Did Djokovic really play that poorly?

[Backhand_DTL]

Well, when he won Oz in 2012 to reach 5, a brave man or a fool would say he'd only have 6 at this stage...

Yep, he has won 1 of the last 9 majors now and aside from 2011 he has never won any other slam aside from AO. That's why I think it is at the point you have to wonder about his place/future in the game.

Especially 0 of the last 5 is a problem. After Nole won the US Open 2011 and the Australian Open 2012 in a somewhat fortunate way he was never really close to winning the French Open or Wimbledon, although with lighter rain that would have allowed to continue playing or an outdoor match against Federer he might have won one of these. The US Open loss was probably the most disappointing that season, but didn't seem to have too much of an effect on him as he won in Australia again after that.

But after that regrettable net touch-mistake at Roland Garros his mental toughness doesn't seem to be the same anymore. He won close slam matches against Del Potro and Wawrinka, but those only got close due to Novak's level not being too high there. Against other elite players he really struggles to retain leads and seems to get quite tense when serving to stay in sets or matches.

In Wimbledon he would probably need his draw to open up a bit to have a chance to win again, but the US Open will be really important as Nole still shows the most consistently high level on hard courts and should be the favorite if he performs reasonably well in the Masters 1000 events before. I think he has a good chance to turn the corner there, otherwise things will look really bad.

It's not clear to me that playing outdoors on grass helps Novak against Roger. Yes Roger with the roof closed is a beast. Probably still the best player in the world. But Novak has taken Roger out indoors quite a few times. I think it's more of a surface issue. I can't see Novak handling those nasty slices on grass, outdoor or indoor...

I don't think it makes a huge difference either as Novak is a very good indoor player himself and would probably prefer playing indoors against everyone else. But playing with a roof especially seems to help Roger in getting a good timing on his topspin backhand. Also the 2012 semi final was extremely even until 4:4 in the third set, so it's not unthinkable that small differences in the circumstances could significantly change the result.

In general it's clear Roger has a much higher potential and at least until a few years ago better movement than Novak on grass. Further Roger's variety and great slice make him a difficult match up for Nole on faster courts anyway. That's why he needs conditions to be as much in his favor as possible to help his chances.

 

[Kieran]

It's a black & white view, and disrespectful to Novak. He's run Rafa closer at Paris than anyone has, who still lost. It took titan performances to stop him in Oz and last year's US Open final. Sure, he was a huge letdown at the last two Wimbledons, against Murray and Federer, and the US Open in 2012, but you get that with great players over the course of a long career, especially when they keep putting themselves in the firing line for majors...

 

[brokenshoelace]

By the way, can someone please examine how did Novak break Nadal each time that he did? Because I assure you, you're going to see a crap-ton of Nadal errors and double faults.

But of course, things never cut both ways here.

 

[Backhand_DTL]

I think the breaks in the 1st and 2nd set were both rather due to errors from Nadal than to great play from Novak. But subjectively Nadal's mistakes felt not as bad, as he mostly missed when trying to take the offensive, whereas Novak seemed to regularly make mistakes in crucial moments when he already was in an advantageous position and only needed to make a putaway or some kind of easy volley.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I think the breaks in the 1st and 2nd set were both rather due to errors from Nadal than to great play from Novak. But subjectively Nadal's mistakes felt not as bad, as he mostly missed when trying to take the offensive, whereas Novak seems to regularly make mistakes in crucial moments when he already is in an advantageous position and only needs to make a putaway or some kind of easy volley.

Sure, but missing a routine inside out forehand from a comfortable position after a great body serve is bad in a match like this, regardless of the intentions. Double faults are also never "not as bad", especially with Rafa, since he never actually tries to do much with the second serve. Don't get me started on that double-fault/missed overhead combination in the 4th set that got Novak the break back.

My point is, it's so easy to be selective.

 

[Backhand_DTL]

Yeah my feeling is that in this match up Novak's misses more often stand out in a "How did he not win that point"-kind of way, whereas most of Nadal's errors have a routine "He should have made that shot, but from time to time it happens"-feel to them. But who you want to win probably influences that judgment in a significant way.

Aside from the double fault I thought Novak got the break back in the fourth with some good play. The defensive lob that provoked the overhead miss was quite high an on or close to the baseline, so considering Nadal was struggling physically at that point it seemed rather tough to make to me.

 

[Kieran]

The lob was exceptional, given how defensive it was. Rafa's back looked tight on that one, but in general in that game, I thought he didn't play with as much aggression as he found when he held the next game.

The funny thing about some posters is that they seem to hold Novak to a higher standard than they hold Rafa. This is why he gets such a hard time, I think, they expect him to beat Rafa handily. I know I'm not misrepresenting Cali when I include him in this, since his default setting is that Nole should beat Rafa in straights anywhere in the world, if Nole plays his so-called A-game.

Whereas the truth is a little different: beating Rafa in a big slam final is maybe the toughest ask for anybody - especially when the final is in Paris...

 

[isabelle]

Nole didn't play poorly, he played the best he could but he was sick like his pregnant girlfriend...that's probably why he made so many errors. I do hope he'll win RG one day, he deserves it

 

[Backhand_DTL]

The lob was exceptional, given how defensive it was. Rafa's back looked tight on that one, but in general in that game, I thought he didn't play with as much aggression as he found when he held the next game.

The funny thing about some posters is that they seem to hold Novak to a higher standard than they hold Rafa. This is why he gets such a hard time, I think, they expect him to beat Rafa handily. I know I'm not misrepresenting Cali when I include him in this, since his default setting is that Nole should beat Rafa in straights anywhere in the world, if Nole plays his so-called A-game.

Whereas the truth is a little different: beating Rafa in a big slam final is maybe the toughest ask for anybody - especially when the final is in Paris...

My impression is that in 2011 Novak countered Rafa's game in a way that he wasn't used to by matching him physically and being very consistently, but not overly aggressive in regularly making difficult DTL-shots. When Novak's level dropped a bit after that Rafa found a way to make a majority of their matches at least close again due to some adjustments on his own and use his superior mental stability to win most of those.

In the last four matches Novak than seemed use a reliable gameplan that took advantage of Rafa's a bit diminished movement and often attacked his forehand with short angled balls and kept him guessing on the next ball by varying between playing another angled cross court shot or agressively DTL, so Rafa's lack of anticipation made him often look somewhat slower than usual. On Sunday his own physical discomfort and the higher bounce probably prevented him of executing this strategy on the level of the matches before.

 

[DarthFed]

Djokovic isn't winning Wimbledon. Huge underdog vs. Murray and I could see a whole lot of other players beating him before or in a final. The USO is the big one and will determine if he can still be considered a force in tennis.

He's 1-4 in finals in New York. How is it "the big one"? It's not like it can be used as the standard measure of his previous successes, unlike the AO.

Well if he doesn't win Wimbledon then it will be New York which decides whether or not he can salvage the season. And if he wins neither that'd be 7 straight majors without a win.

My views are often seen as extreme but I look at tennis as the regular season (everything but slams), and the postseason (the 4 slams, the ones that truly count especially for top players who want to boost the resume). Djokovic has remained amazing in the "regular season" but has struggled in the "post season" for awhile now. He did win 1 each in 2012 and 2013 which means the year wasn't a disaster but I doubt Nole was satisfied with it given his stranglehold at Oz. 2013 in particular featured head scratching performances just like the first 2 this year. If he doesn't win 1 of the next 2 we have to wonder when the bleeding will stop.

 

[DarthFed]

oh come on, Novak is a force regardless of wether he does well at USO. He has sort of under-performance according to expectations but the guy has made major finals on a regular basis, what are you talking about?

Agreed. Too many over the top knee jerk reactions.

Djokovic doesn't need to wait until the US Open to prove he is a "force" in tennis. He is a force right now and has been for the last 6 years.

I agree. Every time someone loses a few big matches in a row, the same old "will he ever win again, and how often?" thing emerges. We saw it with Federer after AO 2009, Nadal after 2011/AO 2012, Murray after every final loss, and Djokovic now. My belief is, if you're good enough, and you keep putting yourself in positions to win, you will, especially since you've done it before, and done it often.

It's worth considering for a minute what the commentary would have been IF Djokovic had won that match. Completely different. I'm not talking about the specific match itself but the discussions on the "bigger picture".

Everyone would have been querying whether Nadal could ever beat Djokovic again having lost 5 on the spin, where Djokovic was in the GOAT rankings with 7 slams, how Djoker was going to be number one for the rest of the year, whether he could win Wimbledon.... Instead some are coming up with the commentary that his numbers are abominable, he's not a force in the sport etc.

Knee-jerk city.

If Kate Middleton had balls and no hair she'd be Prince Willy. The fact of the matter is he didn't get it done and now people will wonder if him beating the crap out of Rafa at MS events means anything when Rafa is easily winning the ones that matter. I think you might be underestimating the implications and importance that a match can have. And regardless, Nole's slam issues has extended past Nadal the past couple years.

 

[Federberg]

^ I think I fall somewhere between britbox and you darth. Djokovic's resume already will stand the test of time. A proven winner, a multi-slam winner no less, and perennial contender for number 1. But I have to say.. this loss and Australia are crushing blows. Particularly the performance in this recent final. I would not be surprised if this has lasting psychological implications for him. If his prior slam losses were a wound, it's become gaping, and potentially fatal. While we were thinking he could be a 10+ major winner before, he's slowly relegating himself back to a Murrayesque stature. And frankly his wins at Masters level are now starting to look more like a Safina/Wozniacki with great performances at the big tourneys and choke potential at the slams. It's very troubling

 

[Backhand_DTL]

I would agree, that at this point a bit of panic is justified. After last years US Open I found it way too early as Nole losing to Nadal on clay and Murray on grass is not that surprising. And his form and confidence in the US HC season were hardly great and Nadal had all the momentum, so after the way he performed against Youzhny and Wawrinka before, his play in the second and start of the third set in the final was almost unexpectedly good.

But since then he was by far the best player on a week-to-week basis, winning the WTF and all but one Masters 1000 in which he participated and aside from Indian Wells and maybe the Raonic-match in Rome in a quite convincing way. Even in Monte Carlo he might have won without the wrist injury. So that the level to win big events seems to be consistently there, but goes missing when he needs it at the final stages of a Slam must be thoroughly frustrating for him and naturally raises some doubts if and when this will change again.

 

[brokenshoelace]

A year from now, maybe a little more, Djokovic will win back-to-back majors and this will seem like a distant memory. We LOVE big picture narratives and act like the world is coming to an end. Yeah, this loss will hurt. But how much? How long will it take him to get over it? You think it's going to affect the rest of his career and impact his performances at future slams 18 months from now? Really? Other players have endured worse losses and rebounded just fine. Djokovic has proven he can overcome tough losses, and he's proven he's good enough to win more. This is not some Andy Roddick Wimbledon 2009 scenario. You guys are going overboard.

 

[Federberg]

A year from now, maybe a little more, Djokovic will win back-to-back majors and this will seem like a distant memory. We LOVE big picture narratives and act like the world is coming to an end. Yeah, this loss will hurt. But how much? How long will it take him to get over it? You think it's going to affect the rest of his career and impact his performances at future slams 18 months from now? Really? Other players have endured worse losses and rebounded just fine. Djokovic has proven he can overcome tough losses, and he's proven he's good enough to win more. This is not some Andy Roddick Wimbledon 2009 scenario. You guys are going overboard.

Which top player has come back from multiple failures at the key moments in the majors? I'm not so much challenging you as wanting to know who I'm overlooking

 

[Kieran]

Lendl.

He has 11 defeats in slam finals, and 8 wins. He's lost matches we might say he "should have won", such as the US Open finals against Wilander and Becker. Nole is getting there with similar figures so far...

 

[DarthFed]

A year from now, maybe a little more, Djokovic will win back-to-back majors and this will seem like a distant memory. We LOVE big picture narratives and act like the world is coming to an end. Yeah, this loss will hurt. But how much? How long will it take him to get over it? You think it's going to affect the rest of his career and impact his performances at future slams 18 months from now? Really? Other players have endured worse losses and rebounded just fine. Djokovic has proven he can overcome tough losses, and he's proven he's good enough to win more. This is not some Andy Roddick Wimbledon 2009 scenario. You guys are going overboard.

What you're missing is that it isn't just one bad loss. He hasn't overcome a big loss in over a year now. They have been mounting for a while and it culminated in an awful way for him this past Sunday. Would you bet on him to win Wimbledon or USO at this point? No prayer at the first and with low confidence I wouldn't bet on him to do anything at USO either.

 

[Federberg]

A year from now, maybe a little more, Djokovic will win back-to-back majors and this will seem like a distant memory. We LOVE big picture narratives and act like the world is coming to an end. Yeah, this loss will hurt. But how much? How long will it take him to get over it? You think it's going to affect the rest of his career and impact his performances at future slams 18 months from now? Really? Other players have endured worse losses and rebounded just fine. Djokovic has proven he can overcome tough losses, and he's proven he's good enough to win more. This is not some Andy Roddick Wimbledon 2009 scenario. You guys are going overboard.

What you're missing is that it isn't just one bad loss. He hasn't overcome a big loss in over a year now. They have been mounting for a while and it culminated in an awful way for him this past Sunday. Would you bet on him to win Wimbledon or USO at this point? No prayer at the first and with low confidence I wouldn't bet on him to do anything at USO either.

Have to agree with you here. It's almost like a Murray in reverse isn't it? I can understand losing to the big guys repeatedly at the start of your career... but with Novak he's starting to have these mishaps during his peak years. It might be a career dip, but at what point do we acknowledge the trend. We're talking 5 or 6 slams now with serious disappointments. I, for one, am not calling the end of his career.. that would be too hysterical, but at some point you have to admit that something bad is going on...

 

[britbox]

oh come on, Novak is a force regardless of wether he does well at USO. He has sort of under-performance according to expectations but the guy has made major finals on a regular basis, what are you talking about?

Agreed. Too many over the top knee jerk reactions.

Djokovic doesn't need to wait until the US Open to prove he is a "force" in tennis. He is a force right now and has been for the last 6 years.

I agree. Every time someone loses a few big matches in a row, the same old "will he ever win again, and how often?" thing emerges. We saw it with Federer after AO 2009, Nadal after 2011/AO 2012, Murray after every final loss, and Djokovic now. My belief is, if you're good enough, and you keep putting yourself in positions to win, you will, especially since you've done it before, and done it often.

It's worth considering for a minute what the commentary would have been IF Djokovic had won that match. Completely different. I'm not talking about the specific match itself but the discussions on the "bigger picture".

Everyone would have been querying whether Nadal could ever beat Djokovic again having lost 5 on the spin, where Djokovic was in the GOAT rankings with 7 slams, how Djoker was going to be number one for the rest of the year, whether he could win Wimbledon.... Instead some are coming up with the commentary that his numbers are abominable, he's not a force in the sport etc.

Knee-jerk city.

If Kate Middleton had balls and no hair she'd be Prince Willy. The fact of the matter is he didn't get it done and now people will wonder if him beating the crap out of Rafa at MS events means anything when Rafa is easily winning the ones that matter. I think you might be underestimating the implications and importance that a match can have. And regardless, Nole's slam issues has extended past Nadal the past couple years.

Well, we definitely view things from a different perspective.

For me, winning a major in a year = a great year. Regardless.

For you, winning a major will salvage a season.

It probably stems from expectations and valuations of players. I never used to expect players to be almost routinely winning 3 majors a year... so what Federer, Nadal and Djokovic did seems almost phenomenal to me in the greater historical scheme of things.

Maybe fans who have been bought up with the more modern era and with less of an eye on previous eras have much higher expectations and demands. You mentioned a comment the other day, that Roger hadn't done enough and should have won more. To me, winning 17 majors is fricken insane.

I don't mean any offence by this, but growing up watching guys like Borg, McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Lendl etc.. who I regard as some of the greatest players to ever play the sport, I kind of feel a lot of fans have been spoilt by the current era and have unrealistic expectations.

I followed Edberg from his beginning in the pros. He won 6 majors between from 85-93 and nothing after the age of 26. He'd be routinely slaughtered by fans on forums every other tournament if he was playing today - yet for me he is maybe a Top 15/20 of all time in the history of the whole sport.

Modern era players get slaughtered too quickly. The fringe contendors get hammered for being gutless. The better players get thrown under a bus whenever they lose a match and the greatest players of them all get hammered for not even winning more silverware - even the guy who has won more top table trophies than anyone else in history.

These guys aren't robots mate and 4 players can't all win the same trophy.

For me, Djokovic is one of the best players I've seen EVER and I'm pretty certain he will win a fair bit more before he'd done.

 

[brokenshoelace]

A year from now, maybe a little more, Djokovic will win back-to-back majors and this will seem like a distant memory. We LOVE big picture narratives and act like the world is coming to an end. Yeah, this loss will hurt. But how much? How long will it take him to get over it? You think it's going to affect the rest of his career and impact his performances at future slams 18 months from now? Really? Other players have endured worse losses and rebounded just fine. Djokovic has proven he can overcome tough losses, and he's proven he's good enough to win more. This is not some Andy Roddick Wimbledon 2009 scenario. You guys are going overboard.

Which top player has come back from multiple failures at the key moments in the majors? I'm not so much challenging you as wanting to know who I'm overlooking

Federer, Nadal and Murray.