Novak Djokovic and The USO - Can he end his career there as the USO Open Era's greatest champion?

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
One of the great unreported rivalries of the OE.......But off-topic, do you think he'll be in any shape for one more Wimbledon appearance. I'd like to see it, but not at the risk of further injury.
I'm not getting my hopes up.

I hope he gets pain free. If he then finds he's still able to play tennis, anything is a bonus.
 
He's been grasping at any straws he could come up with since order has been restored at Wimbledon.

Winning Masters was majoring in minors when Djokovic did it, while WTF was a pathetic field throughout his winning run. When he didn't do it, it's a roast on big stages. Pathetic at this point.
His Djokovic "indifference" is truly getting the best of him at this point. I saw in another post where he said Djokovic can perhaps now be considered on the level of Laver, Fed, Rafa, Pete, Borg. Perhaps? Lol. This is indeed grasping at straws.
 
Now masters and YEC are not important ? How convenient ! We have been hearing all last year how Djokovic is going to be the title leader of the big 3 titles .
You said big stages. The big stages are the 4 Slams where Zverev has done nothing yet. Of course Masters and the YEC are important but they are not on the level of Slams, which you obviously already know.
 
You said big stages. The big stages are the 4 Slams where Zverev has done nothing yet. Of course Masters and the YEC are important but they are not on the level of Slams, which you obviously already know.
Don't be so hard on him. Djokovic not winning YEC was probably his favorite tennis moment of the last 12 months. There was nothing better to find.
 
I'm a Novak fan, but in all fairness, if we go back 12 months, there were first-round losses at IW, Miami... then Cecchinato...
Yes true but Djokovic was going for 6 WTFs and would have equaled Federer's record there so that loss couldn't have come at a better time for them. Lol.
 
Djokovic wins all ties and in some situations doesn't have to tie to be greatest because he's Djokovic. He can do that. To hell with record keeping.
A failure with 3 titles and 8 finals, and 11 years in a row making at least the SF? LOL. That's a new one on me and lucky wins over Federer? Well Djokovic will forever be a legend at the USO for that 2011 match alone and one time is lucky, 2 times is not. Good thing you are not the judge and jury of his legacy.
2 matches he should have never lost at the US Open. The 2012 and 2013 final. He was the better player and.....he lost. At the same time he won twice against Fed saving match points.

Still his achievements at the Us open are pretty amazing. 3 wins 5 times runner up 3 semi finals. Solid and amazing. Playing 11 times a semi finals is far from being a failure. I am a fed fan.
I'm not on the "give it to Djokovic train" every time he wins something. He has to earn it like everyone else. I can't see myself calling someone the greatest UO champion ever if he's lost the finals more times than he's won it. Sorry.
 
There's one problem with this

Zverev is just a far inferior tennis player than Djokovic.
probably it's true for 90% but we can't discount another 10, remember fed didn't win any slam till 22, and that thread about djoko 4 years ago with asking where he's amongst the all time greats nobody didn't expect he will win 15 slams by now..just saying
 
A failure with 3 titles and 8 finals, and 11 years in a row making at least the SF? LOL. That's a new one on me and lucky wins over Federer? Well Djokovic will forever be a legend at the USO for that 2011 match alone and one time is lucky, 2 times is not. Good thing you are not the judge and jury of his legacy.
Delpo losing in the final at the USO required a 6-1 record and had a pay day of 1.85 million dollars. Zverev lost in the 3rd round(his best USO showing yet) with a 1-1 record that paid him 156,000 dollars. I would would much rather lose in final than in an earlier round. And I am sure that the players’ bank accounts agree with that, not to mention the 1200 points in rankings.

If Djoker hypothetically won 5 titles and had a 5-7record in the finals, then I would crown him the USO GOAT. Those 12 trips to the final would trump Jimbo’s 5 titles across 3 surfaces.

This argument worked the same way with Fed vs Pete at Wimbledon when Fed was stuck at 7 titles. Why?

Top 7 results was a title for each player.

Next 3 best results:
Fed 3 finals, 18-3 record total
Pete: semi, quarter, round of 16, 12-3 record total.

18-3>>>>>>12-3

The huge fallacy here is that people aren’t punishing Pete here for losing in earlier rounds. Instead, they are saying 7-0>7-3. But Pete still lost in those other 3 tourneys. I don’t see how losing to a lesser player in a earlier round makes Pete better. The same reasoning applies for Djoker. Jimbo throws another rinkle in their with his titles across 3 surfaces.
 
Djokovic wins all ties and in some situations doesn't have to tie to be greatest because he's Djokovic. He can do that. To hell with record keeping.
I think you are embellishing here and you said he was a failure at the USO, which is just...ridiculous. I didn't even say anything about a tie or him being the greatest USO player but to say someone who won it 3 times and has made at least the SF for the last 11 years is a failure does not pass the smell test.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
probably it's true for 90% but we can't discount another 10, remember fed didn't win any slam till 22, and that thread about djoko 4 years ago with asking where he's amongst the all time greats nobody didn't expect he will win 15 slams by now..just saying
The tools for that kind of dominance just aren't there in my opinion.
 
I think you are embellishing here and you said he was a failure at the USO, which is just...ridiculous. I didn't even say anything about a tie or him being the greatest USO player but to say someone who won it 3 times and has made at least the SF for the last 11 years is a failure does not pass the smell test.
How many times have you felt let down by him at the UO? Countless times I'm sure. Maybe failure is too strong of a word. 3-5 is a sucky record though no matter how you cut it.
 
Delpo losing in the final at the USO required a 6-1 record and had a pay day of 1.85 million dollars. Zverev lost in the 3rd round(his best USO showing yet) with a 1-1 record that paid him 156,000 dollars. I would would much rather lose in final than in an earlier round. And I am sure that the players’ bank accounts agree with that, not to mention the 1200 points in rankings.

If Djoker hypothetically won 5 titles and had a 5-7record in the finals, then I would crown him the USO GOAT. Those 12 trips to the final would trump Jimbo’s 5 titles across 3 surfaces.

This argument worked the same way with Fed vs Pete at Wimbledon when Fed was stuck at 7 titles. Why?

Top 7 results was a title for each player.

Next 3 best results:
Fed 3 finals, 18-3 record total
Pete: semi, quarter, round of 16, 12-3 record total.

18-3>>>>>>12-3

The huge fallacy here is that people aren’t punishing Pete here for losing in earlier rounds. Instead, they are saying 7-0>7-3. But Pete still lost in those other 3 tourneys. I don’t see how losing to a lesser player in a earlier round makes Pete better. The same reasoning applies for Djoker. Jimbo throws another rinkle in their with his titles across 3 surfaces.
Any player would prefer to lose in the final than an earlier round so I agree with you. The Federer and Pete comparison at Wimbledon was close but by the time Federer made the final in 2014 and 2015, he had pretty much separated himself at that point. Still, Pete's record of 7-0 in finals gave him certain bragging rights so some could have argued in his favor but Federer broke the tie anyway and became the all time GOAT so it doesn't matter now. I probably would say Djokovic was the Open Era USO GOAT with 5 titles and 7 finals, and place him over Connors as well. I don't think a losing record in finals would matter in that situation.
 
How many times have you felt let down by him at the UO? Countless times I'm sure. Maybe failure is too strong of a word. 3-5 is a sucky record though no matter how you cut it.
You're living up to "True Fanerer" status, as you keep bringing in extraneous factors.
Who cares how many times he disappointed his fans. It's better, record-wise (performance-wise) to reach a final than to lose in a previous round.
None of us - that I saw - is saying that Novak's record in USO Finals is better than Fed's or Jimmy's or Pete's. But he earned his way to all those finals - he didn't guess heads-or-tails to get there.
 
How many times have you felt let down by him at the UO? Countless times I'm sure. Maybe failure is too strong of a word. 3-5 is a sucky record though no matter how you cut it.
Only Larned and Tilden in the history of tennis have more USO finals than Djokovic which was 90-110 years ago so of course he is not a failure at the USO. Any 3 time champ at any Slam has had an amazing achievement so he may have lost more finals than he would have liked but he does not suck at the USO. Your thought process on this is just wrong.
 
You're living up to "True Fanerer" status, as you keep bringing in extraneous factors.
Who cares how many times he disappointed his fans. It's better, record-wise (performance-wise) to reach a final than to lose in a previous round.
None of us - that I saw - is saying that Novak's record in USO Finals is better than Fed's or Jimmy's or Pete's. But he earned his way to all those finals - he didn't guess heads-or-tails to get there.
When Federer and Djokovic were tied at AO, Djokovic fans used the same tactic even though Federer had been more consistent there throughout his career. H2h was thrown around and everything under the sun.
 
Only Larned and Tilden in the history of tennis have more USO finals than Djokovic which was 90-110 years ago so of course he is not a failure at the USO. Any 3 time champ at any Slam has had an amazing achievement so he may have lost more finals than he would have liked but he does not suck at the USO. Your thought process on this is just wrong.
Ok, he doesn't suck at the UO. Fair? He's just not that great at winning it.
 
When Federer and Djokovic were tied at AO, Djokovic fans used the same tactic even though Federer had been more consistent there throughout his career. H2h was thrown around and everything under the sun.
Maybe so, but not by me. I try to live up to higher standards: I may be wrong at times, or people may disagree with my judgments, but I try to make arguments that will apply to whoever the player(s) in questions are. Anyway, this isn't that big of a deal, as we're kind of debating the fine edges of a hypothetical scenario.
 
That loss hurt but the one last year was just annoying. I was upset at the 2016 loss and the loss of the ranking.
I care much more about the #1 YE-ranking than the WTF itself - a tourney I just don't care for or regard as more than an indoor M-1000, with a weird format. Looking back at 2016, and what has transpired with Murray since, I do feel good for him, although I've never rooted for him much as a player. But he's a good guy, who had a huge second half of 2016, which this tourney ratified, and he kind of "deserved" to have some time at #1.

(Still, it was tough at the time, and yeah, I give Zverev some credit. He has a lot of game when on, which he was. The RR format didn't do Novak any favors there, as it's hard to soundly defeat another player, and then come back four (?) days later and try to do it again.)
 
I care much more about the #1 YE-ranking than the WTF itself - a tourney I just don't care for or regard as more than an indoor M-1000, with a weird format. Looking back at 2016, and what has transpired with Murray since, I do feel good for him, although I've never rooted for him much as a player. But he's a good guy, who had a huge second half of 2016, which this tourney ratified, and he kind of "deserved" to have some time at #1.

(Still, it was tough at the time, and yeah, I give Zverev some credit. He has a lot of game when on, which he was. The RR format didn't do Novak any favors there, as it's hard to soundly defeat another player, and then come back four (?) days later and try to do it again.)
I care more about the YE #1 ranking than the WTF but I weigh it more than a Masters 1000 tournament. I wasn't happy at the time that Djokovic lost the ranking and the WTF but now looking back, I am glad that Murray was able to achieve that and cap off a great career.

Djokovic thrashed Zverev earlier that week and crushed everybody and had a major letdown in the final. That was odd to see him do that but now that AO has happened, I don't even think about that loss or really care about it.
 
When Federer and Djokovic were tied at AO, Djokovic fans used the same tactic even though Federer had been more consistent there throughout his career.
nope, djokovic hab been more consistent and greater, because djoko now is 31 and we don't know what's will be his performances in the future, we can only judge them till the age of 31, fed won 4 titles by that age, djoko- 7 and he will have another tries in the years to come to improve his stats
 
Last edited:
True Fanerer's spirit has been completely crushed these past two weeks. So sad to see. :(
I am genuinely concerned for his well being. Forum dynamics aside, I don't wish ill on anyone's health in real life.

Sounds like he has become unglued totally due to the success of a certain wiry Serb, and may not be sleeping or eating in adequate amounts due to the omnipresent defensive and butt hurt replies to anything Djokovic.

I can see him on an old Nokia constantly refreshing TT using dodgy WiFi at some local Starbucks before being told it's 11 PM and to go back out on the street.

Wish there was a number of a social worker or caretaker that I could call :-D
 
I am genuinely concerned for his well being. Forum dynamics aside, I don't wish ill on anyone's health in real life.

Sounds like he has become unglued totally due to the success of a certain wiry Serb, and may not be sleeping or eating in adequate amounts due to the omnipresent defensive and butt hurt replies to anything Djokovic.

I can see him on an old Nokia constantly refreshing TT using dodgy WiFi at some local Starbucks before being told it's 11 PM and to go back out on the street.

Wish there was a number of a social worker or caretaker that I could call :-D
Sorry to bring this up. That is very rich coming from a bell boy.
 
Yes he can. 2 more titles seem doable at this moment in time, but we all know how easily things take drastic turns in tennis. What a turn that would be though.

Also, still putting my hopes in Federer winning one more in NY. Really unlikely but maybe if they make the USO faster again?
 
I am genuinely concerned for his well being. Forum dynamics aside, I don't wish ill on anyone's health in real life.

Sounds like he has become unglued totally due to the success of a certain wiry Serb, and may not be sleeping or eating in adequate amounts due to the omnipresent defensive and butt hurt replies to anything Djokovic.

I can see him on an old Nokia constantly refreshing TT using dodgy WiFi at some local Starbucks before being told it's 11 PM and to go back out on the street.

Wish there was a number of a social worker or caretaker that I could call :-D
I already knew when I said how I feel that it would bring out the worst of you. Low and behold you showed up to talk out of your a** as usual.
 
I'm of the opinion on this specific matter that a tie is a tie. When looking at the history books, it will say tied, players with the same amount of titles will always be on the same column, not below or above eachother. Then of course you can look at consistency and finals too as a tiebreaker but in the end they will always have the same amount of titles. Therefore it's hard to name someone GOAT at an event in matters such as these. Neither Federer, Connors nor Sampras are GOATs at USO in the OE. As a matter of fact there is no stand alone leader. Tilden, Sears and Renshaw too has 7 titles a piece.

So Djokovic will need 6 USOs for OE GOAT.
 
Top