Is Djokovic a threat to Federer's 17?

[shawnbm]

If he wins the grand slam, it is heads and shoulders above Rocket Rod in my view. In fact, this two year period would surpass Roger's 2006-2007, even if he only wins SW19 and fails in New York, because then he would have the Triple Crown of majors in one year encompassing all 3 surfaces. He is on the precipice of unprecedented greatness. Oh, how Roger must lament that left-handed Mallorquino popping up when he did on the red stuff. He would have easily captured two calendar year Slams. And now, Novak is poised to do what Roger never did.

 

[Tennis Fan]

he might be playing smarter than he ever did, but better? No way no how. Commentators have an agenda which makes it easy to understand why they would make that comment. I guarantee you if you pull one of them aside and talk to them privately they would say something different. I'm not even going to discuss the obvious reasons why Federer or his coaches (don't recall any of his coaches making comparisons between his current play and the past by the way... might have made comments about specific shots), those are far too obvious, I wouldn't want to patronise you. Anyway all you have to do is look at the guys movement now versus in his peak years. It's painfully clear he is not the same, which is I suppose why he needed to play smarter. The guy is raging against the dying of the light, a true great

So true, you can discount everything that the commentators say. It seems to me that they have talking points. The things they say are not true, it's only spin.

 

[Billie]

The most important Nole stats from the start of 2011:

 

[britbox]

Novak Djokovic Can Beat Roger Federer’s Grand Slam Record: Boris Becker

Novak Djokovic closed in on Roger Federer’s all-time record of 17 Grand Slam titles after the top-ranked Serb won his 12th major at the French Open last week. This seems to have given confidence to his coach, Boris Becker, who believes that Djokovic is competent enough to taste more success a majors in the times

Article: http://www.ubitennis.net/blog/2016/...oger-federers-grand-slam-record-boris-becker/

 

[britbox]

"It is very likely that Djokovic will pass Federer’s Grand Slam record, but we realize that there are many tennis matches to be won if we want to do,” Becker told Sport1.

 

[isabelle]

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.

I guess he'll surpass Federer if he can stay injury free

 

[shawnbm]

Very hard to say--if he gets one more this year, then next year will be crucial, for he too will get a bit slower and the fire will dim just a tad, as that is part of human nature. If he wins the grand slam this year and is sitting on 14, then the idea it is "very likely" can be taken more seriously. Four more over the next two or three years--assuming nobody new emerges--would not look so impossible. As it is, it is merely a potentiality; this year and next are the key.

 

[Federberg]

It's funny, in the trading world we have what we call market tops. It's a situation that arises when a stock has rallied to a new high, and inexperienced buyers are convinced the price will continue rising. At that point the smart money gets out. Now I'm not saying that this is Novak's market top, but it's extraordinary how many times crazy extrapolations get made at exactly the wrong time and it ends in tears. There's a great story about Joseph Kennedy (father of JFK) who days before the crash was talking to his chauffeur. The chauffeur was expressing his great confidence in the market and let Kennedy know that he was getting involved and making money. As soon as Kennedy got to his office he called his broker and dumped his stock basically when the silly money takes a trend foregranted it's time to get out.

Who knows how things will evolve. One things for sure, with both Roger and Rafa their slam count dried up even as we continued to extrapolate big numbers for them. I remember back in the day when we were talking about Roger getting to at least 20! I'm just going to sit back and enjoy the tennis... and hopefully be entertained by it!

 

[Tennis Fan]

It's funny, in the trading world we have what we call market tops. It's a situation that arises when a stock has rallied to a new high, and inexperienced buyers are convinced the price will continue rising. At that point the smart money gets out. Now I'm not saying that this is Novak's market top, but it's extraordinary how many times crazy extrapolations get made at exactly the wrong time and it ends in tears. There's a great story about Joseph Kennedy (father of JFK) who days before the crash was talking to his chauffeur. The chauffeur was expressing his great confidence in the market and let Kennedy know that he was getting involved and making money. As soon as Kennedy got to his office he called his broker and dumped his stock basically when the silly money takes a trend foregranted it's time to get out.

Who knows how things will evolve. One things for sure, with both Roger and Rafa their slam count dried up even as we continued to extrapolate big numbers for them. I remember back in the day when we were talking about Roger getting to at least 20! I'm just going to sit back and enjoy the tennis... and hopefully be entertained by it!

That kind of talk is so silly to me. People jump on bandwagons so easily without any thought to past experience. Like you said, so much has been forecast and very few things have panned out. I don't understand the reasoning behind it. I don't know why we can't just enjoy the tennis, you know? We all have our faves, but the constant comparisons and "my dad's bigger than your dad" is so silly to me.

I don't care about GOATs, H2H, or anything. I just enjoy what's happening on the tennis landscape.

Then, when it doesn't pan out people are angry at the people who never even initiated it. SMH.

 

[Moxie]

It's a bit hard to call backing Djokovic a "bandwagon" position, at this point. (I thought so when he had 3, and folks were predicting 10 or more, and you see how that turned out.) And I enjoyed Federberg's anecdote, but there is something to be said for Novak's charting new territory. It's pretty much all up to him, for the time being. If he keeps playing at this level for some while longer, and stays healthy, he may break the mold of how many Majors can be won after age 29-30. Maintaining this level of tennis and focus is the question; we'll just have to wait and see how long he keeps it up.

 

[Tennis Fan]

It's a bit hard to call backing Djokovic a "bandwagon" position, at this point. (I thought so when he had 3, and folks were predicting 10 or more, and you see how that turned out.) And I enjoyed Federberg's anecdote, but there is something to be said for Novak's charting new territory. It's pretty much all up to him, for the time being. If he keeps playing at this level for some while longer, and stays healthy, he may break the mold of how many Majors can be won after age 29-30. Maintaining this level of tennis and focus is the question; we'll just have to wait and see how long he keeps it up.

Bandwagons are quite common in tennis and sports in general. Let's see, there was the Roger Bandwagon where he was going to get 20+ majors, the Rafa Bandwagon where he was going to take over after Roger was slowing down, the Dmitrov Bandwagon; it goes on and on. I stand by my statement.

The future isn't promised to anyone.

 

[Moxie]

Bandwagons are quite common in tennis and sports in general. Let's see, there was the Roger Bandwagon where he was going to get 20+ majors, the Rafa Bandwagon where he was going to take over after Roger was slowing down, the Dmitrov Bandwagon; it goes on and on. I stand by my statement.

The future isn't promised to anyone.

Absolutely, and fair enough. I'm trying to be generous towards the Djokovic people. But what Britbox, and others have said is true enough: things can change fast in tennis. We take the landscape as it exists and project it into the endless future, which doesn't often work. Look, there was the Jerzy Janowitz bandwagon a few years back, and you see how far THAT went. (Personally: guilty.) Of all the "bandwagons" that have worked out in men's tennis in the last 14 years, Roger, Rafa and Novak have been the sturdiest, and have fulfilled a lot of expectations. By my definition, that's not even a "bandwagon" anymore...that's people backing a rather sure thing. But I'm fine however you define it or parse it out. From where Djokovic sits right now, the future looks made of caramel ice cream and candy canes. At the moment, there's no reason to pull a shroud over it.

 

[Carol]

The big question is how long Novak is going to dominate or how long is going to take the others players to rise their game (which they have) but also their confidence/strength/mentality which is even more important than their own game and then to be able to win?

 

[Tennis Fan]

Absolutely, and fair enough. I'm trying to be generous towards the Djokovic people. But what Britbox, and others have said is true enough: things can change fast in tennis. We take the landscape as it exists and project it into the endless future, which doesn't often work. Look, there was the Jerzy Janowitz bandwagon a few years back, and you see how far THAT went. (Personally: guilty.) Of all the "bandwagons" that have worked out in men's tennis in the last 14 years, Roger, Rafa and Novak have been the sturdiest, and have fulfilled a lot of expectations. By my definition, that's not even a "bandwagon" anymore...that's people backing a rather sure thing. But I'm fine however you define it or parse it out. From where Djokovic sits right now, the future looks made of caramel ice cream and candy canes. At the moment, there's no reason to pull a shroud over it.

I totally get that. I'm just not one to leap before I look. Things change on a dime, it's best not to count any chickens before they hatch.

Continued success to Novak. What he has done has been incredible. I just stay in wait and see mode.

 

[Mastoor]

he might be playing smarter than he ever did, but better? No way no how. Commentators have an agenda which makes it easy to understand why they would make that comment. I guarantee you if you pull one of them aside and talk to them privately they would say something different. I'm not even going to discuss the obvious reasons why Federer or his coaches (don't recall any of his coaches making comparisons between his current play and the past by the way... might have made comments about specific shots), those are far too obvious, I wouldn't want to patronise you. Anyway all you have to do is look at the guys movement now versus in his peak years. It's painfully clear he is not the same, which is I suppose why he needed to play smarter. The guy is raging against the dying of the light, a true great

I had a look and I must say your memory is playing tricks. Federer of 2015/16 is much faster than federer of 2007 or if you like Federer of 2007 was like 2015/16 Federer on sedatives. Look:




Compare with this

 

[Carol]

I had a look and I must say your memory is playing tricks. Federer of 2015/16 is much faster than federer of 2007 or if you like Federer of 2007 was like 2015/16 Federer on sedatives. Look:




Compare with this

Do you mean that Roger is better player now than in his peaks years? really?

 

[Carol]

"It is very likely that Djokovic will pass Federer’s Grand Slam record, but we realize that there are many tennis matches to be won if we want to do,” Becker told Sport1.

The funny thing is that everybody says that the players after 30 start the decline and I suppose that Becker should know that but it seems or everybody is wrong and it doesn't matter the age to win GS or Novak is the exception and he could win at least 6 more GS while the others players 0......:scratch:

 

[DarthFed]

I had a look and I must say your memory is playing tricks. Federer of 2015/16 is much faster than federer of 2007 or if you like Federer of 2007 was like 2015/16 Federer on sedatives. Look:




Compare with this

The difference is the opponent. In 2007 Federer didn't have to move nearly as much as the semi this year where Djokovic was hitting incredibly well and had Roger on the full run pretty much every point. Regardless the fact remains a 34 year old Roger is naturally tons worse than the mid-20's version. If he was playing as well as you are implying he'd be #2 by a country mile over a much lesser talent in Murray.

 

[Ricardo]

Mastoor has a way of kicking his own butt. Fed 2015 was definitely below his 2007 level in the first two sets, way slower, played up to his level in 3rd set and look what happened.

It's a waste of time explaining this really. But in the history of the sport, no player is better in his mid 30s than his mid 20s..... nobody. We can see what a desperate Djoker fan tries to do. First he changes definition of the Grand Slam, and then he claims 34yo Fed to be better than when he was 26. Does it ever occur to him that vast majority of players actually have retired by Fed's age? facts don't matter, he'll use whatever to talk up his idol.

 

[MikeOne]

I think Djoker can get to 17 in next 3 years but it's difficult to predict. I can see him winning 3-4 this year, 2-3 next year and a couple after 2017 but things can change fast. Fed's game was built for longevity and at one point he was on pace for like 20 slams but has ended up winning 1 slam since turning 30? Any small injury can derail Novak from breaking the slam record and youngsters can all of sudden start beating him. Now comparing Fed and Nole, Fed's latter years coincided with peak Nadal and rising Djoker and Murray whereas Nole isn't facing such threats as Fed did. Thiem and Nick K. are probably the most talented youngsters but i have doubts that they will be able to beat Novak at slams in next 2-3 years. Of the old guard, Nadal is having problems and so is Fed, Murray and Stan are threats but Nole can beat them more often than not.

I do think Nole is more complete than Fed and this may ultimately be reflected in total slam count. Federer had more weapons but more weaknesses. Nadal always had a very effective game against Federer but not against Nole. I think only an on fire Stan has the type of game to give Novak problems on 2 of the 4 slams (AO, FO - slower courts) but he's older than Nole and very streaky.