Is Djokovic a threat to Federer's 17?

[Denis]

I found this really well done graph which shows slams won by age. Almost everyone hits his limits around 29. This would indicate that Djokovic might only have next year to come close to Nadal's 14, but it will be difficult going beyond that:



http://www.tennisviz.com/can-djokovic-surpass-federer-in-grand-slams/



However, I do think there are a number of factors in Novak's favour, including the weaker competition and how Novak takes care of his body which should ensure longlivity. He is also starting to tweak his game a bit, notably by improving and relying on his serve more.

 

[MikeOne]

<cite>@Denis said:</cite>
I found this really well done graph which shows slams won by age. Almost everyone hits his limits around 29. This would indicate that Djokovic might only have next year to come close to Nadal's 14, but it will be difficult going beyond that:

http://www.tennisviz.com/can-djokovic-surpass-federer-in-grand-slams/

However, I do think there are a number of factors in Novak's favour, including the weaker competition and how Novak takes care of his body which should ensure longlivity. He is also starting to tweak his game a bit, notably by improving and relying on his serve more.

weaker competition? Novak would've loved to be in his prime between 04-06 when Roddick, Hewitt and a very young Nadal were Federer's main rivals. Do you really think Roddick, Hewitt and young Nadal (before his prime) would've stopped current Djokovic? I see today's Djokovic winning all 4 slams in 04, and 2-3 a year between 05-07. I would argue competition during Djokovic's prime (11-15) is tougher than Federer's prime (04-07).

Now, i will say this. Djokovic's chances of getting to 17 are slim. I believe he has the best chance of anyone to win 4 slams next year but very hard to do. Let's say he wins 3 (will be very hard), then by 2017 he would be 30 and surely other young players would start to challenge him. Also, he will be more prone to injury as he gets older so this could get in the way. Nadal was playing amazing tennis in 2013 and in 14 injuries crept and it's taken him a long time to get back to form. I think Djokovic will probably get to 14-15 at the most. He will need to dominate for next 2 years.

 

[Denis]

I agree re 2003-2004. I was referring to the 2008-2013 period which was arguably the most competitive period in tennis ever.

 

[calitennis127]

<cite>@MikeOne said:</cite>
weaker competition? Novak would've loved to be in his prime between 04-06 when Roddick, Hewitt and a very young Nadal were Federer's main rivals. Do you really think Roddick, Hewitt and young Nadal (before his prime) would've stopped current Djokovic? I see today's Djokovic winning all 4 slams in 04, and 2-3 a year between 05-07. I would argue competition during Djokovic's prime (11-15) is tougher than Federer's prime (04-07).

Now, i will say this. Djokovic's chances of getting to 17 are slim. I believe he has the best chance of anyone to win 4 slams next year but very hard to do. Let's say he wins 3 (will be very hard), then by 2017 he would be 30 and surely other young players would start to challenge him. Also, he will be more prone to injury as he gets older so this could get in the way. Nadal was playing amazing tennis in 2013 and in 14 injuries crept and it's taken him a long time to get back to form. I think Djokovic will probably get to 14-15 at the most. He will need to dominate for next 2 years.

 

There is no comparison between the 2004-2007 era in terms of the Top 20. Djokovic would have been in the Top 2 in that era, but getting to finals every week would not have been so easy. This era of players is so bad that Milos freaking Raonic is in the Top 10. Let's be real here. Tennis in general is incredibly boring compared to what it was 6 to 8 years ago. Where are the Davydenkos and Fernando Gonzalez's of this era? There are none.

The only hope is Kyrgios, who has really impressed me by challenging the cattiness of Stan Wawrinka and with the athleticism and shotmaking he demonstrated against Murray. Kyrgios just needs to cut the drop shots out. If he does that and tidies up some loose ends, he can easily be a Top 5 player in no time.

 

 

[MikeOne]

<cite>@Denis said:</cite>
I agree re 2003-2004. I was referring to the 2008-2013 period which was arguably the most competitive period in tennis ever.

it's still pretty competitive. Murray has been plating great and Federer's level was really high during wimbledon and US open runs. The difference is Nadal, who has come down but he's getting into form gradually.

 

[britbox]

He's a threat but I don't think he catches or overtakes Federer. The gap between them statisically is a hall of fame career in it's own right.

 

[Moxie]

Nice graph, Denis.  Thanks for putting that up.  I agree with britbox that 7 is a long haul, at 28.  For sure Novak is very fit, and coming into his own out of the shadow of his impressive recent predecessors, which may give him a longer shelf-life.  However, time waits for no man, and I'm not sure that it won't catch up with Djokovic somewhat predictably, as well.  And however much everyone sees no decent competition for him in the near future, that demonstrates a distinct lack of imagination.  No one saw Wawrinka coming at the FO.  It is very possible that he has another nearly unbridled year in 2016, though I don't see the Calendar Slam.  (He missed it by one match this year, and look at Serena, who was virtually a shoe-in.  I don't think that opportunity comes again.)  After that, you have to think the competition starts to catch up, as well as Father Time.

 

[Mastoor]

I think if Nole wins 5 more he will be still considered a GOAT if Nike dolls don't win any more. But Fed is actually in very god shape and all he needs to win another slam is to get to the final relatively fresh, while Nole not getting there or playing in the final hurt.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Just a question for Mike, do you consider the competition today, with old Federer, washed up Nadal who's a non factor in majors (does he even count as part of the competition in 2015 when he's losing in the 2nd and 3rd rounds?), Murray and occasionally Wawrinka as really good competition? Can you name me a single other serious threat on tour?

Please make your response concise. I don't want to go through 8 paragraphs of irrelevant ramblings where you're swimming around the topic to find an answer to a straightfoward question.

 

[brokenshoelace]

To answer the OP's question, at this point, I'd say he's a minor threat (he still needs 7 more. That's a LOT), but probably the most realistic threat unless Nadal rejuvenates.

 

[Mastoor]

That "old" Federer is still  #2 therefore better than anyone in the world except for one guy. He says himself that he is playing better than ever, his coaches say so, many commentators say so and I don't see why anyone else would say otherwise except to play down competition of today.

 

 

 

[brokenshoelace]

<cite>@Mastoor said:</cite>
That "old" Federer is still  #2 therefore better than anyone in the world except for one guy. He says himself that he is playing better than ever, his coaches say so, many commentators say so and I don't see why anyone else would say otherwise except to play down competition of today.

Actually, the fact that the old Federer, who was an absolute non factor for the first 6 months as evidenced by his horrendous results at the AO and FO is the second best player in the world, says a lot about the state of the other players. There's no way of escaping that. Nadal has declined, Federer has declined. That alone means there's a significant drop in competition as the two formerly best players in the world are not what they once was, despite Roger's heroics.

 

[calitennis127]

<cite>@britbox said:</cite>
He's a threat but I don't think he catches or overtakes Federer. The gap between them statisically is a hall of fame career in it's own right.

Fortunately for Djokovic he is dealing with a very non-HOF era at the moment and is soaring with confidence going into his best major by far.

 

 

[calitennis127]

 

 

<cite>@Moxie said:</cite>
Nice graph, Denis.  Thanks for putting that up.  I agree with britbox that 7 is a long haul, at 28.  For sure Novak is very fit, and coming into his own out of the shadow of his impressive recent predecessors, which may give him a longer shelf-life.  However, time waits for no man, and I'm not sure that it won't catch up with Djokovic somewhat predictably, as well.  And however much everyone sees no decent competition for him in the near future, that demonstrates a distinct lack of imagination.  No one saw Wawrinka coming at the FO.  It is very possible that he has another nearly unbridled year in 2016, though I don't see the Calendar Slam.  (He missed it by one match this year, and look at Serena, who was virtually a shoe-in.  I don't think that opportunity comes again.)  After that, you have to think the competition starts to catch up, as well as Father Time.

 

This is mostly just wishful thinking on your part, Moxie, because you don't want Djokovic to catch Nadal, let alone pass him. You also do not like Djokovic's persona, so you would hate to see his career given a stamp of superiority to Nadal's. Unfortunately for you Djokovic is coming at Nadal's 14 like a an 18-wheeler headed downhill with bad breaks. You need to face the reality. At this point injuries to Djokovic are your best bet at him not passing Nadal.

As for your father-time argument, again, you are just thinking very wishfully here and trying to liken Djokovic's situation to Nadal's or Federer's at the same age. The reality is that where Djokovic is at 28 is entirely different than where Federer or Nadal were at 28.

Federer at 28 had three players with very respectable H2H records against him coming in to their mid-20's, in Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray. Where is the comparable group of competitors 4-6 years younger than Djokovic right now?

Nadal at 28 had just weaseled his way into some Grand Slam victories over Djokovic, and he also had a history of being highly injury prone with his main rival being a year younger and historically durable. Again, where is the comparable rival or injury history for Djokovic?

Djokovic is 28, coming off of arguably the most confidence-boosting win of his career in the US Open final and he is going in to his best major by far. He is also coming off a year when he finally got the Nadal monkey off his back at Roland Garros but still retains the motivation to go there and get the job done, more than ever. On top of that, he is the 2-time reigning Wimbledon champ and appears to also be finally getting a firm hold of the US Open (something long overdue for him).

As much as you don't want to acknowledge it, the signs are still very much pointing up for Djokovic and his career. He is in a very different situation at age 28 than Federer or Nadal were.

 

 

[Billie]

Yeah, I don't know what grounds people have to compare Nole to Nadal or Nole to Federer.  They are all different in body and mind.

According to his physio from earlier this year, who knows Nole's body best after Nole, he predicts at least 3 more years of being in top shape, barring injury, of course.  Even if we include this year into that calculation, that still leaves him 2 very good years to compete for all majors.  He already said that he doesn't plan on retiring any time soon and will keep playing until he has desire.  He wants his son to see him play anyway so he only needs to stay free of any major injury. That is my only concern, nothing else.

Both Nadal and Federer have still chances to add to their major total, but so far since turning 28 last year Nadal won only 1 major and since turning 28 6 years ago, Federer won 2 majors.  Nole won 2 majors in 4 months after turning 28.

 

[Moxie]

<cite>@calitennis127 said:</cite>






This is mostly just wishful thinking on your part, Moxie, because you don't want Djokovic to catch Nadal, let alone pass him. You also do not like Djokovic's persona, so you would hate to see his career given a stamp of superiority to Nadal's. Unfortunately for you Djokovic is coming at Nadal's 14 like a an 18-wheeler headed downhill with bad breaks. You need to face the reality. At this point injuries to Djokovic are your best bet at him not passing Nadal.

As for your father-time argument, again, you are just thinking very wishfully here and trying to liken Djokovic's situation to Nadal's or Federer's at the same age. The reality is that where Djokovic is at 28 is entirely different than where Federer or Nadal were at 28.

Federer at 28 had three players with very respectable H2H records against him coming in to their mid-20's, in Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray. Where is the comparable group of competitors 4-6 years younger than Djokovic right now?

Nadal at 28 had just weaseled his way into some Grand Slam victories over Djokovic, and he also had a history of being highly injury prone with his main rival being a year younger and historically durable. Again, where is the comparable rival or injury history for Djokovic?

Djokovic is 28, coming off of arguably the most confidence-boosting win of his career in the US Open final and he is going in to his best major by far. He is also coming off a year when he finally got the Nadal monkey off his back at Roland Garros but still retains the motivation to go there and get the job done, more than ever. On top of that, he is the 2-time reigning Wimbledon champ and appears to also be finally getting a firm hold of the US Open (something long overdue for him).

As much as you don't want to acknowledge it, the signs are still very much pointing up for Djokovic and his career. He is in a very different situation at age 28 than Federer or Nadal were.

Hey, Cali!  Nice to have a new start here, eh?  No need to dig over old bones, or assume you know people's minds...or, not?  Look, I'm not interested in Djokovic passing Nadal, that is true, but it's not "wishful thinking" on my part, what I posted.  It's a counter-argument to the notion that there is nothing to stop Novak.  A lack of imagination is the reason we never see the next season's surprises coming.  Like Wawrinka.   You tip your own hand to say how much Djokovic is going to get at Nadal's records...which is what you hope.  Or by saying that Rafa "weaseled" some Major victories over Nole.  (3 since the annus mirabilis of 2011.  That's some "weaseling", eh?  Surely couldn't be his tennis.)  You're doing your own wishful thinking, mate.  Everyone keeps saying that Novak at 28 is a different animal.  That may be so, but isn't that wishful thinking, of a sort, based on statistics?  Everyone sees the unblocked path to glory, until it gets blocked.  Djokovic got the Nadal "monkey" off his back, (which was a bit like swatting a fly this year,) only to get thwarted by Stan.  Roger had a clear path to #18 last year at the USO, with Novak out, and then Cilic happened to him.  Even an 18-wheeler barreling down the road can blow a tire or hit a pot-hole.  I'm not wishing for it, I'm just saying it happens often enough.  Just ask Serena.

 

[Tennis Fan]

I agree, Moxie. People often speak in absolutes, and depending on their view think that someone with an opposing view is a hater, or a fanboy/fangirl, but common sense says that no matter how things look today, nothing is promised to anyone in sports or in life. Life is unpredictable; no one saw Novak losing in the final last year against Stan. No one thought that Nadal after a stellar 2013 would be injury plagued in 2014, and surely no one thought Fed would make two major finals and lose both of them. We can't accurately predict anything, time has shown that over and over.

 

[EdbergsGhost]

Thought maybe this deserves a bump.

The Djoker has accomplished something that hasn't been done since 1969 when the Rocket won the calendar year Grand Slam. He is the current holder of all four slam titles. He is halfway to his own (potential) calendar year G.S. What say you?

 

[Tennis Fan]

Actually, the fact that the old Federer, who was an absolute non factor for the first 6 months as evidenced by his horrendous results at the AO and FO is the second best player in the world, says a lot about the state of the other players. There's no way of escaping that. Nadal has declined, Federer has declined. That alone means there's a significant drop in competition as the two formerly best players in the world are not what they once was, despite Roger's heroics.

This is a great post. Sometimes the numbers do lie, and Raonic being in the top ten is evidence of that, along with Berdych and others who simply lack the ability to win slams. Anything is possible, but so far...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Roger is just waiting Rafa and Nole out ...