Realistic scenario how Djokovic can end his career with 18 slams

[Obsi]

2016: 3 slams
2017: 2
2018: 1
2019: 1
2020: 1

 

[britbox]

Hey @Obsi

Welcome to the boards.

18 majors is a big ask but the way Nole is going then you've got to concede it's possible.

Definitely realistic but if I had to give an opinion, I'd still say he won't.

Things can change very quickly in tennis. We've seen Novak's breakout year in 2011, Rafa's resurgence, Fed and Murray winning majors and then Novak reaffirming his dominance, the decline of Nadal and Murray... All in the space of of the last 5 years. There will be twists and turns going forward and Novak will win more majors. 7 more? Maybe, but I'd bet against. Only because I think the landscape will change. If it didn't change and was the same today for the next 5 years then yes, without a shadow iof a doubt.

 

[Billie]

I don't like to predict anything like that, for superstitious reasons...this is what Robbie Koening says:

 

[calitennis127]

Hey @Obsi

Welcome to the boards.

18 majors is a big ask but the way Nole is going then you've got to concede it's possible.

Definitely realistic but if I had to give an opinion, I'd still say he won't.

Things can change very quickly in tennis. We've seen Novak's breakout year in 2011, Rafa's resurgence, Fed and Murray winning majors and then Novak reaffirming his dominance, the decline of Nadal and Murray... All in the space of of the last 5 years. There will be twists and turns going forward and Novak will win more majors. 7 more? Maybe, but I'd bet against. Only because I think the landscape will change. If it didn't change and was the same today for the next 5 years then yes, without a shadow iof a doubt.

I agree with you, but my reasons are different. The most likely reason for Djokovic not getting to 18 would be injuries. The only competition that I could see getting in his way would be Federer or a resurgent Nadal at the French Open.

The young generation offers absolutely nothing that could concern Djokovic for another 3 years. Kyrgios has the talent but his game has too many holes in it right now.

 

[Moxie]

Hey @Obsi

Welcome to the boards.

18 majors is a big ask but the way Nole is going then you've got to concede it's possible.

Definitely not a dream too far, but if I had to give an opinion, I'd still say he won't.

Things can change very quickly in tennis. We've seen Novak's breakout year in 2011, Rafa's resurgence, Fed and Murray winning majors and then Novak reaffirming his dominance, the decline of Nadal and Roger... All in the space of of the last 5 years. There will be twists and turns going forward and Novak will win more majors. 7 more? Maybe, but I'd bet against. Only because I think the landscape will change. If it didn't change and was the same today for the next 5 years then yes, without a shadow iof a doubt.

Hey @Obsi
Yes, hi, Obsi! Welcome to the boards. I agree with BB. To think that the landscape we're looking at right now, is the same one we'll see in 2 years is short-sighted. With a clear path, Novak could put up 5-6 more majors, depending on how this year goes. But that assumes not only his health, but the lack of inspiration from the rest of the field. But just look at Raonic and the change in his level.

18 majors is a big ask but the way Nole is going then you've got to concede it's possible.

Definitely realistic but if I had to give an opinion, I'd still say he won't.

Things can change very quickly in tennis. We've seen Novak's breakout year in 2011, Rafa's resurgence, Fed and Murray winning majors and then Novak reaffirming his dominance, the decline of Nadal and Murray... All in the space of of the last 5 years. There will be twists and turns going forward and Novak will win more majors. 7 more? Maybe, but I'd bet against. Only because I think the landscape will change. If it didn't change and was the same today for the next 5 years then yes, without a shadow iof a doubt.

Yes, hi, Obsi! I agree with BB. To think that the landscape we're looking at right now is the same one we'll see in 2 years is short-sighted. With a clear path, Novak could put up 5-6 more majors, depending on how this year goes. But that assumes not only his health, but the lack of inspiration from the rest of the field. But just look at Raonic and the change in his level. No one expected that. (OK, except herios.) And I think that Rafa has a Major still in him. Novak could run the table this year, which is a hard enough ask. Even still, then he turns 30, and the field matures. To think that Novak wins 7 more titles would presume either he wins 7 of the next 8, or he does a lot of winning post-30. I will be very surprised if he doesn't drop his head occasionally, or if no one gets the better of him, on the odd day.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Federer at 28,the same age as Novak won his 16th slam.Novak is a late bloomer,though to his credit there isn't a player at the moment that can challenge him.Clay will be interesting,there are a few players,who can challenge Novak at RG.I was live at RG when Wawrinka denied Novak his career slam and his 1st RG title.

 

[EdbergsGhost]

If Djokovic continues his commitment to improve each facet of his game, I still don't think we've seen his best yet. There are always variables that could impede his progress, but he and his team work to take care of what they have control over. At the end of the day, it's possible. By the end of the year we may have a better idea whether it's probable or not.

 

[isabelle]

i guess he can reach at least 17 or maybe more

 

[Denis]

The Fedals are making the usual assumptions about greatness: Fed has 17, the outer limit of what is humanly possible (Nadal fans gladly stick to that narrative for some reason).

Graf has 22 and Williams 21.

We shall see what Novak can do. He is 28 and currently no significant competition, unlike Fed when he was 28.

His mindset is even better than Feds. Fed always dismissed the Nadal matchup and never did anything about it. Novak is different.

 

[shawnbm]

I still think he ends up with 14-15 majors when all is said and done, but that was based on him winning no more than two majors this year. He is looking ominously good, though, so I can't say he is incapable of reaching 18--it is possible.

 

[Moxie]

The Fedals are making the usual assumptions about greatness: Fed has 17, the outer limit of what is humanly possible (Nadal fans gladly stick to that narrative for some reason).

Graf has 22 and Williams 21.

We shall see what Novak can do. He is 28 and currently no significant competition, unlike Fed when he was 28.

His mindset is even better than Feds. Fed always dismissed the Nadal matchup and never did anything about it. Novak is different.

It's really not about "Fedals", I don't think, or that Djokovic can't achieve the same "greatness." It's just about predicting based on history. Novak will be 29 by RG. Roger has 2 Majors since age 29. (Incidentally, so does Agassi, who won his one RG at age 29.) I get that Nole is a different player, and in many ways we're in uncharted territory. But even to tie Federer, he'd have to win 6 past the age of 29. And Roger has also been a very fit, rarely injured player his whole career. Obviously, Djokovic is at a very high level, and it's hard to see who can take him down. Perhaps that lasts for the next 3 years. But history tells us that isn't likely. Or maybe he wins every Major in the next two years. But, again, there's no precedent for it. And I don't want to diss the WTA, but it's not the same level of competition.

 

[DarthFed]

Roger actually only won 1 after age 29. He was about 28 and a half when he won the 2010 AO. I don't think anyone would've predicted he would fall off so sharply after that (his 16th slam). That's why I kind of get taken aback when people talk about how well Roger has aged. He hasn't really but there is one big factor and it's also a reason Djokovic is better situated at 29 than Roger was: Roger had accomplished a lot more at 29. Roger already held the big record and tons of other records as well and most already considered him the best to ever play the game. I attribute that to some of the really bad losses Roger has had the past 6-7 years, losses do not kill him anymore and why should they as he is the most accomplished player ever and has a wife and 4 kids. Most people in his situation would've been long retired or simply irrelevant by now.

Djokovic as he nears 29 is still on the hunt to make his own history and carve out his own legacy. And if we are being honest there is not big competition anywhere; it's not a deep field and Roger, Andy, Rafa, and Stan are not great players at this point. Rafa has stunk and the other 3 are somewhere between good and great. But that is not to take away from Djokovic because when you look at it he probably had it the toughest of anyone when he was young and is having it relatively easy when he is getting old (and yes 28/29 is still getting pretty old for elite players). Roger on the other hand had it easier when he was young and maybe had it the toughest of anyone when he got old. I'd say it has evened out.

 

[Moxie]

But that is not to take away from Djokovic because when you look at it he probably had it the toughest of anyone when he was young and is having it relatively easy when he is getting old (and yes 28/29 is still getting pretty old for elite players). Roger on the other hand had it easier when he was young and maybe had it the toughest of anyone when he got old. I'd say it has evened out.

Evened out except perhaps for Rafa, who was sandwiched between the two, and had too many injury lay-offs. At least you admit that Roger had it a bit easier in the early days, and Djokovic has no competition at the moment. Rafa, however, was sandwiched between the two, and had to lose too much time in his best years. There's something to be said for facing real competition throughout your career and still coming so good.

 

[DarthFed]

Rafa lost time because of his style of play. And the fact he appears to be totally washed up by age 28 (he just turned 28 before winning 2014 RG) isn't something that should be ignored. Djokovic will probably end up passing Nadal, I didn't think it would happen this time last year but it seems likely and I don't mind it for a second.

 

[Moxie]

Rafa lost time because of his style of play. And the fact he appears to be totally washed up by age 28 (he just turned 28 before winning 2014 RG) isn't something that should be ignored. Djokovic will probably end up passing Nadal, I didn't think it would happen this time last year but it seems likely and I don't mind it for a second.

I don't know why you have to say "because of his style of play" as if it were a fault, or a choice. Rafa plays the way he plays, and his body is built the way it is built. Inclination to injury is not wholly down to a style of play. Everyone tends to feel sorry for Del Potro, Monfils, Tsonga, Safin, etc., for their injury woes. But with Rafa, it's "his fault." And yet, in amongst the lay-offs, he won 14 majors. Not bad, for a gimp. Imagine if he hadn't had to sit out so many Majors.

 

[DarthFed]

^ Imagine if he was never faster, stronger, with more endurance than everyone else out there. Rafa played the most physically demanding game I've ever seen and he had to in order to have anywhere near the level of success he enjoyed. We are seeing now what happens when he can't just rely on his physicality anymore.

 

[shawnbm]

Yes, Nadal ran and ran and defended and exerted himself to hit that topspin FH the way he did. Yes to all the physicality stuff. Moxie is right in the end--he is what he is and that has made him one of the best ever. Borg was as much if not more of a physical "freak of nature" with his abnormally low heart rate than Nadal!!! He never tired even after four or five hours of endless sliding and rallying from the baseline on clay or hard court. I can't honestly recall ever seeing him winded (I can with Rafa). It is what it is; Nadal was and still is a special player from a physical standpoint, right down to learning to play with his left hand rather than right (I am convinced he never would have had the success he did in his career, particularly against Federer, if he had a Fh from the right). But, just as we don't take away McEnroe's victories over Borg because of his lefty service into the backhand, we don't take that away from Nadal. At the end of the day, the real thing that made each of them great was the fact that they could execute--use those special advantages--when it counted. Most players can't do that and fail over and over. Nadal has not. So, time always wins and surely Nadal's grandest days are sliding behind him, just as we have seen with Federer. Novak's time is coming--we just don't know when yet.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Rafa's game has always been a physical one and in some circumstances in the past for example he has suffered knee problems which I believe are a result of the way he plays.Let us not forget he was told in 2005 that he may never play tennis again due to his underfoot problem.Rafa has had in his career a lot of time off tour.After having great results in 2013,his 2014 results,were again hampered by injuries and appendix problem.I concur with other posters Rafa's best days are behind him,he will be turning 30 this year,his movement is slower,which is to be expected,his fhand still lacks the depth and intensity it once had.There have not been many players when turning 30 that have won GS titles.In saying that if Rafa was to win another GS title it would be at Roland Garos.Personally I do not think Rafa will play the tour for many years,if he cannot reach a competitive level consistently

 

[shawnbm]

I agree with you, Margaret, he does not appear to have the personality to toil away and grind away, only to finish tenth or worse in the world. If he feels he can't win majors and loses early a few more times, why not marry the exceedingly lovely Xisca, play golf and fish regularly? He has done more than 99% of the men to ever swing a racquet. He need answer to no one. He will be missed and has been missed these last two years--either due to injury or results on court. He plays with great energy and the people love him. I believe he wins another French. I have a hard time seeing him winning at SW19 or in New York again. If I had to pick another major, I might choose Melbourne, as it comes in the beginning of the year when he is a bit more fresh. Then again, he has only prevailed there once, which is surprising.

 

[Denis]

It's really not about "Fedals", I don't think, or that Djokovic can't achieve the same "greatness." It's just about predicting based on history. Novak will be 29 by RG. Roger has 2 Majors since age 29. (Incidentally, so does Agassi, who won his one RG at age 29.) I get that Nole is a different player, and in many ways we're in uncharted territory. But even to tie Federer, he'd have to win 6 past the age of 29. And Roger has also been a very fit, rarely injured player his whole career. Obviously, Djokovic is at a very high level, and it's hard to see who can take him down. Perhaps that lasts for the next 3 years. But history tells us that isn't likely. Or maybe he wins every Major in the next two years. But, again, there's no precedent for it. And I don't want to diss the WTA, but it's not the same level of competition.

Moxie, your post proves the point. You say it is not about Fedals, then you go on to reference everything by Federer's achievements. Then your post gets liked by two more Fedals. Lol, seriously?

Bringing in Agassi doesn't do much good either. Don't get me wrong, I was a huge fan of his, but he is not even close to the same level as Djokovic. Besides, Agassi was doing meth during his career, Novak eats a piece of chocolate to celebrate a Slam win. What I am saying is: Novak is setting his own standards, and referring to Fed as the maximum possible is doing him short. You will see.