Is Djokovic developing to the most complete player of all time, or is he already?

RF-18

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
You know, I have seen many great players, federer is in my top list of course, but djokovic is something quite special.

You guys who have watched from ca. 70s to presentis nole possibly the most complete player tennis has seen? or is he developing into it?

I mean, he has no weaknesses. His offensive is world class, defense on nadal level, from what I have seen now at wimbledno its like he has developed his serve A LOT (before the final yesterday, he had made more aces than federer), his return game is miles away from the rest of the guys, his backhand undisputed #1, forehand one of the top 3 for sure, his mental game etc. Surfaces he is world class in all of them.

Can some of you point to me what his weaknesses are? please? or am I blind or something? what is going on with this guy?

Im pretty sure he will have the most GS titles after Federer and Nadal when its time to retire. Thats for sure, a guy with this game it's impossible to not be considered as one of the all time greats when he leaves the game. I think he may even surpass nadal if he keeps doing what he does and keeps developing (strangely enough at this age).

Before it was only federer for me, but the recent years i just can't stop admiring Novak Djokovic. True master of the game.
 
Last edited:
RF-18 said:
I mean, he has no weaknesses.

Can some of you point to me what his weaknesses are? please? or am I blind or something? what is going on with this guy?
Click to expand...

His biggest weakness is the mental part of his game.

This is why he only has 7 grand slams and one of the worst win/loss GS finals percentages in history.

I'm not saying hes not a great player, because he is, BUT he is not the most complete player of all time.
 
What are his weaknesses? Easy.

1) Volleys/net play
2) Overhead smashes
3) Prone to get tight/choking as of late

But other than those 3 things...yes he is pretty darn complete. ;)
 
Simply looking at win/loss percentage without considering the actual level of play (of matches) at a very detailed level is overly simplistic. There was a great IBM analysis posted here of the Federer/Djokovic match, where it looked liked they drew conclusions based on a detailed quantification of court positioning and shot speed / heaviness. That is the kind of analysis you'd need to do to really compare.

So I wouldn't say Djokovic is mentally weak. You don't win 7 GS being mentally weak (yes, I think he was before 2011, but not after).

That said, I wouldn't say he is the most complete player of all time, although he is certainly great overall. He is very unfortunate not to have won the FO yet, and would be very
unlucky not to win it in his career.

I doubt he'll challenge Nadal or Federer's Major count, but of course can't say for sure. He is 27 with 7 Majors. I'd guess he has 3-6 more in him.

However, I would say that the W 2014 Final actually shows how great Federer is, that he is still at 33 years old making another all-time great -- who may very well be a 1st tier all-time great when all is said and done -- go to 5 sets and win it late in the 5th on a break.
 
A guy that couldn't put away sitting duck volleys against Rafa in the 2013 US Open final is the most complete player?

Not buying it.
 
No that would still be Federer:

at least 5 finals at all four Grand Slams (Nadal is at 3, Djokovic is at 2)

at least 7 semifinals at all four Grand Slams (Nadal is at 4, Djokovic is at 4)

at least 9 quarterfinals at all four Grand Slams (Nadal is at 5, Djokovic is at 7)

Federer has won a Grand Slam final in straight sets at all four Grand Slams (Novak has done this at 1 Slam, Nadal has done this at 2 Slams)
 
Is Djokovic developing to the most complete player of all time, or is he alre...

Phenomenal athlete for sure, but as stated by others, not complete (yet).

His serve could be more dominant and he displays a bit too much drama on court. More defensive than aggressive overall. Id like to see more balance there. It appears he plays the same way no matter what.

His superhuman return game and defense lightens the load in the other areas.
 
Last edited:
and I have not even mentioned his movement on the court, his court coverage, His agility, flexibility etc. Acc. to mcenroe djokovic is the greatest returner on serve in the history of game.

But yes, i forgot one weakness, his netplay/volleying is really bad as someone said previously, but I would like to now who is more complete than him, except maybe federer?
 
That is a Hobson's Choice, no ? Yes, no ? For sure Novak is a great player, no ? But Roger, he is the best, no ? Of course I beat him, yes, no, yes ?

-- rafael nadal
 
his weakness maybe he does not possess one particular strong weapon. he is all rounded but hardly say which aspect is the best among all.

being the most complete may not be a good thing after all
 
RF-18 said:
You know, I have seen many great players, federer is in my top list of course, but djokovic is something quite special.

You guys who have watched from ca. 70s to present(i haven't) is nole possibly the most complete player tennis has seen? or is he developing into it?

I mean, he has no weaknesses. His offensive is world class, defense on nadal level, from what I have seen now at wimbledno its like he has developed his serve A LOT (before the final yesterday, he had made more aces than federer), his return game is miles away from the rest of the guys, his backhand undisputed #1, forehand one of the top 3 for sure, his mental game etc. Surfaces he is world class in all of them.

Can some of you point to me what his weaknesses are? please? or am I blind or something? what is going on with this guy?

Im pretty sure he will have the most GS titles after Federer and Nadal when its time to retire. Thats for sure, a guy with this game it's impossible to not be considered as one of the all time greats when he leaves the game. I think he may even surpass nadal if he keeps doing what he does and keeps developing (strangely enough at this age).

Before it was only federer for me, but the recent years i just can't stop admiring Novak Djokovic. True master of the game.
Click to expand...

He's balanced off both wings sure, a good returner and solid on serve but no. He's not particularly good at the net, can't hit an overhead, is a bit of a choker and quite honestly his forehand is not the greatest shot, though of course it is pretty solid.
 
Djokovic has no slice, no volleys, and no overhead smash to speak of. His serve and forehand are good, but not great.

He has great flexibility, stamina, backhand and return.

Why people are calling him "complete" is beyond me. He is anything but. Federer, with his poor return and backhand, is not "complete" either. In fact, out of the top 10 players only Murray can resemble a player that is more or less "complete" (his net game is underdeveloped, though).
 
McEnroeisanartist said:
No that would still be Federer:

at least 5 finals at all four Grand Slams (Nadal is at 3, Djokovic is at 2)

at least 7 semifinals at all four Grand Slams (Nadal is at 4, Djokovic is at 4)

at least 9 quarterfinals at all four Grand Slams (Nadal is at 5, Djokovic is at 7)

Federer has won a Grand Slam final in straight sets at all four Grand Slams (Novak has done this at 1 Slam, Nadal has done this at 2 Slams)
Click to expand...

Really? Fed is like 45. This is a poor argument. Fed is pretty complete, aside from the backhand and his return game is not impressive.
 
1 thing that I like about Djoko is that his game works on every surface. Which is why he is so close to becoming the 1st player to win the 9 masters + WTF. It's also why I hope he will eventually win RG. If he doesn't, he will be the most versatile player ever not to get the 4 slams.
 
Netspirit said:
only Murray can resemble a player that is more or less "complete" (his net game is underdeveloped, though).
Click to expand...

His 2nd serve blows.

Fed is complete.

Novak is complete if you account for the fact that no one (barring Fed and possibly for some low ranked players) seems able to S+V anymore.
 
Tshooter said:
His 2nd serve blows.
Click to expand...

It used to. It is no longer a glaring weakness.

Fed is complete.
Click to expand...

He has a weak backhand, ROS, and approach shot. That makes him incomplete.

Novak is complete if you account for the fact that no one (barring Fed and possibly for some low ranked players) seems able to S+V anymore.
Click to expand...

You do not need to S&V to have your slice, volleys and smash exposed. Granted, they are no longer critical on modern surfaces with modern strings. He is a rock-solid offensive baseliner. World #1, Wimbledon champion, 7-time GS champion, 3-time WTF champion - very accomplished, but by no means "complete".
 
Last edited:
Yesterday Nick Bollettieri said Novak is the most complete player he has seen of all time.

Interesting..
 
RF-18 said:
You know, I have seen many great players, federer is in my top list of course, but djokovic is something quite special.

You guys who have watched from ca. 70s to presentis nole possibly the most complete player tennis has seen? or is he developing into it?

I mean, he has no weaknesses. His offensive is world class, defense on nadal level, from what I have seen now at wimbledno its like he has developed his serve A LOT (before the final yesterday, he had made more aces than federer), his return game is miles away from the rest of the guys, his backhand undisputed #1, forehand one of the top 3 for sure, his mental game etc. Surfaces he is world class in all of them.

Can some of you point to me what his weaknesses are? please? or am I blind or something? what is going on with this guy?

Im pretty sure he will have the most GS titles after Federer and Nadal when its time to retire. Thats for sure, a guy with this game it's impossible to not be considered as one of the all time greats when he leaves the game. I think he may even surpass nadal if he keeps doing what he does and keeps developing (strangely enough at this age).

Before it was only federer for me, but the recent years i just can't stop admiring Novak Djokovic. True master of the game.
Click to expand...

NO. And he will not surpass Nadal. Get serious. I find him to be quite one-dimensional but he is GREAT at what he does which is grind people to death.
 
cc0509 said:
NO. And he will not surpass Nadal. Get serious. I find him to be quite one-dimensional but he is GREAT at what he does which is grind people to death.
Click to expand...

Yes, one dimensional.

Have you seen his latest records and what he is accomplishing?
 
RF-18 said:
Yes, one dimensional.

Have you seen his latest records and what he is accomplishing?
Click to expand...

One-dimensional players can accomplish a lot. I find his style boring. That Murray/Djokovic final was zzzzzzzzz IMO. I thought it would be more interesting because Murray would continue his more aggressive play in the final. But he didn't.
 
I think Novak is the most complete player now on HC and Clay (Rafa being his only nemesis).

On Grass, I still wonder how he won 2 majors , for he has not learnt how to move there. Fed truly sucked in his ground game in 2014 that in spite of phenomenal serve all through he managed to lose.
 
cc0509 said:
One-dimensional players can accomplish a lot. I find his style boring. That Murray/Djokovic final was zzzzzzzzz IMO. I thought it would be more interesting because Murray would continue his more aggressive play in the final. But he didn't.
Click to expand...

His records sais he is not one-dimensional. He has 130 weeks at number one and is going to pass nadal very soon, he is like 5000 points ahead of federer, he will easily end up over 200 at the top. He has three year end number ones and 4 WTFs titles, 20 masters third in history, holds the record of amount of master titles during one season, most consecutive quarters and semis in ALL slams along with federer, 130 wins against top 10 surpassing nadal, most in history after federer, I can go on forever. Almost all this has been happening just before our eyes since 2011.

He has been the best and most consistent player across everything for the last 4 years, if you are one dimensional you can't possibly do what he has done year after year, and if you look at what he has accomplished and is accomplishing.
 
Last edited:
All time is a bit premature but of this era, yes he is the most complete player.

Just looking at his conversion rate in GS finals will tell you he is not as mentally strong as some other greats, which IMO is part of what makes a player complete.
 
His game development is also very interesting as he is more dimensional now. He has a weapon on his serve, he is going more to the net and getting good results there, he slices more often and mixes between top spin strokes and flat. He is not just a baseline player nowdays.

If you want to be the perfect tennis player, Djokovic is the one to look at. I know some, and many, have a heard time to admit what a player he is, hope that changes. He is becoming a legend of the sport.
 
Last edited:
Does this include having the ability to hit every type of volley and being able to smash at best adequately?

Also, if Bollitieri really did say that, does he mean it or is he just saying that for the gallery? It seems to me the phrase "most complete player I have ever seen" is used on a top player once every two to three years. It has become difficult to take that phrase seriously, whichever pundit says it.
 
Laurie said:
Does this include having the ability to hit every type of volley and being able to smash at best adequately?

Also, if Bollitieri really did say that, does he mean it or is he just saying that for the gallery? It seems to me the phrase "most complete player I have ever seen" is used on a top player once every two to three years. It has become difficult to take that phrase seriously, whichever pundit says it.
Click to expand...

Who has the most complete game in history?
 
Laurie said:
Does this include having the ability to hit every type of volley and being able to smash at best adequately?

Also, if Bollitieri really did say that, does he mean it or is he just saying that for the gallery? It seems to me the phrase "most complete player I have ever seen" is used on a top player once every two to three years. It has become difficult to take that phrase seriously, whichever pundit says it.
Click to expand...

He wrote it on his twitter yesterday.
 
I think what he does, he does well, which basically seems to grind people out and force a lot of errors from his opponents. His speed across the baseline is also a key factor to his success and gives him an advantage in having that split second more time to play his shots. But in terms of being the complete player, I have to say no. A complete player is able to play every shot at the highest level and it seems well documented on here how his overheads and volleying is not as good as others.
 
robbo1970 said:
I think what he does, he does well, which basically seems to grind people out and force a lot of errors from his opponents. His speed across the baseline is also a key factor to his success and gives him an advantage in having that split second more time to play his shots. But in terms of being the complete player, I have to say no. A complete player is able to play every shot at the highest level and it seems well documented on here how his overheads and volleying is not as good as others.
Click to expand...
I don't think he's quite complete, but I think he's getting closer and closer to a player with no weaknesses. His netgame has improved tremendously the last few years and even his overhead has gotten quite a bit better under Becker. He's got a world class hold game and the best return game. His slice ain't super, but he can play them.
Best defense along with Nadal. Balanced off both wings. And some pretty great offensive weapons too. His forehand ain't as big as Rafa's and Fed's, but he can control the rally with it and hit plenty of winners with it nonetheless.

Pretty close to complete imo
 
More complete than Federer? No way. He isn't as good as Federer on the net & his serve is worse.

But I think he is the most complete player right after Federer.
 
Chanwan said:
I don't think he's quite complete, but I think he's getting closer and closer to a player with no weaknesses. His netgame has improved tremendously the last few years and even his overhead has gotten quite a bit better under Becker. He's got a world class hold game and the best return game. His slice ain't super, but he can play them.
Best defense along with Nadal. Balanced off both wings. And some pretty great offensive weapons too. His forehand ain't as big as Rafa's and Fed's, but he can control the rally with it and hit plenty of winners with it nonetheless.

Pretty close to complete imo
Click to expand...
^ what this guy said
 
Today's game is about dominating baseline rallies and in that sense I believe he is the most complete player.

However, he lacks the magic or touch that McEnroe or Federer ooze every time they play a match.
 
YetAnotherFedFan said:
Today's game is about dominating baseline rallies and in that sense I believe he is the most complete player.

However, he lacks the magic or touch that McEnroe or Federer ooze every time they play a match.
Click to expand...

Like Lendl:

1. He plays like a machine
2. He has less fans than other top players
3. He dominates the tour in general, but had problems in many big matches
4. Has built himself up as a better player, through fitness, diets etc.
5. Is obsessed with a major he has never won
 
Mustard said:
Like Lendl:

1. He plays like a machine
2. He has less fans than other top players
3. He dominates the tour in general, but had problems in many big matches
4. Has built himself up as a better player, through fitness, diets etc.
5. Is obsessed with a major he has never won
Click to expand...
funny but true
 
Is Nadal's game still more flexile though? Just throwing it out there. To my eyes he varies his game-style more from player to player and different conditions. He'll go in lockdown-mode and be very defensive when he needs to, or he'll stand further into the court and unleash his strokes.

Many will say the imbalance of his groundstrokes make him less complete, but having a huge weapon from the baseline is also a big deal for completeness imo, not just balance. He also has better slice, overhead, a worse net-game but better volleys (important distinction imo).

Bottom line: both those guys have very complete ways in slightly different ways. Prime Fed too of course (in some ways more complete due to his more dynamic multifaceted), but I think enough people will defend him. The idea that he had an extremely weak backhand in primetime is moronic though.
 
Cortana said:
More complete than Federer? No way. He isn't as good as Federer on the net & his serve is worse.

But I think he is the most complete player right after Federer.
Click to expand...

Agreed, considering he lost to Fed the last time they played, which wasn't so long ago. He had no answer for Fed's S&V.
 
i tend to agree. i think he will clearly be the best player in the world next two years. i think he wins fo and one of wimby and us open. i don't think rafa or fed get another slam.
 
coloskier said:
Agreed, considering he lost to Fed the last time they played, which wasn't so long ago. He had no answer for Fed's S&V.
Click to expand...

actually fed retired at year end championships. I don't believe djok will lose any big match to fed again. this is the year I think you will see unquestionable decline in fed game. already saw it in AO 2015. in sports you kind of have to predict the future....
 
RF-18 said:
You know, I have seen many great players, federer is in my top list of course, but djokovic is something quite special.

You guys who have watched from ca. 70s to presentis nole possibly the most complete player tennis has seen? or is he developing into it?

I mean, he has no weaknesses. His offensive is world class, defense on nadal level, from what I have seen now at wimbledno its like he has developed his serve A LOT (before the final yesterday, he had made more aces than federer), his return game is miles away from the rest of the guys, his backhand undisputed #1, forehand one of the top 3 for sure, his mental game etc. Surfaces he is world class in all of them.

Can some of you point to me what his weaknesses are? please? or am I blind or something? what is going on with this guy?

Im pretty sure he will have the most GS titles after Federer and Nadal when its time to retire. Thats for sure, a guy with this game it's impossible to not be considered as one of the all time greats when he leaves the game. I think he may even surpass nadal if he keeps doing what he does and keeps developing (strangely enough at this age).

Before it was only federer for me, but the recent years i just can't stop admiring Novak Djokovic. True master of the game.
Click to expand...

His movement on grass is average. His net play is good but that's it. His serve is good, but that's it. His slices are average. He camps the baseline. He's the most complete player ever? Nowhere near.
 
WHAT AM I READING? Is everyone out of their freaking minds? Djokovic is mediocre to average in the volley and smash department, doesn't have the best drop shots and his slice is an utter joke for a professional tennis player and especially no 1.

Federer was a master in every shot at his peak. Djokovic doesn't even come close, man it feels stupid that one has to bring up the OBVIOUS. Watch Federer from late 2006 or early 2007 and you'll see one of, if not the most complete player ever.

The hype is VERY strong with this one. Djokovic's style is perfectly suited for TODAY'S conditions but he's not a complete player, man what a joke! NADAL is more complete than Djokovic.

I wonder how the "most complete player ever" Djokovic would do on 90's grass or carpet.
 
Last edited:
Djokovic is the most complete at least of this era if we're talking about the balance of weaknesses off both sides and nothing else. i.e that his BH and FH combo are probably the most complete in terms of not having a weakness and if we exclude slices and net play. In other words he's perfectly suited for this era. But being "complete", while it is a great thing is not the end all be all in tennis. Most times a huge weapon is more preferable to being balanced.

That's why, if you had to choose you'd take the Federer or Nadal FH over the completeness of Djokovic if you were smart. Federer himself is more complete than Djokovic anyway IMO. When everything is included as it should be, Federer wins this by a country mile for this era at least, and his BH was never as bad as many people make it out to be. He also hits better passing shots than Novak off both sides.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Is Djokovic the most complete player of the modern era?
2
Replies
65
Views
11K
Nathaniel_Near
N
B
Is Nadal the most COMPLETE player?
Replies
21
Views
3K
Aggro
Aggro
NoleIsBoat
Is Djokovic the most complete player ever?
3 4 5
Replies
205
Views
11K
jga111
J
nimailni
Nick Bollettieri: "Djokovic is the most complete player of all time"
2 3 4
Replies
166
Views
19K
clayqueen
clayqueen
Backspin1183
Is Djokovic the most complete player of the Open Era?
2
Replies
86
Views
7K
Kenshin
Kenshin
Back
Top