Wow--Djokovic could be headed for another historic year

[nehmeth]

nehmeth, I half agree. Clearly Novak is the best player on tour, but when he loses to Roger I don't think it is simply because he defeats himself. Roger knows how to beat Novak; he can't always do it and perhaps largely due to the age difference, the longer the match the harder it gets, but I would never count Roger out against Novak and I wouldn't say that any defeat of Novak at the hands of Roger is mainly due to "the space between Novak's ears."

When people say that one player loses because of himself it subtly--or not-so subtly--denigrates every player he loses to.

I did not mean to inadvertently denigrate your boy... however I gave the old guy the nod on fast hards and grass. Still, if Novak stays focused and plays his game, Roger is on the losing end most anywhere else. Novak had a mental lapse in IW, otherwise that would have been over in a quick two. For years, fans of other players have suffered through the incessant drone of "The match was on Roger's racquet". There were never any apologies for it from his crowd, because to them - it was.

 

[Federberg]

federberg, do you think Roger has more "fully come to terms with his new style of play" since last July? He seems to have been pretty consistent since late 2013/early 2014. 2013 seemed like a bad year for two reasons: A lingering back injury and trying to figure out that new Edbergian style with a different racket ("Racketgate"). By late 2013 or early 2014, he seemed healthier and more comfortable and his results greatly improved. It seemed to take until mid-2014 for him to be fully settled into that new style, but by Wimbledon he seemed there.

Not meaning to be a downer, but I don't expect Roger to be at a higher level in this year's Wimbledon than last. That said, he still can beat anyone there and almost beat Novak. I'd still favor Novak, but it isn't a walkover.

I do actually. I think he had done the work, but the belief, the patterns of play, muscle memory wasn't full ingrained. I think he'll be a nightmare on faster courts going forward. I can't remember the match, it was in China I think where he played Novak and really beat him up. For me that was the match where he really embraced serve and volley fully. It's one thing to do it against the also rans but to do it against one of his big 4 rivals, I mean totally commit to it. I hadn't seen that before

 

[Federberg]

When they played at Indian Wells, Isner was much more dialed in than he was tonight. He was regularly serving between 125 - 135mph and Novak was returning them. He even got the one that was 143mph back. It was top quality.

Tonight he ran the legs off poor John in his first two service games and kept up the pressure all night. This could be a very good year for Novak if he can pace himself well and peak for the Slams. Feeling hopeful.

This is how I feel. Guarded optimism. Any talk of a calender year slam is insane before having three much less two of the slams won. All novak has done slam wise this year, is win the one that he had already won four times. He has much poorer records at the slams he would still have to win so that talk is crazy.

Can I also point out that Novak fans (I am including Darth) on the board are the ones telling people to slow down, haha. I think that is our inherent fan group trait, saying "woah, slow down, we have been burned before, so let's not add any pressure." Compared to the ULTIMATE FEDAL NIGHTMARE Thread

While I think that Novak can pull off a calendar slam I think I'll need to see it to believe it. There are only two players on tour at the moment who have the absolute mental strength to achieve that (in my opinion). I'm not talking about ability, but mental strength. And those 2 are Rafa and Roger. I think that when you're on the final leg, the pressure is immense. It is far harder than simply being the best player out there. 2 times Roger was in that position, but he had to face some monster on clay. He lost those matches for one reason only... the other guy was simply better on clay than him. Never for a moment did I doubt that if he'd played anyone else he would have taken it. But I'm not convinced with Novak. In 2011, the pressure got to him and he lost tamely to Roger. It took until the 3rd set for him to just play the match and not the streak

 

[Riotbeard]

federberg, do you think Roger has more "fully come to terms with his new style of play" since last July? He seems to have been pretty consistent since late 2013/early 2014. 2013 seemed like a bad year for two reasons: A lingering back injury and trying to figure out that new Edbergian style with a different racket ("Racketgate"). By late 2013 or early 2014, he seemed healthier and more comfortable and his results greatly improved. It seemed to take until mid-2014 for him to be fully settled into that new style, but by Wimbledon he seemed there.

Not meaning to be a downer, but I don't expect Roger to be at a higher level in this year's Wimbledon than last. That said, he still can beat anyone there and almost beat Novak. I'd still favor Novak, but it isn't a walkover.

I do actually. I think he had done the work, but the belief, the patterns of play, muscle memory wasn't full ingrained. I think he'll be a nightmare on faster courts going forward. I can't remember the match, it was in China I think where he played Novak and really beat him up. For me that was the match where he really embraced serve and volley fully. It's one thing to do it against the also rans but to do it against one of his big 4 rivals, I mean totally commit to it. I hadn't seen that before

At least the evidence supports this. We all know Fed nabbed up all the major titles to have come in the almost year since Wimbledon, or wait...

 

[Federberg]

federberg, do you think Roger has more "fully come to terms with his new style of play" since last July? He seems to have been pretty consistent since late 2013/early 2014. 2013 seemed like a bad year for two reasons: A lingering back injury and trying to figure out that new Edbergian style with a different racket ("Racketgate"). By late 2013 or early 2014, he seemed healthier and more comfortable and his results greatly improved. It seemed to take until mid-2014 for him to be fully settled into that new style, but by Wimbledon he seemed there.

Not meaning to be a downer, but I don't expect Roger to be at a higher level in this year's Wimbledon than last. That said, he still can beat anyone there and almost beat Novak. I'd still favor Novak, but it isn't a walkover.

I do actually. I think he had done the work, but the belief, the patterns of play, muscle memory wasn't full ingrained. I think he'll be a nightmare on faster courts going forward. I can't remember the match, it was in China I think where he played Novak and really beat him up. For me that was the match where he really embraced serve and volley fully. It's one thing to do it against the also rans but to do it against one of his big 4 rivals, I mean totally commit to it. I hadn't seen that before

At least the evidence supports this. We all know Fed nabbed up all the major titles to have come in the almost year since Wimbledon, or wait...

Instead of resorting to sarcasm, why don't you just tell me what you disagree with..:nono

 

[Riotbeard]

I do actually. I think he had done the work, but the belief, the patterns of play, muscle memory wasn't full ingrained. I think he'll be a nightmare on faster courts going forward. I can't remember the match, it was in China I think where he played Novak and really beat him up. For me that was the match where he really embraced serve and volley fully. It's one thing to do it against the also rans but to do it against one of his big 4 rivals, I mean totally commit to it. I hadn't seen that before

At least the evidence supports this. We all know Fed nabbed up all the major titles to have come in the almost year since Wimbledon, or wait...

Instead of resorting to sarcasm, why don't you just tell me what you disagree with..:nono

I disagree with the notion that it was anything but Novak's superior play over an aging Fed that won him Wimbledon. If they play again this year, Novak should be considered the favorite. Of course, it would a tough battle. Fed is still tough on any surface, and even more so on grass or fast hards, but Novak has been the better player at Wimbledon consistently for some time now.

 

[Federberg]

At least the evidence supports this. We all know Fed nabbed up all the major titles to have come in the almost year since Wimbledon, or wait...

Instead of resorting to sarcasm, why don't you just tell me what you disagree with..:nono

I disagree with the notion that it was anything but Novak's superior play over an aging Fed that won him Wimbledon. If they play again this year, Novak should be considered the favorite. Of course, it would a tough battle. Fed is still tough on any surface, and even more so on grass or fast hards, but Novak has been the better player at Wimbledon consistently for some time now.

Consistently against whom? In terms of overall record in the last 5 years, the facts would support that. I expressed an opinion that Roger can still have an edge over Novak on a fast court, particularly with his new aggressive style which I don't believe was fully built in at SW19 last year. I guess we'll see if I'm right or not.. IF they get to play each other

 

[El Dude]

nehmeth, I half agree. Clearly Novak is the best player on tour, but when he loses to Roger I don't think it is simply because he defeats himself. Roger knows how to beat Novak; he can't always do it and perhaps largely due to the age difference, the longer the match the harder it gets, but I would never count Roger out against Novak and I wouldn't say that any defeat of Novak at the hands of Roger is mainly due to "the space between Novak's ears."

When people say that one player loses because of himself it subtly--or not-so subtly--denigrates every player he loses to.

I did not mean to inadvertently denigrate your boy... however I gave the old guy the nod on fast hards and grass. Still, if Novak stays focused and plays his game, Roger is on the losing end most anywhere else. Novak had a mental lapse in IW, otherwise that would have been over in a quick two. For years, fans of other players have suffered through the incessant drone of "The match was on Roger's racquet". There were never any apologies for it from his crowd, because to them - it was.

Well I agree, nehmeth - it is annoying when fans of ANY player do this. I'm not even really saying that you are, just that it seems a common refrain from fans of the top-dog. Rafa fans were doing it the last few years, Roger fans before that; maybe it is time for Novak fans to do it.

 

[Riotbeard]

nehmeth, I half agree. Clearly Novak is the best player on tour, but when he loses to Roger I don't think it is simply because he defeats himself. Roger knows how to beat Novak; he can't always do it and perhaps largely due to the age difference, the longer the match the harder it gets, but I would never count Roger out against Novak and I wouldn't say that any defeat of Novak at the hands of Roger is mainly due to "the space between Novak's ears."

When people say that one player loses because of himself it subtly--or not-so subtly--denigrates every player he loses to.

I did not mean to inadvertently denigrate your boy... however I gave the old guy the nod on fast hards and grass. Still, if Novak stays focused and plays his game, Roger is on the losing end most anywhere else. Novak had a mental lapse in IW, otherwise that would have been over in a quick two. For years, fans of other players have suffered through the incessant drone of "The match was on Roger's racquet". There were never any apologies for it from his crowd, because to them - it was.

Well I agree, nehmeth - it is annoying when fans of ANY player do this. I'm not even really saying that you are, just that it seems a common refrain from fans of the top-dog. Rafa fans were doing it the last few years, Roger fans before that; maybe it is time for Novak fans to do it.

I don't think any of us are doing that. All that we are saying is our player should get credit for winning, when he won. The fact that Fed can legitimately compete at his age with Novak on any surface is as impressive an achievement as any title he won in his prime, but it gets old to hear that the guy defying age only lost to the world number one (who has been the player overall for years now), because he wasn't quite used to his new game yet. Imagine if Pete played at a high level into the middle of Fed's prime, but was not winning everything (like Fed has done), then everybody said well, he only lost to Fed at wimbledon, because of arbitrary excuse X. Wouldn't that get annoying, isn't that a bigger insult to the guy in his prime, than the guy who's best years are in the rearview, but still competing with dignity.

 

[Riotbeard]

Instead of resorting to sarcasm, why don't you just tell me what you disagree with..:nono

I disagree with the notion that it was anything but Novak's superior play over an aging Fed that won him Wimbledon. If they play again this year, Novak should be considered the favorite. Of course, it would a tough battle. Fed is still tough on any surface, and even more so on grass or fast hards, but Novak has been the better player at Wimbledon consistently for some time now.

Consistently against whom? In terms of overall record in the last 5 years, the facts would support that. I expressed an opinion that Roger can still have an edge over Novak on a fast court, particularly with his new aggressive style which I don't believe was fully built in at SW19 last year. I guess we'll see if I'm right or not.. IF they get to play each other

The last five years are the relevant facts. Fed himself said he was lucky to take Novak to a fifth set last year. Point being, the evidence for Wimbledon now supports novak as favorite.

 

[Federberg]

I disagree with the notion that it was anything but Novak's superior play over an aging Fed that won him Wimbledon. If they play again this year, Novak should be considered the favorite. Of course, it would a tough battle. Fed is still tough on any surface, and even more so on grass or fast hards, but Novak has been the better player at Wimbledon consistently for some time now.

Consistently against whom? In terms of overall record in the last 5 years, the facts would support that. I expressed an opinion that Roger can still have an edge over Novak on a fast court, particularly with his new aggressive style which I don't believe was fully built in at SW19 last year. I guess we'll see if I'm right or not.. IF they get to play each other

The last five years are the relevant facts. Fed himself said he was lucky to take Novak to a fifth set last year. Point being, the evidence for Wimbledon now supports novak as favorite.

Like I said. We'll see if they meet again this year..

 

[Riotbeard]

Consistently against whom? In terms of overall record in the last 5 years, the facts would support that. I expressed an opinion that Roger can still have an edge over Novak on a fast court, particularly with his new aggressive style which I don't believe was fully built in at SW19 last year. I guess we'll see if I'm right or not.. IF they get to play each other

The last five years are the relevant facts. Fed himself said he was lucky to take Novak to a fifth set last year. Point being, the evidence for Wimbledon now supports novak as favorite.

Like I said. We'll see if they meet again this year..

Obviously. Fed is great on grass, and it would be a competitive match that either guy could win. I am not saying he can't win, he just wouldn't be the favorite.

 

[Billie]

Stop being defensive Riot:lolz:

I think that Nole will do OK this year. It's his 2nd best start of his career, he actually did not play DC in 2011 so to me this year's start is even more impressive. In 2011 he took everybody by surprise in the first few months, but he is a hunted man now so the pressure is greater and he bagged 3 biggest titles already.

I only worry about 2 things: his physical state and then his mental state. All players need to be healthy, in both departments. If he can navigate through a tough season (losing occasionally at some less important tournaments) but peaking for the bigger ones (the rest of the big 3), that would be ideal. Tough to combine everything. There is only one week till MC starts and seeing he's already played a lot of tennis, I am afraid that he will need a bit more time to adjust to clay. I hope he doesn't overdo it like he did last year and got injured in his first clay tournament. But I am hopeful about his results this year.

 

[nehmeth]

As much as I like Monte Carlo, it might be nice for Novak to take a rest...

 

[El Dude]

I did not mean to inadvertently denigrate your boy... however I gave the old guy the nod on fast hards and grass. Still, if Novak stays focused and plays his game, Roger is on the losing end most anywhere else. Novak had a mental lapse in IW, otherwise that would have been over in a quick two. For years, fans of other players have suffered through the incessant drone of "The match was on Roger's racquet". There were never any apologies for it from his crowd, because to them - it was.

Well I agree, nehmeth - it is annoying when fans of ANY player do this. I'm not even really saying that you are, just that it seems a common refrain from fans of the top-dog. Rafa fans were doing it the last few years, Roger fans before that; maybe it is time for Novak fans to do it.

I don't think any of us are doing that. All that we are saying is our player should get credit for winning, when he won. The fact that Fed can legitimately compete at his age with Novak on any surface is as impressive an achievement as any title he won in his prime, but it gets old to hear that the guy defying age only lost to the world number one (who has been the player overall for years now), because he wasn't quite used to his new game yet. Imagine if Pete played at a high level into the middle of Fed's prime, but was not winning everything (like Fed has done), then everybody said well, he only lost to Fed at wimbledon, because of arbitrary excuse X. Wouldn't that get annoying, isn't that a bigger insult to the guy in his prime, than the guy who's best years are in the rearview, but still competing with dignity.

I hear you and agree. What I saw last year was a younger and better player dictating the match, then an old warrior make a rush later on and almost pull off a heist but fell short. I think that match is exemplary of how the two compare today, even now: Novak is the better player on ANY surface, but Roger still isn't far behind - at least in best of fives. On best of twos I think they are pretty darn close.

 

[El Dude]

Back to Novak, boy is he running away with it so far. He's won all three of the big tournaments so far. In the live rankings he's almost twice runner up Andy Murray.

4385 Novak
2420 Murray
1890 Berdych
1655 Ferrer
1645 Wawrinka
1515 Federer
1350 Nishikori
1180 Raonic
1015 Nadal
800 Tomic

Novak fans have to feel pretty good about that commanding lead, even though it is so early. Novak could theoretically go out in the SF of the remaining Slams and still finish the year #1 if he wins a couple more Masters and/or the WTF.

 

[Busted]

Really shouldn't be too hard for Nole to have "another historic year". Look at the players in the rankings below him -

2. Roger, though I love him, just can't get it done in the final set in big matches anymore.

3. Murray is out-classed. Not just by Nole but Fed (even at 33!) and Nadal, too.

4. Nishikori needs to grow a spine.

5. Nadal is phoning it in and going through the motions. He's not playing with his usual commitment and fire or confidence. I don't even like the guy and I can see that.

6. Raonic is too one dimensional. He's this generation's Andy Murray. Doesn't mean he can't get lucky and win a Slam, but he's not a serious threat to Nole.

7. Ferrer never had enough weapons and now age is catching up with him.

8. Stan, bless his heart, just doesn't have enough weapons either - or mental toughness. He's losing to guys he should beat in his sleep.

9. Berdych just doesn't have the game - never heard the phrase "Plan B" before and doesn't have one.

10. Cilic can't get his shoulder right - and most times his head either.

11. Dimitrov is shaping up to be all promise and no delivery.

14. Tsonga is history. Sometimes I forget he hasn't retired yet.

Injured - DelPo is the most fragile wrists in the history of man and even when he's healthy he lumbes around the court. Make him run and you can easily beat him.

The Aussie young guns like Kyrios and Kokkanikis aren't there yet. Neither is Coric.

Looking at the list of pretenders? Why wouldn't Nole have another "historic year"? Unless Nadal gets his game and his head together or Roger sucks it up in the final set for once...there's really not that much competition for him these days. It's kind of a sad state of affairs when the 2nd best guy is 33 going on 34 and the rest of these guys are 4-10 years younger and should be outplaying him but aren't. Good thing I like Nole or else I'd be bored spitless with men's tennnis right now.

 

[Busted]

Back to Novak, boy is he running away with it so far. He's won all three of the big tournaments so far. In the live rankings he's almost twice runner up Andy Murray.

4385 Novak
2420 Murray
1890 Berdych
1655 Ferrer
1645 Wawrinka
1515 Federer
1350 Nishikori
1180 Raonic
1015 Nadal
800 Tomic

Novak fans have to feel pretty good about that commanding lead, even though it is so early. Novak could theoretically go out in the SF of the remaining Slams and still finish the year #1 if he wins a couple more Masters and/or the WTF.

Murray got lucky when Roger skipped Miami. Otherwise he'd be #3 and Fed would be #2. Clearly Fed's not that concerned with the live rankings or he'd have been in Miami. He said he was more concerned about his fitness for the clay season when he skipped it. Maybe Nadal should have done the same thing. The way he's playing right now - even clay's not a sure thing.

 

[Busted]

Well I agree, nehmeth - it is annoying when fans of ANY player do this. I'm not even really saying that you are, just that it seems a common refrain from fans of the top-dog. Rafa fans were doing it the last few years, Roger fans before that; maybe it is time for Novak fans to do it.

I don't think any of us are doing that. All that we are saying is our player should get credit for winning, when he won. The fact that Fed can legitimately compete at his age with Novak on any surface is as impressive an achievement as any title he won in his prime, but it gets old to hear that the guy defying age only lost to the world number one (who has been the player overall for years now), because he wasn't quite used to his new game yet. Imagine if Pete played at a high level into the middle of Fed's prime, but was not winning everything (like Fed has done), then everybody said well, he only lost to Fed at wimbledon, because of arbitrary excuse X. Wouldn't that get annoying, isn't that a bigger insult to the guy in his prime, than the guy who's best years are in the rearview, but still competing with dignity.

I hear you and agree. What I saw last year was a younger and better player dictating the match, then an old warrior make a rush later on and almost pull off a heist but fell short. I think that match is exemplary of how the two compare today, even now: Novak is the better player on ANY surface, but Roger still isn't far behind - at least in best of fives. On best of twos I think they are pretty darn close.

While I agree that at this stage in their careers Nole is the better player - you still have to give it up to Fed. (I do laugh that the "old guy" is the better fast hard court player though. Seems like it should be the other way around.) These younger guys like Nole and Muarry have to be looking across the net and wondering if they'll still even want to ATTEMPT play tour level tennis as 31, 32, 33 going on 34, let alone still be that competitive. You're starting to see signs of disinterest from Nadal right now and he's "only" (about to turn) 29.