Why Dimitrov will never reach world number 1
- Thread starter Amritia
- Start date
Sysyphus
Talk Tennis Guru
I think the text makes some good points. His mental strength indeed seems to be holding him back from taking his performances to the next level.
That being said I think he will improve in this aspect, and I think and hope that he will get some time at no. 1 in the vacuum that will inevitably occur when Djok/Nad decline more.
That being said I think he will improve in this aspect, and I think and hope that he will get some time at no. 1 in the vacuum that will inevitably occur when Djok/Nad decline more.
HailDjokovic
Semi-Pro
It isn't just mental strength either.
I've watched numerous matches of his and he really needs to work on that return instead chipping it back. His physically consistency is still a level below the big 3 too. He also needs to be as aggressive as Wawrinka on that backhand wing.
But obviously mental strength is the biggest issue. He always loses by slim margins which is a BIG problem
I've watched numerous matches of his and he really needs to work on that return instead chipping it back. His physically consistency is still a level below the big 3 too. He also needs to be as aggressive as Wawrinka on that backhand wing.
But obviously mental strength is the biggest issue. He always loses by slim margins which is a BIG problem
rainingaces
Legend
Dimitrov has a good chance at Wimbledon but I don't ever see him winning a hard court slam because Nishikori, Delpo, Djokovic, Nadal and more are better hardcourt players.
I think Del Potro will be number 1, maybe not next year but soon.
I think Del Potro will be number 1, maybe not next year but soon.
Amritia
Hall of Fame
Agree on this fully
My prediction is that in a few years when the Nadal & Djokovic (& arguably still Fed) reign at the top of the rankings is done you will possibly see a far greater number of players consistently in contention for the top ranking.
In terms of points, we know the current top 3 are quite close but from 3 to 4 there is a fair gap and after that it tightens up again and we tend to see a reasonable amount of movement.
Without trying to sound like Captain Obvious I personally think that removing the top 3 from the equation will likely just move everyone up 3 spots (needless to say order will have changed numerous times by then) and the tight margins will remain, meaning the number 1 position will likely be on the line more often than not.
Such a situation obviously means that winning a slam especially would result in a significant jump in ranking. I'm yet to see anyone coming through who has the ability to truly dominate across multiple surfaces (obviously early days on many young players) and as such I think we will have a much more even spread of Slam winners and subsequently players who at some stage are ranked number 1. Although as we may again see this year, reaching world #1 doesn't necessarily require you to win a Slam.
So to answer the question, sure I think Dimitrov barring any serious injury should at some stage reach world number 1, I don't however think he'll dominate it and make it his own in the same fashion Fed, Nadal and Djokovic have though.
In terms of points, we know the current top 3 are quite close but from 3 to 4 there is a fair gap and after that it tightens up again and we tend to see a reasonable amount of movement.
Without trying to sound like Captain Obvious I personally think that removing the top 3 from the equation will likely just move everyone up 3 spots (needless to say order will have changed numerous times by then) and the tight margins will remain, meaning the number 1 position will likely be on the line more often than not.
Such a situation obviously means that winning a slam especially would result in a significant jump in ranking. I'm yet to see anyone coming through who has the ability to truly dominate across multiple surfaces (obviously early days on many young players) and as such I think we will have a much more even spread of Slam winners and subsequently players who at some stage are ranked number 1. Although as we may again see this year, reaching world #1 doesn't necessarily require you to win a Slam.
So to answer the question, sure I think Dimitrov barring any serious injury should at some stage reach world number 1, I don't however think he'll dominate it and make it his own in the same fashion Fed, Nadal and Djokovic have though.
Last edited:
I think he has two major flaws. He double faults way too much for a top player, and his backhand is actually more susceptible than everyone says. I don't see his backhand as his stronger wing, and i think he slices too much off it. he has all the tools, he needs to tighten his serve, improve his fitness further, and really work on being more aggressive on the backhand IMO.
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
I'm not buying his analysis. If Dimitrov were 'mentally weak' how has he been able to beat Djokovic on clay and take sets off the top guys numerous times? A weak younger player would just wilt and get steamrolled.
Too early to say he has no shot at being #1. Too many variables.
Agreed. But I don't see that as 'mental weakness' - over exuberance is more like it.
Too early to say he has no shot at being #1. Too many variables.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
One time in a best of three match? So what.
Dimitrov is pretty mentally weak imo. Plus he is not the brightest bulb in the box when it comes to strategy and shot selection, at least not compared to the Big Three.
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
I think he'll be no. 1 for a short stint at least. He is one of the leading players of the next generation, so he should get there eventually (someone will be no. 1 during the transition period circa 2016-2018 ). I wouldn't be surprised if Nishikori, Raonic or others of that age group get their spell at no. 1 even for a brief period.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't think so.
Anti-Fedal
Professional
I agree with OP. Considering he's 23 and hasn't won a slam or even a masters 1000, the future looks dark for him.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Sadly I doubt Del Potro will ever be ranked 1. He will most likely never be ranked higher than his career best ranking of 4.
Last edited by a moderator:
tennis_commentator
Hall of Fame
Dimitrov and Nadal could be at the top in a few years from now, because Nadal will always be great at French Open (and US Open), while Dimitrov will cash-in at Wimbledon when Federer and Djokovic leave the scene.
Chico
Banned
So let me get this straight?
Younger and less mileage Djokovic will "leave the scene", while older Nadal with bummed knee and back and ... will rule the tennis world in "few years from now" together with much younger Dimitrov. :shock:
Sure, sure, ...
Unbelievable
tennis_commentator
Hall of Fame
So let me get this straight?
Younger and less mileage Djokovic will "leave the scene", while older Nadal with bummed knee and back and ... will rule the tennis world in "few years from now" together with much younger Dimitrov. :shock:
Sure, sure, ...
Unbelievable
Nadal has had less problems with his knees in 2014 (aka no problems at all) than he's ever had in his career (that's why he had a much better French Open in 2014 than 2013, and a much better Wimbledon too). So, gonna have to find another way to get rid of Nadal. And no, appendix won't be it.
Chico
Banned
Nadal is done winning slams and Djokovic will rule tennis world for the next 3-4 years. You will have to learn to deal with it.
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
I love the inconsistencies of the responses :lol:
"He's already 23 and he hasn't won a Slam or a Master's 1000"
"Nishikori is better"
So... Nishikori, who is older than Dimitrov, consistently has injury related problems and also has not won a Master's 1000 or a Slam is better? Okay.
Who else is in the fray and has won a Master's 1000 or a Slam? Del Potro and... Cilic. Both are older, with the former having terrible problems with injuries constantly setting him back and the latter having ups and downs like Wawrinka.
Then there is Raonic, who is fairly consistent, but who clearly lacks the complete game to be at the top of tennis (also Dimitrov seems to have a good matchup against him).
Finally there is the young(er) guns: Kyrgios, Kokkinakis, Coric, Thiem, etc. They have all showed some good performances, but we have no clue as to how they will develop.
Kyrgios lacks the drive needed IMO. His early exit in the season does not bode well for the future IMO. Kokkinakis has shown good quality tennis, but he hasn't really achieved anything with it, in other words, he has not converted it into a win of notice. Thiem has shown more inconsistencies than success and his most noteworthy win of the season was against Mr. Inconsistent himself, Wawrinka. Coric seems the most promising of the bunch, but it will take time before he reaches his prime and is a serious contender on the big stage being only 17 years old.
So Dimitrov has a time span of around 4-5 years where he is the best of the rest and the current Big 4 will likely not be a huge factor due to age. Signs are very good for Dimitrov and to say with certainty that he will not achieve much is just foolish.
"He's already 23 and he hasn't won a Slam or a Master's 1000"
"Nishikori is better"
So... Nishikori, who is older than Dimitrov, consistently has injury related problems and also has not won a Master's 1000 or a Slam is better? Okay.
Who else is in the fray and has won a Master's 1000 or a Slam? Del Potro and... Cilic. Both are older, with the former having terrible problems with injuries constantly setting him back and the latter having ups and downs like Wawrinka.
Then there is Raonic, who is fairly consistent, but who clearly lacks the complete game to be at the top of tennis (also Dimitrov seems to have a good matchup against him).
Finally there is the young(er) guns: Kyrgios, Kokkinakis, Coric, Thiem, etc. They have all showed some good performances, but we have no clue as to how they will develop.
Kyrgios lacks the drive needed IMO. His early exit in the season does not bode well for the future IMO. Kokkinakis has shown good quality tennis, but he hasn't really achieved anything with it, in other words, he has not converted it into a win of notice. Thiem has shown more inconsistencies than success and his most noteworthy win of the season was against Mr. Inconsistent himself, Wawrinka. Coric seems the most promising of the bunch, but it will take time before he reaches his prime and is a serious contender on the big stage being only 17 years old.
So Dimitrov has a time span of around 4-5 years where he is the best of the rest and the current Big 4 will likely not be a huge factor due to age. Signs are very good for Dimitrov and to say with certainty that he will not achieve much is just foolish.
tennis_commentator
Hall of Fame
Djokovic would first need to figure out how to win slams.
Since June of 2013, Nadal has won 3 slam titles.
Djokovic has won ONE slam title.
Minor problem there for Djokovic :lol:
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
He's basically 23.5 years old, born in May and will be 24 next May.
What world #1 was ever still #11 after age 23?
He didn't break into the top 100 until around April of 2012
Coric is shown to be #124 at the moment, but with his recent wins he's going to move way up. He will be 18 in November, and he will already break into the top 100.
Fed broke into the top 100 in 1999, at 18.
Nadal was in the top 100 in 2003, at 16.
Novak was an old man of 18 when he broke into the top 100.
Murry was not yet 18 when he broke into the top 100.
Could not agree more, but I'm also pointing out that he is perhaps a couple years later than most of the guys who went on to be #1.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
Maybe #1 for a week or a month. But for a year? I doubt that...
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
I would not like to rate Wimbys of the past two years for Nadal. Both were not good.
But it is true that his stats on clay this year seem to say that he was even better than in 2013 - not wins, but percentage of points won.
Also ratio of percentage of holds and breaks.
83/48 131, with 57% of points won on clay for the year.
Compare with last year: 87/38 125, with 56% of points won on clay.
On clay he served better last year on clay. He dropped from 87 to 83 on winning hold games. But he increased his percentage of break games from 38 to 48, and he increased his percentage of points from 56 to 57.
Compare with 2008 on clay, when he won 84% of his service games, broke 51% of the time (games), won 50% of return points and overall won 58% of all points on clay for the year.
I don't think we will live to see any player come close to that.
llodra_fan
Professional
Bang on. Add to this his movement and balance while hitting aggressive shots. I mean he is really fast while getting to a ball defensively, but somehow I feel he has a small technical problem when he hits an aggressive ball. I think its probably his transfer of body weight, he leans back too early.
And one more problem is hanging 5 ft behind base line. If you are an aggressive player, you need to come inside or close to the baseline every time you get the opportunity. As a result he hits quite a short balls, especially on his backhand side.
Roger Rasheed has made him stronger and his stamina related problems seem to be almost gone but now he needs a more technical coach who can lift him to that extra level where he can compete with elite 4-5 toe to toe on every occasion.
wilkinru
Professional
I see no reason he can't get much better in the next few years, just when the big 4 are going to begin declining.
ATP 1000s aren't an old (non-fed) man's game.
I look at his competition from his age and I wonder who the heck will actually challenge him. In a way I think he will just gain confidence by winning more and more easily.
ATP 1000s aren't an old (non-fed) man's game.
I look at his competition from his age and I wonder who the heck will actually challenge him. In a way I think he will just gain confidence by winning more and more easily.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Nah, there will be players younger than him who will leapfrog over him and do much better. Dimitrov is not good enough.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Why don't you like Grigor cc0? :?
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't dislike Dimitrov, in fact I quite like him and think he is a good ambassador for the game. But I don't think he is going to be what many thought he would be. He should have done a lot more by now. He has trouble beating the very top guys. Don't you agree?
Enga
Hall of Fame
Not sure he's mentally weak. The times I've seen him get beat, it has been my opinion that he was beat, not that he choked.
He has won some tournaments. He's got a smoking hot tennis girlfriend.
I really think these symptoms that suggest mental weakness are really something that points to his conditioning. I think he could do well to increase his core strength. Instead, his feet are always slipping out from under him. Something that would often happen to me in my youth when I tried to run faster than what I was capable of. If he increased his leg strength, he could get those legs moving as fast as his brain wants him to.
Faster speed really opens the door for all possibilities on the court.
He has won some tournaments. He's got a smoking hot tennis girlfriend.
I really think these symptoms that suggest mental weakness are really something that points to his conditioning. I think he could do well to increase his core strength. Instead, his feet are always slipping out from under him. Something that would often happen to me in my youth when I tried to run faster than what I was capable of. If he increased his leg strength, he could get those legs moving as fast as his brain wants him to.
Faster speed really opens the door for all possibilities on the court.
Last edited:
ScentOfDefeat
G.O.A.T.
I think he'll never be #1 because Federer is better than him and he's 33. Their age difference won't change so why would Dimitrov represent the future and Federer the past? A declining 33 year old Dimitrov will still be less of a favorite to win Wimbledon than a 43 year old Federer.
One year ago the discussion here was whether or not he will ever win a tournament. One year later he has already 4.
Time will show. All the comparison with Djoco, Fed and Nadal are pointless. The game has changed a lot in the last years. Top players need to mature physically and mentally.
Dimitrov needs to change some things in order to achieve a better ranking. Rasheed has gave him good physical lessons, he needs now a coach who can teach him tactic against the top players.
Time will show. All the comparison with Djoco, Fed and Nadal are pointless. The game has changed a lot in the last years. Top players need to mature physically and mentally.
Dimitrov needs to change some things in order to achieve a better ranking. Rasheed has gave him good physical lessons, he needs now a coach who can teach him tactic against the top players.
L
Laurie
Guest
Can't really argue with Anudeep's prognosis, it is really up to Dimitrov to prove his detractors wrong.
I mentioned before as well that Dimitrov has to work out how to have a coherent return of serve strategy on the backhand side.
You might recall in January Sampras said he would be very surprised if Dimitrov wasn't in the top 5 of the rankings by the end of this year. Dimitrov is not even going to make it in the top 8 to play in the WTF in London, not as much progress as was expected.
I mentioned before as well that Dimitrov has to work out how to have a coherent return of serve strategy on the backhand side.
You might recall in January Sampras said he would be very surprised if Dimitrov wasn't in the top 5 of the rankings by the end of this year. Dimitrov is not even going to make it in the top 8 to play in the WTF in London, not as much progress as was expected.
Dimitrov totaly under rated player
Years ago every one questioned why this guy could not reach top ten pleyer level with such skills...now he is top ten player and many peple is remarking...hooo baby federer....a copycat of federer...hooo mental low level..hooo he needs to improve his return *****..hoo what ever guys !!!..in 2 years this Dimitrov went from 60 to 10..he is young and improving...he plays like federer because is a clasic tennis player with high technic...so yea he can be number number one ..and he is improving every year...stop to under rate this guy and lets give thanks due there are still clasic players nice to see....because tennis is a very complete and beautifull sport...my best regards
Years ago every one questioned why this guy could not reach top ten pleyer level with such skills...now he is top ten player and many peple is remarking...hooo baby federer....a copycat of federer...hooo mental low level..hooo he needs to improve his return *****..hoo what ever guys !!!..in 2 years this Dimitrov went from 60 to 10..he is young and improving...he plays like federer because is a clasic tennis player with high technic...so yea he can be number number one ..and he is improving every year...stop to under rate this guy and lets give thanks due there are still clasic players nice to see....because tennis is a very complete and beautifull sport...my best regards
Marius_Hancu
Talk Tennis Guru
With new coaching he might get there.
90's Clay
Banned
No doubt he has the talent but I doubt it. Basically hes another Nalbandian. Untapped potential but doesn't have the focus or is a flat out head case.
Another clown.. Clownitrov. Wasted potential and talent that should have gone to a hard worker that wanted it more but didn't have the talent.
This guy is lucky to put together more than 2 weeks of good tennis and people think he may reach #1? ROFLMAO
Another clown.. Clownitrov. Wasted potential and talent that should have gone to a hard worker that wanted it more but didn't have the talent.
This guy is lucky to put together more than 2 weeks of good tennis and people think he may reach #1? ROFLMAO
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Seems more like Gasquet to me.
Lucky?...number 10 in the world and you call him lucky...?...so Nalbandian was a clown?...is easy to be a troll and thalk trash just because a player does not like you..
L
Laurie
Guest
I wouldn't write him off. Don't forget Murray didn't win a slam until he was 25 or 26 years old. Of course Murray never got to number 1.
torpantennis
Legend
Dimitrov's problem? Rasheed, as good as Rasheed has been for his physical conditioning, his command has transformed Dimi into a baseline grinder. That's not the way this guy should play. If he doesn't fire Rasheed, he won't get to world #1.
staceyliving
Banned
I am not sure honestly. Unlike some posters I don't think either Nadal or Djokovic are close to being done, and wont be for another 3-4 years. Dmitrov wont pass either until they seriously decline further, or in Nadal's case is off tour long enough (as he is every 2nd year it seems for 4 months plus) to be passed even with Dmitrov not being a better player.
I am not sure if he is even better than Raonic, Nishikori, Cilic, guys only slightly older than him.
The much younger up and comers could easily be on him already by the time in the IMO distant future when Nadal and Djokovic are completely out of the way.
Quite possibly never to be honest, but he might get to #1 for a blip. Slam wins probably 2-3 if he is fortunate.
I am not sure if he is even better than Raonic, Nishikori, Cilic, guys only slightly older than him.
The much younger up and comers could easily be on him already by the time in the IMO distant future when Nadal and Djokovic are completely out of the way.
Quite possibly never to be honest, but he might get to #1 for a blip. Slam wins probably 2-3 if he is fortunate.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
