Novak: This is one of my 2 biggest professional goals – Surpassing Roger’s record for longest No. 1 and win as many Slams as possible"

DRII

G.O.A.T.
It's not a personal attack on someone to say you want to break their records. If that was the case then someone would have said the same thing when Federer publicly talked about the record when Sampras held it. Don't see how you are making something based on your career personal.
how about you expect some class from your guy!
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Nadal also has leading h2h at USO. You could flip that round and say Djokovic only dominates Nadal.at AO. Regardless the 6-1 is massively significant. Djokovic is no mug on clay and he should not have such a poor record at RG v Nadal. Especially as outside of RG their h2h is quite close. It definitely indicates, as does the USO h2h that at the Majors Nadal has an advantage over Djokovic.
Djokovic also leads Nadal 2-1 at Wimbledon. You don't see me tossing it around because the sample size is too small, meaning they should have been meeting more in these places rather than RG anyway, and it's not enough of a difference. Djokovic is not a mug on clay and maybe he shouldn't have such a poor record at RG, but RG is only one Slam and the Slam where Nadal is most successful. Let's see them meet 7 times at AO and then see you brag about a Slam head to head so much.
 

TheNachoMan

Professional
Djokovic also leads Nadal 2-1 at Wimbledon. You don't see me tossing it around because the sample size is too small, meaning they should have been meeting more in these places rather than RG anyway, and it's not enough of a difference. Djokovic is not a mug on clay and maybe he shouldn't have such a poor record at RG, but RG is only one Slam and the Slam where Nadal is most successful. Let's see them meet 7 times at AO and then see you brag about a Slam head to head so much.
Djokovic and Federer get handicapped for actually showing up deep in HC and grass majors unlike RAFA. Unfair :sneaky:
 

upchuck

Professional
Slam Record
Weeks at Number 1
Most year-end number 1 finishes
Most season ending championship titles
Most tennis masters 1000 titles.

All achievable.
 

octogon

Hall of Fame
Djokovic also leads Nadal 2-1 at Wimbledon. You don't see me tossing it around because the sample size is too small, meaning they should have been meeting more in these places rather than RG anyway, and it's not enough of a difference. Djokovic is not a mug on clay and maybe he shouldn't have such a poor record at RG, but RG is only one Slam and the Slam where Nadal is most successful. Let's see them meet 7 times at AO and then see you brag about a Slam head to head so much.

Nadal and Djokovic had different grass peaks/primes. When Nadal was getting to the finals every year, Djokovic was not even a factor to win Wimbledon for most of that time.

3 meetings at Wimbledon seems about right, considering their grass primes barely intersected. Nadal started declining on grass, just as Djokovic started getting good enough to win on it. And 2-1 to Djokovic (combined with having more Wimbledon titles) is a fair enough reflection and sample size that Djokovic is better on grass (or at least has better results.Nadal may be supremely unlucky that his Grass prime/peak co-incided with Federer's). You don't have to point out that Djokovic is better than Nadal at Wimbledon, because it's clear in their H2H and the amount of titles Djokovic has there.
 
Last edited:

Devtennis01

Semi-Pro
These interviews in general are trash. I never watch them. Players just say soundbites and obvious things for journos to write about. Waste of time for everyone. Just easy writing. Journos would need to actually know stuff about tennis otherwise to write articles like explaining why Zverev's serve isn't working, etc. Much better to ask some stupid questions then spin a story from it. Snooze.
 

roysid

Hall of Fame
In the weeks the tour wasn't active, the rankings were froken so Djokovic's weeks at #1 didn't count. He's incredibly unlucky, not lucky, in this aspect because he could have paased the record this year if it wasn't for covid.
No. The no. Of weeks at #1 for Djokovic is still increasing week by week. That's isn't frozen. hes scheduled to cross Pete Sampras on 23-Sep and if ranking at #1 continue, on March 21 cross Federer.

Correction : Once the tour started, rankings are not frozen, can change. But only for the performance at the tournament one is playing.

So, in both Rome abd Roland Garros Nadal can't gain a single point whereas Novak has opportunity to gain.

The earlier tournaments viz Madrid, Barcelona, Monte Carlo all got cancelled. Nadal had done poorly last year there. But no chance to improve this year
 

roysid

Hall of Fame
Nadal also has leading h2h at USO. You could flip that round and say Djokovic only dominates Nadal.at AO. Regardless the 6-1 is massively significant. Djokovic is no mug on clay and he should not have such a poor record at RG v Nadal. Especially as outside of RG their h2h is quite close. It definitely indicates, as does the USO h2h that at the Majors Nadal has an advantage over Djokovic.
Nadal and Djokovic had different grass peaks/primes. When Nadal was getting to the finals every year, Djokovic was not even a factor to win Wimbledon for most of that time.

3 meetings at Wimbledon seems about right, considering their grass primes barely intersected. Nadal started declining on grass, just as Djokovic started getting good enough to win on it. And 2-1 to Djokovic (combined with having more Wimbledon titles) is a fair enough reflection and sample size that Djokovic is better on grass (or at least has better results.Nadal may be supremely unlucky that his Grass prime/peak co-incided with Federer's). You don't have to point out that Djokovic is better than Nadal at Wimbledon, because it's clear in their H2H and the amount of titles Djokovic has there.
So the conclusion is
Djokovic better at AO and Wimbledon
H2H 2-0 and 2-1 and more importantly 8-1 and 5-2 titles

Nadal better at FO and USO
H2H 6-1 and 2-1
Titles 12-1 and 4-3
This is so clear that everyone can agree on that
 

Lew II

Legend
Nadal leads the US Open H2H as well.

I know 9-6 is a bitter pill to swallow, but you can't change it by crying about clay.
5-3 off RG at Slams
12-4 in finals off clay

The clay skew was heavy in their h2h. They played half of the matches on a minor surface. Incredible that Djokovic leads the h2h despite that.
 
Last edited:

Meles

Bionic Poster

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Djokovic's career goal is to beat the record at #1 with an unprecedented lack of younger ATGs on his back? Oh, noez!

As for "winning as many Majors as possible", I think that St. Nick's career goal is the same.

:-D
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
It's not a personal attack on someone to say you want to break their records. If that was the case then someone would have said the same thing when Federer publicly talked about the record when Sampras held it. Don't see how you are making something based on your career personal.
Agree. Sampras certainly didnt take it personally either.

He was quite deferential about the whole thing and even said that he thought Federer could break the record.

The only thing that i think does change things slightly is that there is an extra mental component to this when the comment is made between two players who are both still active.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Yeah because 5 wins is the same as 29 and 26 wins :-D
So, if it is not "the same" why would you ever compare players with less than the amount of matches between the big 3?

Clearly, in your statement, you imply that that is not enough information to draw conclusions from, yet you do it all the time, so which is it?

:cool:
 

Dragan

Semi-Pro
That is cherry picking. Nadal has dominated Djokovic at the Majors. Edberg dominated becker at the Majors. Becker seems more revered because of his Wimbledon record. Weeks at no.1 is a misnomer. What is better? Being number 1 for 45 weeks of a year but ending as YE2 or being number 1 for 7 weeks but ending YE1?
It is definitely a better indicator of your dominance when you have more weeks at number one position than the number of YE1 endings. And I say this not because I am Novak's fan.

The number one position correlates with your sustained performance over the "moving" 12-month period. YE1 position simply happens when moving 12-month performance coincides with the calendar year, so it looks great to end a calendar year on "a high note", but a player cannot rest on his YE1 laurels, because last year's YE1 ranking does not translate to a better draw on this year's tournaments - only your current ranking.
 
He will probably achieve that and more, and come to realise that he’s still not liked. At that point, he’ll be criticised for being too robotic, fake, etc and start being compared to Federer and Nadal re: oh-so-graceful (yawn) and the intensity and passion of Nadal (yawn too). Poor guy
 

blablavla

Hall of Fame
Don't think so, look how many slams Fed and Rafa had when Novak won his first... It wasn't that obvious Novak will be that great but I believed... Off course I got lucky in prediction, it was probably more wish than reality, now it's more reality than wish ;)
what is the age difference between Nadal and Djokovic?
 

blablavla

Hall of Fame
Why are you picking only the slams when it comes to titles but are not doing the same with the h2h category? Nadal leads Djokovic in their h2h at slams.
because that is the essence of Lewiscean "statistics", cherry pick and compare the taste of apples with the taste of sand.
what a surprise that apples taste better.

just take out of comparison anything that might taste better than apples for other folks :-D:-D:-D
 

Lew II

Legend
So, if it is not "the same" why would you ever compare players with less than the amount of matches between the big 3?

Clearly, in your statement, you imply that that is not enough information to draw conclusions from, yet you do it all the time, so which is it?

:cool:
9 matches is an info.
50 or 55 matches is a much bigger info.
 

blablavla

Hall of Fame
So, if it is not "the same", why are you comparing these things? Either you consider the "info" from 9 matches as valid for conclusions, or you don't.

Which is it?

:cool:
both:
- when it suits Lew narrative it is valid for conclusions
- when it doesn't suit Lew narrative then is is insufficient data, too much skewed by RG and USO, and a bunch of other blah blah blah excuses
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
both:
- when it suits Lew narrative it is valid for conclusions
- when it doesn't suit Lew narrative then is is insufficient data, too much skewed by RG and USO, and a bunch of other blah blah blah excuses
Ah, I forgot Lew's "it matters until it doesn't".

Also, let's disregard half of the Majors to make a point. Basing the conclusions on the other half is so much more credible.

8-B
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
No. The no. Of weeks at #1 for Djokovic is still increasing week by week. That's isn't frozen. hes scheduled to cross Pete Sampras on 23-Sep and if ranking at #1 continue, on March 21 cross Federer.

Correction : Once the tour started, rankings are not frozen, can change. But only for the performance at the tournament one is playing.

So, in both Rome abd Roland Garros Nadal can't gain a single point whereas Novak has opportunity to gain.

The earlier tournaments viz Madrid, Barcelona, Monte Carlo all got cancelled. Nadal had done poorly last year there. But no chance to improve this year
You need to get your facts straight. From March to August, while the tour was suspended, none of Djokovic's weeks at #1 counted. They only started counting again once the tour started back. He would have passed Sampras back in March or April if it wasn't for covid. Nadal is in great position because he didn't lose a single point even though he didn't defend his USO title and won't lose points at RG either. In a regular season, he would be #3 right now and Dominic would be #2, but you have somehow made this seems like Nadal got the short end of the stick? :unsure:
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Agree. Sampras certainly didnt take it personally either.

He was quite deferential about the whole thing and even said that he thought Federer could break the record.

The only thing that i think does change things slightly is that there is an extra mental component to this when the comment is made between two players who are both still active.
True. I guess it keeps him motivated that there is a goal but I would probably not be so open about it if it were me.
 

beard

Hall of Fame
Djokovic's career goal is to beat the record at #1 with an unprecedented lack of younger ATGs on his back? Oh, noez!

As for "winning as many Majors as possible", I think that St. Nick's career goal is the same.

:-D
I doubt... St. Nick's career goal is to bash as many real tennis players as possible and continue being Twitter influencer...
He knows he has 0 percent chance of winning any slam... His maximum is some 500...
 

weakera

Legend
And you know that Nole winning RG against Rafa in the final is less boring.
I don't really mind Nole Fam celebrations and bragging rights outside of the whole "Earths Avenger" stuff which really makes me cringe tbh. It's much preferred to when the Swiss fans take over.
 
Top