that.


Since the BO3 introduction , it is just the majors and WTF that truly distinguish the men from the boys.

However Novak is in invincible form with or without these titles and that is what counts at the end of the day

 

[NatF]

Masters 1000's aren't tier 1. Regardless Djokovic is certainly in a dominant stretch.

 

[RF-18]

Masters are not minor tournaments.

Great numbers by Nole

 

[Inanimate_object]

Masters are not minor tournaments.

Great numbers by Nole

They are minor by virtue that they are not major. They are seen only as useful as the ranking points they endow leading up to the slam seeding.

 

[TJfederer16]

I think Novak needs to get smarter with his schedule. He's won plenty of these master's event. If he really wants to start racking up the slams he needs to be more strategic in his planning. Its crucial he doesn't burn himself out for the French. He definitely needs to recharge and miss at least one of the 3 clay masters for sure if he hopes to be fully fresh mentally and physically for the French.

 

[Rozroz]

I think Novak needs to get smarter with his schedule. He's won plenty of these master's event. If he really wants to start racking up the slams he needs to be more strategic in his planning. Its crucial he doesn't burn himself out for the French. He definitely needs to recharge and miss at least one of the 3 clay masters for sure if he hopes to be fully fresh mentally and physically for the French.

i REALLY hope he'll do that.
otherwise it's goodbye RG.

 

[Bukmeikara]

Agree.

Masters are good for ranking points and playing into form for majors. Nothing more to be read from that.


Since the BO3 introduction , it is just the majors and WTF that truly distinguish the men from the boys.

However Novak is in invincible form with or without these titles and that is what counts at the end of the day

Stupid post, so an event which gives 1 mln to the winner and has stadiums with capacity of 10-16k people is not a Major one? In a way BO3 is harder than BO5 because you have to play almost every day on the week and keep concentration because you are more vulnerable to the lower ranked players, this was said by Andy Murray. If the players give their best to win, something the big 4 do almost every time at the Masters than there is no difference if they play at Wimbledon, Doha or Casablanca.

 

[citybert]

Does anyone even think Nole is playing his best tennis, seems like he's playing just ok and even downright awful in a couple of early round matches. talking about IW/Miami

Not saying he will get better but feel like he has been a little lucky in some matches. If the Dog never got hurt he definitely gets stretched even more.

 

[Bukmeikara]

I think Novak needs to get smarter with his schedule. He's won plenty of these master's event. If he really wants to start racking up the slams he needs to be more strategic in his planning. Its crucial he doesn't burn himself out for the French. He definitely needs to recharge and miss at least one of the 3 clay masters for sure if he hopes to be fully fresh mentally and physically for the French.

I am curious from what perspective you are giving your opinion. Have you been a profesional tennis player or have you spoken about this with Nadal, Federer or Djokovic?! Using terms like "he definately needs to" or "its crucial" suggest something of it. The truth is you dont know for sure if this would actually help Novak or not. Champions need to play tournaments and win them!

 

[Inanimate_object]

Does anyone even think Nole is playing his best tennis, seems like he's playing just ok and even downright awful in a couple of early round matches. talking about IW/Miami

Not saying he will get better but feel like he has been a little lucky in some matches. If the Dog never got hurt he definitely gets stretched even more.

You don't need to play great tennis to win tournies. You just have to be better than everyone else. At the moment, that's Djokovic.

 

[daddy]

Does anyone even think Nole is playing his best tennis, seems like he's playing just ok and even downright awful in a couple of early round matches. talking about IW/Miami

Not saying he will get better but feel like he has been a little lucky in some matches. If the Dog never got hurt he definitely gets stretched even more.

I feel that luck is not the word you should use when we are talking about someone taking this many titles during an 18 month long period of time. Sure he had to be lucky to do it more than a few times but luck is not the factor that made this happen.

And I do think he'll get better as he likes playing on clay even if it is not the popular opinion on this particular forum. Not saying he'll own Rafa on clay but chance of him loosing vs lower ranked opponents on clay is minimal.

 

[Tiger8]

Masters 1000's aren't tier 1. Regardless Djokovic is certainly in a dominant stretch.

You don't think tournaments where the best players in the world consistently come out and play are tier 1? The Big Four have won something like 40 of the last 44 Masters tournaments, I think they value them pretty highly.

 

[spinovic]

Djokovic will likely end his career as the best 3-set Masters player of all-time. That doesn't outweigh majors in GOAT arguments, but is impressive nonetheless.

 

[RF-18]

They are minor by virtue that they are not major. They are seen only as useful as the ranking points they endow leading up to the slam seeding.

All best players in the world are participating in masters, and there is always big big crowds. IW and Miami are called ''the fifth slam'' for a reason.

It's not in the league of slams, but definietly tier 1

 

[tennisaddict]

Stupid post, so an event which gives 1 mln to the winner and has stadiums with capacity of 10-16k people is not a Major one? In a way BO3 is harder than BO5 because you have to play almost every day on the week and keep concentration because you are more vulnerable to the lower ranked players, this was said by Andy Murray. If the players give their best to win, something the big 4 do almost every time at the Masters than there is no difference if they play at Wimbledon, Doha or Casablanca.

Do you think Rafa or Fed give as much effort to IW/Miami as they give for the majors ? There is your answer.

Fed does not even play Miami. Shouldn't that tell you that it is not tier 1.

We are not here to undermine Novak or Murray's accomplishments but clubbing masters with Majors and WTF is outright silly.

It is a separate tier of its own.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Djokovic will likely end his career as the best 3-set Masters player of all-time. That doesn't outweigh majors in GOAT arguments, but is impressive nonetheless.

Exactly. It would be a nice feather in his cap to have and I think he has a great chance at achieving it.

 

[mule250]

They are minor by virtue that they are not major. They are seen only as useful as the ranking points they endow leading up to the slam seeding.

This, they cant be major if there are already major events above it. They are obviously important tournies though(ranking points and $). That's why the big 3+1 have had a stranglehold on them.

 

[Inanimate_object]

All best players in the world are participating in masters, and there is always big big crowds. IW and Miami are called ''the fifth slam'' for a reason.

It's not in the league of slams, but definietly tier 1

Tier 1 is a categorization you've made up. It doesn't exist on tour or far beyond your perspective. Slams are slams. In this day and age, that's all anyone cares about. The Sony Ericsson Open USED to be called the fifth slam, and is no longer. What does that tell you about how Masters fare relative to slams?

 

[torpantennis]

Djokovic record in MS1000 finals: 10-0. During the same stretch of time, his record in slam finals (RG13 is "final"): 3-5

How's that possible??

 

[Djokovic2011]

Djokovic record in MS1000 finals: 10-0. During the same stretch of time, his record in slam finals (RG13 is "final"): 3-5

How's that possible??

Because he's a better player in best of 3 matches? :|

 

[MichaelNadal]

What impresses me most about Djokovic is the fact that you have to play the match of your life to beat him. No lead is safe, and you can't relax for 2 minutes. Like him or not, he puts crazy work into his game.

 

[torpantennis]

Because he's a better player in best of 3 matches? :|

Then why's that? He won Murray so easily because of his fitness and stamina. And that AO12 proved that it's not about stamina at least! Has to be something else?

 

[xFedal]

Since 2014 Wimbledon how many big tournaments has Novak won?

 

[Doflamingo]

Since 2014 Wimbledon how many big tournaments has Novak won?

3 Slams (A0, Wimbledon, USO)
5 Masters (Paris, Indian Wells, Miami, Monte Carlo, Rome)
1 WTF

So 9​

 

[Djokovic2011]

Since 2014 Wimbledon, Djokovic has played 90 matches and won 81 of them. 


 

[GabeT]

Can we one day stop this nonsense that m1000s are not important? The actual pros that play this completely disagree. Why do internet posters insist they know more than the pros?

 

[Doflamingo]

Can we one day stop this nonsense that m1000s are not important? The actual pros that play this completely disagree. Why do internet posters insist they know more than the pros?

M1000s are important. It's just that Novak gets a lot of hate for his recent success so if he wins them it's not important but if Federer and Nadal were to win them, the roofs would be blown sky high. Double standards is a thing. ​

 

[Deleted member 77403]

M1000s are important. It's just that Novak gets a lot of hate for his recent success so if he wins them it's not important but if Federer and Nadal were to win them, the roofs would be blown sky high. Double standards is a thing. ​

Djokovic was getting hate for dominating AO also. Some of those gems I remember include...
He's winning the least important slam
Djokovic doesn't know how to win a slam in the northern hemisphere.
Nobody cares about AO, it is a new slam
AO is least important in building your legacy

Djokovic's response? Three time Wimbledon Champion. Two time US Open Champion.

Hater's response? It's a weak era. Weak Era slams.

 

[swordtennis]

3 Slams (A0, Wimbledon, USO)
5 Masters (Paris, Indian Wells, Miami, Monte Carlo, Rome)
1 WTF

So 9​

Overrated stats. He needs to have more major wins than masters wins since 2014. Weak era for sure.

 

[Doflamingo]

Djokovic was getting hate for dominating AO also. Some of those gems I remember include...
He's winning the least important slam
Djokovic doesn't know how to win a slam in the northern hemisphere.
Nobody cares about AO, it is a new slam
AO is least important in building your legacy

Djokovic's response? Three time Wimbledon Champion. Two time US Open Champion.

Hater's response? It's a weak era. Weak Era slams.

I know right? Can you imagine if Nadal won a 2nd AO title? Threads would be filled about how he won a 2nd CGS and is the GOAT.

But but...what about AO being useless? New slam? 1 Wimbledon is worth more than 5 AOs? ​

 

[helterskelter]

Overrated stats. He needs to have more major wins than masters wins since 2014. Weak era for sure.

Winning four out of six Slams is pretty impressive by anyone's standards. (As for the losses, he can't be blamed too much for losing to Wawrinka on the form that Stan showed that day. But the loss against Nishikori was sub-par by his standards).

 

[CYGS]

Djokovic's potential to be the GOAT is getting increasingly higher. Some people are scared.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

I know right? Can you imagine if Nadal won a 2nd AO title? Threads would be filled about how he won a 2nd CGS and is the GOAT.

But but...what about AO being useless? New slam? 1 Wimbledon is worth more than 5 AOs? ​

There are plenty of gems out there in regards to Djokovic and his domination at the AO. I wonder how bad it will get should he win his sixth title there in the next couple of months.

 

[GabeT]

Tier 1 is a categorization you've made up. It doesn't exist on tour or far beyond your perspective. Slams are slams. In this day and age, that's all anyone cares about. The Sony Ericsson Open USED to be called the fifth slam, and is no longer. What does that tell you about how Masters fare relative to slams?

Really? I wonder what the pros that play the matches, the spectators that buy the tickets and the tv channels that broadcast all these other tournaments think about that?

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Avoid confusion please folks. Just call them "full field" events and nobody can level a single argument against you. Or if you want "strongest possible field" events, given that only 8 enter the YEC. You get my point.

Full field events are important because beating the full field is dayum difficult. End.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Avoid confusion please folks. Just call them "full field" events and nobody can level a single argument against you. Or if you want "strongest possible field" events, given that only 8 enter the YEC. You get my point.

Full field events are important because beating the full field is dayum difficult. End.

But "Tier 1 events" sounds so much nicer Nathaniel!

 

[Mainad]

Do you think Rafa or Fed give as much effort to IW/Miami as they give for the majors ? There is your answer.

Fed does not even play Miami. Shouldn't that tell you that it is not tier 1.

We are not here to undermine Novak or Murray's accomplishments but clubbing masters with Majors and WTF is outright silly.

Nothing gets clubbed with Majors but why is it silly to club Masters with WTF? Both are played in best of 3 format, both are played daily and within the space of a week, both require the presence of the top players, both are usually won by the top players but are occasionally won by somebody lower ranked (like Slams too for that matter).

This sniffy attitude to Masters events which some posters here purport to hold is frankly silly and usually motivated by some kind of agenda.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

But "Tier 1 events" sounds so much nicer Nathaniel!

Tier 1 is a massive pile of **** because it's prone to wildly different interpretations. I think "full field" is clinical and basically impossible to refute. It also clearly demonstrates a parity between the 1000s and Slams which is difficult to deny.

You could call them "top level" events in that the competition is comparable. Masters are not as important as Slams but the level that tends to present itself is similar.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Nothing gets clubbed with Majors but why is it silly to club Masters with WTF? Both are played in best of 3 format, both are played daily and within the space of a week, both require the presence of the top players, both are usually won by the top players but are occasionally won by somebody lower ranked (like Slams too for that matter).

This sniffy attitude to Masters events which some posters here purport to hold is frankly silly and usually motivated by some kind of agenda.

@tennisaddict sure wasn't sniffy after Federer won Shanghai last year!

 

[GabeT]

Tier 1 is a massive pile of **** because it's prone to wildly different interpretations. I think "full field" is clinical and basically impossible to refute. It also clearly demonstrates a parity between the 1000s and Slams which is difficult to deny.

I'm ok with full field.

Someone should run the numbers of the average quality of a Slam, meaning the average ranking of the players the ultimate winner faced, vs a Masters. As I recall Nole faced more top ten players in MC and Rome this year than Stan did to win the FO.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Tier 1 is a massive pile of **** because it's prone to wildly different interpretations. I think "full field" is clinical and basically impossible to refute. It also clearly demonstrates a parity between the 1000s and Slams which is difficult to deny.

You could call them "top level" events in that the competition is comparable. Masters are not as important as Slams but the level that tends to present itself is similar.

"Top level" sounds pretty good too Nathaniel.

 

[xFedal]

3 Slams (A0, Wimbledon, USO)
5 Masters (Paris, Indian Wells, Miami, Monte Carlo, Rome)
1 WTF

So 9​

2014 Wimbledon Champion
2015 Australian Open Champion
2015 Wimbledon Champion
2015 u

Djokovic was getting hate for dominating AO also. Some of those gems I remember include...
He's winning the least important slam
Djokovic doesn't know how to win a slam in the northern hemisphere.
Nobody cares about AO, it is a new slam
AO is least important in building your legacy

Djokovic's response? Three time Wimbledon Champion. Two time US Open Champion.

Hater's response? It's a weak era. Weak Era slams.

Can Nole get 5 Wimby's?

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Can Nole get 5 Wimby's?

 

[xFedal]

I take that as a no?

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

I take that as a no?

No, he's just excited at the possibility and can barely contain his excitement.. at least I'm pretty sure that's what it means.

To actually answer the question, I don't think he'll win 5 Wimbledon titles but probably 4. It's not like he can't do it though.

 

[jm1980]

No, he's just excited at the possibility and can barely contain his excitement.. at least I'm pretty sure that's what it means.

To actually answer the question, I don't think he'll win 5 Wimbledon titles but probably 4. It's not like he can't do it though.

If he wins one next year then I think he could get to 5

Even if he doesn't win any more Wimbledon titles, he'll still end up with 3 more titles than I expected him to win so all is not lost

 

[Noelan]

@tennisaddict sure wasn't sniffy after Federer won Shanghai last year!

I can bet that Shangai is the most frequently mentioned Masters tournament here since Rogie won it, before that was one of the worsts , wasn't fast enough ofc ,ATP should get rid of it, (Chinese audience is tennis uneducated , gloryhunt and similar gems)