Novak Djokovic legacy tarnished inflated by multiple Australian Open titles.

Forehand Of Doom said:
My point is he missed a great window of opportunity. Take Djokovic out of the picture for 7 months and see what happens.
Click to expand...

Good point. Things would be very different. I'm actually surprised he hasn't gotten injured in the last few years given the level of play he's found.
 
tennisaddict said:
Rafa won 4 FO before he won any other major. It is not that Novak has lost in early rounds in other majors. He is in the finals of every major. His consistency is Federerian.
Click to expand...

But Rafa won those first four FO's by the time he was 22. When Novak was 22 he had won one slam. He didn't win another til he was 24. By the time Rafa was 24, he had won another four slams and had accomplished the career golden slam. I don't think you want to be comparing Novak's accomplishments to Rafa's as Novak comes out far worse.
 
vernonbc said:
But Rafa won those first four FO's by the time he was 22. When Novak was 22 he had won one slam. He didn't win another til he was 24. By the time Rafa was 24, he had won another four slams and had accomplished the career golden slam. I don't think you want to be comparing Novak's accomplishments to Rafa's as Novak comes out far worse.
Click to expand...

It is given that Novak's resume is far worse than Rafa, but the point is that Rafa won 4 FO's before he won another slam. Novak has 4 AOs and "only" two other non-AO slams. Players will have their preferred surface/venue. Novak winning another AO (and Rafa winning another FO) will not hurt their legacy at all...it only enhances it. Will winning a different slam other than their "pet slam" enhance their legacy even more? Probably. But winning a slam, period, can only enhance, and not hurt their careers.
 
All majors are equal in my opinion.

All majors count in the end of the career tally.

Novak's legacy cannot be tarnished by winning a major, any major.
 
Amelie Mauresmo said:
Most casual tennis fans don't even know or care about the Australian Open. Nobody cares about the Australian Open EXCEPT hard core tennis fans. Ask ten people on the street if they ever heard of the Australian Open or care for it most would say NO.

Most people know about Wimbledon, US OPEN, and the French Open. The Australian Open is the least important of the four slams it isn't equal to the other three. So Novak being dominant in Australia doesn't improve his legacy and it only proves 2011 was a fluke. Novak MUST win grand slams outside of Australia to improve his legacy.
Click to expand...

Don't Confuse Europe with Asia in terms of recognition it'd be more popular than the French. Hell I forgot when the French was on this year.

Asia has more people than europe the one slam they can watch at a decent hour is Australias, Australia is basement to europeans because of the time

Big whoop, Wimbledon, US/Aus/ and then the French is generally how it works over here in Aus.
 
Yes Novak Djokovic is consistent no dispute from me. However, being a great champion is the ability to WIN when it matters most. Novak has a 6-6 record in slam finals. Federer and Nadal's grand slam records are superior.

Novak is definitely the third great player of this generation BUT he won't go higher unless Novak can WIN outside of the Australian Open. The Australian Open is the basement of the grand slams the least important and the one with the least glamour.

Most people around the world have probably never heard or care for the Australian Open. The three other slams are superior and that's where Novak NEEDS to improve if he wants to be even considered an all time great.
 
Wynter said:
Don't Confuse Europe with Asia in terms of recognition it'd be more popular than the French. Hell I forgot when the French was on this year.

Asia has more people than europe the one slam they can watch at a decent hour is Australias, Australia is basement to europeans because of the time

Big whoop, Wimbledon, US/Aus/ and then the French is generally how it works over here in Aus.
Click to expand...

What? Oz Open bigger than FO? Source please :)
 
Wynter said:
Don't Confuse Europe with Asia in terms of recognition it'd be more popular than the French. Hell I forgot when the French was on this year.

Asia has more people than europe the one slam they can watch at a decent hour is Australias, Australia is basement to europeans because of the time

Big whoop, Wimbledon, US/Aus/ and then the French is generally how it works over here in Aus.
Click to expand...


Who cares what people in Asia think? The tennis universe is centered around North America and western Europe because that is where the money is!
It isn't just Europeans who consider the Australian Open the least important slam many people in North America think the same thing. The Australian Open doesn't have the glamour as the three other slams.
 
TheTruth said:
All majors are equal in my opinion.

All majors count in the end of the career tally.

Novak's legacy cannot be tarnished by winning a major, any major.
Click to expand...

You know this comment is not true. Margaret Court is a perfect example of this she won 24 slams YET people dismiss Court as GOAT because she won 11 grand slams at the Australian Open. The Australian Open was so unimportant that from the 1960s up to the late 1980s, players regularly SKIPPED the Australian Open they couldn't bother making the long trip to Australia.

It was only when the Australian Open got a roof did they elevate themselves upward. But still, the Australian Open is not as important as Wimbledon, French Open, or US OPEN. The other three slams count more they are TOUGHER to win and have a higher importance.
 
Amelie Mauresmo said:
You know this comment is not true. Margaret Court is a perfect example of this she won 24 slams YET people dismiss Court as GOAT because she won 11 grand slams at the Australian Open.
Click to expand...

That is because the Australian Open back then wasnt a real slam. Today it is a real slam. The top players when healthy all participate. Had Margaret Court played today and won 24 slams but with 11 at the Australian Open, people probably would say she is the GOAT.
 
Amelie Mauresmo said:
You know this comment is not true. Margaret Court is a perfect example of this she won 24 slams YET people dismiss Court as GOAT because she won 11 grand slams at the Australian Open. The Australian Open was so unimportant that from the 1960s up to the late 1980s, players regularly SKIPPED the Australian Open they couldn't bother making the long trip to Australia.

It was only when the Australian Open got a roof did they elevate themselves upward. But still, the Australian Open is not as important as Wimbledon, French Open, or US OPEN. The other three slams count more they are TOUGHER to win and have a higher importance.
Click to expand...

In order to win one of the majors you have to meet the same criteria, win seven matches. That makes them equal in my eyes.

I know people didn't play it back in the day, but it also hadn't reached its current stature as far as being one of the four majors.

In retrospect, I'd bet any of the players who played back then regret not playing Down Under. They'd be foolish to still reject it, in light of what it has become.

Glamor, status, prestige, meh, means nothing to me.
 
Amelie Mauresmo said:
You know this comment is not true. Margaret Court is a perfect example of this she won 24 slams YET people dismiss Court as GOAT because she won 11 grand slams at the Australian Open. The Australian Open was so unimportant that from the 1960s up to the late 1980s, players regularly SKIPPED the Australian Open they couldn't bother making the long trip to Australia.

It was only when the Australian Open got a roof did they elevate themselves upward. But still, the Australian Open is not as important as Wimbledon, French Open, or US OPEN. The other three slams count more they are TOUGHER to win and have a higher importance.
Click to expand...

I cannot say whether you are being serious or just trolling, I hope the latter is the case (given the more or less exact same thread posted after the US Open as pointed out above)

But for the sake of the argument - what on earth makes this comment true?
"they (the others) are TOUGHER to win "
Why is that? The same players are playing and you need to win seven matches everywhere. If anything, AO is tougher to win as everybody (in theory) should be fresh and injury free after the offseason. And everyone can play relatively well on HC as opposed to both clay and grass.

And yes, the AO was less important 25 years ago. But now, it's more or less on pair with FO and US. The only one that sticks a bit out is Wimbledon as the grand price.

Finally, winning more AO's cannot hurt anyones legacy, only add to it. Diversifying your resume will add even more, but a slam is still a slam.
 
Novak is not tarnished by his GS victories and where they occurred. He's done very well to win 6! And he'll likely win more.
 
Disagree. Sure he needs to win more outside AO to be considered a great all courter but winning another AO does not harm his legacy. He can end his career being the best ever to play AO.

Thank you!
 
Last edited:
Chanwan said:
I cannot say whether you are being serious or just trolling, I hope the latter is the case (given the more or less exact same thread posted after the US Open as pointed out above)

But for the sake of the argument - what on earth makes this comment true?
"they (the others) are TOUGHER to win "
Why is that? The same players are playing and you need to win seven matches everywhere. If anything, AO is tougher to win as everybody (in theory) should be fresh and injury free after the offseason. And everyone can play relatively well on HC as opposed to both clay and grass.

And yes, the AO was less important 25 years ago. But now, it's more or less on pair with FO and US. The only one that sticks a bit out is Wimbledon as the grand price.

Finally, winning more AO's cannot hurt anyones legacy, only add to it. Diversifying your resume will add even more, but a slam is still a slam.
Click to expand...

You sir have hit the nail on the head. Superb post.
 
what djokovic needs to do is improving his record in slam finals. yes he did have a tough time facing prime nadal and fed in most of those finals but he also had some unnessercary losses like those 2 against murray or nadal in the USO 2013 on a surface that does not really suit nadal all that well.

he will be an all time great anyway but if he for example finishes his career with a 9-9 slam record he would be about on par with ivan lendl which is great but not quite tier 1.

howwever if he is able to pick it up and lets say finish with 13 slams and only 8 losses he would be a top5 player ever, probably even top3 considering that he probably faced the toughest opponents ever in fed and nadal.
 
Last edited:
Novak Djokovic legacy tarnished inflated by multiple Australian Open titles
Click to expand...

bs_meter_1.gif
 
Last edited:
I really don't believe in such a thing as a GOAT but I am rather sad that Djokovic's claim to GOAT status seems to rest on his ability to win a few odd Slams IN SPITE OF ROGER AND RAFA. And that's what his most rabid supporters say!

Surely that statement makes him out to be inferior to them? Or implies that he was lucky to have won with them around because otherwise he wouldn't have won any without a lot of good luck?

I can't watch Nole play for more than an hour before I fall asleep but I can still respect him for what he's won and for having won it playing his way.

And I'm looking forward to watching him play next year. He's implied that he needs to attack the net more next year and I really, really hope he does that. With his flexibility, I'm sure he's capable of pulling off some spectacular volleys. I just hope he doesn't lose any fans for playing more of an all-court game instead of a dedicated baseline game...who are all the 2.5-3.5 "counterpunchers" going to idolise in that case???
 
Amelie Mauresmo said:
I disagree it is about QUALITY not just QUANTITY. Look at Margaret Court she has 24 slams the most out of anybody YET she isn't considered GOAT because she won 11 Australian Opens. The Australian Open is the basement of the grand slams and people on this board KNOW IT.

Federer is RESPECTED because he won Wimbledon SEVEN TIMES the most of any man he has tied his idol Pete Sampras. Since Wimbledon is the MOST IMPORTANT slam it only shows Federer's greatness. Federer has also won the US OPEN FIVE TIMES. This shows how special a player Roger is.

The other three slams have MORE GREATNESS. When Nadal BROKE Borg's record at the French Open winning it more than SIX TIMES it was considered an incredible achievement. If Novak wins EIGHT Australian Open it is not equal. People will shrug their shoulders if Novak gets to six or seven Australian Open titles it won't matter. The reason is, people will NOTICE Novak has NEVER won the French Open and he's only won Wimbledon and the US OPEN once.

So QUALITY of winning slams is just as important as the overall number.
Click to expand...

actually margaret court is considered the greatest tennis player of all time, with rosewall being the greatest male player in history
 
Novak should get some non hard court slams, he only has one.
That would help him if he wants to be historical.

Obvious.
 
dominikk1985 said:
what djokovic needs to do is improving his record in slam finals. yes he did have a tough time facing prime nadal and fed in most of those finals
Click to expand...

Actually, most of his Slam finals have been played against Nadal and Murray. He has faced Federer only the once!

In his 12 Slam finals, he is:

3-3 v Nadal (6 finals)
2-2 v Murray (4 finals)
1-0 v Tsonga (1 final)
0-1 v Federer (1 final)

dominikk1985 said:
but he also had some unnessercary losses like those 2 against murray or nadal in the USO 2013 on a surface that does not really suit nadal all that well.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by 'unnecessary losses'? He had chances to win 2012 and 2013 USO but, in the end, his opponents proved to be the better player. At 2013 Wimbledon, he was outplayed from start to finish.
 
Last edited:
Yes, Novak needs more Slams outside AO to strengthen his claim to being a Legend! Right now, he's an AO Great. That's it!
 
3 years later, do you want to re-think your position?

Amelie Mauresmo said:
If Novak Djokovic does NOT win a slam outside of the Australian Open next year then I feel his legacy will be tarnished. Djokovic has 4 AO titles yet he's only won Wimbledon once and US OPEN once.

Novak isn't even close to being in Rafa's category and to Nadal's credit he has won FIVE slams outside of the French Open.

So, next year is a VERY IMPORTANT one for Novak Djokovic he must prove his 2011 season was no fluke. If Novak doesn't win the French Open next year I fear he is NEVER going to win it.

People on this board keep on saying how mentally tough Novak is BUT I am not so sure. The choke job against Nadal at the French Open, the mental collapse against Murray not putting up a good fight at Wimbledon.

The 1-4 record in US OPEN finals is disgraceful for a champion like Novak.

Next, year Novak MUST find a way to grab a slam outside of Australia or his legacy will be ruined. He will only prove he can win the least important of the four slams the Australian Open which doesn't make him a great legend.

Even Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg they both won six slams like Novak but Becker won Wimbledon twice, and Edberg won the US OPEN twice.

Maybe Novak isn't so great after all?
Click to expand...
 
DerekNoleFam1 said:
Interesting bump, but just about every atg player has a "pet slam" where they do/did best at.
Half of Djoker's slams are AO, half of Sampras' were at Wimbledon.
Who really cares, it is the overall number that counts.
Click to expand...
I agree, also some Nadal t***s forget that if you take away both Djokovic and Nadals "pet slams" then Novak would lead the slam count.
 
Amelie Mauresmo said:
If Novak Djokovic does NOT win a slam outside of the Australian Open next year then I feel his legacy will be tarnished. Djokovic has 4 AO titles yet he's only won Wimbledon once and US OPEN once.

Novak isn't even close to being in Rafa's category and to Nadal's credit he has won FIVE slams outside of the French Open.

So, next year is a VERY IMPORTANT one for Novak Djokovic he must prove his 2011 season was no fluke. If Novak doesn't win the French Open next year I fear he is NEVER going to win it.

People on this board keep on saying how mentally tough Novak is BUT I am not so sure. The choke job against Nadal at the French Open, the mental collapse against Murray not putting up a good fight at Wimbledon.

The 1-4 record in US OPEN finals is disgraceful for a champion like Novak.

Next, year Novak MUST find a way to grab a slam outside of Australia or his legacy will be ruined. He will only prove he can win the least important of the four slams the Australian Open which doesn't make him a great legend.

Even Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg they both won six slams like Novak but Becker won Wimbledon twice, and Edberg won the US OPEN twice.

Maybe Novak isn't so great after all?
Click to expand...
Cool story, Amelie
 
Mainad said:
Actually, most of his Slam finals have been played against Nadal and Murray. He has faced Federer only the once!

In his 12 Slam finals, he is:

3-3 v Nadal (6 finals)
2-2 v Murray (4 finals)
1-0 v Tsonga (1 final)
0-1 v Federer (1 final)



What do you mean by 'unnecessary losses'? He had chances to win 2012 and 2013 USO but, in the end, his opponents proved to be the better player. At 2013 Wimbledon, he was outplayed from start to finish.
Click to expand...
If I were you, I would have:
a) come and updated my previous post
b) deleted it
 
dr325i said:
Because you sounded so convinced that the situation will remain that way...
Click to expand...

On the contrary, I merely pointed out the statistical facts of that moment in time. I do this all the time. If I had to go back and update every ancient post I made updating out of date stats I'd never have time to post anything else! :confused:
 
Mainad said:
On the contrary, I merely pointed out the statistical facts of that moment in time. I do this all the time. If I had to go back and update every ancient post I made updating out of date stats I'd never have time to post anything else! :confused:
Click to expand...
No problem. Someone got this thread up from dead...
 
Irrespective of whether his legacy is tarnished or not , it looks like the organizers yet again are not helping him build one.

Novak has been shunted out of center court yet again for his 3R. 3 time champion and winner of last 2 times first to get the boot. LOL
 
tennisaddict said:
Irrespective of whether his legacy is tarnished or not , it looks like the organizers yet again are not helping him build one.

Novak has been shunted out of center court yet again for his 3R. 3 time champion and winner of last 2 times first to get the boot. LOL
Click to expand...
In 2010, then defending and six-time Wimbledon champion Federer was relegated to Court No. 1 in his second round match

Everyone has to play on Court No. 1 once, no?
 
Not sure but I do hope he wipes out Fedal a couple more times at the AO before he hangs them up.
I really hope he gets 10+ straight wins over Nadal as well.
Be nice to see him straight set Nadal at the AO as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Novak needs to beat Rafa at the slams that's what counts.
Replies
35
Views
2K
Sentinel
Sentinel
A
Novak needs to win the French Open to prove he is back
2
Replies
82
Views
7K
FreeBird
FreeBird
M
Nadal - Since 2010 US Open. Djokovic since 2012 Australian Open.
Replies
48
Views
5K
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
M
Defeat 2 Current Grand Slam Champions in Same Grand Slam
Replies
1
Views
729
Golden
G
JennyS
Players who won multiple Slams after the age of 25
Replies
21
Views
3K
JennyS
JennyS
Back
Top