Remember, it was Lopez who first exposed the crack in the Djokovic armor

[Federberg]

Andrew Miller writes:

It's obvious. When Djokovic is far from his winning ways Federer and Nadal are sharper and more confidant out there. Djokovic had all the answers. Now he doesn't and is very diminished. Statement of fact, Federer and Nadal had no answers for him. Now they don't need them.

It's not obvious at all. This is a classic case of false correlation. It's extremely simplistic. Personally I would have loved to have seen Novak of 18 months ago against Rafa at RG, or Federer at AO. It's not clear to me that the outcome would have been inevitable. You're talking about the two best players of all time, playing injury free. Novak was great, but he's certainly not earned the right to waltz to those trophies no matter what fan boys say. Next thing, you'll be telling us Murray would have beaten them too Why am I even bothering...

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Interesting question. If Djokovic did not drop off after Paris last yr and did not lost Querrey Vesely Lopez Delpo and Andy at usopen, would Fed and Rafa have regained their dominances? I dont quite think so. Remember just how great Djokovic was. Its easy for some to forget. Just not sure Fedal wouldve subdued prime Djokovic. What we need is for Agassi to re-light and ignite Djokovics best level. Then it will be very interesting.

 

[Federberg]

If I had wings I would be an angel. How about that for fantasy? I assume that's what we're all doing now right?

 

[DarthFed]

For all these great players and the tour in general everyone benefits when one of the legends struggle (Fed, Rafa, Djoker). Going on that of course it has helped Fed and Rafa that Djoker has been bad but let's not pretend he hasn't benefited from Fed being in his 30's and much worse or that he didn't benefit from Rafa struggling badly the few years before this. When these guys fall off a cliff it makes the path that much easier. That's just common sense.

 

[Carol]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Interesting question. If Djokovic did not drop off after Paris last yr and did not lost Querrey Vesely Lopez Delpo and Andy at usopen, would Fed and Rafa have regained their dominances? I dont quite think so. Remember just how great Djokovic was. Its easy for some to forget. Just not sure Fedal wouldve subdued prime Djokovic. What we need is for Agassi to re-light and ignite Djokovics best level. Then it will be very interesting.

In 2011 Novak surprised to everyone how his improved game in just three months beating to anyone in most of the tournaments but 2014, 15 and 16 I think that he (and Muzz too) had both a huge advantage because Roger aging plus his knee surgery and Nadal with some injuries and appendix surgery (everything counts). I'm not taking any credit to them, both played excellent but like every single player sooner or later goes though their bodies and minds are paying for all that effort, while they are winning the confidence is on the top but when they start to lose is easier to lose more too. In one word it's dificult to see the top four playing at 100%, injuries, bad patches, lack of confidence and others issues affect their game because they are not machines but just a human beings

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

There was A LOT of chatter after Djokovic won the French Open last year that he was, if not invincible, something like that. False correlation? I don't think so. Djokovic was playing at a level that limited Federer to one slam between 2010 and 2016, and Nadal was marginalized to French Open rather than complete clay dominance. That's because of Djokovic. Maybe some Wawrinka who shook Nadal with his 2014 Australian, which rocked Nadal more than bothered Djokovic. Well to me at least I think Djokovic's level of play from 2011 to June 2016 was the only variable, maybe Ivan Lendl too in joining and then returning to team Murray, was the only variable that kept Nadal and Federer at bay.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Henk writes:

Good to see Federberg, DarthFed and Carol setting the records straight. The most ridiculous statement on this thread: "What's been astonishing to me is how with no Djokovic to fear suddenly Federer and Nadal have bounced back so easily. Shows how much they feared him"... wow...! So Novak won 49 titles between 2011 and today, including 10 slams. For sure that's a great count, but for Andrew to also state Novak's only "leaving a bone for Nadal, a few for Wawrinka, etc. " obviously is also pretty far from the truth: Rafa won 6 slams in the same period (only 4 less than Novak and still 4 more in total), was in 10 GS finals and won a total of 30 titles. Sure looks like "a bone" and fear, not! You're also conveniently forgetting that both Roger and Rafa had very bad and injury-filled years in 2015 and 2016, but still showed up. That's how much "fear" they felt. With this type of reasoning what then is your analysis of Novak, Roger and Rafa prior to 2011, Andrew? During that period Novak won only ONE lone slam (the AUS Open) in 2008 and prior to that didn't win his first titles until 2006, whereas Rafa and Roger were raking in Slams and Masters and beating Novak on a more than regular basis....? According to your reasoning, Novak must have really feared Roger and Rafa then, or? Mine is that Roger and Rafa were simply too good then, after which Novak suddenly had a great run and played better. Now the tables seem to have turned again. It's as simple as that. No fear. It's a matter of everything coming together at the right time. Maybe, if Novak stops with his completely artificial and nausea creating 'love' stuff, he willl have a good shot again, but for now Roger and Rafa are the guys to beat and I'm enjoying every moment of it.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Henk writes:

Correction to the above 7:43 pm: Rafa played in 11 GS finals in the mentioned period, winning 6. Those are 'bones' most players can only dream about....

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

Nadal won the French in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014. That's four slams since super Djokovic emerging at the tail end of 2010. Four slams in six years and none off the clay. Compare that with his six slams in four years from 2008-2010, including significant time off for injuries. I'm glad to refer to data. What factor can explain this, with Nadal set to obliterate Federer's record back at the end of 2010 with his 10th slam, nearly seven years ago? Novak Djokovic! I don't think we should underestimate how significant Djokovic's domination had been from 2011 to mid 2016. He had by far the best record and twice as many slams as Nadal and Federer combined. Or than Nadal, Federer, and Murray combined. Murray with Lendl had a shot at Djokovic and only in front of a home crowd in England, and Wawrinka because for some reason he was a different player against Djokovic at every slam.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

As far as I can tell, only three people have been able to completely derail Djokovic. And they are Pepe the Fruitcake, and Mr. and Mrs. Djokovic.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

Sorry, Nadal had six slams in three years from 2008-2010. The double of the French and Wimbledon in 2008, the Australian in 2009, and his three slam super year in 2010. From 2011 to 2017 he has been a one surface threat at slams, and that's Djokovic's doing. Federer had a pretty good slam pace himself prior to super Djokovic and then gets one over a period of six years, way off his pace. Djokovic's impact has been enormous. We have it all documented here on tp. Before his ridiculous isn't try this at home shot against Federer in the us open in 2010, Djokovic was a one slam wonder who to my eye only had one slam in him, his 2008 Australian, where Federer played with mononucleosis and dropped his semifinal in miserable form to Djokovic. He became a fine tuned machine or robot, take your pick, from 2011 onwards. Few could stop him and only for a brief period of time. He entered almost every tournament as the favorite with the exception of the French Open.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

I don't think we'd have seen Nadal and Federer back on top if Djokovic hadn't gone into a tailspin after last year's French Open triumph. You never know, but I didn't see much evidence of evolution in the Nadal or Federer repertoire. And like all of us on this board I have no idea. Would Federer have rediscovered his brilliant form in the final if he'd have faced Djokovic in Australia? I don't know. Would Nadal have punched through to a title if he'd faced last year's Djokovic? I don't know. But did Djokovic plant a ginormous seed of doubt in the heads of his competitors from 2011 to mid 2016? I think so.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Henk writes:

Why stop at 2016 in stead of until NOW? Because Novak only won one title in 2017? You're also forgetting Rafa won the US Open in 2013(beating... yes, Djokovic), so including this year's RG that makes 6 GS titles to Novak's 10. On top of that between 2011 and NOW, Rafa has been in 11 GS finals on ALL surfaces. Would hardly call that 'bones' or fear... Why blame others for derailing a player. If the player let's himself be derailed then he's the only one 'to blame'... At least Roger and Rafa always look at themselves first, if/when something goes wrong.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

Good call. So Nadal's slams from 2011 to 2016 were the French (2011, 2012, 2013, 2014) and a US open crown in 2013. Yes, you're right. So that is five for Nadal and ten for Djokovic, one for Federer, three for Murray, three for Wawrinka, one for Cilic from 2011 to 2016. I stop at 2016 because I set the 2011 to 2016 Wimbledon period as Djokovic's peak power. I think we can all agree that since his Querrey and Olympic loss he hasn't resembled anything remotely close to grand slam caliber. I leave out 2017 because Djokovic had clearly fallen off his level by 2016 and consider 2017 where we have a severely diminished Djokovic entering tournaments with a top ranking but being more like a top thirty player versus a defending champion. Sensing that Nadal and Federer to me have had a lot more open road. But good call.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

I'm not making it up that Djokovic had double the slam count for the half decade of his dominance, which ended in mid 2016. That's real, he was the best player by far from 2011 to 2016 and setting himself for a run at the top - he had 11 slams heading into Wimbledon last year playing at the absolute zenith of ability, and being younger than most of his top four competitors. It's not just me saying this - that was the consensus of tennis journalists who had seen it all. I don't think we can just say that never happened - there was literally no one and nothing in his way. Then, all of the sudden, he loses to Querrey, or gets ruffled by Feliciano Lopez (not unheard of to start wondering when the bubble will burst). Not to bring Kerber into this but this happened to her too, where she was playing the tennis of her life and sadly it was over before she knew it too. I'm a huge Nadal fan but for the most part I'm a tennis fan. I like Rostango as much as the Maleeva sisters or Mal Washington, or Sevastova as much as Sloane Stephens or Cirstea. I don't have any particular tennis wisdom or crystal ball. But Djokovic was by far the top dog from 2011 to mid 2016, a solid 4.5 year run as the undisputed best player alive for that period ( much like Rios was unbeatable in 1998 for several months, or Nadal on the clay for most of his career, or Federer from 2004 to 2007 off the dirt.

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Andrew; Did you know Pepe Imaz actually played in the Roland Garros main draw and lost to Carlos Moya the year Charlie won the title? I think we were undervaluing Pepe, Good thing Hewitt or Serena or Rafa never hired the Peace and Love doctor

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

Yes I'd say Djokovic feared Nadal and Federer from 2009 to 2010. He had nothing to show from his Australian triumph until his Federer match at the us open in 2010 where suddenly he came alive with his nutso shot. He lost to Nadal, who was easily the world's best player that year with his three slams. And then the tables turned, Djokovic became another kind of player and Nadal was not the dominant player for the last six years.

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Rafa said last year in January the best most perfect tennis he ever saw was by Djokovic who crushed him in that final in Doha or Dubai. Rafa did not say that after his three finals losses this year to Roger. Could that be evidence straight from Rafa that Djokovic's level was indeed superior to Roger's best? Possibly and probably. Rafa should have said that about Roger's level this year but he did not. Why not?

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

Scoop I'm sure you're right, he may be a marginally better coach than I credit. I just don't remember peace and love working for other players. Guga Kuerten played with peace and love but he hired credible coaches! Kvitova tried out peace and love in bringing on Steps as her boyfriend but said no thanks to that. Love means nothing to a tennis player!!!

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

I think Nadal's uncle considers Federer the best but Nadal owns him in the h2h. I don't think Nadal would ever say Federer's in his head or should, but he said similar things about Djokovic being too good, and seemed to mean it!