If Federer and Nadal never existed, would Djokovic pull off the CYGS in 2007?

[tennis_pro]

AO - lost to the best version of Federer. Would've played Robredo, Roddick and Gonzalez in the final. I guess Roddick would've been a big threat and Gonzalez would've been a problem.

FO - lost to Nadal in the SF, would've faced Federer in the final. Potential threats: Davydenko, Robredo, Hewitt, Moya

Wimbledon - retired against Nadal in the SF, would've faced Federer in the final. Potential threats: Berdych, Gasquet, Roddick, Haas

US Open - lost to Federer in the final. I only see Roddick as a big threat, lesser threat: Davydenko

Djokovic was still young (20 years old) but the only players he lost to were Federer and Nadal, both at their peaks of the respective matches. Do you think he had a shot at the CYGS that year?

 

[NatF]

He was the third best player so he had more of a shot than anyone else. But he doesn't do it, not strong enough in the mind yet and I find it unlikely that he sweeps the majors. Definitely think Roddick would stop him at the USO with the home crowd tbh. Probably wins at least a major though.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

If he already had experience and won some Majors before maybe there would have been a slight chance but I don't see a guy just announcing himself to the top by winning CYGS. In this scenario my guess is he would take 2/4.

 

[MichaelNadal]

If I were white, I wouldn't be black

 

[Red Rick]

Think he's the favorite for RG, and maybe Wimbly. Underdog vs Roddick at USO, no chance in hell for Australia.

 

[tennis_pro]

Think he's the favorite for RG, and maybe Wimbly. Underdog vs Roddick at USO, no chance in hell for Australia.

He wasn't bad against Federer, I actually think that he'd have a shot against Roddick and then Gonzalez. Probably an underdog in the first match and a 50/50 call in the final but still with a shot.

 

[mike danny]

He wasn't bad against Federer, I actually think that he'd have a shot against Roddick and then Gonzalez. Probably an underdog in the first match and a 50/50 call in the final but still with a shot.

If Roddick plays like he did against Federer in the AO semis, Djokovic is in with a shot.

 

[tennis_pro]

If Roddick plays like he did against Federer in the AO semis, Djokovic is in with a shot.

I don't think Roddick would be so suicidal against a younger Djokovic. Besides, he was still in his prime and Djokovic wasn't necessarily in his + the match-up issues. I'd still give Djokovic a 30-40% chance to beat Roddick at that AO.

 

[mike danny]

I don't think Roddick would be so suicidal against a younger Djokovic. Besides, he was still in his prime and Djokovic wasn't neccessarily in his + the match-up issues. I'd still give Djokovic a 30-40% chance to beat Djokovic at that AO.

True, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Djokovic beating himself

 

[buscemi]

He wasn't bad against Federer, I actually think that he'd have a shot against Roddick and then Gonzalez. Probably an underdog in the first match and a 50/50 call in the final but still with a shot.

I don't think he would have had anything close to a 50/50 shot against Gonzo in the final. That was Gonzo in God mode. Only Federer was taking him down in the finals.

 

[mike danny]

His only chances would be the FO and the USO. At Wimb he got injured/ran out of gas anyway. A shame as he was outplaying Nadal before those issues hit him.

At the FO I think he beats Davydenko, because I expect Nikolay to choke.

At the USO he has a shot if nerves don't get to him in the final and if he mantains his coposure and takes his opportunities. But if he arrives at the USO as already a FO champion, then his chances increase significantly.

 

[NatF]

If Roddick plays like he did against Federer in the AO semis, Djokovic is in with a shot.

I don't think Roddick would be so suicidal against a younger Djokovic. Besides, he was still in his prime and Djokovic wasn't neccessarily in his + the match-up issues. I'd still give Djokovic a 30-40% chance to beat Roddick at that AO.

Roddick was actually in great form, he beat Fish 2-2-2 in the QF hitting only about 5 UE's.

 

[buscemi]

At the FO I think he beats Davydenko, because I expect Nikolay to choke..

It would have been an interesting match because Novak definitely got tight in his first Major final against Federer at the U.S. Open later that year. At the 2007 French Open, Davydenko was ranked higher, had better clay court results, had done very well at the French Open the last few years, was coming off a tight loss in the Rome SF against Nadal, and had really nice wins against Nalbandian and Canas in R16 and QF.

 

[mike danny]

It would have been an interesting match because Novak definitely got tight in his first Major final against Federer at the U.S. Open later that year. At the 2007 French Open, Davydenko was ranked higher, had better clay court results, had done very well at the French Open the last few years, was coming off a tight loss in the Rome SF against Nadal, and had really nice wins against Nalbandian and Canas in R16 and QF.

It would have been interesting but Nikolay did choke quite a bit against Federer in the semis.

 

[tennis_pro]

His only chances would be the FO and the USO. At Wimb he got injured/ran out of gas anyway. A shame as he was outplaying Nadal before those issues hit him.

At the FO I think he beats Davydenko, because I expect Nikolay to choke.

At the USO he has a shot if nerves don't get to him in the final and if he mantains his coposure and takes his opportunities. But if he arrives at the USO as already a FO champion, then his chances increase significantly.

I think you need to look at the context here. Davydenko choked against peak Federer because he knew he almsost had to play beyond his capabilities to beat that Rog. He wouldn't have to against Djokovic. If this was anything before the final I'm fairly sure Davydenko woudl've won. If this was a final then it's closer to 50-50 because:
a) I don't know how Davydenko would react playing his first final
b) Djokovic wasn't a mental giant in his first final either (but also against peak Federer)

 

[buscemi]

It would have been interesting but Nikolay did choke quite a bit against Federer in the semis.

Right, just like Novak choked against Fed in the U.S. Open finals later that year. I think that there would have been a lot of nerves on display in a Nikolay/Novak French Open final. It might have looked something like the Gaudio/Coria final in 2004.

 

[mike danny]

I think you need to look at the context here. Davydenko choked against peak Federer because he knew he almsost had to play beyond his capabilities to beat that Rog. He wouldn't have to against Djokovic. If this was anything before the final I'm fairly sure Davydenko woudl've won. If this was a final then it's closer to 50-50 because:
a) I don't know how Davydenko would react playing his first final
b) Djokovic wasn't a mental giant in his first final either (but also against peak Federer)

Good points. Still, I couldn't forget when Nikolay led 4-2 in the 5th against Puerta at RG 2005 and still lost. That's why I don't really trust him even against Djokovic.

Let's just say the Roddick-Djokovic USO and Davydenko-Djokovic FO would have been fascinating matches. Djokovic would have had a shot in both, but not without a fight.

 

[mike danny]

Right, just like Novak choked against Fed in the U.S. Open finals later that year. I think that there would have been a lot of nerves on display in a Nikolay/Novak French Open final. It might have looked something like the Gaudio/Coria final in 2004.

Ok, I really doubt either of them would have choked to that extent. Coria's choke was a choke of epic proportions. I don't think Novak or Nikolay would have choked as badly as Guillermo.

 

[BVSlam]

Absolutely not. It's not like "if two big three members didn't exist, the other would have 30 slams".

If Federer and Nadal didn't exist, the players Djokovic would have to go through that year would have been multiple slam champions themselves. They wouldn't (mentally) be the same players they were in the existing scenario. It looks doable on paper only because of what actually happened and how they matched up against Fedal.

And, as had been mentioned already, that doesn't work well together with breaking through for the first time that year. Or heck, who knows, he might have been the surprise kid who'd win Roland Garros 2006 where he was doing pretty well before falling to Nadal. Then he might have been a different player himself already.

Scenarios such as "if legendary player X didn't exist then..." never work because that would change the entire tennis landscape. You can't just cross them out of a draw and everything remains the same.

 

[Steve0904]

Maybe 1 major. No more than that. You could see at the USO that he got tight in his first major final and I'm not sure it had all that much to do with his opponent. He might win the USO, but neither Roddick or Davydenko would be easy to beat, especially considering Roddick often beat the younger Djokovic and would be the heavy crowd favourite. Ironically his best chance might be RG, but even there if there was no Nadal he'd probably be playing a very good clay courter like Moya in the SF who hadn't dropped a set since the first round. And if Federer wasn't there he's probably playing Davydenko or Robredo in the final, and in mid 2007 I'm not sure he was ready to win those potential match ups.

And strangely enough his lowest chance is probably the AO. Still on Rebound Ace in 2007, and he'd have to beat probably Youzhny, Robredo, Roddick and Gonzalez. Would not favour him to beat Roddick or Gonzalez. People are still underestimating Gonzalez at that AO. Federer had a habit of cooling down in form players at that time, but I highly doubt a very young Djokovic would be able to do the same.

On grass he retired due to injury/exhaustion anyway so I'd just assume he retires no matter who the opponent is.

 

[mike danny]

Maybe 1 major. No more than that. You could see at the USO that he got tight in his first major final and I'm not sure it had all that much to do with his opponent. He might win the USO, but neither Roddick or Davydenko would be easy to beat, especially considering Roddick often beat the younger Djokovic and would be the heavy crowd favoyurite. Ironically his best chance might be RG, but even there if there was no Nadal he'd probably be playing a very good clay courter like Moya in the SF who hadn't dropped a set since the first round. And if Federer wasn't there he's probably playing Davydenko or Robredo in the final, and in mid 2007 I'm not sure he was ready to win those potential match ups.

And strangely enough his lowest chance is probably the AO. Still on Rebound Ace in 2007, and he'd have to beat probably Youzhny, Robredo, Roddick and Gonzalez. Would not favour him to beat Roddick or Gonzalez. People are still underestimating Gonzalez at that AO. Federer had a habit of cooling down in form players at that time, but I highly doubt a very young Djokovic would be able to do the same.

On grass he retired due to injury/exhaustion anyway so I'd just assume he retires no matter who the opponent is.

Maybe it had something to do with the opponent too. Djokovic knew deep inside that he had to go for more on some occasions, because it was the only possible way to take down peak Fed.

 

[Steve0904]

Maybe it had something to do with the opponent too. Djokovic knew deep inside that he had to go for more on some occasions, because it was the only possible way to take down peak Fed.

Maybe, but would it matter anyway? I don't think he beats Roddick in the final personally (the Roddick-Davydenko H2H is 5-1 Roddick). He'd probably be 50/50 against Davydenko.

 

[mike danny]

Maybe, but would it matter anyway? I don't think he beats Roddick in the final personally (the Roddick-Davydenko H2H is 5-1 Roddick). He'd probably be 50/50 against Davydenko.

Lke I said, against Roddick he'd have a shot if he maintains his composure.

 

[AngryBirds]

Roddick would be beating him in 3 out of 4 slams. Djokovic always had problems with Roddick even in his prime.

 

[Steve0904]

Lke I said, against Roddick he'd have a shot if he maintains his composure.

He probably wouldn't though. Anyway, @BVSlam has the thread ending answer unless we're assuming Federer and Nadal only took 2007 off to have fun or something else ridiculous.

With no Federer and Nadal in the years before 2007, guys like Roddick and Davydenko would win more slams and have more confidence against young upstarts like Djokovic at the time.

Obviously he's not winning the CYGS in 2007 in a million years even if he got 6 WO's and only had to play the finals of all the slams. This thread is much more realistic when talking about the idea that he might win 1 major.

I find most people in this thread are either underestimating how fragile young Novak could be, or underestimating his potential opponents, or both.

 

[Red Rick]

If Roddick plays like he did against Federer in the AO semis, Djokovic is in with a shot.

It's not just Roddick, I think Gonzo would straight blow Djoko off court

 

[uliks]

Zero slams. Robredo, Gonzalez, Roddick, Davydenko would be too strong for him... It's not suprise that he never won a match against them before 2008 anyway...

 

[Krish872007]

No one has done the Grand Slam since 1969 - even Djokovic missed it in 2015 and 2011, so the chances of a 2007 version doing it are very slim. He would have ended up playing Davy in the FO and US Finals - probably could win at least one of them. Unlikely to win the AO.

Wimbledon is a bit of a mystery. Without Nadal & Federer, Wimby 2007 would have been the tournament of the walking wounded. Tired, injured Novak against tired, injured Gasquet in the final lol.

 

[buscemi]

No one has done the Grand Slam since 1969 - even Djokovic missed it in 2015 and 2011, so the chances of a 2007 version doing it are very slim. He would have ended up playing Davy in the FO and US Finals - probably could win at least one of them. Unlikely to win the AO.

Wimbledon is a bit of a mystery. Without Nadal & Federer, Wimby 2007 would have been the tournament of the walking wounded. Tired, injured Novak against tired, injured Gasquet in the final lol.

If we're talking about a universe where Federer and Nadal don't exist (or don't play tennis), I think that Roddick takes Wimbledon in 2007. In that universe, Roddick is likely #1 in the world at Wimbledon in 2007, with multiple Wimbledon titles under his belt. I doubt that version of Roddick blows a 2 set lead against Gasquet, and I also doubt that he loses to Djokovic in the final.

 

[Big_Dangerous]

AO - lost to the best version of Federer. Would've played Robredo, Roddick and Gonzalez in the final. I guess Roddick would've been a big threat and Gonzalez would've been a problem.

FO - lost to Nadal in the SF, would've faced Federer in the final. Potential threats: Davydenko, Robredo, Hewitt, Moya

Wimbledon - retired against Nadal in the SF, would've faced Federer in the final. Potential threats: Berdych, Gasquet, Roddick, Haas

US Open - lost to Federer in the final. I only see Roddick as a big threat, lesser threat: Davydenko

Djokovic was still young (20 years old) but the only players he lost to were Federer and Nadal, both at their peaks of the respective matches. Do you think he had a shot at the CYGS that year?

This is idiotic. If Federer hasn't existed, then at most he only could have won 2 slams in 2007, and AO was iffy at best, because he still would have needed to win a Final.

 

[abmk]

LOL, no ...he's not winning vs gonzo in AO 07 ...doesn't probably win vs roddick either. Roddick was mediocre was fed in the SF, but he was playing some fine tennis before that.

RG is possible, but I think he loses to davy at RG

he was dead tired due to the draw in wim 07 and had to retire, so that doesn't even come into the picture.

USO is possible, but if Roddick plays well, anywhere near as he did in the QF vs fed, I'd have to give roddick the edge, esp in front of the USO crowd.

 

[guanzishou]

Nay, he would have lost to me.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk