How many Wimbledons would Djokovic have won on the “fast grass”

[StringGuruMRT]

It saddens me a bit that a predominantly backcourt player like Djokovic could be considered one of the all time greats on grass. I think that he has benefitted the most from the homogenization of court surfaces, particularly at Wimbledon.

How many Wimbledons do you think he would have won on the “fast grass?”

 

[PerilousPear]

As many as PETE allows it.

 

[Kralingen]

Really hard to say. We have to remember that these players train solely for the conditions they have in reality, not for some hypothetical world 25 years ago where they have to use 85” racquets and gut.

I do think he’d have good chances in any era, but more than any fast grass issues, the competition would be too stiff to allow him this many Wimbledons after age 30.

that being said… match still not over!

 

[T23]

As many as PETE allows it.

This.

 

[Terry Tibbs]

You have hit the nail on the head. He has been winning Wimbledon at a canter every year not even having to play that well. Whilst Im not saying he doesnt play any attacking shots, its a largely defensive game that relies on errors from his opponents and just wearing them down. Obviously effective but incredibly dull. It just shows what a pathetic era this is.

I doubt he would have won any Wimbledon's on the old fast grass. Wouldn't have had a chance against the grass court specialists of old. The likes of Sampras, Edberg, Becker and Goran.

 

[Slicehand]

None

 

[Milanez82]

Really hard to say. We have to remember that these players train solely for the conditions they have in reality, not for some hypothetical world 25 years ago where they have to use 85” racquets and gut.

I do think he’d have good chances in any era, but more than any fast grass issues, the competition would be too stiff to allow him this many Wimbledons after age 30.

that being said… match still not over!

What competition? 17 year olds were winning Wimbledons, that's how tough the competition was... If you look at it from another angle

 

[ChrisJR3264]

You have hit the nail on the head. He has been winning Wimbledon at a canter every year not even having to play that well. Whilst Im not saying he doesnt play any attacking shots, its a largely defensive game that relies on errors from his opponents and just wearing them down. Obviously effective but incredibly dull. It just shows what a pathetic era this is.

I doubt he would have won any Wimbledon's on the old fast grass. Wouldn't have had a chance against the grass court specialists of old. The likes of Sampras, Edberg, Becker and Goran.

disagree. While he plays “defensive shots” he takes attacking approaching players and dictates points at an incredible pace. It’s not like he’s a defensive pusher. This is just a poor analysis.

Novak beats you with angles and precision. His serve is probably the weaker point of his game and he wins there with excellent placement despite the pace not exactly being up to modern standards.

 

[MeatTornado]

Zero

Or maybe twenty

Idk

 

[NonP]

Against the same competition? Exactly the same. There's no such thing as "fast grass" cuz grass has always been fast.

In fact the courts are playing "faster" than ever by any objective measure. Quoting me-self:

Per UTS's Court Speed Index we've seen only 5 slower USOs since '04 and the slowest USO by far (since '91) was the '92 edition which was of course won by full-time S&Ver Edberg. U jokers sure your eyes can be trusted and it's the courts rather than the players that make the game?

Oh and the AO has also seemingly more than doubled in speed since the '90s. So much for this "slow" HC Slam.

And not a single Wimbledon in this new century was slower than any of the '90s editions. But how can this be? After all we know for a FACT that Pistol and Goran are the ones that ruined the fast grass courts!

The only major that fits the conventional homogenization narrative is RG, but even here you run into a hitch: only half the '90s editions ('91/92/94/95) were noticeably slower than the slowest FOs in '06-21.

I've been making this point for a loooooooooooooooong time and these #s confirm it. It's true that playing styles have become less varied since the '90s, but that's got nothing to do with the courts and everything to do with coaching/player development. "Speeding up" the courts won't make a whit of difference unless and until we allow youngsters to experiment with their game regardless of early results. The current factory-style model is clearly not working and the pendulum will ultimately swing the other way.

And here's again how he'd do in Pistol's/Fred's place:

Grass Court GOAT

list's a joke! We all know it goes: PETE ......... ........ ....... ......... ...... ........ ........ everybody else I think it should work like this....... Best Grass courter of the decade..... 1970s Bjorn Borg.....80s Mac? 90s Pete....00s Fedr....10s Djokovic.

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

Djokovic in lieu of Federer (and Nadal's own revised record) at Wimbledon

Just got the idea for another infallible NonP analysis following this one: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/grass-court-goat.303216/page-6#post-16331422 So the '90s studs do bring down Djoker's #s but he makes up the deficit in the aughts, proving my timeless maxim (among...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

 

[StringGuruMRT]

Against the same competition? Exactly the same. There's no such thing as "fast grass" cuz grass has always been fast.

In fact the courts are playing "faster" than ever by any objective measure. Quoting me-self:



And here's again how he'd do in Pistol's/Fred's place:

Grass Court GOAT

list's a joke! We all know it goes: PETE ......... ........ ....... ......... ...... ........ ........ everybody else I think it should work like this....... Best Grass courter of the decade..... 1970s Bjorn Borg.....80s Mac? 90s Pete....00s Fedr....10s Djokovic.

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

Djokovic in lieu of Federer (and Nadal's own revised record) at Wimbledon

Just got the idea for another infallible NonP analysis following this one: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/grass-court-goat.303216/page-6#post-16331422 So the '90s studs do bring down Djoker's #s but he makes up the deficit in the aughts, proving my timeless maxim (among...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com

So maybe “fast grass” is not the right term. But they have manipulated the grass so that it now gives a more predictable bounce, which gives players more confidence to let the ball bounce, rather than take it out of the air by serving and volleying.

 

[initialize]

Probably none. His serve is good but not great, his volleys are mediocre and his overhead is terrible. Each of those need to be good to be successful on fast grass

 

[Genious at Work]

Against good competition of actual grass court players? Probably none.

 

[T007]

What competition? 17 year olds were winning Wimbledons, that's how tough the competition was... If you look at it from another angle

That is the competition...here grown up dads like zverev,medvedev,Tsitsipas can't even make it past the QFs.

 

[Milanez82]

You have hit the nail on the head. He has been winning Wimbledon at a canter every year not even having to play that well. Whilst Im not saying he doesnt play any attacking shots, its a largely defensive game that relies on errors from his opponents and just wearing them down. Obviously effective but incredibly dull. It just shows what a pathetic era this is.

I doubt he would have won any Wimbledon's on the old fast grass. Wouldn't have had a chance against the grass court specialists of old. The likes of Sampras, Edberg, Becker and Goran.

So why does he have as many winners as Kyrgios from open play if he relied on errors only

 

[Tennfan123]

Zero.

 

[ChrisRF]

Who of the current players would beat him if the grass was faster? Still nobody I guess, so what's the point?

Also his return and ground game is so good that he wouldn't consistently be beaten with S&V, by nobody in history actually. It's more about the modern racquets than about "fast or slow grass".

In 90s conditions and with 90s racquets Sampras probably could win, but that's all.

 

[Herald]

Depends on the year. His style is really not conducive on any level to the faster grass. Agassi won his Wimbledon as the most aggressive baseliner in history who took every ball on the rise and battered the return. The final point of his 1992 win is him battering Goran's serve so hard he grunts audibly. Maybe '96 opposite to Kracijek in place of Washington, or 2000 against a one legged Pete.

 

[Spencer Gore]

Baseliners Borg and Connors won 7 out of 9 on the fast grass between 1974 and 1982.

 

[StringGuruMRT]

Who of the current players would beat him if the grass was faster? Still nobody I guess, so what's the point?

Also his return and ground game is so good that he wouldn't consistently be beaten with S&V, by nobody in history actually. It's more about the modern racquets than about "fast or slow grass".

In 90s conditions and with 90s racquets Sampras probably could win, but that's all.

I think that Kygrios proved today that a big serve and decent ground game can keep you close to Novak on grass. Players from the 90s with more complete ground games (Becker and Ivanisevic to name a couple) would beat him under 90s conditions. And I think even today with modern equipment

 

[Herald]

Baseliners Borg and Connors won 7 out of 9 on the fast grass between 1974 and 1982.

Borg came in quite a bit and Connors was very aggressive on both sides. Borg's movement on grass was also surreal whereas Novak has fallen over multiple times in single matches over the years, including this one.

 

[Spencer Gore]

Borg came in quite a bit and Connors was very aggressive on both sides. Borg's movement on grass was also surreal whereas Novak has fallen over multiple times in single matches over the years, including this one.

Djokovic's movement being poor on grass is certainly an original approach to an argument.

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Raonic and Isner might have allowed Big 3 to win a couple

 

[jindra]

One. Wimbledon '22.

 

[ChrisRF]

I think that Kygrios proved today that a big serve and decent ground game can keep you close to Novak on grass. Players from the 90s with more complete ground games (Becker and Ivanisevic to name a couple) would beat him under 90s conditions. And I think even today with modern equipment

No, in my opinion they have zero chance. I mean, why is the game like it is today? If constant S&V would be a winning strategy, then some people would play it. They would get passed left and right, there is no doubt about it. Ivanisevic has next to no ground game (at least compared to Djokovic). Even in the 90s he was only competitive at Wimbledon. So how could he win on THIS grass? Djokovic throws himself into the return and then he has the advantage. And Ivanisevic will have to risk too much and will hit double faults.

I would much rather say Djokovic beats anyone in the 90s than they beat him today. Imagine the 1999 Wimbledon final. Yes, Sampras was great, but Agassi was only a break down in any set. Now imagine twice the player Agassi is as an opponent. Djokovic would hit the same strokes as Agassi but with movement like a madman. Even Sampras would struggle when rushing the net. With modern equipment it would become ugly for him. Remember even Hewitt beat him on grass. S&V became obsolete.

As a Federer and Sampras fan I don't like it, but it is what it is. Djokovic's game is less interesting, but unfortunately more effective.

 

[Flash777]

Lol..... Did u guys ever see how balanced Novak's resume is?

Fast Courts, Medium Courts, Slow Courts, Hard, Grass, Clay...... This guy has won it everywhere multiple times against different opponents..... He is a true Master of All surfaces.

He would have easily won even Fast Grass multiple times because he wud have figured it out. No one has a positive H2H against him once they have played 10 matches against him.

We are talking about a True ATG here

On Fast Grass, Djokovic 's Serve would have been even more effective and his ROS even more deadlier. He is returning 135+ mph serves right back at their feet and old ATGs would have struggled with his movements and his defence/offence from both wings.

He is one GOAT who would have dominated every era because he would have adapted.

 

[xFedal]

Baseliners Borg and Connors won 7 out of 9 on the fast grass between 1974 and 1982.

Lol..... Did u guys ever see how balanced Novak's resume is?

Fast Courts, Medium Courts, Slow Courts, Hard, Grass, Clay...... This guy has won it everywhere multiple times against different opponents..... He is a true Master of All surfaces.

He would have easily won even Fast Grass multiple times because he wud have figured it out. No one has a positive H2H against him once they have played 10 matches against him.

We are talking about a True ATG here

On Fast Grass, Djokovic 's Serve would have been even more effective and his ROS even more deadlier. He is returning 135+ mph serves right back at their feet and old ATGs would have struggled with his movements and his defence/offence from both wings.

He is one GOAT who would have dominated every era because he would have adapted.

About 7-9 Wimbledons on fast grass.

 

[Herald]

Lol..... Did u guys ever see how balanced Novak's resume is?

Fast Courts, Medium Courts, Slow Courts, Hard, Grass, Clay...... This guy has won it everywhere multiple times against different opponents..... He is a true Master of All surfaces.

He would have easily won even Fast Grass multiple times because he wud have figured it out. No one has a positive H2H against him once they have played 10 matches against him.

We are talking about a True ATG here

On Fast Grass, Djokovic 's Serve would have been even more effective and his ROS even more deadlier. He is returning 135+ mph serves right back at their feet and old ATGs would have struggled with his movements and his defence/offence from both wings.

He is one GOAT who would have dominated every era because he would have adapted.

Key areas of Novak's game such as his serve, return and volleys would all be weakened by smaller rackets and gut. His counterpuncher style would be a dream for a great serve and volleyer.

 

[Herald]

Djokovic's movement being poor on grass is certainly an original approach to an argument.

Not poor. Not near Borg.

 

[GabeT]

How many Wimbledons would Pete have won if it was played on clay?

who gives a rodent’s behind?

 

[PMChambers]

You have hit the nail on the head. He has been winning Wimbledon at a canter every year not even having to play that well. Whilst Im not saying he doesnt play any attacking shots, its a largely defensive game that relies on errors from his opponents and just wearing them down. Obviously effective but incredibly dull. It just shows what a pathetic era this is.

I doubt he would have won any Wimbledon's on the old fast grass. Wouldn't have had a chance against the grass court specialists of old. The likes of Sampras, Edberg, Becker and Goran.

So Djokovic isn't in the calibre of,
Agassi 1xW & RU, Courier RU, Connors 2xW 4xRU Pioline xRU!

Connors is outlier as he didn't win in the 90s. But he played fast grass. Djokovic volleyed in recent times as well Borg ever did, noted he didn't play 90s but 70/80 grass was faster and more erratic, but the tools where under powered.

End of the day Wimbledon 90s was Sampras and not many player could challenge him in grass in 90s condition including Federer, Borg, Mac, Becker, Edberg, Goran, etc. He was too good for that eras technology and conditions. Agassi as an outlier of 90s is only due to not meeting Sampras, swap 92 & 93 opponents and Agassi wouldn't have a Wim and Courier might have won.
Federer would not have beaten Sampras in 90s conditions either, he nearly beat him on slow grass during poor form with sampras going 5 set against the Mighty Barry Cowan.

 

[ChrisJR3264]

People want to say “fast grass” but the game is so much faster in today’s era. Heavy top - rpm and serve speeds.

 

[DSH]

It saddens me a bit that a predominantly backcourt player like Djokovic could be considered one of the all time greats on grass. I think that he has benefitted the most from the homogenization of court surfaces, particularly at Wimbledon.

How many Wimbledons do you think he would have won on the “fast grass?”

It is truly sad; indeed.

 

[nolefam_2024]

7

 

[nolefam_2024]

Nadal 0

 

[legcramp]

More as competition is weaker back then just like any other sport (unless you're delusional).

 

[LaVie en Rose]

How many of these threads TTW imbeciles unable to cope ,will open then dig?Who promised you will have all of your wishes fulfilled?

 

[abmk]

No, in my opinion they have zero chance. I mean, why is the game like it is today? If constant S&V would be a winning strategy, then some people would play it. They would get passed left and right, there is no doubt about it. Ivanisevic has next to no ground game (at least compared to Djokovic). Even in the 90s he was only competitive at Wimbledon. So how could he win on THIS grass? Djokovic throws himself into the return and then he has the advantage. And Ivanisevic will have to risk too much and will hit double faults.

I would much rather say Djokovic beats anyone in the 90s than they beat him today. Imagine the 1999 Wimbledon final. Yes, Sampras was great, but Agassi was only a break down in any set. Now imagine twice the player Agassi is as an opponent. Djokovic would hit the same strokes as Agassi but with movement like a madman. Even Sampras would struggle when rushing the net. With modern equipment it would become ugly for him. Remember even Hewitt beat him on grass. S&V became obsolete.

As a Federer and Sampras fan I don't like it, but it is what it is. Djokovic's game is less interesting, but unfortunately more effective.

djokovic doesn't have the same strokes as agassi. agassi's are clearly better. both fh and bh.
djokovic also doesn't like being put off rhythm, unlike agassi who doesn't mind it.

also no mention of disadvantages for djokovic in the 90s? no poly, more slipping on that grass, less rhythm

you just keep blatantly over-rating djokovic.

sampras would be dominant over djokovic on grass(any grass) and it wouldn't even be close.
Hewitt had a better return vs SnVers than djokovic (not even close) and was a better passer/lobber and loved a target at the net, didn't get disturbed by net play (in fact, loved a target at the net). Sampras would still lead the h2h prime to prime vs Hewitt comfortably enough. Hewitt did catch him when he was on the decline.

 

[Hypo Crisis]

It saddens me a bit that a predominantly backcourt player like Djokovic could be considered one of the all time greats on grass. I think that he has benefitted the most from the homogenization of court surfaces, particularly at Wimbledon.

How many Wimbledons do you think he would have won on the “fast grass?”

 

[StringGuruMRT]

LOL. What a surprise that a user named "Goatovic", would post a video trying to put Djokvic's accomplishments in a better light!

 

[fedfan24]

between 07-16 maybe 1 if he can avoid federer. since 2018/2019 still wins 3-4 because the field sucks but more prone to upset on the slicker grass so won’t dominate as much

 

[Hypo Crisis]

LOL. What a surprise that a user named "Goatovic", would post a video trying to put Djokvic's accomplishments in a better light!

No really, you should be worried about his name and not ultimate truth he is presenting
How typical from you guys.
But, if there is a user with Feds or Nadal pic as avatar, then it is all legit

 

[vex]

It saddens me a bit that a predominantly backcourt player like Djokovic could be considered one of the all time greats on grass. I think that he has benefitted the most from the homogenization of court surfaces, particularly at Wimbledon.

How many Wimbledons do you think he would have won on the “fast grass?”

I think you fundamentally misunderstand why Djokovic is good at Wimbledon. He might have had even BETTER results on “faster” grass.

 

[StringGuruMRT]

No really, you should be worried about his name and not ultimate truth he is presenting
How typical from you guys.
But, if there is a user with Feds or Nadal pic as avatar, then it is all legit

I would say the same about a Fed or Rafa Fanboy. I don't want to live in an echo chamber where I'm only hearing the words that I agree with. I want to hear opinions from people who think critically, not just try to get clicks from super fans, or closed minded people. Probably why I find myself interacting less and less online, and in social media forums...

 

[Hypo Crisis]

I would say the same about a Fed or Rafa Fanboy. I don't want to live in an echo chamber where I'm only hearing the words that I agree with. I want to hear opinions from people who think critically, not just try to get clicks from super fans, or closed minded people. Probably why I find myself interacting less and less online, and in social media forums...

I belive you 100%

 

[Break To Win]

Neither Djokovic nor Nadal would win Wimbledon if they played in the 1980s-90s.

Federer would have a better chance of winning, but he certainly wouldn't win 8

 

[DSH]

Neither Djokovic nor Nadal would win Wimbledon if they played in the 1980s-90s.

Federer would have a better chance of winning, but he certainly wouldn't win 8

Becker from Wimbledon 1995 vs Djokovic from Wimbledon 2015, on fast grass, who wins?