Mustard
Bionic Poster
And winning majors with a hamstring and abdominal tear at like age 33 and 35. Doesn't make any sense. Hamstring tears stop you running at least.
How does Djokovic keep making all these finals...??
- Thread starter Graf1stClass
- Start date
BGod
G.O.A.T.
90% chance he wins 1 more Slam after this one bruf. Too bad Fed couldn't seal the deal at 37.11
Unseeded Player
Hall of Fame
Yes, WB19 was his last true chance.
initialize
Hall of Fame
This LMAO. Basically a repeat of every slam Joke has won since 2018
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
slipgrip93
Professional
this, regarding his racquet with a 360g swingweight.
Djokovic's reported racquet specs:
("Novak Djokovich's Raccquet" - perfect tennis)
If he's still on tour when he turns 40, I think it'll be interesting to see if he's still using the same 95 sq. in. racquet and specs.
Rattie
Legend
All I know is it means tennis finals in slams aren’t worth watching anymore unless he plays Alcaraz who has the weapons to beat him. Slam finals are the biggest prizes in the sport; the same guy just winning easily over and over and over again has made it boring. When there is no competition, the sport suffers.
That isn’t Djokovic’s fault btw.
That isn’t Djokovic’s fault btw.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
No competition at all. Darkest era all of time.
Rattie
Legend
Apart from one guy
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Alcaraz also isn't competition until proved otherwise. His DO collapse and Cincinnati choke can't be ignored.
ronalditop
Hall of Fame
I laughed.
ronalditop
Hall of Fame
Did she really do something to stay in shape?
ronalditop
Hall of Fame
He's a cyborg.
Rattie
Legend
You’re way too harsh. It’s a 2-2 h2h and Alcaraz beat him at Wimbledon. Cincinnati could have gone either way. He is still very young and at that age his results are impressive
chrischris
G.O.A.T.
Ni idea.
Find him interesting on many levels, extremely good player
Find him interesting on many levels, extremely good player
80s New Wave
Semi-Pro
He skipped the vax which has weakened the rest of the field.
I laughed when they showed the "Moderna shot of the day" featuring Djokovic.
Draw played a big part. Had he won Wimbledon and seeded #1, really didn’t see he could have reached USO final
RaulRamirez
Legend
Where's the 4th d-word? Dependability?
Crocodile
G.O.A.T.
Thanks I will add it in next time
Djokovic_is_the_best#1
Bionic Poster
Alcaraz couldn’t beat meddy. I guess he needs to improve his consistency. The serve and FH were poor from him in that SF.
Day_Tripper
Rookie
Controversial view no doubt but to my mind Djokovic and Nadal are both overrated and their records hugely inflated. Both have massively benefitted from the anomaly of their being a fifteen year period in which no all time great emerged. The two generations following Nadal and Djokovic failed to produce a single all time great! Nadal played his entire career without having to play a younger all time great - that is just crazy! Djokovic is only having to deal with one now at the age of 36 with the emergence of Alcarez.
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
They are not comparable.
Nadal won 13 Majors in his 20s and 8 in his 30s, the difference between both decades for him is +5.
Djokovic won 12 Major titles in his 20s and has just equaled that mark in his 30s, despite what happened at Wimbledon 2020, his disqualification at the US Open that season and his decisions in 2022.
Djokovic just won 50% more Major titles than Nadal, both in their 30s.
And there is still the 2024 season for the Serbian player to further increase his numbers at a late age.
Nadal only has a slim left at RG 2024 to add to his showcase of his tennis career.
I ask you, which of the two benefited the most in their 30s?
Kralingen
Talk Tennis Guru
Absolutely. Now, none of that is their fault, nor is it at all a reflection of their abilities as competitors or tennis players, so it is arguably an unfair criticism. But it has greatly affected the Slam race.
Unseeded Player
Hall of Fame
No competition at all too in 2011-2016.
Yup, it makes it hard for Fed and Nadal to return to the tour.
Unseeded Player
Hall of Fame
So did affected Fed lack of the competition while Novak and Nadal were still kids and Sampras and Agassi ended or were ending their careers.
There is no rule that every generation should have all time great. Who was between Sampras and Fed? Fed had really bad H2H with Nadal since 2008, 9 years without a slam win against him, also without a win against Novak at slams since 2012.
Hypo Crisis
Professional
It's incredible how you don't watch tennis, don't know thing about Djokovic, yet you dare to speak about Serena working her whole life... wtf Djokovic did ? Fyi, he is by far most professional and dedicated person that ever played this sport, much more than Serena who needs to lock herself in panic room, or Steffi who needs crazy fan to take out her biggest rival, or Nadal who needs to clean his body every 6 months so he finds injury excuses...
Rattie
Legend
Arguably the players seen as those who could have troubled him ended up losing against lesser players anyway. When everyone is rolling their eyes as soon as the draw came out, it doesn’t help though. I do agree lopsided draws aren’t doing anything to make a tournament more competitive. He had 11 qualifiers and WCs in his quarter compared to 3 in the Alcaraz quarter.
Alcaraz was running on fumes, and didn’t play at the level everyone expected. He demolished Medvedev in their previous two meetings and would have done so again had he been playing that way. It’s not as if Daniil brought some new tactic to the match, he just did what he always does slogging away from the baseline but very efficiently. There were numerous times in the match when Carlos could have taken control but couldn’t find his shots.
Rattie
Legend
Of course not. Every fan wants their favourite player to win. There is a difference between winning some slams and making every slam final and winning virtually all of them. Monopolising one tournament isn’t the same as monopolising all four of them, all the time.
And as I’ve said before, if you’re a fan you get a buzz from your favourite winning all the time; if you’re not it’s tedious.
stray_cat
New User
Fintft
G.O.A.T.
The results were rigged in favour or Roger and Rafa in the past (for the sake of tennis sales), now it's his turn to get his due.
Plus he is a pusher and tennis is a sport of errors.
initialize
Hall of Fame
Muller, Zapata, Djere, Gojo, Fritz, Shelton. How does Djo-Kovid do it? LOL
canta_Brian
Hall of Fame
It’s almost as if there could be a better way to judge goatness. In a sport like tennis there is no empirical measurement of level. Wins alone doesn’t do it as the level of the opponent effects outcome.
And before Djokovic fans decry the idea of eye test, I’ve seen posts today by them saying his volley game was Edberg like. Firstly, no, just no. Secondly, what measure was used to decide this? That’s right, eye test.
It's actually not that difficult to understand.
He comes from an era of absolutely great players.
He had countless amazing battles against players like Federer, Nadal, Wawrinka, Murray, Del Potro, Tsonga, Ferrer, Berdych...
The players he has to beat nowadays are of vastly inferior caliber, so even at 36 he is clearly superior to all of them, except for maybe Alcaraz.
He comes from an era of absolutely great players.
He had countless amazing battles against players like Federer, Nadal, Wawrinka, Murray, Del Potro, Tsonga, Ferrer, Berdych...
The players he has to beat nowadays are of vastly inferior caliber, so even at 36 he is clearly superior to all of them, except for maybe Alcaraz.
Last edited:
Helps when you don't have to do the child bearing yourself.
jl809
Hall of Fame
He’s stayed very fit and since 2019 his slam SEMIFINAL opponents have been
Pouille
Thiem (he lost)
RBA
Federer (with a groin injury)
Tsitsipas
Zverev (0 top 10 slam wins at the time)
Nadal (played 1 more match in the entire season afterwards)
Shapovalov
Zverev (still had 0 top 10 wins at the time lol)
Norrie
Paul
Alcaraz (who full body cramped after 2 sets)
Sinner
Shelton
Not that hard to see why when you look at that really
Pouille
Thiem (he lost)
RBA
Federer (with a groin injury)
Tsitsipas
Zverev (0 top 10 slam wins at the time)
Nadal (played 1 more match in the entire season afterwards)
Shapovalov
Zverev (still had 0 top 10 wins at the time lol)
Norrie
Paul
Alcaraz (who full body cramped after 2 sets)
Sinner
Shelton
Not that hard to see why when you look at that really
Djokovic_is_the_best#1
Bionic Poster
This is silly you can only beat what’s put in front of you. Feds early era of titans like roddick, baggy, Gonzales, old Agassi, Hewitt was no different. Those players were no different to now.
Anyway you can only win what’s in your draw. Fed couldn’t do it as well as djokodal hence why he’s 3rd. The gap is only growing between Djokovic and Federer and Fed should have did better in some of the bigger slam matches he lost.
She wasn't bearing children at the time.
What? She was pregrnant in 2017 and missed the next 4 slams after winning the Australian Open.
Sure but her physical condition was vanishing years before that.
a10best
Hall of Fame
Djokovic is great at tennis, holistic health, and mentally smart. When you put a player like that against players who have noticeable flaws in not only their strokes, decision making, health, and commitment you get someone who is winning more.
And no the top 20 players are not all trying to stop him. Only 2 currently have a chance. Today's players ranked 5 to 20 wouldn't win a slam in any era.
So, yes he is that good but in a weak era records get inflated. He'd probably have 12-14 slams if he played against a consistently strong field instead of top heavy.
They all benefited from this while Djokovic is the best of the best. No flaws apart from anger mgmt.
It's similar to the Lakers from 2001-2004 only having one real threat, the Sacramento Kings. Once the Lakers made the final they blitzed inferior skill teams like the Nets or Sixers.
And more recently the Warriors and Cavs rivalry. Each was a big favorite in their conf. with no real threat. Just two top heavy teams in a weak era. Today the western conf. and east are more balanced.
And no the top 20 players are not all trying to stop him. Only 2 currently have a chance. Today's players ranked 5 to 20 wouldn't win a slam in any era.
So, yes he is that good but in a weak era records get inflated. He'd probably have 12-14 slams if he played against a consistently strong field instead of top heavy.
They all benefited from this while Djokovic is the best of the best. No flaws apart from anger mgmt.
It's similar to the Lakers from 2001-2004 only having one real threat, the Sacramento Kings. Once the Lakers made the final they blitzed inferior skill teams like the Nets or Sixers.
And more recently the Warriors and Cavs rivalry. Each was a big favorite in their conf. with no real threat. Just two top heavy teams in a weak era. Today the western conf. and east are more balanced.
Last edited:
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
To be consistent with his anti vax stance I think it would be appropriate for Novak give up some of his prize money since Moderna was one of the main sponsors.
Similar threads
