When this guy is at his 80%, he cleans everyone off the court

OhYes

Legend
Mats Wilander:

"When he’s at his best, I think he breaks the world record in how good you can play tennis. He does it on every surface, and does it against every match-up.

He doesn’t have a problem with Nadal or a problem with Roger Federer. The other two always had that, and he doesn’t. And he does it against any style of player, doesn’t matter if it’s a big-server, it doesn’t matter if it’s [Roberto] Bautista Agut, doesn’t matter if it’s clay, or grass, or hard court.

He’s basically the only one I think that looks unbeatable for longer periods of time”. Before the final against Roger Federer, Wilander had said: “The problem with Novak for everybody is that we have not seen 50 per cent of his ability so far.

You see 80 per cent at times, and then he cleans them off the court. And then he goes down to 40, because he doesn’t really – I don’t know, he couldn’t be bothered, because he’s too good. It’s like he’s not fully into it because I think he knows he’s so much better than most of them, especially here."


I have to agree with him. Deep down you know it is true also.
 

OhYes

Legend
That's like saying if Federer can get 1st serves in 90% of the times he would clean everyone off the court
You do realize consistency is part of the performance, right?
It is about level of someone's 100% compared to other players levels at 100%. Novak showed that he has highest 100% level.
 

Sport

Legend
What is this 50%-80% or whatever? How do you calculate the percentage? It looks like an excuse so every time Djokovic loses, his fans can put the excuse that "he was not at his best".

Djokovic loses to Nadal in the US Open 2010 final: "he was not at his best".

Djokovic loses to Federer in the Wimbledon 2012 semifinal: "he was not at his best".

Djokovic loses to Nadal in the US Open 2013 final: "he was not at his best".

Djokovic loses to Nadal in Rome 2019: "Djokovic was not at his best".

Djokovic almost lost to 37-year old Federer in the Wimbledon 2019 final: "Djokovic was subpar and not at his best".

With the "he was not at his best" excuse, almost every time Djokovic loses to Fedal is not valid. But if Djokovic defeats Fedal, they must be "at their best". This is how the "Djokovic has the highest level" legend was born.

Also, Nadal still leads the H2H over Djokovic 9-6 in Slams (including 2-1 at the US Open). So it is false that Djokovic doesn't have any problem with Nadal, as Wilander said.
 
Last edited:

OhYes

Legend
Djokovic has never beaten Nadal playing at his 100% at Roland-Garros. The opposite seems to be true when Nadal defeated Djokovic at RG 2012, RG 2013 and RG 2014.

Even Federer has beaten Djokovic at 100% of his level at Roland-Garros 2011.

Also, what is this 50%-80% or whatever? How do you calculate the percentage? It looks like an excuse so every time Djokovic loses, his fans can put the excuse that "he was not at his best".

Djokovic loses to Nadal in the US Open 2010 final: "he was not at his best".

Djokovic loses to Federer in the Wimbledon 2012 semifinal: "he was not at his best".

Djokovic loses to Nadal in the US Open 2013 final: "he was not at his best".

Djokovic loses to Nadal in Rome 2019: "Djokovic was not at his best".

Djokovic almost lost to 37-year old Federer in the Wimbledon 2019 final: "Djokovic was subpar and not at his best".

With the "he was not at his best" excuse, almost every time Djokovic loses to Fedal is not valid. But if Djokovic defeats Fedal, they must be "at their best". This is how the "Djokovic has the highest level" legend was born.

Also, Nadal still leads the H2H over Djokovic 9-6 in Slams (including 2-1 at the US Open). So it is false that Djokovic doesn't have any problem with Nadal, as Wilander said.
Wilander is not Djokovic fan, and he certainly doesn't track Djokovic fans on social media.
 

Raphael Nadal

Professional
Rafa wiped the floor with Djokovic at 2010 US Open and 2013 US Open, despite Djokovic putting 100% of his mind, body and soul into it.
Djokovic only won 2011 US Open because Rafa was too low on confidence to go down-the-line that year.
Djokovic has no control over Rafa at the US Open, zero control :)
 

Raphael Nadal

Professional
OP, forget about what former (and current) Pros say, what multiple slam winners say, the experts on this board know and understand the game way better...
McEnroe was right about Rafa having the best volleys in the Top 10, but I can't say all former pros are right about everything :)
Let's not forget, former pros are biased, just like everyone else......they have their favorites.
Plus some of them are on drugs or impaired in other ways, so not everything they say makes sense.
 

dr325i

Legend
Rafa wiped the floor with Djokovic at 2010 US Open and 2013 US Open, despite Djokovic putting 100% of his mind, body and soul into it.
Djokovic only won 2011 US Open because Rafa was too low on confidence to go down-the-line that year.
Djokovic has no control over Rafa at the US Open, zero control :)
I have never seen anyone as lost as Rafa at that Doha match or at the 2019 AO final.
He looked like a 5.0 player thrown into the match with absolutely no idea what to do or plan B...talking about "wiping the floor"
 

Mike Sams

Legend
Mats Wilander:

"When he’s at his best, I think he breaks the world record in how good you can play tennis. He does it on every surface, and does it against every match-up.

He doesn’t have a problem with Nadal or a problem with Roger Federer. The other two always had that, and he doesn’t. And he does it against any style of player, doesn’t matter if it’s a big-server, it doesn’t matter if it’s [Roberto] Bautista Agut, doesn’t matter if it’s clay, or grass, or hard court.

He’s basically the only one I think that looks unbeatable for longer periods of time”. Before the final against Roger Federer, Wilander had said: “The problem with Novak for everybody is that we have not seen 50 per cent of his ability so far.

You see 80 per cent at times, and then he cleans them off the court. And then he goes down to 40, because he doesn’t really – I don’t know, he couldn’t be bothered, because he’s too good. It’s like he’s not fully into it because I think he knows he’s so much better than most of them, especially here."


I have to agree with him. Deep down you know it is true also.
Yeah, god level Djokovic is unbeatable which shows why he's only managed to win 1 title at Roland Garros over his 16 year pro career. :laughing:
 

Sport

Legend
OP, forget about what former (and current) Pros say, what multiple slam winners say, the experts on this board know and understand the game way better...
That is a logical fallacy (wrong argument) known as argumentum ad hominem: to assume that something is true only because an authority on the topic says so.

Authorities must prove their claims as everyone else. And Wilander's comments are merely his opinion, he doesn't prove anything with any data.
 

dr325i

Legend
That is a logical fallacy (wrong argument) known as argumentum ad hominem: to assume that something is true only because an authority says so.

Authorities must prove their claims as everyone else. And Wilander's comments are merely his opinion, he doesn't prove anything with any data.
I agree that those comments are not necessarily true, however, the expert in the field probably has a better knowledge than the keyboard warrior and a fan here...
After all, these guys hve dedicated their whole lives to the analysis of the game
 

Mike Sams

Legend
How many did Federer win? Sampras?
How many AO did Rafa win?
Which shows that Rafa is a billion times better than Novak at Roland Garros doesn't it? And it means Novak isn't unbeatable or even close to it is on clay, right? So therefore Novak is not even close to being a near perfect player. You can't only have 1 RG title while your main rival has 12 RG titles and claim to be the most perfect player in tennis. LOL
 

dr325i

Legend
Which shows that Rafa is a billion times better than Novak at Roland Garros doesn't it? And it means Novak isn't unbeatable or even close to it is on clay, right? So therefore Novak is not even close to being a near perfect player. You can't only have 1 RG title while your main rival has 12 RG titles and claim to be the most perfect player in tennis. LOL
I never claimed he was the perfect player or any other player for that matter.
 

dr325i

Legend
If Novak is the most perfect player...why does he only have 3 titles at USO despite having played it 13 times? Wouldn't he have won it a whole lot more? Heck he was even lucky to have won it in 2011. Should've lost to Federer in that semi.
Lucky? There is nothing lucky about beating Federer at any slam.
Also, I am glad that we agree that there is no GOAT in this sport
 

Bender

G.O.A.T.
That is a logical fallacy (wrong argument) known as argumentum ad hominem: to assume that something is true only because an authority on the topic says so.

Authorities must prove their claims as everyone else. And Wilander's comments are merely his opinion, he doesn't prove anything with any data.
Wait no, that's not what an ad hominem is. An ad hominem is when you conflate a personal attack on the proponent of an argument with tackling the argument itself, ie TTW 101.

What you're talking about is more like an argument from / appeal to authority.
 
Last edited:

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
It is about level of someone's 100% compared to other players levels at 100%. Novak showed that he has highest 100% level.
How has he "shown" that? It’s impossible to show because nobody can ever play at 100% in real life.

It’s a completely unprovable scenario.

With the same right one could say: "If playing at 100%, Federer's first strike is always a winner. So nothing to retrieve for Djokovic."
 

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
He does it on every surface, and does it against every match-up.
How would you ever prove this? Take a "theoretical" Djoko at his best, would he have beaten Nadal at the FO in 2008? Or Federer at Wimbledon between, say 2004 and 2007? Given that he had to wait until Nadal's worst year to beat him at the FO and he didn't beat Fed at Wimby until Fed was nearly 33 I think that's a fairly contentious statement.

I seem to recall Wilander making a whole series of daft, hyperbolic statements about Fed and Nadal and I suspect Djoko has just been added to the list.
 

tennis_pro

Bionic Poster
Mats Weedander at it again. The guy goes with what's current, remember when in 2015 he said that Djokovic at his best beats Nadal at his best on clay? Yeah guess what, Djokovic was in the middle of his 2-year domination window. Someone should've asked him in 2017 if he changed his opinion on the matter.
 
Top