Will Novak pass Rafa?

[Bonaca]

There another issue being ignored here;the changing of surface playing conditions. The US Open has slowed down significantly and that has helped Djokovic and Nadal more. This is in addition to Wimbledon, even though Wimbledon was changed earlier.

More Nadal than Novak, he plays fast courts significantly better than Bull. And sometimes also better than Maestro.

 

[monfed]

Oh I do agree that those guys had it way easier in the post-prime period but the Nad and Djokovic fans will cry that Roger had it easier in his early 20's. And in regards to that period I mentioned (post AO 2010 - pre AO 2017 Federer lost at 24 majors and 9 to Djokovic including 2010 USO (when Djoker still wasn't great) and 3 to Nadal with 2 being off clay (weak losses in Australia) 12 of those were to much weaker players. He dropped the ball a lot in that period.

Fed never had it easy ever. When he started his career he had to beat players like Sampras, Henman etc. After that Fed did meet the stronger players like Davy, Haas, Nalbandian, Safin in the earlier rounds. The same doesn't apply to dull and faker.

He didn't drop the ball. Whenever he made a deep run post 2010, he had to face faker or dull in the sf or final.

As far as 2010 USO goes, Fred would've lost to dull in the final even if faker lost.

 

[monfed]

As long as there is RG there is dull.

 

[atttomole]

More Nadal than Novak, he plays fast courts significantly better than Bull. And sometimes also better than Maestro.

I agree with that. And his return of serve is so good that it could have allowed him to get decent results on very fast surfaces.

 

[Moxie]

I mean yeah at one point this is bound to be true, but short sighted? lt's been about the big 3 since literally 2008. So excuse me for being short sighted over the past 11 years.

I just think there's a better crop of youngsters coming up, but they may not pan out.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I just think there's a better crop of youngsters coming up, but they may not pan out.

There always is, and they rarely do these days.

Of course there's bound to be an exception at some point. It's just that we literally haven't had one in over a decade.

 

[El Dude]

There always is, and they rarely do these days.

Of course there's bound to be an exception at some point. It's just that we literally haven't had one in over a decade.

Yes, but we've already seen more from Zverev, Tsitsipas, and FAA at their respective ages than we've seen from any of the "Lost Gen" guys. There's also some serious depth among the younger players. Consider the number of players <25 currently in the live top 100:

5. Zverev (22)
6. Tsitsipas (20)
9. Khachanov (23)
13. Medvedev (23)
14. Coric (22)
21. Auger-Aliassime (18)
24. Berrettini (23)
25. Shapovalov (20)
26. De Minaur (20)
27. Djere (24)
30. Edmund (24)
32. Garin (23)
35. Tiafoe (21)
38. Kyrgios (24)
41. Fritz (21)
48. Norrie (23)
52. Hurkacz (22)
55. Jarry (23)
60. Ruud (20)
61. Opelka (21)
63. Humbert (20)
66. Nishioka (23)
69. McDonald (24)
75. Sonego (24)
78. Rublev (21)
82. Kecmanovic (19)
85. Bublik (21)
86. Harris (22)
87. Munar (22)
89. Moutet (20)
101. Popyrin (19)

(I added Popyrin because he's on the fringe)

Now dial that back almost five years, to year-end 2014/beginning of 2015:
8. Raonic (24)
11. Dimitrov (23)
22. Goffin (24)
39. Thiem (21)
42. Sock (22)
43. Janowicz (24)
51. Carreno Busta (23)
52. Kyrgios (19)
53. Pospisil (24)
56. Tomic (22)
59. Struff (24)
60. Delbonis (24)
61. Schwartzman (22)
66. Vesely (21)
69. Lajovic (24)
80. Rola (24)
86. Berankis (24)
92. Kuznetsov (23)
100. Krajinovic (22)
102. Coric (18)

Kei Nishikori was #5 but turned 25 on December 29.

Obvious the first list is not only longer but younger. Now let's dial it back two years, to age 22 and younger, and create one list. Five years ago is in bold, with current live rankings in normal:

5. Zverev (22)
6. Tsitsipas (20)
14. Coric (22)
21. Auger-Aliassime (18)
25. Shapovalov (20)
26. De Minaur (20)
35. Tiafoe (21)
39. Thiem (21)
41. Fritz (21)
42. Sock (22)
52. Kyrgios (19)
52. Hurkacz (22)
56. Tomic (22)
60. Ruud (20)
61. Schwartzman (22)
61. Opelka (21)
63. Humbert (20)
66. Vesely (21)
78. Rublev (21)
82. Kecmanovic (19)
85. Bublik (21)
86. Harris (22)
87. Munar (22)
89. Moutet (20)
100. Krajinovic (22)
101. Popyrin (19)
102. Coric (18)

As you can see, the top seven players on the combined list are all of the current young generation - you have to get to 8th, Dominic Thiem, to get to one of the older guys.

This is not to say that all of this is proof that we're on the verge of some young player(s) rising to dominance, but simply that it is a much stronger crop of young players than Lost Gen was five years ago.

 

[Moxie]

^ I think that does tell us something about the crop coming up. Thanks, Dude. This was my point to Broken. He says, "we literally haven't seen one in over a decade." My point was that I don't think it's "one." It's unlikely, imo, that we'll see an elite player that is equivalent to Roger/Rafa/Novak for some time yet. But if you have a group that's talented enough to stage an onslaught, and an aging Fedalovic, you're going to see more upsets. Sure, in the last many Majors, the Big 3 still prevailed, and one of them will likely win the next several, or most of them. But I don't think it's merely by attrition that the upcoming group will break through. I could be wrong, of course.

 

[don_fabio]

The rise of these youngsters should bring some worries to Novak in his slam quest to overcome Roger and Rafa, because he has most to catch up. Why after AO he even said he is chasing it, the Feds slam count? I guess he was high on adrenaline, but he just put pressure on himself which was maybe not really needed. Nadal handles this quitely just claiming that he tries to play best he can and meanwhile got to 18 slams.

I have a feeling that these youngsters, who still need to prove themselves, might screw Novak's quest or at least make it much harder to achieve. I feel like some of these youngsters are impatiently lurking around, waiting for an opportunity to meet him in a slam (like Medvedev in AO, played a great match). Novak's record against youngsters is not the best too, I guess he don't like to play them, maybe because they are not so predictable and he doesn't know them too well yet. There were talks here before how this year and maybe next are crucial for his total slam count. I would just add if he doesn't win this WImbledon that pressure will rise again and he might be even more vulnerable coming to USO.

 

[Moxie]

^ I guess it becomes a question of how dangerous this young crop turns out to be, but even if they're just good spoilers, not even Major winners for the next year and a half or so, they could mess up one of more of the big 3 in a quest for the title. Yes, the danger could be greater for Novak, given that he has more ground to make up over the other 2. That is IF the youngsters can prove to be real trouble-makers and giant killers in the big moments.

I don't know how much it matters that Novak said out loud that he's got his sights on Roger's Slam count. Everyone believes he does, anyway, so it probably doesn't make the pressure any greater, just because he admitted it.

 

[don_fabio]

I like the word spoilers. That is what I hope to see a bit more in a next few slams and increased chances for youngsters to win a match against big3. This stretch of slams for big3, 10 in a row, is really becoming too long again. In any case, it will be exciting to see how young guys will do over the period of a next few slams and next few years. I really hope they do a damage and prove they are worthy of the hype.

 

[Moxie]

I like the word spoilers. That is what I hope to see a bit more in a next few slams and increased chances for youngsters to win a match against big3. This stretch of slams for big3, 10 in a row, is really becoming too long again. In any case, it will be exciting to see how young guys will do over the period of a next few slams and next few years. I really hope they do a damage and prove they are worthy of the hype.

It will also be interesting to see how the Big 3 navigate the rising tide. I don't know if the the tide will rise first or the Big 3 will begin to sink, (most likely one at a time,) but all will be revealed in the next year and a half, I think. If it's sooner, I'll be surprised. Likewise, if it takes much longer.

 

[El Dude]

I agree with the last several posts by don and Moxie. Given the rising tide of improving youngsters, it is hard imagining Novak winning the 6 or more Slams necessary to pass Roger (and/or Rafa). That's the entire career of Edberg or Becker. I think the Big 3 have maybe 6 more Slam titles between the three of them.

 

[Moxie]

I agree with the last several posts by don and Moxie. Given the rising tide of improving youngsters, it is hard imagining Novak winning the 6 or more Slams necessary to pass Roger (and/or Rafa). That's the entire career of Edberg or Becker. I think the Big 3 have maybe 6 more Slam titles between the three of them.

This is why I don't think Novak will pass Roger. Going back to the point of the thread: Will Novak pass Rafa? Maybe 50/50, but I don't think it will matter as much how they play against each other, as to how they do against the younger field. I do think Novak will play longer than Rafa, by a year or two, so he probably has that benefit. But Novak will have the diminishing results against the field. And at least Rafa will always have RG.

 

[El Dude]

This is why I don't think Novak will pass Roger. Going back to the point of the thread: Will Novak pass Rafa? Maybe 50/50, but I don't think it will matter as much how they play against each other, as to how they do against the younger field. I do think Novak will play longer than Rafa, by a year or two, so he probably has that benefit. But Novak will have the diminishing results against the field. And at least Rafa will always have RG.

Yep. Because Rafa and Roger are moving targets, and also because when each Slam is gone it is one less chance before they age out and the tide rises, the chances re-calibrate after each Slam...and diminish unless he wins the Slam, even if one of the other two doesn't.

But Novak not only has the problem of aging and the rising Next Gen, but also Rafa and (to a lesser degree) Roger still in elite form. Winning 6+ more Slams now, at his age and with Rafa still dominating clay and both still threats on all four Slams, it is a very tall order.

It could happen, but he needs three things:

1) To go another nearly-unbeatable run, and
2) Remain consistently in elite form for another 3+ years, and
3) Roger and especially Rafa to start dipping substantially.

If all three happen, he's got a better than average chance (50%+) of winning 6+ more Slams. But taking away any of those drops those chances by 10%+ each factor.

 

[Moxie]

Yep. Because Rafa and Roger are moving targets, and also because when each Slam is gone it is one less chance before they age out and the tide rises, the chances re-calibrate after each Slam...and diminish unless he wins the Slam, even if one of the other two doesn't.

But Novak not only has the problem of aging and the rising Next Gen, but also Rafa and (to a lesser degree) Roger still in elite form. Winning 6+ more Slams now, at his age and with Rafa still dominating clay and both still threats on all four Slams, it is a very tall order.

It could happen, but he needs three things:

1) To go another nearly-unbeatable run, and
2) Remain consistently in elite form for another 3+ years, and
3) Roger and especially Rafa to start dipping substantially.

If all three happen, he's got a better than average chance (50%+) of winning 6+ more Slams. But taking away any of those drops those chances by 10%+ each factor.

Novak's best chance is to go on that un-beatable run, as you say, and that would be now. I would say this is his window. Just before the Next Gen takes hold. I think he looked wobbly in the last weeks, after Madrid. That could be due to stressing the Nole Slam. If it wasn't that, he's vulnerable. He needs to make a lot of hay right now, and I'm sure he knows it.

 

[don_fabio]

Novak's next 3 slams are kind of crucial in his slam chase. He should take 2 out of 3 to have a real shot, but 2 slams in the next 3 is not an easy task too. His margin of winning AO is not that big like Rafa's for RG.

Couple of these new guys bring something that Novak don't like: powerful shots. He could be blasted off the court like Wawrinka did, it is just that these guys need to be patient enough too. Same what Stan figured out. I am sure they all studied those matches and will try to copy it in some way once they meet him. Whether they succeed remains to be seen.

On the other hand Novak could run in a motivation issue again if he fails in some attempts to win a slam and feels like he is loosing the race.

 

[The_Grand_Slam]

I agree with the last several posts by don and Moxie. Given the rising tide of improving youngsters, it is hard imagining Novak winning the 6 or more Slams necessary to pass Roger (and/or Rafa). That's the entire career of Edberg or Becker. I think the Big 3 have maybe 6 more Slam titles between the three of them.

What improving youngsters? Lol

no one good enough to stop Federer/Nadal consistently at slams let alone Djokovic(at 3/4 slams)
Unless he physical collapses he is the best bet to end the top-dog at the end of his career.

 

[don_fabio]

What improving youngsters? Lol

no one good enough to stop Federer/Nadal consistently at slams let alone Djokovic(at 3/4 slams)
Unless he physical collapses he is the best bet to end the top-dog at the end of his career.

There are 3 next gen guys in top 10 + thiem + more knocking at the door. The changes are happening. Just because youngsters didn't make enough upsets on slams yet it doesn't mean they won't. I like Novak, but let's be realistic, he has a tough task ahead of him.

 

[Sundaymorningguy]

Well we shall see I can see 2-3 more for Novak in his count, but I could as easily see Rafa get 1-2 more and Fed could sneak 1 in before things start to unravel.