The Djokovic bubble, when will it pop? A prediction based on actual mileage
- Thread starter Crionics
- Start date
Yup, i have been thinking about dumping it for a while
Sereger
Hall of Fame
After going through the original post, the decline after winning certain number of match at around 8xx seems like a fact. But why was that? What happened to them then?
The slip of Fed in 2010 still disappoints me. He had no business to lose against Hewitt, Bagdatis, Gulbis, twice against Murray and Berdych.
I'm super lazy tbh
, really appreciate a link to any explaination somewhere within this thread if any
The slip of Fed in 2010 still disappoints me. He had no business to lose against Hewitt, Bagdatis, Gulbis, twice against Murray and Berdych.
I'm super lazy tbh
, really appreciate a link to any explaination somewhere within this thread if anyThe bubble may have deflated some what, and he may be able to inflate it another time, yet It is seemingly a Herculian effort, on many fronts, for a player to be able to achieve the consistency and enduring winning / record that Federer has trailblazed. With the bar being set THAT high, odds may be slim that anyone in the next 2 - 3 decades will best it. Nadal has been the runner up and it appears that his body has paid for it.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Oh.We can close this discussion? OP theory was ok, well elaborated, fact-based, had some good arguments... and it's complete failure. This doesn't mean OP made bad prediction. It's just Novak going against the odds. ATM, he holds absolute atp points record, winning 2 mayors and 3 masters1000 events. His 2016 is arguably better season than 2015 so far. No bubble. No decline. There is nothing left in defense of OP theory. Even if Novak doesn't win Wimbledon, theory is all wrong, because of it's time-frame. I guess we'll have to wait some time for Novak's real decline. How long? Few more months? Few more years? Nobody knows.
Sent from my LG-D605 using Tapatalk
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Oh.He he, lots of wishful thinking by haters, as usual. Nole trolled you guys few times, he'll do it again
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Thats the last well be hearing from you, boy.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Nole's level clearly came down but is there any evidence it was physical or related to the number of matches played?
Also, at the time of the OP fed had won 2 slams after his 812th match. Today that is 3. And absent a truly GOATing Nole it would have been 6.
The dominance we saw from Nole in 2015 and early 2016 was among the highest in all tennis history. That's not going to repeat itself. But Nole has already won two slams and reached another slam final since the OP and he can easily win a few more slams if his concentration returns.
Also, at the time of the OP fed had won 2 slams after his 812th match. Today that is 3. And absent a truly GOATing Nole it would have been 6.
The dominance we saw from Nole in 2015 and early 2016 was among the highest in all tennis history. That's not going to repeat itself. But Nole has already won two slams and reached another slam final since the OP and he can easily win a few more slams if his concentration returns.
Last edited:
BlueB
Legend
Quick update:
-Djokovic: +2
-Federer: 2 +1
-Nadal: 1
-Sampras: 2
-Agassi: 2
-Serena: 2 +1
Seems that Nole is in a very fine company there and with age potential to do better then his colleagues...
He just played a great match at DC, this morning. We'll see if it's (hopefully) the beginning of his renaissance.[/B]
Big_Dangerous
Talk Tennis Guru
And boom goes the dynamite!
tenisdecente
Hall of Fame
He played well but ARV is not what I would label as a good test
D
Deleted member 742196
Guest
Wow. Somebody called this one really well.
Currently tally with Nadal's French Open win:
-Djokovic: 2
-Federer: 3
-Nadal: 2
-Sampras: 2
-Agassi: 2
-Serena: 3
D
Deleted member 756486
Guest
Not a bad prediction...
Nope It holds up... Somewhat unfair that Djoker is the center of attention though, cause It was meant as a general "rule"...
I am the Greatest!
Professional
After Australian Open 2018:
-Djokovic: 2
-Federer: 5
-Nadal: 2
-Sampras: 2
-Agassi: 2
-Serena: 3
-Djokovic: 2
-Federer: 5
-Nadal: 2
-Sampras: 2
-Agassi: 2
-Serena: 3
N
nikdom
Guest
I am the Greatest!
Professional
Ambeleeeebable
hipolymer
Hall of Fame
should be 3 for Nadal
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
Utterly demolished.You don't need to be that complicated. Of course, a player's chances of winning slams decrease with each passing year.
Over 45 seasons (since 1970) and 180 slams:
5.5% slams have been won by teenagers (17-19)
49.4%: 20-24 years old
38.8%: 25-29
8.3%: 30+
Here is the % per age:
17: 1.6%
18: 1.1
19: 2.7
20: 6.1
21: 7.7
22: 12.7
23: 8.3
24: 14.4
25: 12.7
26: 9.4
27: 7.7
28: 4.4
29: 4.4
30: 3.8
31: 1.6
32: 0.5
33: 0
34: 0.5
35: 0.5
36: 0.5
37: 0.5
Novak will find solace in the fact that his odds of winning slams are exactly the same at 29 as they are at 28 but he can still worry about the sharp drop after 30. All of the dinosaur wins (34-37) happened between 1970 and 1972.
But precisely, what if we were going back to that era (early 70s) in terms of age profile for the tour?
This is the average age of slam winners per season:
1970: 27.7
1971: 28
1972: 30.5
1973: 27.7
1974: 20.7
1975: 26.5
1976: 22.7
1977: 23.6
1978: 24
1979: 23.2
1980: 23.7
1981: 22.7
1982: 24.7
1983: 24.2
1984: 23.5
1985: 20.2
1986: 23.3
1987: 24.2
1988: 23
1989: 21.7
1990: 25.5
1991: 22.5
1992: 22.5
1993: 21.7
1994: 22.7
1995: 24.5
1996: 24.7
1997: 23.5
1998: 25.5
1999: 27.2
2000: 25
2001: 25.7
2002: 26
2003: 24.2
2004: 23
2005: 22.7
2006: 23.2
2007: 24.2
2008: 22.7
2009: 24
2010: 25
2011: 24
2012: 26.2
2013: 26.2
2014: 27
2015: 28.2
You read that right: 2015 is the second oldest average after 1972. It's all happening folks!!! Pretty soon you'll see players winning slam titles around their mid-30s again just like the beginning of open era! Will Djoko, with his diet from the future, herald that (re)new(ed) "super grandpa" generation???
And finally, a look at which slam a player is most likely to win in his 30s:
1- AO: 40%
2- USO: 26.6%
3- RG: 20%
4- W: 13.3%
(sorry Roger, not looking so good for your prospects
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
It's 3 for Nadal.
D
Deleted member 688153
Guest
I am the Greatest!
Professional
After Australian Open 2018:
-Djokovic: 2
-Federer: 5
-Nadal: 3
-Sampras: 2
-Agassi: 2
-Serena: 3
Edited
-Djokovic: 2
-Federer: 5
-Nadal: 3
-Sampras: 2
-Agassi: 2
-Serena: 3
Edited
Backspin1183
Talk Tennis Guru
Is this a fact or an opinion?
Crionics
Semi-Pro
heh, this thread resurrected?
I think I wasn't that far off, but in retrospect I think Djokovic's downfall/decline was more related to him finally winning the French Open rather than the mileage. I think if he had won the FO earlier, maybe he wouldn't have been so dominant during 2015-2016, but we'll never now for sure.
The fact that both Federer and Nadal won 3 and 2 more slams also puts a dent in my theory, though I think this can be explained by the extremely weak era we're in and the fact that both players benefited from long breaks (injury-related or not). One thing is clear to me: both Federer and Nadal need long breaks in order to win slams at this stage of their careers. Maybe Djokovic needs also to skip one part of the season?
I think I wasn't that far off, but in retrospect I think Djokovic's downfall/decline was more related to him finally winning the French Open rather than the mileage. I think if he had won the FO earlier, maybe he wouldn't have been so dominant during 2015-2016, but we'll never now for sure.
The fact that both Federer and Nadal won 3 and 2 more slams also puts a dent in my theory, though I think this can be explained by the extremely weak era we're in and the fact that both players benefited from long breaks (injury-related or not). One thing is clear to me: both Federer and Nadal need long breaks in order to win slams at this stage of their careers. Maybe Djokovic needs also to skip one part of the season?
D
Deleted member 742196
Guest
Crionics
Semi-Pro
The person below said the same thing, except his was in foresight.
Yes that was a great prediction.
Im(moral) Winner
G.O.A.T.
Pop pop!
D
Deleted member 742196
Guest
OMG!
May just be @Nathaniel_Near is the very same Near from deathnote?
This wasn’t so much a prediction as brilliant deductive reasoning, which to me is all the more impressive.
Zebrev
Hall of Fame
I watched some different press conferences to see the difference between when he was at the top and now, and it was really startling. We thought Novak's streak would never end, it was probably the biggest period of dominance ever, sealing the calender slam. Seeing what happened in the last two years in really sad. I hope he is ready for a comeback at US Open at least, if not before. I still think if he keeps going 2019 will be another year like 2011/15.
Before.
After
Before.
After
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Nah. You knew it was coming and I said it was coming. It happens to every player(post age 29) in one degree or another.
This thread is a classic. A lot of bubbleheads in this thread. Most have scattered with their tails between their legs.
ak24alive
Legend
And finally, a look at which slam a player is most likely to win in his 30s:
1- AO: 40%
2- USO: 26.6%
3- RG: 20%
4- W: 13.3%
(sorry Roger, not looking so good for your prospects
Lol
Fedal one of a kind
Plamen1234
Hall of Fame
Djokovic decline was bound to happen.It was inevitable.I believe he can be again Top player but he needs to change partially his style - grinding wont work the same way it worked before.
Plamen1234
Hall of Fame
Remember the time when Djokovic getting to 17 Slams was certainty and it will happen in a short time - just lol.Now Novak fans have new illusion.They believe that 2019 will be repeat of 2011 and 2015.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
17? Many were predicting between 18-20. I'm not sure if some of these fans are really young kids with no life experience or just older dumb people, lol. Most of those brilliant ones scattered though. That's why you have to give it to fans like RF-18. He's an over the top Novak fan but he stuck around when he was getting a lot of heat.
Yes, as if the past predictions of Djokovic never slowing down and winning 20 slams weren't enough. Some are continuing on with this charade like nothing happened and saying he'll be back to his 2015 form and be number one in 2020. Just lol.
These younger players have been useless but they aren't going to continue to be useless. They'll do what they're supposed to do and start to beat these aging greats. If they don't, it will be against the laws of nature. That's why I hope Federer can get in one more Wimbledon title before the storm hits. And Nadal has to hope he can win this RG title because he'll be stopped soon too.
Jackuar
Hall of Fame
The GOATest prediction of all. This thread and this single post tied-1 for GOAT TTW posts.
ghostofMecir
Legend
The current talk about Novak Djokovic’s future prospects reminds me a lot of all the hype surrounding stock markets at all-time highs (think 2000 or 2007); What could possibly go wrong back then ?! After all, the economy was booming and stock prices could only continue increasing.
Just like with the stock market, the perception of future results of current players is either overly optimistic when everything is going well (think Djokovic 2015 or stock market in 2000 and 2007) or overly pessimistic when everything is going down the drain (think Nadal 2015 or stock market in march 2009). Can we also talk about irrational exuberance to describe the prediction of future results of "hot" players?
Anyway, after seeing a topic about Djokovic winning 18 slams, I decided to look a bit more into numbers and found some quite interesting patterns. There is been a lot of talk about the number of slams won after the magic age of 28, but not so much about actual mileage. As a surrogate for mileage I take the number of matches played on the pro tour.
After his US Open 2015 win, Djokovic has played 812 matches on the pro tour. Where did Djokovic’s two biggest rivals, Federer and Nadal, stand in their careers with 812 matches played on the tour?
For Federer, his 812th match was actually his Wimbledon win against Roddick in 2009. After that, he went on to win "only" two slams.
For Nadal, his 812th match was the 2014 Miami finale which he lost against Djokovic. He only won one more slam after that (of course he can win more since his career is not over, but it doesn’t seem very likely at the moment).
Regarding the decline of both players, I think most people agree that Federer declined after AO2010 with many losses to former pigeons. The AO2010 was his 850th match on tour. For Nadal, it’s a bit more difficult to pinpoint the starting of his decline as he had a decline in two phases: a slow decline after the AO2014 loss (which was his 799th match on the tour) with some bad losses to former pigeons Ferrer and Almagro on clay, but he still managed to win Madrid, Roland Garros and made the finals of Miami and Rome, so not that bad really. But the real steep decline for Nadal started after Wimbledon 2014 with the Kyrgios loss which was his 840th match on the tour. Notice how close 840 is to Federer’s number (850). Despite Nadal playing a much more physical game, both Nadal and Federer started to decline with about the same mileage; in the meantime Federer has come back and reached several slam finals, but that’s another story.
After looking up the data for Nadal and Federer, I looked for data about Sampras and Agassi, the previous big rivalry in tennis.
For Sampras, his 812th match was the third round of Wimbledon 1999 which he ultimately won. After that Wimbledon title, he went on to win 2 more slams. The case of Agassi is more interesting as he won most of his GS titles later in his career after the magic number of 28 and he’s often being used as an exemple as to why Djokovic could also be winning many more GS titles as the latter gets older.
Agassi’s 812th match was an early round match in Rome in 2000. After that point of time, Agassi would win 2 more majors (just like Sampras and Federer actually). It gets often overlooked that Agassi missed many tournaments earlier in his career and had a lot less mileage when he reached the age of 28 years.
Sometimes, people also evoke that Djokovic could be dominating the tour at 30+ years like Serena has been doing the last couple of years on the WTA tour. Just for the heck of it, I looked at her numbers even though I don’t think you can really compare the WTA and ATP tour (especially when it comes to Grand Slams: winning in best-of-3 is not the same as winning in best-of-5). I was quite surprised to find out she has a lot less mileage as I would have expected given her age and many titles won over the course of her career: "only" 860 matches under her belt after the US Open 2015. Her 812th match was a Fed Cup match in February of this year. She went on to win two more slams after that point of time, which also means that she has won 19 majors out of 21 with less than 812 matches under her belt. Of course, she can still win more majors as her career is not over yet.
In summary, the number of majors won after playing the 812th match on tour is as follows:
-Federer: 2
-Nadal: 1
-Sampras: 2
-Agassi: 2
-Serena: 2
These numbers are of course subject to change for still active players. I quickly looked up the data for Borg and Connors: Borg didn’t even reach the 800th match on the tour and Connors won 3 more majors after having played his 812th match on the tour, so he did pretty well with a lot of mileage.
So what can we expect from Djokovic? There are still four more tournaments to be played this year: Beijing, Shanghai, Paris, WTF. Assuming he makes it deep (SF/F stage) in each of them, that’s about 15-20 more matches under his belt. He’ll start the year 2016 with about 830 matches on the pro tour. Factoring in the warm-up event (Doha?) he’ll probably play before the Australian Open, by the time he reaches the later stages of the AO he’ll have about 840 matches under his belt, a very close number to the 840/850 matches Nadal/Federer had played when they started to decline… So, next year will be very interesting!
Of course, I can hear some of you saying: « but!!!! there is no competition and all top players are old!!! who will be winning the slams if not Djokovic? »
To this question, I would answer « whoever is still in the draw » and it doesn’t really matter who wins it once Djokovic gets kicked out.
I remember two years ago people were saying all the upcoming Grand Slams in the 5 next years would either be won by Djokovic and Nadal. Well, Nadal lost this year to Berdych, Djokovic, Brown and Fognini and none of those players went on to win the actual slam (it’s quite ironic to note that the only time Nadal met Djokovic in a slam, the latter failed to win that actual slam).
About top players being quite old, this is true, but again let’s look at mileage (numbers taken shortly after US open, may be a bit different with Davis Cup matches and ATP 250 tournaments played since then):
Djokovic: 812
Federer: 1282
Murray: 701
Wawrinka: 606
Berdych: 806
Nishikori: 351
Nadal: 905
Ferrer: 944
Raonic: 302
Simon: 614
Gasquet: 652
Anderson: 367
Isner: 452
Cilic: 511
Goffin: 159
You see where I want to come: most of these players have quite a bit less mileage than Djokovic. Only Federer, Nadal and Ferrer have quite a bit more mileage while Berdych has about the same mileage as Djokovic.
My prediction is that we’ll see a sudden drop in Djokovic’s level with some unexpected losses before the French Open 2016. Maybe even an upset at the AO2016. I can see him losing to the likes of Anderson, Goffin, Dolgopolov or any good top-20 player for that matter (maybe not Gasquet though…).
Feel free to bump this thread in a year if I’m wrong
GOATy post.
Nadal_Django
Legend
Indeed!
Djokodalerer31
Hall of Fame
Why does everyone always look to burst Djokovic's bubble is more of concern tbh...especially around these forums...
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Well....
Nadal_Django
Legend
So many gems in this thread. Lol
Similar threads
- Deleted member 733170
- General Pro Player Discussion
