# Odds of Djokovic (now) winning the CYGS is ...

#### RaulRamirez

##### Legend
My understanding of statistics is limited, but let's look at this way. My personal opinion of whether I'm rooting for Novak to complete it or not (which would be the first since Laver in '69 - the first full year of the Open Era) is irrelevant.

Djokovic has already, of course won the AO and RG. I'm not sure how that figures in now, so let's look ahead.

Novak has won 5 of the 15 Wimbledons he's entered, which by that measure, would give him a .33 chance.
He has won 3 of the 15 USOs he's entered ...........................................................which would give him a .2 chance.
Statistically, by this measure, he will have .066 chance of winning both ...so a little less than 7%.
(if you flip a coin, the odds of two heads in a row is .5 x.5 = .25)

If we want to look it more favorably, we can look at it since he started being a dominant - or at least co-dominant - figure in 2011.
Starting that year, Novak has won 5/9 Wimbledons he has entered (.55 %) and 3 out of 9 USOs he's entered (.33), so achieving both by this measure would give him about an 18% chance.

Other factors that may diminish these odds are:
He has yet to win RG and Wimb in the same year.
He'll be an even bigger target, with possibly more pressure.
Again, nobody has done this (although, of course, Novak did have the 15-16 NCYGS...quite impressive) in 52 years.

Why did I post all this?
I just think that we have to respect unique achievements more than we do.
Nobody just shows up and wins a "slam", let alone strings two, three or four together.
I say this to both his overconfident fans and his detractors.
Respect the game, the players and their achievements.

#### Cortana

##### Hall of Fame
I would look at the current field. 70% chance winning Wimbledon and maybe 40% chance winning USO. 28% chance for CYGS.

#### Tarkovsky

##### Rookie
What odds do the bookies give?

#### RaulRamirez

##### Legend
What odds do the bookies give?
Someone may know. I have no clue - not a betting man.

D

#### Deleted member 771911

##### Guest
I see it happening. Who can stop him?

Jai

#### Nole_The_Champion

##### Semi-Pro
Possible. But it's a long shot to tell.

Jai

#### Hitman

##### G.O.A.T.
Wimbledon is going to be hard, there are going to a lot of potential landmines that he will not be able to outgrind on that surface in the early stages. And he is going in with the absolute biggest target on his back right now, everyone is looking at him.

#### reef58

##### Semi-Pro
Odds are low. It is a difficult task that is why you don't see it.

#### RaulRamirez

##### Legend
I see it happening. Who can stop him?
Barring anything unforeseen, Novak figures to be the favorite at both tourneys. Still, it's a field of 128 and winning 7 B of 5 matches over a fortnight (Wimbledon on a short turnaround after an emotional FO win) is never easy. Granted, Big 3 have made it look easier than it is, but how often has anyone won three straight slams in the same year? (I think just once: Rafa 2010!)

We know that the calendar slam - the true Grand Slam - hasn't been done since 1969.

Last edited:
Jai

#### oldmanfan

##### Legend
I see it happening. Who can stop him?
Similar sentiments as 2016 after Djokr won AO16/RG16, a time when Nadl sucked, Fedr was limping, and Djokr was younger, faster, stronger, simply better. Yet of the 3 WB/USO/OG, he won none.

Matches have to be played. We'll know soon enough .

D

#### Deleted member 771911

##### Guest
Similar sentiments as 2016 after Djokr won AO16/RG16, a time when Nadl sucked, Fedr was limping, and Djokr was younger, faster, stronger, simply better. Yet of the 3 WB/USO/OG, he won none.

Matches have to be played. We'll know soon enough .
I’d kind of agree except RG 16 draw was very weak while he really had to play well at ‘21.

#### Djokovic_is_the_best#1

##### G.O.A.T.
Similar sentiments as 2016 after Djokr won AO16/RG16, a time when Nadl sucked, Fedr was limping, and Djokr was younger, faster, stronger, simply better. Yet of the 3 WB/USO/OG, he won none.

Matches have to be played. We'll know soon enough .
His draw at Wimbledon is crucial. I feel if he gets a decent draw in early rounds that will be great for him. He’s more vulnerable in the earlier stages as he moves from the french open and adapts to grass.

If he survives the first week and gets into machine groove then I think he will win it again. The first week is the biggest threat like another Sam querry moment occurring.

It’s similar to 2016 but there are differences too. He isn’t coming into Wimbledon holding all 4 majors this time. Plus he went wild when he won RG in 2016 to get career grand slam. He said it was an outer body experience and I feel he lost a bit of motivation and focus.

This time around though he seems determined for more as he on the cusp of matching their slam records. It was a measured celebration this time like he happy but the job ain’t done yet. He’s very motivated for more from his french open presser and physically fit. I wish in a way it was 3 weeks gap between the french and Wimbledon to give him a bit more time to reset. However, he’s in a great place mentally and physically and his game has a lot of confidence so I feel getting another major soon may help him to continue to strike while the iron is hot. He’s the form player and alpha male again in the tennis world right now.

We will see what happens and he has the pressure to handle but his form, physical condition and mental aspect is in great order.

100%

#### oldmanfan

##### Legend
I’d kind of agree except RG 16 draw was very weak while he really had to play well at ‘21.
What I meant was 'after' he had already won RG16, weak draw or not. Also, Djokr was even more dominant up to winning RG16 than he had been so far in 2021. And yes, Djokr played well to beat a very old Nadl at RG21, but he also had lady luck on his side with Musetti AND Tsits even though he was down 2 sets to love in both. He played 'well enough' to win RG21, but I'm not sure about 'well', bc he could've been on 18 slams or Nadl could've easily been on 21 slams if Musetti/Tsits didnt sh*t their pants.

#### oldmanfan

##### Legend
His draw at Wimbledon is crucial. I feel if he gets a decent draw in early rounds that will be great for him. He’s more vulnerable in the earlier stages as he moves from the french open and adapts to grass.

If he survives the first week and gets into machine groove then I think he will win it again. The first week is the biggest threat like another Sam querry moment occurring.

It’s similar to 2016 but there are differences too. He isn’t coming into Wimbledon holding all 4 majors this time. Plus he went wild when he won RG in 2016 to get career grand slam. He said it was an outer body experience and I feel he lost a bit of motivation and focus.

This time around though he seems determined for more as he on the cusp of matching their slam records. It was a measured celebration this time like he happy but the job ain’t done yet. He’s very motivated for more from his french open presser and physically fit. I wish in a way it was 3 weeks gap between the french and Wimbledon to give him a bit more time to reset. However, he’s in a great place mentally and physically and his game has a lot of confidence so I feel getting another major soon may help him to continue to strike while the iron is hot. He’s the form player and alpha male again in the tennis world right now.

We will see what happens and he has the pressure to handle but his form, physical condition and mental aspect is in great order.
Adaptation is part of it. IMO, it's actually bc he's not great at moving on grass. You can see evidence of this where he slips and falls way more often than he should in the early rounds, considering how many WBs he's won. He needs his feet to 'grip' the surface to make those crazy stretchy gets (it's why he's so good on HC bc HC affords him to change direction quickly), and early round grass doesn't allow his feet to grip the surface. But once he's in the 2nd week, the grass are basically gone, so it's closer to a HC in the back court, and that's when he's much harder to beat. So yes, you'll be very happy once he's in the 2nd week bc he'll be acclimated and his footing will be more sure, thus he's harder to beat.

#### HBK4life

##### Professional
As long as he stays healthy he has a good shot. Unless he throws a ninja star at the chair umpire or something.

##### Bionic Poster
I see it happening. Who can stop him?
Exactly.

Wimbledon is going to be hard, there are going to a lot of potential landmines that he will not be able to outgrind on that surface in the early stages. And he is going in with the absolute biggest target on his back right now, everyone is looking at him.

#### BGod

##### Legend
He's won the last 2 Wimbledons and 4 of his last 6 appearances. USO is the far harder one for him and that's why I see him flubbing there due to a variety of actors.

In terms of betting right now Novak is being given around 2-1 odds of winning USO. But then again Fed is 13-1 which is beyond laughable. Betting lines are moved by volume, like stock so it's not really related to true odds.

Personally I think the combination as of now stands at 20%. Historically there hasn't been many who've won the first two Slams of the season.

Borg x3
Courier x1
Djokovic x2*

Courier didn't come close losing in the 3rd round of Wimbledon and a SF at the USO. Borg made two USO finals losing one in 5 sets. However the expectation was if Borg won either of the two USOs specifically 1978 then he'd be a heavy favourite to take AO for that time. Courier lost the Wimbledon Final in 4 sets the following season and had made USO Final two years prior. Meanwhile in Novak's first attempt he lost 3rd round of Wimbledon like Courier but did make USO Final.

And of course statistically the closest to have made it after Laver was Federer who was 2 sets away in 2009, 07 & 06.

#### Spencer Gore

##### Hall of Fame
And of course statistically the closest to have made it after Laver was Federer who was 2 sets away in 2009, 07 & 06.
?
Federer has never been close to doing it.

#### Spencer Gore

##### Hall of Fame
This is the first time since Borg that I've genuinely thought someone might do it.

it's a Herculean task though. Laver doing it twice is mind blowing.

#### BGod

##### Legend
?
Federer has never been close to doing it.
Statistically. He lost in four sets at French Final twice and in 5 sets at two Finals. In terms of order he only made the 2nd Slam Final but statistically for the season. Novak was by that metric 2 sets away in 2015 as well.

#### Spencer Gore

##### Hall of Fame
Statistically. He lost in four sets at French Final twice and in 5 sets at two Finals. In terms of order he only made the 2nd Slam Final but statistically for the season. Novak was by that metric 2 sets away in 2015 as well.
That metric makes no sense in this context. Once you've lost the first or second slam the Grand Slam is off.

#### helterskelter

##### Legend
He's won the last 2 Wimbledons and 4 of his last 6 appearances. USO is the far harder one for him and that's why I see him flubbing there due to a variety of actors.

In terms of betting right now Novak is being given around 2-1 odds of winning USO. But then again Fed is 13-1 which is beyond laughable. Betting lines are moved by volume, like stock so it's not really related to true odds.

Personally I think the combination as of now stands at 20%. Historically there hasn't been many who've won the first two Slams of the season.

Borg x3
Courier x1
Djokovic x2*

Courier didn't come close losing in the 3rd round of Wimbledon and a SF at the USO. Borg made two USO finals losing one in 5 sets. However the expectation was if Borg won either of the two USOs specifically 1978 then he'd be a heavy favourite to take AO for that time. Courier lost the Wimbledon Final in 4 sets the following season and had made USO Final two years prior. Meanwhile in Novak's first attempt he lost 3rd round of Wimbledon like Courier but did make USO Final.

And of course statistically the closest to have made it after Laver was Federer who was 2 sets away in 2009, 07 & 06.
You forgot Wilander 88.

Also, if you're counting Federer as two sets away in 06, 07, and 09, you have to also count Djokovic as two sets away in 2015.

#### BGod

##### Legend
Laver doing it twice is mind blowing.
3 of 4 Slams on grass.
First was amateur circuit while best players were elsewhere.

#### BGod

##### Legend
You forgot Wilander 88.

Also, if you're counting Federer as two sets away in 06, 07, and 09, you have to also count Djokovic as two sets away in 2015.
Yes I pointed out Novak in a later post. Wilander lost in QF at Wimbledon and handedly so.

#### helterskelter

##### Legend
Yes I pointed out Novak in a later post. Wilander lost in QF at Wimbledon and handedly so.
Ah, I see that now. Wilander did indeed lose to Mecir. But he got two rounds closer than did Courier!

#### threehandedbackhand

##### Hall of Fame
Wimbledon: odds for Djokovic win are currently around 2.20
US Open: odds for Djokovic win are currently around 2.30

2.20 can be translated to 44% approx.
2.30 can be translated to 41% approx.

Conclusion: Djokovic CYGS chances are about 18%

#### helterskelter

##### Legend
Bookies have Djokovic in the region of 5/4, 6/5, or 11/10 for Wimbledon.

Similar for the US Open, but some stretch it out to 7/5.

#### Thriller

##### Hall of Fame
He has to be a strong favourite for Wimbledon.
Going into the USO with both the CYGS and unequivocal GOAT status with 21 on the line will be a lot of pressure. From the media, from his countrymen etc.
We have seen players buckle under that kind of pressure (Serena) so it would be a big ask, especially as his last experience of USO was not a good one.

I am a Nadal fan but I really hope he can do it. I have to admit Djokovic has been the best player in the word for the last decade and there is a strong case that he is the best player of all time.

#### Pheasant

##### Hall of Fame
What'll be interesting is to see how he'd handle the pressure if he won Wimbledon, then got within a few matches at the USO of completing the CYGS while also bagging #21 to break a 3 way tie. The pressure would be incredible, unlike anything that he's ever seen. We saw how Serena was affected when she came within 2 matches of completing the CYGS in 2015. She was visibly shaken by a far inferior player and then proceeded to play the worst tennis I've seen her play in years. She's human. I get it. The CYGS is the holy grail of tennis. That's nothing against Serena. That kind of pressure is incredible. She had already accomplished everything else.

That said, if anybody could be up to the task, it'd be Djoker. As much as it'll hurt to see him pass Federer and Nadal, I'd actually like to see him in that position. It'd be tennis history. It would be incredible. It'd one of the few times that I might pull for him to win. Sometimes, incredible history like this is bigger than watching our heroes get dusted.

Note: Losing the FO final is not even close to winning the CYGS. That means that your winning streak fell 15 matches short. Serena was quite close in 2015 with only 2 more consecutive wins to accomplish that feat. Federer and Djoker were never close in 2006, 2007, and 2015.

That said, I'd give Djoker a 24% chance of completing the CYGS. I think that he's a big favorite at Wimbledon. However, all of the stress is going to make it tough to also bag the USO. He could suffer a big burnout like he did during his ridiculous winning streak in 2011.

#### Spencer Gore

##### Hall of Fame
3 of 4 Slams on grass.
First was amateur circuit while best players were elsewhere.
Yes, the Open Era Slam is more impressive, especially as the court conditions were probably more varied that year -despite 3 being on grass- than they are this year where every tournament plays like a variation of a hard court. Roland-Garros and Wimbledon were two diametrically opposed surfaces in 1969. One dusty and grueling, one slick and fast. And the waterlogged US final was played on a surface that was greasy, but slow.

If it was that easy -even in the amateur days -more than two men would have managed it in the entire history of the sport.

#### game..set..match

##### Semi-Pro
in his current form i have a hard time seeing him losing wimbledon. who is good enough and mentally strong enough to beat him on grass over 5 entire sets at the moment? cilic/tsitsipas/musetti ? yeah i think i prefer novak in those matchups.

i worry about Medvedev at USO though....could be tricky

Jai

#### Musterrific

##### Professional
He's half way there already. The key was winning the French Open, which is by far his worst slam. That alone will give him a tremendous amount of confidence. He has a great record at Wimbledon, especially the last few years, so he's heavily favoured to win that one, unless he crashes out early to some totally random player that he underestimates. And while hardcourt is his best surface and he's won the US Open 3 times, his record there overall is quite strange with many losses in the final. So winning the calendar slam is far from a foregone conclusion, and the odds are against it, but...I would say given his all-court prowess, great physical and mental condition right now, and with GOATHOOD on the line, he's in a better position to pull off this gargantuan task than anyone else since Laver.

#### GabeT

##### G.O.A.T.
Since Laver only Courier (1992) and Novak in 2016 have won the first two slams of the year. So he’s got a good headstart. But will be very difficult

Last edited:

#### duaneeo

##### Legend
What'll be interesting is to see how he'd handle the pressure if he won Wimbledon, then got within a few matches at the USO of completing the CYGS while also bagging #21 to break a 3 way tie. The pressure would be incredible, unlike anything that he's ever seen...
This is why I don't think it'll happen. Djokovic has always struggled at the US Open more so than expected, and with the incredible pressure of the CYGS added to the mix, I think it'll be too overwhelming.

#### helterskelter

##### Legend
Since Laver only Courier (1992) and Novak in 2016 have won the first two slams of the year. So he’s got a good headstart. But will be very difficult
Not true. Wilander did it in 1988, too. Also, Borg did it in 1978, 1979, and 1980, back when the first two Slams of the year were Roland Garros and Wimbledon, because the Australian Open was played in December.

Oh, and Djokovic 2021!

#### GabeT

##### G.O.A.T.
Not true. Wilander did it in 1988, too. Also, Borg did it in 1978, 1979, and 1980, back when the first two Slams of the year were Roland Garros and Wimbledon, because the Australian Open was played in December.

Oh, and Djokovic 2021!

#### helterskelter

##### Legend
That doesn't excuse you forgetting your favorite player's start to the year through which we are currently living!

#### Jokervich

##### Hall of Fame
This is why I don't think it'll happen. Djokovic has always struggled at the US Open more so than expected, and with the incredible pressure of the CYGS added to the mix, I think it'll be too overwhelming.
But who has he struggled against? Almost always top quality opposition:

2007 - lost to Federer
2008 - lost to Federer
2009 - lost to Federer
2011 - won
2012 - lost to Murray
2014 - lost to Nishikori
2015 - won
2016 - lost to Wawrinka
2017 - didn't play
2018 - won
2019 - lost to Wawrinka
2020 - disqualified

He's not lost a set to Nadal on hard court for years now. Federer is not the player he was in 2007-2009, Murray isn't either, Wawrinka always caused him issues. So apart from the inexcusable loss to Nishikori in 2014, he lost to great players and all those players are not a threat in 2021.

What do you think?

#### helterskelter

##### Legend
But who has he struggled against? Almost always top quality opposition:

2007 - lost to Federer
2008 - lost to Federer
2009 - lost to Federer
2011 - won
2012 - lost to Murray
2014 - lost to Nishikori
2015 - won
2016 - lost to Wawrinka
2017 - didn't play
2018 - won
2019 - lost to Wawrinka
2020 - disqualified

He's not lost a set to Nadal on hard court for years now. Federer is not the player he was in 2007-2009, Murray isn't either, Wawrinka always caused him issues. So apart from the inexcusable loss to Nishikori in 2014, he lost to great players and all those players are not a threat in 2021.

What do you think?
If it were any other hard court in the world other than the US Open or the Canadian Open, I would agree with you that Nadal doesn't have a realistic chance against Djokovic. But I think he does have a decent outside chance at those two events. Same is true at Wimbledon. Of all the events on tour that aren't on clay, those three are the ones where he is most likely to play Djokovic close or even beat him. But they are three important events - especially two of them, of course.

#### GabeT

##### G.O.A.T.
That doesn't excuse you forgetting your favorite player's start to the year through which we are currently living!
Oh, I didn’t forget that one. That’s why I said he had a great start. I was referring to the two slams from this year

#### RaulRamirez

##### Legend
But who has he struggled against? Almost always top quality opposition:

2007 - lost to Federer
2008 - lost to Federer
2009 - lost to Federer
2011 - won
2012 - lost to Murray
2014 - lost to Nishikori
2015 - won
2016 - lost to Wawrinka
2017 - didn't play
2018 - won
2019 - lost to Wawrinka
2020 - disqualified

He's not lost a set to Nadal on hard court for years now. Federer is not the player he was in 2007-2009, Murray isn't either, Wawrinka always caused him issues. So apart from the inexcusable loss to Nishikori in 2014, he lost to great players and all those players are not a threat in 2021.

What do you think?
First, of course, he has to win W. Not an easy turnaround after such an emotional RG. At US Open, Novak figures to be the favorite, and if he's not on his A game, there is a (newish) group of players who can certainly stay with, and possibly beat, him:. Tsitsipas, Med, Zverev, Thiem ( if back in-form) possibly Rublev or Karatsev...and still Rafa.

#### helterskelter

##### Legend
Oh, I didn’t forget that one. That’s why I said he had a great start. I was referring to the two slams from this year
I know - just being silly!

#### Spencer Gore

##### Hall of Fame
Oh, I didn’t forget that one. That’s why I said he had a great start. I was referring to the two slams from this year
I thought that was pretty clear from the way you wrote it. It was just the other four times you missed out.

#### SonnyT

##### Hall of Fame
But who has he struggled against? Almost always top quality opposition:

2018 - won
2019 - lost to Wawrinka
2020 - disqualified

He's not lost a set to Nadal on hard court for years now. Federer is not the player he was in 2007-2009, Murray isn't either, Wawrinka always caused him issues. So apart from the inexcusable loss to Nishikori in 2014, he lost to great players and all those players are not a threat in 2021.

What do you think?
Yep, but I wouldn't be surprised if he loses at USO to any of the Young Gang of 4 (Tsi, Thiem, Zed and Med). His chances of beating any of them on grass are much better.

#### GabeT

##### G.O.A.T.
I thought that was pretty clear from the way you wrote it. It was just the other four times you missed out.

#### Sampras-Bruguera 1993

##### Hall of Fame
If he couldn’t do it in 2011/2015 he won’t do it in 2021. He needed to grab it in those years

Last edited:

#### tennis4jags

##### Semi-Pro
my gut feeling is that, US open is going to be the biggest challenge for Djokovic. I think Tsitsipas, Zverev, Medvedev and Rublev are playing great tennis and given in their day they can be dangerous to anybody. Thiem is not far away but mental illness takes some time to come back.
My vote is - Djokovic can win Wimbledon but 100 sure that he cannot win US Open.

#### RelentlessAttack

##### Hall of Fame
He has a 100% chance of winning W. USO is the only place he might lose

#### nachiket nolefam

##### Hall of Fame
I would look at the current field. 70% chance winning Wimbledon and maybe 40% chance winning USO. 28% chance for CYGS.
Who said 70?

Odds makers give him 40% chance to win Wimbledon and around same for us open.

So it's 16% chance of winning CYGS. Same odds as his RG2021 odds at the start of the tournament. Not bad but very improbable.