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

[Carol]

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?

Maybe because the players know better than anyone else who is in his best level?

 

[DarthFed]

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?

That's also a matter of matchups. I would agree for the most part that Djokovic in top gear can make Rafa look silly a lot easier than Roger at top level mostly because Rafa's CC forehand plays right into Djokovic's biggest strength. But Djokovic at top level vs. Roger at top level? That is something we've never seen or really come close to seeing. Lost in all this talk about Roger "fearing" Novak is that when Nole came to power in 2011 Roger was already the same age Djokovic is now and we see how Nole is looking at 30.

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Andrew; If Hewitt yelled PEACE AND LOVE! and not COME ON!!! after big points his whole career he'd have won zero majors and never would have reached no 1. Pepe is a disaster for Djokovic, you don't try to defang and pull the teeth out of a lion. You let the lion be a lion. Pete Imaz should preach his peace and love at a hippie camp not to the no 1 tennis player in the world.

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Exactly Carol and Andrew, Rafa Nadal is the best judge to declare a verdict on this discussion and when he said Djokovic's game was the best and "most perfect" he had ever experienced, he settled the debate. Would you agree Henk?!!?

 

[scoop]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Darth Fed; But Fed now at nearly 36 is looking a lot better than he did at 30. That's why this season has been so confusing. Everything is upside down now. I promise to ask Rafa at the US Open or Cincy if Djokovic last Jan or Federer this year - which was the higher most perfect level? I should have asked Rafa this question in Miami, sorry.

 

[Carol]

That's also a matter of matchups. I would agree for the most part that Djokovic in top gear can make Rafa look silly a lot easier than Roger at top level mostly because Rafa's CC forehand plays right into Djokovic's biggest strength. But Djokovic at top level vs. Roger at top level? That is something we've never seen or really come close to seeing. Lost in all this talk about Roger "fearing" Novak is that when Nole came to power in 2011 Roger was already the same age Djokovic is now and we see how Nole is looking at 30.

When Novak has played at top level vs Nadal at top level excluding 2011 when Roger looked silly too playing vs Novak?

 

[DarthFed]

^ I know I shouldn't bite but Novak has had two different 7 match streaks vs. Nadal and the last one was 15 straight sets. He hasn't come close to anything like that against Fed. even with Roger being a geriatric compared to Rafa and Nole. Since 2011 they are pretty even in best of 3 set matches but Nole has gotten the best of the most important matches at slams.

 

[DarthFed]

Scoop Malinowski writes:

Darth Fed; But Fed now at nearly 36 is looking a lot better than he did at 30. That's why this season has been so confusing. Everything is upside down now. I promise to ask Rafa at the US Open or Cincy if Djokovic last Jan or Federer this year - which was the higher most perfect level? I should have asked Rafa this question in Miami, sorry.

Yes, Fed's level this year has been a pleasant surprise clearly. But he has a new racquet and is playing much more aggressively than when he was 30. He is a totally different player. As for the three meetings I would say only IW was an insane performance from Fed, that was certainly at least on par with some of the destructions Nole has handed Rafa. Miami wasn't too competitive either but neither played at a really high level that day.

 

[Carol]

Since 2014 everybody knows how bad Nadal was playing not only because his first wrist injury but also his appendix surgery and therefore his lack of confidence so whatever Novak did at that time was nothing to do with Nadal game, nothing competitive, nothing to compare because Nadal was in his worst level and losing against anyone not only in HC and grass but also on clay even winning RG 2014

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Andrew Miller writes:

Yes Federer's looked good. Personally I think he deployed a different skill set in his early 20s, including an insanely phenomenal return of serve, but he is for sure an even more strategic player today. I think another thing in Federer's court these days is he's a very quick study - unless a player is leagues better then he was the first or second time they've played, Federer has an encyclopedic knowledge of every player and takes advantage of that knowledge to devastating effect. He really whipsawed poor Alex Zverev. And something I appreciate about Federer, even if it's a bit cruel, is he really likes payback. He likes being able to get wins against the same player he may have lost to. He kept doing this against Bjorn Phau of all people, who apparently had owned Federer briefly, maybe as a junior? Or even briefly on tour. Federer defeated Phau repeatedly after a while and kept saying well Phau has beaten me, he's a really dangerous player when he's on, etc. As if Federer has to find motivation to beat someone, to motivate himself to take nothing for granted, and ultimately to enjoy beating them. It's merciless. But it's impressive.

 

[britbox]

Andrew, you kind of corrected yourself with your latest post on the matter because earlier you said you'd seen no change in the repertoire that Federer and Nadal were bringing over the last few years. The original post makes no sense when you consider the changes and adjustments Federer is making on an ongoing basis. We've seen Edberg come and go, refining Fed's net game, trials like SABR, Ljubicic coming in, a huge improvement in Federer's ROS this year and his backhand groundies... and then Nadal making changes, bringing in Moya - already you're witnessing a big variety in his serve.

Point is, these are not static levels. All three have over time held the baton, with the others adjusting, improving, changing to grab it back. Mental strength and desire are also part and parcel of the equation. Federer and Nadal keep coming back to the well, retooling. You can't just attribute their success to Djokovic's downfall... the mental side is a huge factor in what makes them such great players.

 

[britbox]

Scoop - I don't think Nadal settled the argument. The goalposts are changing constantly. He's also described Federer as unplayable on occasion. Federer has likewise praised Nadal with more lukewarm praise toward Novak. As DarthFed said also - matchups will also be significant on how one player sees another.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Duke Carnoustie writes:

What's more interesting is that if Dan Evans wins match point against Wawrinka at last year's Open, then Novak likely wins the title and his third Slam of the year. Crazy to think that Evans not closing out Stanimal ended up in Djoker losing another big match to Stan the Man and sending Novak into a tailspin he has yet to recover from. And now Dan Evans is banned from tennis. Wild, wild world.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

Duke Carnoustie writes:

Not to get into this McEnroe silliness but interesting to note that the man ranked No. 701 right now is Dmitry Tursunov, who is now 34 year old. Dmitry weighed in: http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/...ighs-john-mcenroe-serena-williams-controversy It's all meaningless talk - we know Serena can't beat these guys but we also know it doesn't matter - but just affirms that I hate when non-tennis people try to debate these stupid issues.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

sharoten writes:

Andrew Miller · June 27, 2017 at 9:54 pm "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...." Oh he was, was he? Is that why Rafa regained the #1 ranking in 2013? Rafa didn't even play for seven months after mid-2012 which gave Novak an easy path to his titles that year. Then in 2014 Rafa hurt his back in the AO and struggled with that all year until he had a stem cell procedure done on it in November, plus he had the right wrist injury which caused him to miss both Wimbledon and the USO and then the appendix in the fall. Again, Novak had the luxury of not having his toughest opponent around for 2014. No one will dispute that Rafa had a tough year in 2015 with his mental problems - Uncle Toni says Rafa didn't trust his body that year and couldn't rely on the athleticism that he had had all his career, but he was starting to get his form and confidence back in 2016 until the wrist injury in Madrid which caused him to miss most of that year too. Finally now, in 2017, Rafa is feeling good again and look at the results he's getting. #1 in The Race by quite a margin. Djokovic is good, there's no question about that, but it annoys me when people call him the best ever when he's been very fortunate with his opponents aging and having injuries and a whole generation of players flopping badly between the Big Four heydays and this supposed Next Gen. Rafa and even Fed to some degree have had their wins this year disqualified by much of the media and many fans as not really counting because Novak and Andy are going through rough patches. A couple of people in this thread have praised Novak for reaching the USO final last year - he only had to play three matches for heaven's sake! Never has one player benefited from so many walkovers and retirements in a slam. I'm happy to give credit where credit is due, but I've never seen a player as lucky as Djokovic. He earned his titles fair and square but he sure wasn't the greatest from 2011 to 2016.

 

[TFBlogGuest]

catherine writes:

Duke- McEnroe is bringing up these silly arguments just to sell his book - pointless piffle. I'm surprised Serena rose to that one. I've never taken much notice of 99% of the stuff that comes out of Mac's mouth, even in his playing days. Kyrgios had the right response to Mac's offer to help Nick with some coaching input: 'He's dreaming.'

 

[TFBlogGuest]

catherine writes:

Interesting - Chris Evert says she would get rid of bathroom breaks if she was in charge of the game. Totally agree. I can't remember anyone running off the court for that particular reason, not in 15 years watching tennis. Most of the time it's cheating, pure and simple. I'd also get rid of OCC and restrict MTOs. I'm not sure because I didn't follow matches live, but I don't know if there was any OCC at the Birmingham WTA tournament - didn't hear of any in the final.

 

[Federberg]

catherine writes:

Duke- McEnroe is bringing up these silly arguments just to sell his book - pointless piffle. I'm surprised Serena rose to that one. I've never taken much notice of 99% of the stuff that comes out of Mac's mouth, even in his playing days. Kyrgios had the right response to Mac's offer to help Nick with some coaching input: 'He's dreaming.'

Actually if you listen to the radio broadcast, Mac tried to avoid this. He was pushed into it by the interviewer who clearly had an agenda. He was full of praise for Serena. He was effusive. The interviewer pushed when he called her the best female player of all time. "Why not the best player John? Why do you have to qualify it?" Well... she's simply not the best tennis player of all time. That's just silly. Greatest? Yes probably (all though I still think Martina's body of work is superior when you factor in all the doubles titles). But if you're talking "best"... best means you can beat everyone. That's just silly. There's too much pc outrage in the world today. He said nothing wrong imho

 

[TFBlogGuest]

catherine writes:

Federberg McEnroe has been around for a long time and done zillions of interviews and publicity puffs etc and he should have known better than to take the interviewer's bait and respond with provocative blather. He could have just cut that line of questioning off. I don't think there's much sense in all these GOAT type nerdy arguments myself but I do tend to agree with you that Martina has the superior career overall and was, as you say, a great doubles player.

 

[Federberg]

catherine writes:

Federberg McEnroe has been around for a long time and done zillions of interviews and publicity puffs etc and he should have known better than to take the interviewer's bait and respond with provocative blather. He could have just cut that line of questioning off. I don't think there's much sense in all these GOAT type nerdy arguments myself but I do tend to agree with you that Martina has the superior career overall and was, as you say, a great doubles player.

I really don't see that he said anything that was untrue though. That's my issue. I'm a Federer fan, and a Vika (and Venus) fan too. I can state categorically that Serena has had a greater career than Roger. But she is NOT a better player than him. I've heard too many people make that statement and it's silly and false. In my view, feminism should be about fighting for equality, no excuses, no frills. I would be the first person to say that Laver was a greater player than Lendl, but if anyone stood up and said he was a "better" player than Lendl I would just laugh. Should I be called ageist for that? (even though my comparison would be if they played against each other at their respective peaks). We all know what Mac is like, and even though I loved him as a player, too many of these old timers say things to remain relevant. The simple truth is that he was factually accurate. I recall Serena interviewed on Letterman years ago conceded that she would bet tuned if she played against men. Are we really saying that it's ok for her to say it, but for no one else?