Will Djokovic ever manage to win a slam without dropping a set?

[The_Mental_Giant]

Looking at the statics only 5 men in open era have managed to win slams without dropping a set and only two of them did it 2 or more times (Nadal and Borg).


Will be Nole capable of achieving that feat?

Rosewall = 1 (AO 1971) 6 matches of 5 set format (top seeds didnt play first match)
Nastase = 1(RG 1973)7 matches, first two rounds played at BO3, and rest of tournament BO5
Borg = 3 (RG 1978, 1980 , Wimbledon 1976) 7 matches at BO5
Federer = 1 (AO 2007) 7 matches at BO5
Nadal = 2 (RG 2008, 2010) 7 matches at BO5

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Borg RG 1978 was ridiculous.

That guy could play!

 

[Deleted member 688153]

please enlight me here...

Rg 2008 and 2010 were complete ownage, same as Aussie open 2007.

Didnt watch those from Borg, but check at the scorelines of the French open in 1978... its like he either bageled or breadsticked everybody, insane...

I would say RG 1978, RG 2008, AO 2007 were better.
Otherwise AO 2011 is better.

Losing 1-2 sets esp. in early rounds isn't here nor there.

 

[Gary Duane]

Why? It shows greatness and domination.. just what Borg did 1976-1980 was insane.....

No. Winning lots of slams shows greatness and dominance.

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

I would say RG 1978, RG 2008, AO 2007 were better.
Otherwise AO 2011 is better.

Losing 1-2 sets esp. in early rounds isn't here nor there.

Why RG 2010 was worse? What did rafa wrong there... because he didnt lose a single set and straightsetted Soderling in the Final, who was there reaching final for second time in a row... and previosly defeatured the title holder (federer), and straighsetted Melzer in SF (who took care of djokovic in the previous round).

Djokovic lost a set to Dodig and won a match only after winning the first set.. the other player retired (troicki)..

so its actually 19-1 in sets , compared to 21-0 in Rg 2010.

 

[BringBackSV]

No. Winning lots of slams shows greatness and dominance.

Novak doesn't have to worry about showing greatness then, he's pretty far behind the best to ever do it.

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

No. Winning lots of slams shows greatness and dominance.

Thats why some tournaments and finals are remembered more than others. When I think in fed the first I have in mind is the AO 2007, for Rafa the RG 2008,. Its because of domination. You will never see players like cilic or wawrinka winning slams without dropping a set, heck not even Sampras, Agassi, Lendl, Connors or Mcenroe managed to do that...

 

[Djokovic2011]

for the past 4 years? Nadal was better than nole in 2013 (2 slams 5 m1000).

Anyways quite subpar performance for being the best player in 2012 and 2014 and only winning a single slam.All the YE1 of fedal were actually multiple slam winning years.

YE1 means nothing if you were just one of 4 different slam winners, nothing special..

Since the beginning of 2011 Nole has won more Slams, WTFs and Masters 1000 than anyone else and spent more weeks at #1 and finished YE#1 three times so yeah, he's been without doubt the best player in the world in the last four years.

 

[Djokovic2011]

And as for YE#1 "meaning nothing if you were just one of 4 different slam winners" you obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about. It was never written in stone anywhere that only a multi-slam year makes you a worthy YE#1, especially if you end the season with the next most prestigious tournament on your resume and several Masters 1000 titles. OP's just butthurt that his hero's out for the count yet again while the best player in the world is getting that bit closer to having a more balanced resume than him, hence his making this thread in the first place. Meanwhile, us Nole fans will carry on smiling. :lol:

 

[RF-18]

Djokovic is becoming greater than nadal. Only hard thing for novak will be to catch nadals 14 slams but other records he is very close to surpass and will eventually. OP is scared

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Since the beginning of 2011 Nole has won more Slams, WTFs and Masters 1000 than anyone else and spent more weeks at #1 and finished YE#1 three times so yeah, he's been without doubt the best player in the world in the last four years.

He has been the best in the world for the majority of the last four years.

Federer and Nadal have also been the best in the world for spans of that time (ie when they were #1).

But overall, Djokovic has been the best for the last 4 years all-up as he has the most GS and the most #1 weeks during that period.

 

[Gazelle]

Djokovic should have done this at AO 2011.

Can't even remember where he dropped a set. He beat Berdych, Federer and Murray in straights so really shouldn't have dropped a set to one of the lower guys. But it doesn't really matter of course.

 

[The Green Mile]

Djokovic should have done this at AO 2011.

Can't even remember where he dropped a set. He beat Berdych, Federer and Murray in straights so really shouldn't have dropped a set to one of the lower guys. But it doesn't really matter of course.

Dropped a set to Dodig.

 

[Gazelle]

Djokovic is becoming greater than nadal. Only hard thing for novak will be to catch nadals 14 slams but other records he is very close to surpass and will eventually. OP is scared

Will be hard to be greater than Nadal when he only has halve the number of slams. Not that slam means everything in my book but they still count for a lot.
The 7 slam difference is just too much. Pitty, if Djoker had been mentally a bit stronger at big matches throughout his career he might have beaten Nadal in the slam race. In 2011 he was a rock mentally, but any other year he has been shaky.

 

[mike danny]

One question: Why did RG 1973 didn't play all matches best of 5?

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I think his best shot is at .....Wimbledon!

Well the thing is he is much better than the field at RG sans Nadal. He and Rafa have almost even odds to win it last few years, with others at tiny odds.

He would have the best chance there although often drops sets before the final, but he's in no way straight setting Nadal there so that's out of the question.

As great as he is on HC and especially at AO, it's too tough there imo with the field often stepping up to make tight matches or upsets, especially as late. He did come very close in 2011, but can't see that happening again.

At Wimbledon, because the rest of the tour is weak on grass, he can easily run thru to the SF's. A couple lucky opponents or a good day for him and he can blitz them. Maybe he gets revenge against a 70 percent Murray in the sf's and blitzes Nadal in the final etc. Ofc, these matches could go the other way, but due to the surface and the lack of people who can play on it minus 4 or 5 guys, it's his best shot. It's like the french in that regard minus Nadal's domination of it.

 

[mike danny]

I think his best shot is at .....Wimbledon!

Well the thing is he is much better than the field at RG sans Nadal. He and Rafa have almost even odds to win it last few years, with others at tiny odds.

He would have the best chance there although often drops sets before the final, but he's in no way straight setting Nadal there so that's out of the question.

As great as he is on HC and especially at AO, it's too tough there imo with the field often stepping up to make tight matches or upsets, especially as late. He did come very close in 2011, but can't see that happening again.

At Wimbledon, because the rest of the tour is weak on grass, he can easily run thru to the SF's. A couple lucky opponents or a good day for him and he can blitz them. Maybe he gets revenge against a 70 percent Murray in the sf's and blitzes Nadal in the final etc. Ofc, these matches could go the other way, but due to the surface and the lack of people who can play on it minus 4 or 5 guys, it's his best shot. It's like the french in that regard minus Nadal's domination of it.

Well this year alone before getting to Fed, Djokovic still lost sets to Stepanek and Dimitrov. So maybe the field is not that weak on grass afterall. Even better, both Stepanek and Dimitrov were very close to pushing Djokovic to 5.

So even W is out of the equation IMO. Even in 2011 he lost a set to Baghdatis before even meeting Nadal