Weak era ? No, you just won't admit it.

[Steve0904]

The defensive Nadal from Federer's prime with unlimited energy and mental stamina wouldn't be beaten by Djokovic on clay.

2012 Nadal on clay is a bit overrated, Djokovic was flat in the 2012 clay season IMO.

I agree with the first part, especially if it's RG. Nadal wouldn't lose there. He might drop a masters, but even then if they were BO5 finals as they were in 05 and 06 I'd have to back Nadal if they played in the final.

I don't really agree with the second part though. Nadal was better than Djokovic on clay then whether Djokovic was flat or not. That argument would work for MC where Djokovic was in the immediate stages of grief, but not really for Rome and especially not RG.

 

[dante1976]

Federer fans at their best lol

Yeah Philippoussis, Baghdatis, Gonzales, Hewitt and Roddick are the same thing as Nadal, Federer, Murray!!!??? Holders of 3 GS titles (career-wise) against holders of 33 GS titles (and "counting", all of them are still playing)!!!??? Same/similar/close/whatever class!!!??? Yeah right That's a FACT and no demagoguery on this world will change that, no matter how "hard" you all try!!!
Everyone who watched/followed tennis back then until now (without biased "defensive stance" towards their idol ofc) knows that's a FACT!!!

Numbers, consistency and career-wise achievements/greatness don't lie!!!

Another FACT: After Djokos title in Shanghai, he's currently holding the WTF, 3/4 of the slams (with a final in 4th), and 6/9 of the masters (with finals in other 2/absence in Madrid)!!!???
That's 71% of the big tournaments.
Might be a while until that record is broken
For reference (and just for fan ofc ), Federer held 57% in 2006, and Nadal held 50% in 2013
With (hypothetically speaking ofc) Paris and Wtf titles/finals, Djoko will have most dominant season in history by far (yeah I know... Laver, lacking CYGS, blah, blah... but we can include Don Budge in that consecutive slam count/CYGS as-well )

Let the religious excuses flow...

 

[duaneeo]

Federer fans at their best lol

Yeah Philippoussis, Baghdatis, Gonzales, Hewitt and Roddick are the same thing as Nadal, Federer, Murray!!!???

And you at your worst.

Why do those who make this silly claim always include Nadal among Djokovic's era, but not Federer's? Both Roger and Nadal dominated tennis from 2005 - 2010. Nadal won 5 French Opens, 2 Wimbledons, 1 USO, his lone AO title, and 18 Masters all before 2011. And since you're including past-his-peak Roger among the players of Djokovic's era, you should include before-his-peak Djokovic among Roger's era. Nole won a slam, the YEC, 2 slam runner-ups, and 11 Masters finals (5 titles) pre-2011.

 

[Dave1982]

Djokovic is having one hell of a season and I really couldn't care less about those who claim weak era, strong era or whatever....at the end of the day you can only compete against who is on the other side of the net and in 2015 Djokovic has for the most part obliterated his competition.

I know people are making the obvious comparisons to Fed's 2006 season and rightly so...in my opinion though at this point of the season Djokovic is playing as dominant tennis as I've seen in a very long time.
The fact he hasn't dropped a single rankings point all year speaks volumes and fair to say if he maintain that record through to years end he will have put together one of the most dominant seasons in not just tennis but sport in general.

 

[DolgoSantoro]

2015 may be remembered as the year Fed fans started to go the way of Sampras fans

 

[OhYes]

I don't recall anyone ever saying #IvanLendl being a transformative figure. Neither is #NovakDjokovic.

You don't recall ? Then you my dear are not following tennis thoroughly as you should be. There were numerous people stating how Lendl was epitome of athleticism and that he changed the game in that relation. And what about his inside out forehand ? Another thing I have to add is... why you have to put Lendl and Djokovic in same basket ? Because they are from "Eastern Block" ? Other than that, what similarities Lendl has with Djokovic so you should make him great example for Novak's case/career ?

There has always been a whif of irrational exuberance surrounding #Novak.

No there was not. Irrational exuberance followed players like Dimitrov or Nishikori, Djokovic never had exuberance cases of any kind.

Now, someone actually has the audacity to say that "Novak is changing the game" in spite of the fact that #Novak lags the top players historically (????) and has never been a real threat to capture the #CYGS like #RogerFederer.

Never ? Like really never ?

Novak hasn't even accomplished a career grand slam like his more accomplished colleagues, #RogerFederer and #RafaelNadal.

Only thing that is true in your big post.

Novak has changed the game, but not in the way you think. What once was an entertaining sport has now turned into a boring, baseline snoozefest mastered by none other than #NovakDjokovic.

Well, let me tell you something. It's not so much to game that makes one man interesting or not (where we have very clear case of subjectivity), it's the DOMINATION that makes people bored. The same boredom I've encountered when I was watching Federer playing his "dominating peak snoozefest". I wasn't dazzled by his looks, on and off court manners, I didn't care about those things. All I wanted was excitement, unpredictability and in his golden days there wasn't such thing. That is what's boring in Novak's reign - nobody else is winning trophies unless his name is Novak Djokovic.

By far, #Novak is the most unpopular tennis champion of the past thirty years and most definitely in the top three all-time.

You are just full of $t and you know it. Novak is very popular, but he is one of most hated players because of 2 very big fanbases that still exist. Anyone will tell you that. The most hated player is Nadal.

We always see these types of dramatic statements by newer fans to the sport after someone wins a #minor. It's pretty sad actually, seeing how dumbed-down #Novak has made the average tennis fan.

Says person who doesn't know how Lendl changed the game.

 

[Noleberic123]

2015 may be remembered as the year Fed fans started to go the way of Sampras fans

what happened to Sampras fans?

 

[OhYes]

Kyrgios can get through Fed, Stan and Nadal. Murray has been a regular issue though. Yet to play Djokovic...

He can, but he should get to them first and after that to finish the race.
Djokovic will put him down, like everybody else.

 

[NatF]

what happened to Sampras fans?

Have you seen 90's Clay posts?

 

[Noleberic123]

Have you seen 90's Clay posts?

That's one Sampras fan

 

[NatF]

That's one Sampras fan

There's more of them...

ultradr, Start da game, helloworld etc...

 

[Flat Top]

Yup. Djokovic is one of the greatest of all time.

 

[Noleberic123]

There's more of them...

ultradr, Start da game, helloworld etc...

Ultradr- haven't seen him in a while
Start da game- never heard of him
Hello world- haven't seen him post in a year probably

 

[NatF]

Ultradr- haven't seen him in a while
Start da game- never heard of him
Hello world- haven't seen him post in a year probably

Start da game started that Djokovic should be afraid thread.

Whether they're around much or not they're all pretty terrible

 

[Noleberic123]

Start da game started that Djokovic should be afraid thread.

Whether they're around much or not they're all pretty terrible

Fair enough. I haven't had much experience with them on here

 

[moonballs]

Luckily for Nadal, he's beaten their behinds in their respective eras, so...

Wait, are you telling me that Nadal has played in two weak eras?

Nadal is the best no 2 in two weak eras. His own dominance from 2008 to 2010 was the true strong era (per the weak era fallacy) because it wasn't as dominant as Roger's or Nole's. His 0:7 losing steak at the end of the strong Rafa era was the proof of that the brief dominance was the strongest. You happy now?

 

[moonballs]

@OhYes, whenever there is dominance there are geniuses sporting weak era explanations. It is just circular logic. Ask the geniuses whether Nole should lose some to make the competition look stronger?

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Nadal is the best no 2 in two weak eras. His own dominance from 2008 to 2010 was the true strong era (per the weak era fallacy) because it wasn't as dominant as Roger's or Nole's. His 0:7 losing steak at the end of the strong Rafa era was the proof of that the brief dominance was the strongest. You happy now?

Yes, but his great and prolonged dominance at the French Open is troubling, leading me to believe it was also a weak era.

 

[mika1979]

You don't recall ? Then you my dear are not following tennis thoroughly as you should be. There were numerous people stating how Lendl was epitome of athleticism and that he changed the game in that relation. And what about his inside out forehand ? Another thing I have to add is... why you have to put Lendl and Djokovic in same basket ? Because they are from "Eastern Block" ? Other than that, what similarities Lendl has with Djokovic so you should make him great example for Novak's case/career ?
No there was not. Irrational exuberance followed players like Dimitrov or Nishikori, Djokovic never had exuberance cases of any kind.
Never ? Like really never ? Only thing that is true in your big post.

Well, let me tell you something. It's not so much to game that makes one man interesting or not (where we have very clear case of subjectivity), it's the DOMINATION that makes people bored. The same boredom I've encountered when I was watching Federer playing his "dominating peak snoozefest". I wasn't dazzled by his looks, on and off court manners, I didn't care about those things. All I wanted was excitement, unpredictability and in his golden days there wasn't such thing. That is what's boring in Novak's reign - nobody else is winning trophies unless his name is Novak Djokovic.
You are just full of $t and you know it. Novak is very popular, but he is one of most hated players because of 2 very big fanbases that still exist. Anyone will tell you that. The most hated player is Nadal.

Says person who doesn't know how Lendl changed the game.

Don't give her oxygen bro she is a clueless hater with little knowledge or insight

 

[Noleberic123]

Yes, but his great and prolonged dominance at the French Open is troubling, leading me to believe it was also a weak era.

Any era will be proclaimed as weak when a player dominates so much

 

[mika1979]

Any era with Djokovic nadal and Federer is not weak. Federer did have the weakest opponents in his finals but you can only beat what is out there. Nadal is the best number two of all time and the best big match player i have seen. Djokovic has accumulated big titles against the toughest opponents ever. These guys are as tough pros as there have ever been and all three have resurrected themselves a few times in their careers. Most other tennis players once surpassed never came back so it is pretty silly to talk about a weak era now

 

[moonballs]

Yes, but his great and prolonged dominance at the French Open is troubling, leading me to believe it was also a weak era.

Yeah our fiend @SoBad must be agreeing with us.

 

[sarmpas]

Federer in his prime had a younger fitter bona-fide champion Nadal stopping him at the FO. Novak is now in his prime and doesn't have a 'Nadal' to contend with. Were it not for an out of the blue performance from Stan this year at the FO Novak may very well have achieved the Grand slam. His chances of actually winning all four next year still look very good.

 

[dante1976]

And you at your worst.

Why do those who make this silly claim always include Nadal among Djokovic's era, but not Federer's? Both Roger and Nadal dominated tennis from 2005 - 2010. Nadal won 5 French Opens, 2 Wimbledons, 1 USO, his lone AO title, and 18 Masters all before 2011. And since you're including past-his-peak Roger among the players of Djokovic's era, you should include before-his-peak Djokovic among Roger's era. Nole won a slam, the YEC, 2 slam runner-ups, and 11 Masters finals (5 titles) pre-2011.

I was referring to Feds first 10 GS titles
Yeah we could include teen Rafa and Nole in his "mighty competition" back then
FACT is that first 10 Feds slams was won against, kudos to all but still, one of the weakest competition ever it was like WTA lol
Another FACT is that in reality (and our 3 dimensional world) you can't possibly compare Baghdatis, Philippoussis, Gonzales, Hewitt and Roddick with Fed (yeah even in his 40's), Rafa (yeah even in a "wheelchair" ), Murray (yeah he is consistent as hell too, comparing to those 5 from "mighty Feds competition") and why not mention Wawrinka too. Anyone who follows tennis long enough can tell you that Ppl (die hard Fed fans ofc) just can't accept reality and that's it.
In FACT I can bet my house easily that Fed himself won't ever tell that those 5 guys mentioned earlier was tougher to play than Rafa, Novak and Andy

 

[mike danny]

I was referring to Feds first 10 GS titles
Yeah we could include teen Rafa and Nole in his "mighty competition" back then
FACT is that first 10 Feds slams was won against, kudos to all but still, one of the weakest competition ever it was like WTA lol
Another FACT is that in reality (and our 3 dimensional world) you can't possibly compare Baghdatis, Philippoussis, Gonzales, Hewitt and Roddick with Fed (yeah even in his 40's), Rafa (yeah even in a "wheelchair" ), Murray (yeah he is consistent as hell too, comparing to those 5 from "mighty Feds competition") and why not mention Wawrinka too. Anyone who follows tennis long enough can tell you that Ppl (die hard Fed fans ofc) just can't accept reality and that's it.
In FACT I can bet my house easily that Fed himself won't ever tell that those 5 guys mentioned earlier was tougher to play than Rafa, Novak and Andy

The points is all of these guys keep mentioning Federer in Djokovic and Nadal's era, but they never mention Nadal and Djokovic in Federer's era. Nadal was no.2 in 2005-2007 and Djokovic was no.3 in 2007. Yet they never get mentioned. These are double standards.

Funny how everybody jumps to mention Baghdatis everytime but never Nadal who was no.2, while Rafa is always mentioned alongside Djokovic. Despite Federer and Nadal meeting 5 times in slams in 2005-2007, he never gets mentioned.

As for Wawrinka, well he is a force only at the first 2 slams mainly, while Roddick and Hewitt were forces at the other 2 slams.

Nadal and Djokovic are tough for Fed to handle, but Murray and Wawrinka? Doubtful. Fed at 34 dispatched both of them quite easily this year. He only lost 1 match to them.

 

[Adv. Edberg]

Any era with Djokovic nadal and Federer is not weak. Federer did have the weakest opponents in his finals but you can only beat what is out there. Nadal is the best number two of all time and the best big match player i have seen. Djokovic has accumulated big titles against the toughest opponents ever. These guys are as tough pros as there have ever been and all three have resurrected themselves a few times in their careers. Most other tennis players once surpassed never came back so it is pretty silly to talk about a weak era now

But they can only dominate so easily because the rest of the field are so weak. The Dimitrov generation and Kyegios generation have not won a single Masters yet. It's ridiculous.

Kyrgios and Coric and Kokk etc who people say will be the next stars hasn't even won a 250 yet. It's ridiculous.

I'm not saying it's a weak era but I'm certainly not surprised that the majority of the people think it is. They're probably right.

 

[NatF]

I was referring to Feds first 10 GS titles
Yeah we could include teen Rafa and Nole in his "mighty competition" back then
FACT is that first 10 Feds slams was won against, kudos to all but still, one of the weakest competition ever it was like WTA lol
Another FACT is that in reality (and our 3 dimensional world) you can't possibly compare Baghdatis, Philippoussis, Gonzales, Hewitt and Roddick with Fed (yeah even in his 40's), Rafa (yeah even in a "wheelchair" ), Murray (yeah he is consistent as hell too, comparing to those 5 from "mighty Feds competition") and why not mention Wawrinka too. Anyone who follows tennis long enough can tell you that Ppl (die hard Fed fans ofc) just can't accept reality and that's it.
In FACT I can bet my house easily that Fed himself won't ever tell that those 5 guys mentioned earlier was tougher to play than Rafa, Novak and Andy

Form is more important than name.

Also lol at you considering Murray much tougher competition than the rest of those guys. The guy is still lying down to 33+ Federer in GS matches....

 

[cknobman]

Yes this era is weak. Of course Djokovic fans wont see or admit it.

Does it make Djokovic any "less great". No, not in any meaningful way. It will, however, help him stay on top a bit longer than if we had a stronger era.

 

[Say My Name]

I don't recall anyone ever saying #IvanLendl being a transformative figure. Neither is #NovakDjokovic.

There has always been a whif of irrational exuberance surrounding #Novak. Now, someone actually has the audacity to say that "Novak is changing the game" in spite of the fact that #Novak lags the top players historically and has never been a real threat to capture the #CYGS like #RogerFederer. Novak hasn't even accomplished a career grand slam like his more accomplished colleagues, #RogerFederer and #RafaelNadal.

Novak has changed the game, but not in the way you think. What once was an entertaining sport has now turned into a boring, baseline snoozefest mastered by none other than #NovakDjokovic. By far, #Novak is the most unpopular tennis champion of the past thirty years and most definitely in the top three all-time.

We always see these types of dramatic statements by newer fans to the sport after someone wins a #minor. It's pretty sad actually, seeing how dumbed-down #Novak has made the average tennis fan.

#PTL #JC4Ever

Angie​

 

[DolgoSantoro]

what happened to Sampras fans?

NatF sort of already explained for me, but I can elaborate. A few outspoken and prominent Sampras fans have (unfortunately) created a stereotype of a cynical fan, bitter that their favorite player is no longer in the sun and determined to devalue the accomplishments of the new hot stuff. Some people trying to devalue Djokovic's wins this year has reminded me of how others have talked about Federer's prime years. I suppose it just goes to show that we're not so different from one another.

It was wrong of me to generalize like that, and I apologize for giving off any bad vibes. I've got no problem with Sampras, people who like him, or people who support any player for that matter. Any annoyance on my part is directed to people who bitterly try and devalue hard-fought accomplishments, and I'll be more clear about that in future.