RF-18
Talk Tennis Guru
Holy hell
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
No. Most sane ones were saying 14 would be realistic while the hyperboles were targetting 18-20.
Yes, but their assumptions were extrapolated under false theories, that's why they were wrong.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
It's a bit lame. I had several opportunities to do the same but declined from 14 to 16, particularly in regards to Fedovic match predictions. I also always congratulated when Federer won.
I did open myself up for it so not too pressed, but I will say I definitely think the age curve has changed in pro tennis. I don't think ND is quite done yet...
You get a feel for how much this means to certain people, I can't remember most threads from a week ago.
manley0702
Rookie
I disagree. 16-18 still seemed like a long ways off. Murray was playing well and may have been favored had they met in the Wimbledon final. He'd already lost a couple to Wawrinka. Even Anderson nearly took him out less than a year before. Not to mention guys like Thiem and Zverev were getting better. While I certainly didn't expect that FO to be his last (nor do I now), it was clear things were changing, and he needed to win as many as possible in a short period of time before it was too late.
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
Quite true. I am enjoying some of the bumps, but I would have never remembered the threads myself.
I don't remember threads that I've made myself sometimes.
Yeah, you were always classy towards Djokovic, I give you that.
Voice of reason. Excellent post. Good advice for everyone in anything. Make predictions, plan, hope etc but dont count your chickens, dont get cocky or think growth or decline never ends or that world around you wont change. We can all learn from this
Last edited:
Well its a good lesson for anyone not to get carried away like you did here. How has your opinion of novak/tennis and the other things you mentioned in OP changed now that those things didnt happen?
Last edited:
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Not sure it's people remembering them. I think people are actively searching for bumpable threads
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Exactly . When this thread was opened, Novak was at 10 majors. So you know how 18 sounds when that guy was already 28 then ?
What can you expect from armchair critics. Winning slams is insanely hard even for Novak.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Well. I would expect people to be honest and admit their folly.
If you read the OP, they were quick to dismiss Federer stating "they think he is not going add any more" , but now they think "age curve has changed" when it suits them because age is now catching up on Novak, even though Novaks' elbow status is in limbo while Fed had made 3 finals at the time of this thread.
So, the double standards are striking.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Threads like this one, Novak to be No 1 till 2020 , Fed is at his peak in 2015 - they are all "golden" - like the "real slam" thread , will always be in the annals of TTW history.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
What people who are laughing at this prediction are forgetting is that the prediction wasn't made in a vacuum. It was made in a time, where the lost boys were lost, where Rafa seemed done and dusted, where Wawa was the biggest threat to Novak, but didn't pull it together often enough to really alter the situation, where Fed was the 2nd biggest threat to Novak and where Murray was his pigeon.
Fast forward 2,5 years and the basics of the analysis is still true: There's no one younger than 29, who's won a slam. There are 2 players younger than 29, who's been in a slam final (Kei, 28, and Milos, 27). Novak is still "only" 30 years old.
Rafa is back, but would you really favor him against a fully motivated and injury-free Novak? I wouldn't. Would you favor current Fed? He'd take his wins, but he'd surely take his losses too.
That Novak fell from the sky and Rafa rose from the ashes (and Roger too to some extent) was unpredictable at the time. The argument against Novak was his age and now he's been overtaken by two players with much more mileage than him. That's pretty ironic if you think about it.
That being said: 18 was obviously still a high number but with how the landscape looked, I can certainly understand the reasoning.
I would imagine there are 30 threads just like this one. Can't quite measure up with the 'real slam', 'no excuses' etc.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
Lmfao. It hasn't changed at all. This is a forum we are mostly anonymous posters stirring up convo here. It's not that serious.
Plamen1234
Hall of Fame
He would have had today more than 12 GS - probably around 15 if he didnt choke it.He can still reach 14 of 15 if he improves and changes his style
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
Yeah the age curve has changed. Credit to Federer but Nadal as well. Well see how Novak does. I've already conceded this prediction mostly although I don't think ND is done yet either. Not sure what exactly you're looking for.
ghostofMecir
Legend
The game has evolved since then. The players serve better, return better, know how to use the poly strings to perfection. They’re also better athletes. Djokovic cannot compete as well in the modern game.
That’s what I heard about Federer so the same must be true for Djkovic, no?
Yeah, that's why Fed's wins now taste even better.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
It was pointed out by many people even then that Rafa and Fed need not do the job, Novak could lose to Raonic in one major, Dmitrov in the next and Nishikori in the third. All it needs is 1 player out of 127 to step up. And exactly the same thing happened. It is not Fed and Rafa beat him but the Istomins, Querreys and Chungs took care.
Yeah the age curve has changed. Credit to Federer but Nadal as well. Well see how Novak does. I've already conceded this prediction mostly although I don't think ND is done yet either. Not sure what exactly you're looking for.
I don't think ND is completely done either. I opened a thread way back in 2012 predicting Novak will end up with 14 and (for you hopefully ) I am right. Right now the only ATG in open era to have meaningful results after 33 is Federer. The 30-32 range has done well in recent times ( Agassi, Nadal and Stan) but to draw any meaningful extrapolations from this is faulty. While what Fed has done may inspire Novak , what happens after 33 is a 'completely unknown territory" , if we take out Federer. We need several data points to make assertions. We are seeing Ferrer, Lopez, Tsonga, Berdych all declining and it may just be a matter of time before the same happens with Stan and Nadal as well.
D
Deleted member 716271
Guest
Ok fair enough. I did open myself up for this.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
1) that's what happened, to some extent yes. But it's also not really what happened. What happened was that Novak's level fell of a cliff to a degree that seemed highly unlikely at the time. We're talking Wilander post 88 or worse. Istomin and Chung didn't step up. Novak fell down due to injuries, motivation, Pepe Imaz, fidelity issues or what not. That's a significant difference.
Especially, because the argument was typically age-related and now you have two guys older than Novak with more mileage than him dominating the tour.
2) Rosewall did pretty well too...
That's the thing, though. Look through all the past posts on TW into the distant past with incorrect predictions. Everyone thinks everything is a simple trend and can't imagine the countless variables that go into it.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Chanwan , didn’t Fed face the same scenario after AO 10 ? At that time Fed was just 29 and then out of nowhere he started losing to Berdych and Tsonga ?
Didn’t Nadal start declining in 2014-15, losing to Fognini and others after a phenomenal 2013 ?
Decline was expected with Novak , just that his motivation ang injuries accelerated it. If Novak did not get injured but played at 2012–13 level, was he going to reach 18 ?
Ok, that's different. Fed didn't decline but two all time greats improved and surfaces slowed down. Nole got injured, huge difference, without that his level wouldn't drop. Yes, of course young guns improved too, but not enough to beat peak Nole.
But, I don't see how this can be used as an excuse for Djokovic. If Fed didn't decline that means that he is the better player and the goat. Djokovic can't compensate for his decline to sustain his level, so who cares really.
I don't see how Fed not declining helps Djokovic fans or Nadal fans lol. That means he is better than them, since they do decline.
And who cares if Nole beat prime Fed in 2015. Nole can rarely play at that level, that's why Fed destroys him if both are in their primes.
manley0702
Rookie
But that's kinda the point. Sure, his level fell. Could you have predicted that after FO 2016? No. But it could have just as easily been that Dimitrov or Raonic overtook him. It could have been that Roger or Rafa raised their level. It could have been that Stan became consistent. It could have been that Murray figured him out, etc. The point is that, while no one could have predicted exactly why he would fall, it was still more likely than not that he would fall. One of the scenarios listed above was going to happen even if each happened to be low percentage.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Fed's and Novak's situation at 28 are polar opposites as I hoped my mention of the field would make evident.
After the AO 2010, Fed was 28,5 and had a peak Rafa, a soon to be peak Novak and a soon to be peak Murray chasing him.
Rafole have beaten Fed in 11 slams since, 7-8 of them he would have been a very clear favorite in. Yes, he also lost to Söderling, Tsonga and Berdych every now and again, but not enough to keep him from piling up slam after slam if not for Rafole.
Novak had no younger ATG's chasing him at 28. Which is the main reason I (and many others) thought he did have a chance of getting there. He was dominating like Fed and had no younger ATG to stop him.
Nadal's case is different since people has talked about his early retirement since he was a baby and because he's hardly had 2 great seasons in a row (2010 to 2012 FO being the exception to the rule).
So, you thought Djokovic had a weaker era, because he did't have two young greats behind his back?
Yeah, exactly, having two younger greats is still a lot tougher than one at the same age and one older one.
On top of that Fed did have old Agassi as a bonus that compares to 14-2015 Federer.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
I disagree (see also my post just above).
1. Dimitrov, Nishikori and Raonic were 25+ or so already. They're not going to become better than Djokovic on their own all of a sudden
2. Novak was on his 2nd straight winning streak of 7 matches vs. Rafa, this time without losing sets. Rafa's not suddenly going to change that completely after 2 full years without a good slam result.
3. We'd seen enough of Fed-Novak to see that Novak had his no. in the slams. That was also not likely to change going forward as Fed was getting older.
4. We've seen Djokovic dominate Murray time and time again and it was very easy to see why: They played a pretty similar game with Novak being better at pretty much everything. Not going to change all of a sudden.
5. Wawrinka - inconsistent, great peak level. Played like that for 3 full years, also not going to change.
6. Unknowns: The youngsters - they haven't performed just yet.
In conclusion: Djokovic stopped winning primarily because of 1 player. Himself. Be it injury, motivation, marital problems or what not, I don't know. But it wasn't the field who suddenly usurped him. And you may of course just say that himself being one of the factors is exactly the point too. Which I would agree with to some extent, but it's still very surprising to see the degree of the free fall he's been in.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
I thought Fed had it easier in his peak years than Novak did in what would normally be his. But that Novak would have it a heck of a lot easier in his 'post-prime' period from 2014 onwards than Fed did in his (post 2010), where Novak didn't have younger ATG's chasing him. He did have a sweet 18 months there, but then his level fell and now Fedal are the one's benefitting from a (very) weak field.
manley0702
Rookie
Even if each scenario you listed above was only 5% to happen, as a whole it was somewhat likely Djokovic was going to fall.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
I can agree to that. Just not to the extent. That's still a major surprise no matter the perspective - imo.
Pheasant
Legend
Hopefully, Djokovic is healthy and ready to go soon. I know this sounds suicidal as a big Federer fan. But when I purchase my day pass at the USO later this year, my wife and I look forward to watching Djokovic play, just like we did when we were there in 2012. We loved watching this speed-burner run 100 miles an hour on the court, then sliding into his famous backhand shot and hitting winners. And Djokovic's skids on the court sounded like a race car burning rubber. Djokovic is fun to watch. He's a legend. If Federer never existed, then I'm sure we'd be big Djokovic fans. He's fun. He's got a great sense of humor. He helped a kid ask a girl out for a date once. Another time during a rain delay, he sat with a ball boy and chatted. Djokovic is quite entertaining. Granted, I'm a little ticked that he's the only guy that's really stopped Federer since 2014. But I know deep down that I cannot hate a guy for doing what he's paid to do.
Will I end up eating my words if he ends up stopping Federer again later this year and in 2019? I highly doubt it. I would love to see an in-form Djokovic play Federer again, especially at the 2019 AO final(dream match up of the century). Of course, I'd probably have a heart attack if that match went 5 sets. But to me, it wouldn't get any better than that.
Will I end up eating my words if he ends up stopping Federer again later this year and in 2019? I highly doubt it. I would love to see an in-form Djokovic play Federer again, especially at the 2019 AO final(dream match up of the century). Of course, I'd probably have a heart attack if that match went 5 sets. But to me, it wouldn't get any better than that.
Well, Fed is having a losing h2h vs Djokodal at majors, so surely he had it the toughest, they prevented him a lot more.
Fed has 30+ majors without them, but Djokovic even without Fedal doesn't have even 20 lol. So, by far Federer had the toughest competition.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
That isn't really a coherent argument. Gotta sleep though
titoelcolombiano
Legend
I think Djoker has one more run in him at number 1 for a couple of years. that could easily produce 4 - 5 slams for him if it happens.
Plamen1234
Hall of Fame
I dont think Djokovic will have the same longevity Federer have which is going to final on 34 and winning them on 35 years old.So he has 3 years more to win tournaments - not long period and Federer and Nadal are not out of the game so it depends.Still I think he will win 2 more GS
oldmanfan
Legend
I agree to many of your points in your posts above.
I think of the Big3, the one you like most is Fed like me? It is nice seeing you defend Djokovic's side of this topic. Kudos.
RF#18 wasn't surprising to me. This can be seen already from WB14-WB16. Fed was very consistent since WB14, and all he needed was for the one guy ahead, Djokovic, to dip a little and he'd win at least 1 more GS. That's exactly what happened, but like you, I was also surprised how precipitously Djokovic's results fell. Whether it was bc of physically, mentally, playing level, or a combo, it was still too steep of a fall. It caught most by surprise.
Let's hope he gets back to a decent level at least. He's an ATG, and deserves to go out on a nice note.
NBP
Hall of Fame
NBP, the voice of sanity and reason, saw this coming after he'd won the US Open - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/djokovics-decline-will-surprise-people.544070/
But no seriously, I get why people would think he'd stack slams but Rafa's 2014-15 and Fed's post AO 2010 and who they were losing to should have taught some people a lesson.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Last edited:
Tennisanity
Legend
Ohhhhh, so he did factually say Fed in 2015 was peak LOLLLLL, what a liar.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Anyone with a sliver of a brain should know that you can't foresee anything like that ever anyway. There are far, far too many variables and "ifs" that go into future results, yet you numbskulls always come up with the same tautological response when something unpredictable happens: "Derr no one could have predicted x happening." Yeah, no ****.
Tennisgods
Hall of Fame
I’m not giving up on this thread. Novak showed enough at AO that, if he sorts his physical issues out, he can dominate the tour again. He will win multiple slams over the next few years. Something out of the ordinary would need to happen to prevent that in my opinion.
I have no faith in the younger guys to improve over the next year or so sadly. Djokovic will be confronted with the same old sorry 24-30 yr olds, leaving Fedal to try and stand in his way. And Fed is surely not far from slam winning days being over.
I have no faith in the younger guys to improve over the next year or so sadly. Djokovic will be confronted with the same old sorry 24-30 yr olds, leaving Fedal to try and stand in his way. And Fed is surely not far from slam winning days being over.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
titoelcolombiano
Legend
Yep.
"Easily"
Djoker at his very best won 4 slams in 2011 / 12 and 5 slams in 2015 / 16. Stop trolling and go back to your mum's basement
Similar threads
