Is Novak Djokovic the most complete Tennis player in the open era?

[dh003i]

Djokovic is much better from the back of the court and better off the return than Federer, and those are the areas that matter in today's game. If we had faster surfaces where having a complete game mattered, then Federer would be better, but all of Federer's tools are just 'nice things to have' while Djokovic has better 'tools that actually matter.' Federer may have a stronger serve/forehand, but they are not miles ahead of Djokovic's forehand/serve, and Djokovic by far has the much stronger backhand/return game, areas that are above average on a good day for Federer.

Essentially, Federer has stronger strengths, but Djokovic is a much more complete 'modern' player, as he literally has no weakness to exploit when he is on. Federer on the other hand, can be exploited even when he's on top of his game, especially since his game is basically incompatible with today's surfaces.

For all of Djokovic's alleged superiority in terms of being more well-rounded, it hasn't shown in the Majors except for in 2011, where, oh, he only showed parity with Federer at best. In no year has Djokovic demonstrated superiority to Federer's prime.

Other than against Nadal on clay, Federer's backhand wasn't exploitable in his prime, and ultimately he just wasn't exploitable overall, as his incredible W-L records demonstrate. Djokovic's W-L record suggests far more exploitability. And in Federer's prime, his return game was more than merely "above average" on a good day; he has a very good return game.

And for all of Djokovic's alleged backhand superiority, what good has it done him at the French Open? Stopped by Federer in 2011, his best year on clay, and unable to defeat Nadal at the FO on clay since. If he keeps up his level, sure, he'll probably eventually win the FO, perhaps beating Nadal in doing so; seems rather likely, but not because of any claycourt superiority, merely for encountering an older Nadal who's lost a step.

Djokovic is a great player no doubt, but if he were a better player than Federer, he'd be on pace to eclipse 17 Majors by now. That said, I expect him to get double-digits.

PS: Also, this "when on" proviso is key. Except for 2011, Djokovic hasn't demonstrated consistent utter domination like Federer did. He seems to blow hot and cold quite a bit. That is definitely a weakness for a player to have.

 

[torpantennis]

Yeah right his overhead is such a huge weakness. Im sure a lot of players come into the match planning to give novak a lot of overheads to give themselves a better chance of winning. And a player that has 7 grand slams. 100+ weeks at no.1, 4 wtfs, has beaten nadal and Federer a combined 36 times is so mentally weak

Mental weakness is always in relation to your level of play. How do you explain that Djokovic hasn't lost a one single final in 27 months outside of slams, BUT he only has one slam a year?

 

[AngieB]

Mental weakness is always in relation to your level of play. How do you explain that Djokovic hasn't lost a one single final in 27 months outside of slams, BUT he only has one slam a year?

He majors in minors.

#PTL #JC4Ever

AngieB
​

 

[Noleberic123]

Mental weakness is always in relation to your level of play. How do you explain that Djokovic hasn't lost a one single final in 27 months outside of slams, BUT he only has one slam a year?

How do you explain him getting to atleast the qf of every slam in the past 5 seasons?? You have to be so mentally tough to do that. Sure he has choked in a few slams, but so has Federer, so has murray and so has nadal.

 

[torpantennis]

How do you explain him getting to atleast the qf of every slam in the past 5 seasons?? You have to be so mentally tough to do that. Sure he has choked in a few slams, but so has Federer, so has murray and so has nadal.

He gets to at least QF of the slams because his game is technically relatively complete. And he wins small tournaments because he doesn't feel any pressure to win them. But on the biggest of stages, late rounds in slams, he tends to choke more than he should.

Like I said, two weaknesses: overhead and inside the head.

 

[helloworld]

He is probably the most complete BASELINER in the open era. I can give you that.

 

[Noleberic123]

He gets to at least QF of the slams because his game is technically relatively complete. And he wins small tournaments because he doesn't feel any pressure to win them. But on the biggest of stages, late rounds in slams, he tends to choke more than he should.

Like I said, two weaknesses: overhead and inside the head.

Like I said, his overheads aren't even that bad. sure not as good as the rest of his game but they are not horrible. That is not a weakness. And to win 7 grand slams you cannot be mentally weak. If he had the mental strength of murray then he would not have won 7 slams.

 

[BringBackSV]

Like I said, his overheads aren't even that bad. sure not as good as the rest of his game but they are not horrible. That is not a weakness. And to win 7 grand slams you cannot be mentally weak. If he had the mental strength of murray then he would not have won 7 slams.

His overheads at times have been pathetic, it's definitely a weakness.

 

[torpantennis]

Like I said, his overheads aren't even that bad. sure not as good as the rest of his game but they are not horrible. That is not a weakness. And to win 7 grand slams you cannot be mentally weak. If he had the mental strength of murray then he would not have won 7 slams.

Four of those seven slams became within that 2011-AO2012 gluten free post-DC ecstasy. Before and after, he has choked in key moments, more than he should.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Mental weakness is always in relation to your level of play. How do you explain that Djokovic hasn't lost a one single final in 27 months outside of slams, BUT he only has one slam a year?

He majors in minors.

#PTL #JC4Ever

AngieB
​

:lol: slay Angie

 

[Gary Duane]

Four of those seven slams became within that 2011-AO2012 gluten free post-DC ecstasy. Before and after, he has choked in key moments, more than he should.

Aren't you the guy who was pushing for sliding being a huge factor on clay allowing players to change directions really fast?

Just checking...

I was thinking about that today when watching Fed against Gasquet, and I was mentally comparing against an old match between Nadal and Coria when both of them looked like they slid several feet, over and over again, in just one point.

I'm wondering if it is even POSSIBLE to be a "complete" player. Once upon a time I thought Borg came about as close as possible - his yearly flip from FO to Wimbledon was superhuman - but he could never win the USO.

It seems like the greatest players, at least in the open era, are always noticeably weak on one surface.

 

[AngieB]

:lol: slay Angie

Ivan Lendl and Jimmy Connors did something along similar lines. We've seen this happen before. It's not new to the Open Era and that's all I'll say about that.

#PTL #JC4Ever

AngieB​

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Djokovic has made incredible progress in his net game and he showed at the WTF that he really is now a complete player, very good at defense and offense.

BUT, his net game was really frightening against "weaker" players. I haven't seen him win a hard match against a fellow top player thanks to his offensive game yet. See Djokovic-Wawrinka at the AO, where his volleys failed him in the fifth.

 

[kandamrgam]

For all of Djokovic's alleged superiority in terms of being more well-rounded, it hasn't shown in the Majors except for in 2011, where, oh, he only showed parity with Federer at best. In no year has Djokovic demonstrated superiority to Federer's prime.

Other than against Nadal on clay, Federer's backhand wasn't exploitable in his prime, and ultimately he just wasn't exploitable overall, as his incredible W-L records demonstrate. Djokovic's W-L record suggests far more exploitability. And in Federer's prime, his return game was more than merely "above average" on a good day; he has a very good return game.

And for all of Djokovic's alleged backhand superiority, what good has it done him at the French Open? Stopped by Federer in 2011, his best year on clay, and unable to defeat Nadal at the FO on clay since. If he keeps up his level, sure, he'll probably eventually win the FO, perhaps beating Nadal in doing so; seems rather likely, but not because of any claycourt superiority, merely for encountering an older Nadal who's lost a step.

Djokovic is a great player no doubt, but if he were a better player than Federer, he'd be on pace to eclipse 17 Majors by now. That said, I expect him to get double-digits.

PS: Also, this "when on" proviso is key. Except for 2011, Djokovic hasn't demonstrated consistent utter domination like Federer did. He seems to blow hot and cold quite a bit. That is definitely a weakness for a player to have.

1. Your post seem to confuse "winning superiority" with "well-rounded-ness". You dont have to be complete to win Majors or be great or win more often. In other words, having a more all round game shouldn't necessarily win him matches against Rafa at RG. Both Roger and Rafa have weaknesses bigger than Nole's.

The 7 key ingredients of a tennis player should be: Serve + Return + FH + BH + Movement + Mentality + Volley. I believe there is nothing "alleged" when it comes Nole here. He has more balance there. By FH and BH I meant the topspinners. Slice and Overhead (a weakness blown out of proportion in the case of Nole) weaknesses doesnt come close to the 7 I mentioned.

2. Federer's BH was exploitable even in his prime by Nadal. I would agree with it if you meant on "low bouncing surfaces".



Imo, Federer's all rounded-ness comes from his surface adaptability. Djoker has a bigger weakness on grass than Federer on clay.

 

[NamRanger]

For all of Djokovic's alleged superiority in terms of being more well-rounded, it hasn't shown in the Majors except for in 2011, where, oh, he only showed parity with Federer at best. In no year has Djokovic demonstrated superiority to Federer's prime.

Other than against Nadal on clay, Federer's backhand wasn't exploitable in his prime, and ultimately he just wasn't exploitable overall, as his incredible W-L records demonstrate. Djokovic's W-L record suggests far more exploitability. And in Federer's prime, his return game was more than merely "above average" on a good day; he has a very good return game.

And for all of Djokovic's alleged backhand superiority, what good has it done him at the French Open? Stopped by Federer in 2011, his best year on clay, and unable to defeat Nadal at the FO on clay since. If he keeps up his level, sure, he'll probably eventually win the FO, perhaps beating Nadal in doing so; seems rather likely, but not because of any claycourt superiority, merely for encountering an older Nadal who's lost a step.

Djokovic is a great player no doubt, but if he were a better player than Federer, he'd be on pace to eclipse 17 Majors by now. That said, I expect him to get double-digits.

PS: Also, this "when on" proviso is key. Except for 2011, Djokovic hasn't demonstrated consistent utter domination like Federer did. He seems to blow hot and cold quite a bit. That is definitely a weakness for a player to have.

And what happened when Djokovic and Federer met in 2011 at the US Open, or 2008 at the AO, or at various other points in their careers? Djokovic is simply better from the back of the court. Period.

Federer displayed utter domination because of his insane strengths, not because his game was well rounded. His backhand and stubbornness both have gotten the better of him even in his best years. Good examples are the multiple matches he lost throughout his prime years from 2004-2009 or so to players he honestly should have beat. Even a young Nadal was giving Federer all sorts of fits at Miami in 2005, and had Nadal simply not gassed out he probably beats him there.

He has all sorts of tools that are nice to have in today's game, but in the modern game, it's all about being solid from the back of the court and being able to move. Djokovic is clearly just better from the back of the court when it comes to consistency, and is able to direct the ball much better from both wings.