-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Has Djokovic joined Federer & Nadal?
- Thread starter Flameboy
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I definitely think Federer is still capable of beating Djokovic. ND's had the wood on him a bit in Masters events this year but I think over five sets on a fast surface I'd still favour Federer. His game unsettles Novak... his slice and movement doesn't allow him to get into a groove.
The top three is actually a bit rock-scissors-paper at the moment:
Nadal has a game that is very good against Federer
Federer has a game that is very good against Djokovic
Djokovic has a game that is very good against Nadal
The top three is actually a bit rock-scissors-paper at the moment:
Nadal has a game that is very good against Federer
Federer has a game that is very good against Djokovic
Djokovic has a game that is very good against Nadal
crowsfan2004
Team Captain
glass half full or half empty.The same can be argued that plenty of "top tier" players found it extremely difficult to win on that surface.I am pretty sure French Open is physically the toughest out of all slams to win.Borg won 6 slams and it doesnt mean he is a one trick pony.Take the F.O win out of his career and he is no better than Wilander for example.
crowsfan2004
Team Captain
this is where i disagree.Novak has beaten federer 3 times this year and will beat him again.I have no doubt.If you are simply going on H2H basis then it makes novaks form a bit irrelevant.Nadal was 15-6 or 15-7 against Novak before this year and 4-0 in slams.But Novak form this year has changed the equation completely.Wait and lets see what happens at the US open before jumping the gun.
I think it to early to tell if Djokovic has joined the elite level of Nadal and Federer, despite the Wimbledon victory. Time will tell. I do find it fascinating though that Djokovic changed his diet in Dec. and ever since that change, he has gone on a historic winning streak.
Thought Dr. Briffa had a nice article about the diet of Djokovic, compared to what top UK player Murray eats. What we eat, in this case, does seem to make a difference in performance.
"What does the number 1 tennis player in the UK have to learn from the World’s number 1?"
http://www.drbriffa.com/2011/07/04/...-uk-have-to-learn-from-the-worlds-number-one/
Thought Dr. Briffa had a nice article about the diet of Djokovic, compared to what top UK player Murray eats. What we eat, in this case, does seem to make a difference in performance.
"What does the number 1 tennis player in the UK have to learn from the World’s number 1?"
http://www.drbriffa.com/2011/07/04/...-uk-have-to-learn-from-the-worlds-number-one/
Nobody's saying that FO wins don't count. Just that they count less if a player's career is mostly based around it, because it is the slam where very limited players can be successful. I mean, do you really consider Gustavo Kuerten a player in the class of Arthur Ashe?
Borg would be held in a lot less esteem if he hadn't won almost as many titles on the fast grass of Wimbledon, thus demonstrating he had a highly adaptable game.
I didn't say that Djokovic can't beat Federer. I am just saying that Federer has a game that unsettles Djokovic, just as Djokovic has a game that unsettles Nadal.
As such I am skeptical that Djokovic will find it as easy to beat Federer as he does Nadal - even though Nadal is the better player right now.
crowsfan2004
Team Captain
This is the age old debate that french open is the least respected slam out there.I dont get it really..a slam is a slam.Over many several decades the Spaniards and south americans criticised grass courts by saying "on cows like grass".At the end of the day its still a slam.More than 50% of Borgs slams came on clay.So that means Agassi > Borg? or Becker > Borg? just to put into perspective the Guga and Ashe comparison.
Thats a different argument altogether. But this year Novak has owned everyone, good matchups or bad matchups. It goes to show matchups are more mental than anything.Federer played a very good match against rafa at French, a couple of points here and there and rafa could have found himself 2 sets down.
That's silly, you're not comparing apples to apples. Agassi and Becker have significantly fewer titles than Borg.
Nobody is saying a FO is only worth half of a Wimbledon, or anything as such. But there are slams and there are slams. All else being equal, players who earn their titles mostly on other surfaces tend to get more respect than those who base their GS record around clay, because clay is a surface that provides massive amounts of assistance to a particular type of player.
No, that's the argument I made and you supposedly disagreed with.
crowsfan2004
Team Captain
But Borg was one dimensional too then? he never won anything on hardcourts and yet he gets the cheers as GOAT! how can he be the GOAT (or even get into a GOAT argument) when he never won anything on hardcourts which is supposed to be a "neutral" surface? Agassi won on every surface so that makes him a better player?
so you agree matchups are more mental? Nadal was 4-0 against Novak in slams.How can that be a matchup problem all of a sudden? The point is, he is good for just about anyone.Yes federer Federer did beat him last month but Novak is human, but lets not kid ourselves, he is going to steamroll everyone if he keeps this up.I still believe Nadal will Novak a tough time on hardcourts like he did in Miami and Indian Wells.
Clay and (old) grass are the extremes. To win virtually half his Slams on each proves his adaptability. You're being very silly.
No. Certain players have games that are susceptible to other players' games. That means that their level of play has to be much higher in order to beat them. Nadal has always wiped the floor with Djokovic despite the weakness of his playing style because he has always been a much better player.
Djokovic has taken his level of play up a couple of notches recently, Nadal has dropped off a little, and now the tables have turned. I don't know why that is - maybe Djokovic has started juicing or something - but it's not really mental.
Seriously, you can see the natural advantage in how the players implement their strategy. The way Djokovic jams Nadal in his forehand corner and opens up the court for his booming backhand is something Federer can't do with his slice. Nadal is all at sea against it - at the end of the day he is a supremely talented but not particularly tactical player.
- Banned
- #112
Rafa just can't use his high looping forehand to expose Nole's backhand, which is what he does to a lot of players. Nole's backhand is just too solid for that.
Same with the forehand, it seems to be right in Nole's hitting zone.
Same with the forehand, it seems to be right in Nole's hitting zone.
crowsfan2004
Team Captain
yet doesnt win anything on a neutral surface.How does that work?
crowsfan2004
Team Captain
Yeah but no one has been consistent as Djokovic.Del Potro destroyed Nadal with his backhand at USO open.But no one can do it consistently.That is the main problem here.Novak has been consistent thats why he can do it month after month.I dont believe its a serious matchup problem (although yeah there is a matchup problem to a certain extent), but the key for Novak is consistency.If you drop off you are dead
There was only one neutral surface during Borg's career - the USO - and it was only a hardcourt for the last couple of years of his career. He also skipped it a fair bit because he was only really interested in Wimbledon and the French Open, and nobody really cared about the career Slam, or the number of Slam titles people had won, at that stage.
You're just being perverse. You will not find a single person who thinks Borg couldn't have won all four Slams if he'd wanted to.
- Banned
- #116
Borg only played pro for 10 years, the same length that Nadal's been pro now.
11 slams is a good effort.
11 slams is a good effort.
- Banned
- #117
Borg finished as a finallist for the USO 4 times . . . it looks like he wanted to win it.
Borg quit as soon as McEnroe became better than him. Ran off court in '81 Wimbledon absolute dick, still bitter when he talks about it.
Ruined what would have continued to be an amazing rivalry. Shattering McEnroe got what seemed a minor injury 1 set away from would have become a Grand Slam year and was never the same after. Shame McEnroe got injured and now everyone rates Bjorg higher because people only remember stats. Probably other things that affected McEnroe after '84 though too.
Thankfully Federer didn't decide to retire when he realised the same about Nadal and obviously Nadal wont to Djoka.
Djoka has clearly joined Nadal and Federer but it is all about consistency.
McEnroe's best was unbeatable but people only compare current players to Bjorg because he was able to maintain dominance for so many years. This is all Djoka can do to prove he is up there. Very similar season to McEnroe in 1984.
Ruined what would have continued to be an amazing rivalry. Shattering McEnroe got what seemed a minor injury 1 set away from would have become a Grand Slam year and was never the same after. Shame McEnroe got injured and now everyone rates Bjorg higher because people only remember stats. Probably other things that affected McEnroe after '84 though too.
Thankfully Federer didn't decide to retire when he realised the same about Nadal and obviously Nadal wont to Djoka.
Djoka has clearly joined Nadal and Federer but it is all about consistency.
McEnroe's best was unbeatable but people only compare current players to Bjorg because he was able to maintain dominance for so many years. This is all Djoka can do to prove he is up there. Very similar season to McEnroe in 1984.
