If Nole wins RG this year - Is he still majoring in minors?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 77403
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 77403

Guest
All the top guys have their haters and critics, and no matter what they do and win on the court, the haters will always bring them down.

Now in regards to Djokovic, the majoring in minors has been used a lot, especially recently with his masters wins. Yes, I agree he lost a couple of slam finals, but he won two of the last three, and won his fourth WTF to go with his masters collection.

Now, if he wins this edition of RG, likely defeating Nadal, and Murray, possibly even Federer along the way, will that majoring in minors be a thing of the past? ;)
 
He never majored in minors from the first place.

He is the 8th player in history of tennis to have the most slams. If that is majoring in minors, then Im jumping off a bridge.

Haters will be haters. Don't listen to AngieB who created that nonsense.
 
Of course it won't. The haters aren't rational; no results can challenge their dogma.

We still have guys on these boards who, after Sampras admitted Fed had surpassed him, still think Fed is overrated (weak era, H2H with 1 guy, etc) and won't accept him as GOAT.
 
Absolutely. Even if Djokovic wins RG he'll still certainly have been majoring in minors... and also majoring in majors.


Total.

Domination.
 
RF-18 said:
He never majored in minors from the first place.

He is the 8th player in history of tennis to have the most slams. If that is majoring in minors, then Im jumping off a bridge.

Haters will be haters. Don't listen to AngieB who created that nonsense.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. This "majoring in the minors" nonsense is the kind of idiotic argument one sees in the Internet from people who never even came close to being a ball boy in a tournament, much less actually compete in one.
 
No. He never was majoring in minors. That is amateur talk. He loses RG he will go out and win Wimbledon or USO. In fact I kinda would not mind he loses early at RG so he can get some extra rest and practice and win another USO and or another Wimbledon. he wears himself out too much in the first half of the year.
 
Winning 8 majors is an incredible achievement! While I doubt he reaches Federer or even Nadal's slam count Novak is an all-time great. It's amazing how Fedal has spoiled us and made us forget how special someone like Novak's career has been and continues to be.
 
It's always made me laugh when people make out that Djokovic "majors in minors" in the first place. What his haters tend to forget is that there are more than twice as many Masters throughout the year as there are Slams so it stands to reason that he'll win the former much more frequently than the latter. He's also had some pretty high profile losses in the last few years which sadly makes it easier for his detractors to deride him, especially those to Murray. A lot of tennis fans nowadays seem to think that unless you're mopping up all the slams like Federer did at his peak, you're not a worthy number 1 which is nonsense of course. The majors are the most important tournaments but they're not the only ones that count.
 
Hitman said:
Now in regards to Djokovic, the majoring in minors has been used a lot, especially recently with his masters wins. Yes, I agree he lost a couple of slam finals, but he won two of the last three, and won his fourth WTF to go with his masters collection.

Now, if he wins this edition of RG, likely defeating Nadal, and Murray, possibly even Federer along the way, will that majoring in minors be a thing of the past? ;)
Click to expand...
The biggest and best tournaments in tennis are the #ITF-Sanctioned grand slam events. The results of #ITF-sanctioned grand slam events determines tennis players place in tennis history (i.e. #ITHOF).

#Novak is one of (13) other tennis players who have won at least 8 #ITF-sanctioned grand slam events. #Novak has an 8-7 record in #ITF-sanctioned grand slam events. Yet in #Masters finals, he has an exemplary 24-11 record. Such dichotomy has made people question why #Novak struggles in the biggest and best finals in tennis, #ITF-sanctioned grand slam tournaments. Thus, #Novak has been branded as #majoring in #minors because of his excellence in #masters and less than stellar results in #ITF-sanctioned grand slam finals. (See #IvanLendl)

In the 2010's, #Rafael has won 8 grand slam titles and #Novak 7, which is indicative of #Novak's #majoring in #minors. A player of #Novak's stature shouldn't struggle as frequently in #ITF-sanctioned grand slam finals with the #master results he holds. It points towards mental lapses and inconsistency in the biggest tennis tournaments in the world.

FYI, #WTF's are historical #minors and don't hold the sanction or historical significance as #ITF-sanctioned grand slam events.

A win in #Paris would help #Novak historically in many areas, but he needs to win more #Majors to mark his stamp on tennis history. He definitely needs more #grandslam wins to #major in #majors. Currently, he #majors in #minors and that won't change until he can step it up in #ITF-sanctioned grand slam finals.


#AngiesLyst​
 
Djokovic2011 said:
It's always made me laugh when people make out that Djokovic "majors in minors" in the first place. What his haters tend to forget is that there are more than twice as many Masters throughout the year as there are Slams so it stands to reason that he'll win the former much more frequently than the latter. He's also had some pretty high profile losses in the last few years which sadly makes it easier for his detractors to deride him, especially those to Murray. A lot of tennis fans nowadays seem to think that unless you're mopping up all the slams like Federer did at his peak, you're not a worthy number 1 which is nonsense of course. The majors are the most important tournaments but they're not the only ones that count.
Click to expand...

In the 2010's, #Rafael has won 8 #ITF-sanctioned grand slam events, #Novak 7, hence, #Novak #majors in #minors. Given #Novaks other #minor achievements (weeks at no 1, masters wins, et al), he should have won more #ITF-sanctioned grand slam events up to this point. Hopefully, #Novak can shed his #GSfinal demons and make his mark on tennis history.

I think at this point, #Novak's biggest hope is that #Roger and #Rafael's level of play continues to decline, because #Novak was never beating them in grand slam finals at their peak. Everyone knows it.

#AngiesLyst​
 
GabeT said:
Totally agree. This "majoring in the minors" nonsense is the kind of idiotic argument one sees in the Internet from people who never even came close to being a ball boy in a tournament, much less actually compete in one.
Click to expand...
I guarantee you I've attended dozens more #grandslam events than you've ever watched from your television set.

I've seen that best ever and #Novak isn't it. Not even close. Get over it, kids. You can't turn a pair of #Adidas tennis shoes into #Jimmychoo's. #GirlBye

#AngiesLyst​
 
if Novak win the Grand slam this year by winning all 4 majors......is he the NEW GOAT ?? even though he doesn't have any many majors yet as roger ?????
 
AngieB strikes again. Nobody was saying djokovic is the best ever. And everything else?

Pathetic. Horrendous. Disgraceful
 
RF-18 said:
AngieB strikes again. Nobody was saying djokovic is the best ever. And everything else?

Pathetic. Horrendous. Disgraceful
Click to expand...

What gets me is how she's always comparing his slam finals record to Lendl's even though Djokovic's record is exactly the same as her favourite player, JC. And that ain't Jesus Christ by the way. :lol:
 
RF-18 said:
AngieB strikes again. Nobody was saying djokovic is the best ever. And everything else?

Pathetic. Horrendous. Disgraceful
Click to expand...

You can tell those types of posters troll on purpose. It's really easy to look up Djokovic's statistics and see that he's 24-10 in Masters finals, not 24-11 as Mrs. ITF said. I didn't even bother reading anything after that, some people just have their own agendas, can't stop won't stop. :P
 
Strange thread. Djokovic to this point has a better record at Masters Series than Grand Slams. A rational analysis of his career stats shows that, irrespective of whether the person making the observation is a hater, a lover, a fighter or a fanboy.
 
reaper said:
Strange thread. Djokovic to this point has a better record at Masters Series than Grand Slams. A rational analysis of his career stats shows that, irrespective of whether the person making the observation is a hater, a lover, a fighter or a fanboy.
Click to expand...

Mmm, I don't think you've quite grasped what the OP was trying to say. :|
 
Hitman said:
All the top guys have their haters and critics, and no matter what they do and win on the court, the haters will always bring them down.

Now in regards to Djokovic, the majoring in minors has been used a lot, especially recently with his masters wins. Yes, I agree he lost a couple of slam finals, but he won two of the last three, and won his fourth WTF to go with his masters collection.

Now, if he wins this edition of RG, likely defeating Nadal, and Murray, possibly even Federer along the way, will that majoring in minors be a thing of the past? ;)
Click to expand...

Who cares what "haters" say? Who cares what anyone says? Djokovic's accomplishments after he hangs it up will speak for themselves. Doesn't matter what people's little opinions are.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Mmm, I don't think you've quite grasped what the OP was trying to say. :|
Click to expand...

I wasn't just addressing the OP. I would think if Djokovic can get to about 12 slams he could no longer be considered as "majoring in minors." It's a testament to how good his overall career record is, that as a player with 8 Grand slam titles to his name at this point he's underachieved in grand slam tournaments. He's won 4 of the past 13 since 2012. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I'd be surprised if he hasn't won more than 30% of Masters tournaments in that time frame.
 
It's just a catch phrase to point out the discrepancy in how dominant he has been at Masters events vs some unexpected lapses/struggles in the slam events.

That point in itself is a fair one to raise to an extent, but it doesn't change the fact that 8 majors (and at least a couple more likely to come) is better than all but a handful of Open Era players.

If Djokovic retired tomorrow, he'd be one of the 10 best players of the Open Era. Pretty darn good any way you slice it.
 
reaper said:
I wasn't just addressing the OP. I would think if Djokovic can get to about 12 slams he could no longer be considered as "majoring in minors." It's a testament to how good his overall career record is, that as a player with 8 Grand slam titles to his name at this point he's underachieved in grand slam tournaments. He's won 4 of the past 13 since 2012. I don't have the stats in front of me, but I'd be surprised if he hasn't won more than 30% of Masters tournaments in that time frame.
Click to expand...

Which goes back to what I said in my earlier post about there being twice as many Masters as Slams. Why should it therefore be so surprising that he wins more of the tournaments that get played frequently throughout the year than the ones that only take place four times? :?
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Which goes back to what I said in my earlier post about there being twice as many Masters as Slams. Why should it therefore be so surprising that he wins more of the tournaments that get played frequently throughout the year than the ones that only take place four times? :?
Click to expand...

The ratio of Masters tournaments to slams isn't 3 to 1.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Which goes back to what I said in my earlier post about there being twice as many Masters as Slams. Why should it therefore be so surprising that he wins more of the tournaments that get played frequently throughout the year than the ones that only take place four times? :?
Click to expand...

He was talking percentages. The number of events doesn't affect that.

I think the reason he's been better at Masters is simple. More of the Masters events feature conditions that suit him better (percentage-wise and obviously in total events).

How many Masters events feature quicker surfaces/conditions? Cincy. Maybe Shanghai. That's 2/9 (22.2%). Yet half of the majors (Wimbledon & US Open) are played in those conditions.

He gets 4/9 (44.4%) Masters events (and the WTF) in his preferred conditions...slower hard courts. But, only one major (25%) in those conditions.

The rest are on clay, where he is also great. The real question is why has he been unable to translate all that clay Masters success against Nadal to Roland Garros. Again, I think surface speed is a factor. Roland Garros, IMO, is faster than Monte Carlo and Rome, and that makes it tougher for Djokovic to beat Nadal there. Combine that with the 5-set format and the additional space behind the baseline that Rafa likes, and it's Djoker's bad luck that the biggest clay event happens to be the one that offers the most favorable conditions for his nemesis.
 
The point that AngieB always makes seems to be about number of slams, who has grand slams. That's mostly the ITF thing.

I would look at it from another, similar view. I will use Wiki here, so if the numbers are off, please correct me.

Federer:
Grand Slam tournaments 17/8 .68
ATP Masters 1000 23/18 .56

Nadal:
Grand Slam tournaments 14/6 .70
ATP Masters 1000 27/14 .66

Djokovic:
Grand Slam tournaments 8/7 .53
ATP Masters 1000 24/ 10 .70

Fed's % of slam finals won has been going down since he passed his peak, as Nadal's will, and Novak has a long way to go to pull up his slam records.

That said, Novak had the very bad fortune to be in the Fedal era, where Nadal was already taking RG away from Fed when he was still a teen. A lot of the masters he's won had both Fed and Nadal in them.

It's all about this year now. If he wins RG and then at least another slam, at least Nadal's record at slams may be attainable.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
What gets me is how she's always comparing his slam finals record to Lendl's even though Djokovic's record is exactly the same as her favourite player, JC. And that ain't Jesus Christ by the way. :lol:
Click to expand...
At this point I'd still say Connors is better than Novak..

McEnroe, Wilander, Becker, Edberg and Agassi though? Novak is better than them.
 
Sabratha said:
At this point I'd still say Connors is better than Novak..

McEnroe, Wilander, Becker, Edberg and Agassi though? Novak is better than them.
Click to expand...

Connors is better than Djokovic but the fact remains that their slam finals records are exactly the same and Angie doesn't care about anything else outside the majors anyway.
 
Sabratha said:
At this point I'd still say Connors is better than Novak..

McEnroe, Wilander, Becker, Edberg and Agassi though? Novak is better than them.
Click to expand...
I'd say close to equal, but if he continues as he is playing now, that will change. ;)

The one thing Novak lacks that keeps me from being a fan is any kind of aggression in coming in. I also don't think he continue dominating for long hanging back as much as he does.
 
Gary Duane said:
The point that AngieB always makes seems to be about number of slams, who has grand slams. That's mostly the ITF thing.

I would look at it from another, similar view. I will use Wiki here, so if the numbers are off, please correct me.

Federer:
Grand Slam tournaments 17/8 .68
ATP Masters 1000 23/18 .56

Nadal:
Grand Slam tournaments 14/6 .70
ATP Masters 1000 27/14 .66

Djokovic:
Grand Slam tournaments 8/7 .53
ATP Masters 1000 24/ 10 .70

Fed's % of slam finals won has been going down since he passed his peak, as Nadal's will, and Novak has a long way to go to pull up his slam records.

That said, Novak had the very bad fortune to be in the Fedal era, where Nadal was already taking RG away from Fed when he was still a teen. A lot of the masters he's won had both Fed and Nadal in them.

It's all about this year now. If he wins RG and then at least another slam, at least Nadal's record at slams may be attainable.
Click to expand...

This is a fine point and I do think that Novak definitely has more nerves on the big stage than Nadal and Federer. But I think the one thing that is in his favour is that 5 out of the 7 losses have been to the two best players ever, and he has certainly had no easy finals regardless of winning or losing. Whereas both Nadal and Federer have had a few soft ones. This is why I think Agassi is near Novak even though they have identical slam finals records. Names like schuttler, clement, were just happy to be there, and I went to those two rubbish finals. Also the other guys who were genuine players that he beat were a much lower level of player. Medvedev, Ivanisevic, Martin. So I do believe his poorer finals % has excuses for it.
 
Gary Duane said:
I'd say close to equal, but if he continues as he is playing now, that will change. ;)

The one thing Novak lacks that keeps me from being a fan is any kind of aggression in coming in. I also don't think he continue dominating for long hanging back as much as he does.
Click to expand...
#********** lacks the type of aggression that the greatest players possess. Aggression is well-awarded historically.

#AngiesLyst​
 
It doesn't matter what his record in major finals are he still has 8 and has a winning record playing in them (8-7). In 15 major finals he has played Nadal, Federer, Murray and Tsonga once. That has to be some of the stiffest competition for slams ever.
 
Gary Duane said:
The point that AngieB always makes seems to be about number of slams, who has grand slams. That's mostly the ITF thing.
Click to expand...
The #ITF-thing, as you call it, is the sanctioning body of #GrandSlam tennis throughout tennis history. #ITF-sanctioned grand slam events has, and always will be the historically greatest tennis tournaments, of which, winning is predictably mandatory as a former player for admittance in the #ITHOF. Tour-level events, WTF, YEC, et al is delegated to other achievements.

Tennis history begins and ends with the #ITF-sanctioned Grand Slam events. The other tour-level events have their place, but will always be subordinate when compared the ITF-sanctioned grand slam events.

#AngiesLyst​
 
Djokovic2011 said:
AngieB will hate you for saying so. :grin:
Click to expand...
We are only discussing tennis. As you kids get older and are exposed to more generational champions, you will look at tennis history differently. As the years pass, you will learn to love tennis more and find new favorites. The face of tennis will be changing dramatically in the next three to five years. Ask yourself. Are you ready to face that reality?

#AngiesLyst​
 
RF-18 said:
He never majored in minors from the first place.

He is the 8th player in history of tennis to have the most slams. If that is majoring in minors, then Im jumping off a bridge.

Haters will be haters. Don't listen to AngieB who created that nonsense.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Novak is (1) of (13) players to hold 8 #ITF-Sanctioned Grand Slam events. 8-7 record, tons of masters, #majors in #minors.

Why must you always make these threads about me? Why are you so scared of an old woman?

#AngiesLyst​
 
Hitman said:
All the top guys have their haters and critics, and no matter what they do and win on the court, the haters will always bring them down.

Now in regards to Djokovic, the majoring in minors has been used a lot, especially recently with his masters wins. Yes, I agree he lost a couple of slam finals, but he won two of the last three, and won his fourth WTF to go with his masters collection.

Now, if he wins this edition of RG, likely defeating Nadal, and Murray, possibly even Federer along the way, will that majoring in minors be a thing of the past? ;)
Click to expand...

No way is a master's win "minor". You're playing against the best. It's a minor major if anything.
 
Last edited:
Mr.Lob said:
No way is a master's win "minor". You're playing against the best. It's a minor major if anything.
Click to expand...
#MrLob,

#Masters events do not hold the historical significance as an #ITF-sanctioned grand slam #major. Until #masters events are sanctioned by the #ITF and used as primary inclusion factor into the #ITHOF, then #masters are #minors.

No way can you make a #master a #major when #majors are always #grander than #minors. #masters are #minors historically.

#AngiesLyst​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RF-18
Why is Djokovic the one getting ''punished'' for the one slam a year thing?
3 4 5
Replies
241
Views
12K
RF-18
RF-18
Aussie Darcy
  • Poll Poll
Casper Ruud now has 10 titles in his career. All are ATP250 titles with not one win over a top 10 player. Majoring in minors?
2 3
Replies
128
Views
8K
legcramp
legcramp
Gary Duane
Djokovic #majoring in #majors and #minoring in #minors
Replies
7
Views
890
Djokovic2011
Djokovic2011
Gary Duane
Did Novak Djokovic mostly major in minors?
2 3
Replies
112
Views
6K
Mr.Lob
Mr.Lob
Nadal_Django
  • Poll Poll
Is Federer majoring in minors!?
2 3
Replies
137
Views
8K
Third Serve
Third Serve
Back
Top