Will Novak pass Federer?

[Front242]

Please show me (outside of the CVAC systems website) where any of their claims have been verified by science - especially the edge twice as powerful as blood doping.

If any of their claims were actually true, would the owners of CVAC systems and the inventor be living in a trailer park and barely able to make ends meet? No, they would be flush with cash.

He's hardly using it for placebo And he's your proof....the guy went from being a total cardio wreck end of 2010 to Superman in 2011 just a few months later. Seems to work a treat to me or why would he be rushing off to use it before and after matches. Also, he seems to recover pretty well from incredibly long matches which is more proof again.

:eyepop Ok. Well, there is scientific evidence that the blood doping works, based on more than one example.

With the egg, you just have Novak and the claims of the almost bankrupt CVAC systems. Your accessibility, and affordability arguments got shot down a couple of threads ago. If this is something that really works, why aren't we seeing different results among the top 100 - other than some 34 year old guy still playing better than everyone except Novak?

Let's be honest, there really aren't a whole lot of very good players in the top 100 these days that can challenge to win masters or slams. It takes more than stamina to win matches but pitting the top guys against each other, stamina is a huge edge. Btw, re accessibility and the claim that there are only 20 or so worldwide, are people really so naive to think that with his money Novak can't ask for one to be installed in his home? :cover Or course the guys barely scraping a living from tennis couldn't do that though.

 

[dante1976]

If he can sustain at least 80% of his current lvl in the next 2-3 years, anything can happen
He's in a great shape, have a perfect body for his play style, he can reset real quick (hint: RG loses then WIM wins without even playing tennis in between), no real challenge (yet) on a horizon, etc... He simply needs 2-3 year period without his future "Federer's Rafa" in play

 

[10isfan]

I doubt it. He is behind in major title count, normalized for age. I also think "tennis age" should be factored into this. Djoke's style involves longer rallies, as opposed to Federer who generally looks to come forward and end points quickly. I think Djoke ties or surpasses Nadal, but not Fed.

 

[El Dude]

One thing we don't know is if Novak can adjust his came like Roger did. Let's say he starts losing his edge sometime in 2017. Can he adjust and extend his career, albeit at a lower level like Roger did? If so with the weak generation(s) of younger players, he could eek out Slam wins into his mid-30s.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

I think he can. The reason I believe that is because I just do not see who can challenge him on a steady basis. Stan? He gets inspired once every 5 slams or so. Rafa and Roger? Not anymore. Andy? Right... Anyone from the previous generation, like Kei or Milos? Maybe once in a blue moon. Newer generation? Nobody as of yet...

So, he keeps his body in shape and does his thing, he might end up being the most decorated dude in tennis.

 

[Fiero425]

I think he can. The reason I believe that is because I just do not see who can challenge him on a steady basis. Stan? He gets inspired once every 5 slams or so. Rafa and Roger? Not anymore. Andy? Right... Anyone from the previous generation, like Kei or Milos? Maybe once in a blue moon. Newer generation? Nobody as of yet...

So, he keeps his body in shape and does his thing, he might end up being the most decorated dude in tennis.

I think he's already made adjustments; commentators talking about it all the time! Nole's become a more complete player; coming into the net, having some great plays jerking around his opponent with drops shots (eliminate Simone match) and other plays that are about as entertaining as Roger "back in the day!" His serve has become a weapon wiping out multiple break points in all his matches! He's had some great "gets" and plays that will be revisited one day on videotape! I see no reason why he won't improve and shorten these matches to save his body! :angel: :dodgy:

 

[nehmeth]

One thing we don't know is if Novak can adjust his came like Roger did. Let's say he starts losing his edge sometime in 2017. Can he adjust and extend his career, albeit at a lower level like Roger did? If so with the weak generation(s) of younger players, he could eek out Slam wins into his mid-30s.

E.D. I will echo Fiero in saying, he has already begun.

When Becker came on board, one of his primary goals was to help Djokovic get through his matches as quickly as possible. As a commentator watching, he saw what we fans saw - that Novak would often take longer than he had to in lesser matches, often leaving him with less toward the end of a tournament.

Novak's serve (both first and second) has improved tremendously. His volleying has gone from a liability to rock solid. He's happy to move forward on the short ball, as he's confident about knowing what to do now when he gets there. :snicker His willingness to stay on or inside the baseline to dictate play is better than it's ever been and improving. These will all hold him in good stead in terms of longevity.

He and his team are always looking at where they can improve incrementally, so at present he's working on getting better to stay ahead of the pack. Whenever he begins to slow down, I'm sure they will be on top of it, and Nole is one of the most teachable champions I've ever seen.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Look at the match stat from AO finals.

Novak had 31 winners and 41 UFE, for a differential of -10
Andy had 40 winners and 65 UFE, for a differential of -25.

With both players having negative differentials, it is an ugly match. But, that is not my point.

Andy had more winners than Novak. Just pause and think about it. Andy is supposed to be a counter puncher and pusher.

Now, we all know who used to win lots of matches with very few winners compared to his opponent. What happened to him? Surely, the same future will await for Novak sometime soon.

 

[BIG3]

Let us revisit at the end of 2016 season. If Nole wins
--Only AO, no chance to pass Rafa
--Two majors, will tie or pass Rafa
--Three majors, surely pass Rafa and will have a shot to tie Fed
-- Grand Slam? A miracle by itself no less than passing Fed in majors count

 

[El Dude]

Let us revisit at the end of 2016 season. If Nole wins
--Only AO, no chance to pass Rafa
--Two majors, will tie or pass Rafa
--Three majors, surely pass Rafa and will have a shot to tie Fed
-- Grand Slam? A miracle by itself no less than passing Fed in majors count

This looks about right.

Another way to look at it is that Novak has only four more Slams before he turns 30 years old between the 2017 AO and FO. He really needs to win at least three of those to have a chance, in my opinion. Three of the next four gets him to 14 Slams on his 30th birthday, still needing 3 to tie and 4 to pass Roger. But if he does win three of the next four, it means that he's still playing great at 30 years old and has a legit shot to keep on winning the necessary Slams to tie and then pass Roger.

If he wins only half of the next four, not only is he at 13 on his 30th, making 4-5 a more daunting proposition, but it also means that someone is playing well enough to win Slams. Now if that someone is Roger, it means he's at 18, which probably puts it out of reach. If its Andy, that is perhaps a larger problem because it means Andy has figured his mental game out. If it is a younger player, it is an even larger problem because it means someone has broken through, and the hardest Slam to win is your first.

Anyhow, it will be interesting to watch this unfold. I'm sure we'll all re-evaluate after every Slam. In the end, we probably won't know definitively for two or three years. But I guess my frame of reference is "3-2": three in 2016, two in 2017. That's what Novak needs to do to have a legit shot. Less than 13 by the end of 2016 and 15 by the end of 2017 means he probably doesn't have a shot at it. More than those and I think his chances become probable.

 

[nehmeth]

Look at the match stat from AO finals.

Novak had 31 winners and 41 UFE, for a differential of -10
Andy had 40 winners and 65 UFE, for a differential of -25.

With both players having negative differentials, it is an ugly match. But, that is not my point.

Andy had more winners than Novak. Just pause and think about it. Andy is supposed to be a counter puncher and pusher.

Now, we all know who used to win lots of matches with very few winners compared to his opponent. What happened to him? Surely, the same future will await for Novak sometime soon.

Are you being silly? All of their matches are, by nature, rather ugly.

Usually Novak's winner to error count is at least plus five or better. Andy knew his only way to even have a shot at winning was to go all out. Novak beat him in three sets with the strategy he employed.

 

[Great Hands]

Nole is one of the most teachable champions I've ever seen.

Of all Novak's strengths (and he has many!), I think that may be his greatest - his ability to improve. I think it's the reason he's so dominant now.

Part of it is about being willing to take risks - being willing to adjust your game and risk losing something or making it worse, because there's a possiblity you can get better.

There are plenty of horror stories in this regard. e.g. Tim Henman adjusted his service motion, and very soon needed shoulder surgery! (Because his body was just not used to moving in this new way).

Many champions can be very stubborn in this regard. Look how long it took Federer to try a new racket and a new game style - he's done well in changing it, but many think he took too long to do so. Andy is also criticised in this area - with his FH it is kind of understandable, because making major technical changes to a shot is a risk and can go wrong - like the Henman example above - but what about Andy's second serve? He seems to be trying to go for it more now, but he should have been doing that years ago.

Novak's Todd Martin-led serving debacle may have been damaging in the short-term, but it was that impulse Novak displayed there - to risk changing things - that has actually paid dividends in the long run. Because his first and second serves are amazing now. And that has obviously come about by that same willingness to risk change. It's not an easy thing to do if you're already successful, and Novak has shown himself to be one of the best ever at doing it.

 

[nehmeth]

http://www.si.com/tennis/2016/02/02/eric-butorac-practicing-novak-djokovic

Here's a take on what Novak's practice sessions are like. Good read

 

[Front242]

http://www.si.com/tennis/2016/02/02/eric-butorac-practicing-novak-djokovic

Here's a take on what Novak's practice sessions are like. Good read

That growth on Becker's elbow in the link above is pretty nasty looking. Here's a better shot of it.

Ronnie Coleman's is even worse and is a result of steroid abuse. Makes you wonder 'cos there were allegations of steroid abuse for Becker too.

 

[lacatch]

I think that Roger's unfortunate injury will make it more difficult for Novak in the short term. While Roger hasn't seemed capable of defeating Novak at a slam, he could take out almost every other player on tour, eliminating potential competition for Novak.

 

[El Dude]

My father has a similar elbow growth and I'm 100% sure it has nothing to do with steroids.

 

[nehmeth]

I think that Roger's unfortunate injury will make it more difficult for Novak in the short term. While Roger hasn't seemed capable of defeating Novak at a slam, he could take out almost every other player on tour, eliminating potential competition for Novak.

uzzled
Sadly, I was thinking the very same thing. :cover

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I think that Roger's unfortunate injury will make it more difficult for Novak in the short term. While Roger hasn't seemed capable of defeating Novak at a slam, he could take out almost every other player on tour, eliminating potential competition for Novak.

On the other hand, this could potentially (I don't know what is the level of seriousness of the injury) mean Roger would forever be stuck at #17, making it easier for Novak to catch and/or pass. A static target is easier than a moving one.

 

[herios]

I think that Roger's unfortunate injury will make it more difficult for Novak in the short term. While Roger hasn't seemed capable of defeating Novak at a slam, he could take out almost every other player on tour, eliminating potential competition for Novak.

On the other hand, this could potentially (I don't know what is the level of seriousness of the injury) mean Roger would forever be stuck at #17, making it easier for Novak to catch and/or pass. A static target is easier than a moving one.

:laydownlaughing

Moving target?? What kind of moves it does, it may be visible only to you, from where I am sitting, is dead for 3.5 years by now.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I think that Roger's unfortunate injury will make it more difficult for Novak in the short term. While Roger hasn't seemed capable of defeating Novak at a slam, he could take out almost every other player on tour, eliminating potential competition for Novak.

On the other hand, this could potentially (I don't know what is the level of seriousness of the injury) mean Roger would forever be stuck at #17, making it easier for Novak to catch and/or pass. A static target is easier than a moving one.

:laydownlaughing

Moving target?? What kind of moves it does, it may be visible only to you, from where I am sitting, is dead for 3.5 years by now.

It is moving very slowly and you need to have rose colored eyes to see the movement. :s