Will Novak reach 303 weeks at no. 1?

Is Novak likely to end with 303 or more weeks at number 1?


  • Total voters
    97
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

nadalfan2013

Professional
Not sure. If you asked me 6 months ago, I would've said 100% sure. But since he won RG something changed, which he confirmed. If he starts playing again like at start of 2016, then yes. But he just might be sick of playing tennis, and wanting to just retire and do other things in life.

According to many, he cheated on his wife. That's what changed.
 
Not sure. If you asked me 6 months ago, I would've said 100% sure. But since he won RG something changed, which he confirmed. If he starts playing again like at start of 2016, then yes. But he just might be sick of playing tennis, and wanting to just retire and do other things in life.

I think he is very motivated again. Winning the French was so huge for him, and he had marital problems briefly so lost the fire for a bit. Now after losing the US Open final and recharging his batteries the motivation is finally back. He will be very hungry. There is no way he loses passion and fire when he is close to possibly becoming the Open Era GOAT, something he has worked over a decade for, and most of the way towards already.
 
I wouldnt agree. 302 weeks is about 98% likely to happen. 17 only about 65%. Vastly different odds.
The guy winning the slams would be the one at the top of the ranking, so from that perspective it would appear those go together? It's also probably easier to accumulate slams piecemeal than weeks at number 1.


Not sure. If you asked me 6 months ago, I would've said 100% sure. But since he won RG something changed, which he confirmed. If he starts playing again like at start of 2016, then yes. But he just might be sick of playing tennis, and wanting to just retire and do other things in life.

Or it may just be a temporary thing as well.
 
The guy winning the slams would be the one at the top of the ranking, so from that perspective it would appear those go together? It's also probably easier to accumulate slams piecemeal than weeks at number 1.

Novak won only 1 slam in 2012 and 2014 and was still #1 at years end easily both years. After Wimbledon 2013 Murray held 2 slams, is quite consistent himself, held some Masters as usual, and was thousands of points behind a 1 slam Novak. It took Nadal winning 2 slams and 5 Masters to barely wrestle #1 away from a 1 slam Novak in 2013, who is going to have a year like that of the current crop? So for Novak no, being #1 for another 20 months is easier than winning 6 more slams by far (I think he can do both, but it is hard to see him not doing the former, while the latter is more a challenge). Novak even winning slams at the kind of slow rate from now on that prevented him from getting to #17 or #18 would still be unlikely to be knocked out of #1 anytime soon. There is nobody else consistent enough, and there is nobody good enough to dominate and win slams in bunches if he himself doesnt right now.
 

timnz

Legend
The guy winning the slams would be the one at the top of the ranking, so from that perspective it would appear those go together? It's also probably easier to accumulate slams piecemeal than weeks at number 1.




Or it may just be a temporary thing as well.
Doesn't always follow. Look at the fact that Roddick was more weeks at number 1 than Becker - but Roddick has 1 slam and Becker has 6. Another example? McEnroe has 7 Slams and Nadal has 14 - but McEnroe has more weeks at number 1.
 

uscwang

Hall of Fame
Can Novak break Roger's record for total weeks at number 1?

Currently he leads Andy by 2,055 points in the race and by 4,695 in the ranking.

At the end of 2016, he will be at 231 weeks*. That'll leave him needing 72 more weeks. Consecutively, he'll have to keep it till late May 2018. (Although he could do it in bits and pieces)

His history at number 1 is as follows:

53 weeks Jul 2011 - Jul 2012
48 weeks Nov 2012 - Oct 2013
130 weeks Jul 2014 - Dec 2016*

Do you think he can do it? Poll will close at the end of the year. Can edit responses till then.


(*assuming this for convenience. Not intended as a slight to Andy or his excellent fans. Easier to remember 231 weeks at year end 2016, rather than 216 in September. Will make relevant changes if Andy takes no 1 in 2016)

Also worth noting is that since Fed turned #1 on Feb 2, 2004, the Big 3 have had an oligopoly on the #1 position. That's 12 years and 8 months and counting.
The other period close is from July 29, 1974 to Feb 27, 1983, when Connors, Borg, and McEnroe rotated as the #1 player - 8 years and 7 months.
 

5555

Hall of Fame
There are clearly signs that Djokovic is in decline, and is vulnerable on faster surfaces. I don't think he'll ever have a season like 2011 or 2015 again. The question is how it will affect his ranking. Until the French next year, he'll be more susceptible to early losses than this year, so until then he's more likely to drop points then he is to gain then. That's one variable in the equation. The other is about who is gonna take it away from them. IIRC, if you made look at the race since MC, Murray is actually ahead of Djokovic. Now Djokovic is a bit lucky that Murray seems tired as well, so I'm not that sure he'll capitalize on Djokovic having form issues, but I really think that if Murray will bounce back fresh next year and be ready to make a push for #1, especially if Djokovic were to carry his form issues through the winter.

In the race for World #1, Djokovic has been incredibly lucky, with this year being an Olympic year, Murray being dead set on playing Davis Cup, and his absolute cake walk draw to the USO finals. Djokovic got 1000 points of advantage for nothing in Toronto, and the Olympics clearly tired Murray out.

If Murray can't take advantage, I think it will take a fair while. Wawrinka is unlikely, Fed and Nadal out of question, Raonic and Nishikori aren't happening as well. Then we're looking at players who are barely top 10 yet. I really think that as soon as Djokovic starts losing the close calls he's had this year with the likes of Nishikori and loses the odd 2nd round match, he's there for the taking. Question will be when somebody is there to take it. So then you're down to the question whether a player stands up and is able to challenge the slams on all 4 surfaces. I don't see Zverev making a HC run before 2018, I don't see Thiem making a fast HC run before then either, and both have a long way to go anyway. I've been relatively impressed with Kyrgios' constistency this year, he tanked less then I expected him to do, but he also didn't make any deep runs and had bad luck with draws, injuries or lost a crucial match any time he had a shot at going very deep in a slam or 1000. Kyrgios has the game to challenge on HC and grass, and is actually reasonable on clay, but he's losing too many matches to the likes of Berdman and Nishikori in crucial moments, and keeps drawing Murray in slams who he doesn't believe he can beat.

In short, Djokovic is incredibly lucky. He's been very consistent, the players who could challenge his position short term are either his pidgeons, declining harder, inconsistent, and his main challenger has had a matchup issue. The youngsters are probably long enough off for Djokovic to get the record.

Now there's one player I haven't discussed, and I'm slowly starting to believe in him for #1 next year.

Pouille in 5.

Pouille? What? The only player, apart from Djokovic, that realistically can be No. 1 next year is Murray.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Can't see him getting to 303 weeks. If you asked at the start of the year I would've said sure but his love for tennis seems to be gone. Dropping sets to nobodies, getting bagelled, losing early at slams, it's just falling apart. Won't be surprised if he loses the number 1 ranking by the middle of next year let alone 2018.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
I honestly dont see Djokovic losing #1 until sometime in 2019 (at the earliest) given that i see him ending 2017 and 2018 at #1 without losing #1 at any point. So yes I do think he will break the weeks at #1 record.

I almost agree except that I think he'll lose it at some point in 2018, probably after a slam (i.e. after the FO or W). I think he'll only win one slam in 2017 (probably the AO), but that will be enough to hold on to the #1 ranking throughout the year, since no-one else will win more than one slam either, and Nole will as usual be more consistent than the rest.
 

gn

G.O.A.T.
Federer had Djokovic, Murray and Nadal who stopped him. But Novak does not have any such threats.
Plus Murray will never be consistent and he is not as good as Novak on every surface.
So I think Novak has real shot at breaking the record.
Still 250+ weeks as No.1 will be an incredible achievement.
 
Either way I'm looking at where he will be at year end.

Do you agree it will be 231?

Yes, assuming that he maintains the #1 ranking interrupted for the rest of the year, then by my calculation, Djokovic will be on 231 weeks at #1 on December 31st/January 1st, and will start his 232nd week as #1 on Monday January 2nd.
 

xFedal

Legend
This really matters only if Novak is getting to 17 or 18. Otherwise it is a piece of trivia.
Argument can be made for a player who is most decorated No.1 player ever.... Week at No.1 record is very dear and important to Federer and he won't be happy to know that he no longer holds the No.1 weeks record.
 

xFedal

Legend
Yes, assuming that he maintains the #1 ranking interrupted for the rest of the year, then by my calculation, Djokovic will be on 231 weeks at #1 on December 31st/January 1st, and will start his 232nd week as #1 on Monday January 2nd.
How many points will Nole end this year with? Currently on 10k... I predict 12500-13000 points .
 

falstaff78

Hall of Fame
Yes, assuming that he maintains the #1 ranking interrupted for the rest of the year, then by my calculation, Djokovic will be on 231 weeks at #1 on December 31st/January 1st, and will start his 232nd week as #1 on Monday January 2nd.

yep exactly. this is the scenario I assumed in the OP. next year it'll be just easier to remember 231 at year end, rather than 215 on some random day in september!!!
 
yep exactly. this is the scenario I assumed in the OP. next year it'll be just easier to remember 231 at year end, rather than 215 on some random day in september!!!

Agreed.

By the way, good prediction on Djokovic's 2016. As I recall, at the end of last year, you predicted that he'd win the Australian Open and Roland Garros but would not win the other two Slams.
 

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Argument can be made for a player who is most decorated No.1 player ever.... Week at No.1 record is very dear and important to Federer and he won't be happy to know that he no longer holds the No.1 weeks record.

Argument will hold water only when there is a plus or minus one in slams.

Otherwise the two players are not really comparable.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
I guess it will depend on whether or not he can hold on to that #1 ranking until the first half of the 2017 season. Right now, I don't see anyone other than Murray as a credible competitor for that #1 spot, and Djokovic will have fewer points to defend in the second half of the season. Staying at #1 from now until YE 2017 basically carries him all the way to AO 2018, or around 288 weeks. From there it's "only" 15 more weeks.

It's a big ask though. It looks like his dominance has already started to wane. But he's still a threat all year on all surfaces. He can collect enough points throughout the year to hold that #1 spot even if he's not winning everything left and right.

That being said, I think he'll fall a little short. Maybe Murray takes the #1 spot at some point next season, robbing precious weeks from Djokovic. Maybe a new guy will come out of nowhere and dominate the tour. Maybe he'll experience a sharp decline due to age and/or injuries. There are just too many things that can go wrong.
 
Last edited:

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
Realistic goals for Djokovic in career numbers:

- 14 Slams (T-2nd all time)
- 271 weeks at #1 (3rd all time)
- 5 YE #1 (T-2nd all time)
- 81 career titles (4th all time)
- 38 M1000 titles (1st all time)
 
Realistic goals for Djokovic in career numbers:

- 14 Slams (T-2nd all time)
- 271 weeks at #1 (3rd all time)
- 5 YE #1 (T-2nd all time)
- 81 career titles (4th all time)
- 38 M1000 titles (1st all time)

Why is it unrealistic for him to finish #1 again after 2016? Isn't he favorite to finish 2017 as #1?

(I'd argue that he could well get to 15 Slams, 85 titles, and 280-90 weeks as #1, but that third stat is the one that really stood out to me as rather negative).
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
Why is it unrealistic for him to finish #1 again after 2016? Isn't he favorite to finish 2017 as #1?

(I'd argue that he could well get to 15 Slams, 85 titles, and 280-90 weeks as #1, but that third stat is the one that really stood out to me as rather negative).
If he stays healthy and we don't see a Nadal type of decline, sure. But YE 2017 is too far away; anything could happen.
 
Haha I had forgotten that. I should look for it and bump it. Lololol. Thanks for the reminder!!

Let me know if you find it, please. I'd be interested to re-read the conversation.

Also, when you get a chance, would you please update your chart about the ages of Slam winners? I'd be interested to know whether the seven Slams in a row that have been won by men aged 28-31 have altered the long-term breakdown so that 28 no longer seems like a drop-off point, historically. I imagine that 29 still does, but that 28 does not, but I'd be curious to see the stats.
 
If he stays healthy and we don't see a Nadal-type of decline, sure. But YE 2017 is too far away; anything could happen.

Of course. But your previous post suggested it was highly unlikely. I'd say that it's by no means guaranteed but not particularly unlikely. Anyway, first things first: let's see whether he makes it to five years as #1 in 2016!
 

falstaff78

Hall of Fame
Let me know if you find it, please. I'd be interested to re-read the conversation.

Also, when you get a chance, would you please update your chart about the ages of Slam winners? I'd be interested to know whether the seven Slams in a row that have been won by men aged 28-31 have altered the long-term breakdown so that 28 no longer seems like a drop-off point, historically. I imagine that 29 still does, but that 28 does not, but I'd be curious to see the stats.

Yep saw that thanks. Will do!
 

cockneyDjoker

Hall of Fame
Yes to both. Novak still has 5 good years of winning slams ahead of him. The c**k predicts another 2 multi-slam winning years for Djokovic and 350+ weeks at #1 :):)
 

falstaff78

Hall of Fame
Wish we could see how the voting has been since the announcement that Novak skipping Beijing (and potentially Shanghai)
 
If Novak does not have long term injuries, he will come back fresh and dominate again. Wawrinka is the only one that can stop him, but for him to do that consistently is a big ask.

If Novak has injuries that will affect his court coverage, it will change the dynamics of his game and make playing him easier for opponents. That could cause his results to tail off a bit. It's easy to be confident and hungry when you are winning, but losses can rake up issues and cause confusion. We are already seeing him question his motivation after a couple of losses.

We can see now that of the big four, and perhaps among all the greats, Federer was the one with the most hunger for titles and the ability to stay on the grind of the tour year in and year out. Even with the tough losses and the slam drought, he was able to continue. He really did deserve a couple of the one's he lost - 2014 USO, and the several slams he lost to Djokovic the last few years.

Sampras was burnt out towards the tail end of his career, Agassi had a mid career lapse. Djokovic likely comes 2nd with his consistency and domination the frist half of this decade.
 

JoelSandwich

Hall of Fame
Breaking the weeks at number 1 record is a more reasonable goal than the Slam record.
I don't think he'll do either I think he'll get around the Connors/Lendl range in weeks at number 1.
 

mightyrick

Legend
I don't think he'll reach either record. Time is not on Djokovic's side. When players start to decline, every day of play feels like a week, every week of play feels like a month. Every month of play feels like a year. 12 months from 2016-09-30 is not the same as 12 months from 2017-09-30. Djokovic is the most physical player of the last 10 years -- outside of Nadal. The decline isn't going to be slow. It's already happening much faster than people expected.

He might (very strong MIGHT) reach Connors/Lendl... but I don't see any path to him reaching Federer.

Djokovic is losing to random players on big stages too often now. Add to that guys like Murray and Wawrinka who seem to be holding their form better against the field and going deep in tournaments. Add to that the mug generation which seems to be getting a little bit stronger. I just don't see him reaching near 300 weeks.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
I don't think he'll reach either record. Time is not on Djokovic's side. When players start to decline, every day of play feels like a week, every week of play feels like a month. Every month of play feels like a year. 12 months from 2016-09-30 is not the same as 12 months from 2017-09-30. Djokovic is the most physical player of the last 10 years -- outside of Nadal. The decline isn't going to be slow. It's already happening much faster than people expected.

He might (very strong MIGHT) reach Connors/Lendl... but I don't see any path to him reaching Federer.

Djokovic is losing to random players on big stages too often now. Add to that guys like Murray and Wawrinka who seem to be holding their form better against the field and going deep in tournaments. Add to that the mug generation which seems to be getting a little bit stronger. I just don't see him reaching near 300 weeks.

I agree with all you say, but, the key point is: who will have the consistency to replace him as No 1?

Even if his standard falls, I don't see others stepping up to replace him in the next 18 months.
 

Dave1982

Professional
Can Novak break Roger's record for total weeks at number 1?

Currently he leads Andy by 2,055 points in the race and by 4,695 in the ranking.

At the end of 2016, he will be at 231 weeks*. That'll leave him needing 72 more weeks. Consecutively, he'll have to keep it till late May 2018. (Although he could do it in bits and pieces)

His history at number 1 is as follows:

53 weeks Jul 2011 - Jul 2012
48 weeks Nov 2012 - Oct 2013
130 weeks Jul 2014 - Dec 2016*

Do you think he can do it? Poll will close at the end of the year. Can edit responses till then.


(*assuming this for convenience. Not intended as a slight to Andy or his excellent fans. Easier to remember 231 weeks at year end 2016, rather than 216 in September. Will make relevant changes if Andy takes no 1 in 2016)

I actually think he is a very good chance of breaking this record and in many ways is deservingly of this record...as great as Federer was his talent was largely winning Slams, Djokovic will in many ways be defined by his consistency and the dominance he has shown over extended period.

I've been saying for sometime now that Murray's best chance to challenge for #1 ranking will likely come at 2017 Indian Wells/Miami tournaments and obviously for this to remain true he will need to keep the pressure on and probably win at least one of either WTF or 2017 AO...even though Djokovic is largely defending maximum points throughout this stretch.
At this stage it's hard to see Djokovic holding #1 spot continually through to point he would break record...I think he'll lose it at some point next year but will regain it again in doing so will go on to break record.
 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
I actually think he is a very good chance of breaking this record and in many ways is deservingly of this record...as great as Federer was his talent was largely winning Slams, Djokovic will in many ways be defined by his consistency and the dominance he has shown over extended period.

I've been saying for sometime now that Murray's best chance to challenge for #1 ranking will likely come at 2017 Indian Wells/Miami tournaments and obviously for this to remain true he will need to keep the pressure on and probably win at least one of either WTF or 2017 AO...even though Djokovic is largely defending maximum points throughout this stretch.
At this stage it's hard to see Djokovic holding #1 spot continually through to point he would break record...I think he'll lose it at some point next year but will regain it again in doing so will go on to break record.
Usually find your posts on point, but... say what?
 

falstaff78

Hall of Fame
as great as Federer was his talent was largely winning Slams

Usually find your posts on point, but... say what?

yeah that's a very strange observation. if anything Nadal's talent was winning slams. As evidenced by high slam count and (relatively) low number of weeks at number 1. Federer from 2004-2006 was the most consistent tennis player in history. 247 wins and 16 losses for a 94% win rate over 3 years. YIKES!!!
 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
yeah that's a very strange observation. if anything Nadal's talent was winning slams. As evidenced by high slam count and (relatively) low number of weeks at number 1. Federer from 2004-2006 was the most consistent tennis player in history. 247 wins and 16 losses for a 94% win rate over 3 years. YIKES!!!
Yeah, the breadth of wins is staggering. I'm still not sure of the exact criteria, but would he have a Hall-of-Fame-worthy career even without the major titles? Would still be 71 titles, for starters...
 

falstaff78

Hall of Fame
Yeah, the breadth of wins is staggering. I'm still not sure of the exact criteria, but would he have a Hall-of-Fame-worthy career even without the major titles? Would still be 71 titles, for starters...

davis cup, olympic silver/gold, 6xWTF, and I'm sure there were times when the difference between him and number two was more than the number of points he had earned from majors - that is to say he would have been number one without a single point from majors!
 

ultradr

Legend
weeks are not as important. he should concentrate on 6, 7th year #1. He will join the club of Sampras, Laver and Gonzalez.
 

Dave1982

Professional
Usually find your posts on point, but... say what?

yeah that's a very strange observation. if anything Nadal's talent was winning slams. As evidenced by high slam count and (relatively) low number of weeks at number 1. Federer from 2004-2006 was the most consistent tennis player in history. 247 wins and 16 losses for a 94% win rate over 3 years. YIKES!!!

Yeah fair points and there is absolutely no doubt that Federer was extremely dominant during the periods mentioned and of course his career is HOF worthy even without the Slams....guess my thinking is that even when Federer was dominant he always had a genuine rival in Nadal (between 2004 - 2006/7 largely only on Clay) to kind of keep him honest and maintain the pressure on him. As a result there's no doubt that his record at #1 is impressive it probably never felt as though he was as dominant as Djokovic compared to rest of the field...or at least over prior 18 months from this years French Open.

i think we can all agree that Djokovic's dominance over rest of the field has without question diminished in recent months and therefore next 18 months is going to be a real battle for him and will determine how likely he is to achieve record weeks at #1.
Yeah maybe I was a bit flippant and short sighted in my original comment...still just feel that Djokovic has somewhat raised the bar in terms of dominance over the field and needless to say that is due to a combination of factors, some within his control and others due to inconsistency of others.
 
D

Deleted member 743561

Guest
Yeah fair points and there is absolutely no doubt that Federer was extremely dominant during the periods mentioned and of course his career is HOF worthy even without the Slams....guess my thinking is that even when Federer was dominant he always had a genuine rival in Nadal (between 2004 - 2006/7 largely only on Clay) to kind of keep him honest and maintain the pressure on him. As a result there's no doubt that his record at #1 is impressive it probably never felt as though he was as dominant as Djokovic compared to rest of the field...or at least over prior 18 months from this years French Open.

i think we can all agree that Djokovic's dominance over rest of the field has without question diminished in recent months and therefore next 18 months is going to be a real battle for him and will determine how likely he is to achieve record weeks at #1.
Yeah maybe I was a bit flippant and short sighted in my original comment...still just feel that Djokovic has somewhat raised the bar in terms of dominance over the field and needless to say that is due to a combination of factors, some within his control and others due to inconsistency of others.
See your points. I have definitely had this pervasive sense, however, through much of the recent dominance that it was coming against a strikingly lackluster field. Took a little of the shine off it for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top