Novak Djokovic - Part Time Hero

When I think Novak Djokovic I think of a guy who is an extremely talented player who has breath-taking athleticism and is a very modest guy to himself and his fellow pro's. Yet to the masses I think he is still an enigma. Fans still not what to make of him or how to take him. I guess he is a quiet and personal guy away from the court. Doesn't have the flashy gimmick merchandise of a Federer or Nadal. Now I do feel for Novak because of the last 3 years he has done enough to warrant a niche part of the tennis world exclusively to himself. This post isn't about stats. It is trying to find out what the fans are finding relutance into fully immersing themselves in Djokovic. Now last night I browsed over several tennis sections and it was the Federer fans rejoicing in the success of Djokovic. Seeing Nadal lose to Djokovic was the icing on the cake. But that for me is where Novak get's lost. It wasn't a celebration of victory, but one of defeat. I do wonder when will Federer fans will give themselves over to Djokovic and give him the love and respect he deserves. He is the only guy who can live with Nadal when Nadal is on fire. See Novak deserves more from the fans and more from the sport.

See I like Djokovic. I like how he conducts himself and at times how he plays the game. Unfortunately my alliance is with Andy, but who here will give themselves over to Djokovic to give him that love he craves from the fans.

Whew, for a minute I thought you meant part time player, not part time hero

Djokovic perhaps suffers in the way that Sampras or Courier did, in that he comes across as nice enough, without having the looks that (apparently) drove Borg's female fans wild, the combustible nature of Connors or Mac, the image of Agassi etc
His play his more clinical and super-efficient than flair (Fed) and there's not such an overt fighting spirit to engage the fans (Rafa).
Like Sampras, there is just a slight lack of charisma on display compared to others. He's not a love him or hate him kind of guy.

None of this should matter in evaluating his tennis or his legacy on the court, although it makes it harder for the all-important media (these days) to market him, which in turn wrongly leads people to question his level of greatness (unless we consider greatness to encompass more than just the tennis on display). We sometimes ask too much of our sporting champions - they have to be pin-ups and raconteurs as well. Stephen Fry in the body of Johnny Depp would be the ATP's dream Grand Slam champion.

There is just somehow something less memorable and less emotive about Djokovic overall, despite the undeniable quality of his tennis.

Well, he's already my favourite player!

It's a good question you raise though. I'll offer some speculation.

I really don't buy into this idea of Federer and Nadal being more inately 'charismatic' than Novak. I see their progression being thus:

First, the emergence of Federer as an insanely talented, massively successful, multi-lingual nice guy. He naturally draws lots of fans. He lacks though, a genuine rival.

Then another massively talented, polite, good-looking guy emerges who is stylistically the opposite of Federer, and is at first a rival and then a nemesis. He attracts fans in his own right but also serves as the 'anti-Federer'. Those who don't like Federer's perceived smugness are attracted to Nadal.

The legend of both grows in the context of this (in my opinion over-rated) rivalry. I would guess that one of these two players are the favourite of over 90% of fans.

Cue 2011 and the emergence of Novak. What are the circumstances under which he would be the crowd favourite? When he plays Federer and Nadal, he is playing the two most popular players in the world. He is, however, so good that any other opponent is the underdog and therefore gets a lot of support. So Novak is cast as the perennial party pooper.

I'd also speculate that the roaring, the occasional racquet smash and tantrums lose him some fans. In much the same way that Andy's moaning and all Rafa's ticks lose them fans.

I suspect style may play a part too. Roger and Rafa both have idiosyncratic styles at opposite ends of the spectrum. Novak has what is in essence a very conventional style but excecuted brilliantly. To my mind, he displays the qualities of both players. To me, that makes him more compelling. To others, if he's not fire or ice, then he's luke warm water.

One last observation. It only seems to be the really devout fans of Federer or Nadal who dislike him. For many, although he's not their favourite, they like him and respect his talent. And I think that most Murray fans seem to like him too - maybe it's solidarity among those outside the Fedal legend!

HM - Does anyone really dislike Djoko? There's far less dislike towards him than towards any of Fed, Rafa or Murray.

It doesn't really make sense to me that Novak is somewhat under appreciated. On the face of it he is a funny guy who is very intelligent and very polite, whilst maintaining an intense competitive streak. His game is all court, and extremely entertaining with his elastic stretches, electric pace and tribal roars after great winners.

He conducts himself superbly and is a truly great player. Yet Adidas replaced him with Murray so I understand and he doesn't get the neutral support of a Roger or Rafa.

I think he ticks all the boxes, and part of me wonders if he was American or British would he be regarded alongside Roger or Rafa in terms of appeal, marketability and fan base? Is being Serbian just not sexy enough?

JuliusHMarx wrote:HM  - Does anyone really dislike Djoko? There's far less dislike towards him than towards any of Fed, Rafa or Murray.

Yes but, you're right, it is a minority.

Danny_1982 wrote:part of me wonders if he was American or British would he be regarded alongside Roger or Rafa in terms of appeal, marketability and fan base? Is being Serbian just not sexy enough?

I wonder this too. I suspect there are parts of the world where even having a name that is relatively hard to pronounce puts people off him.

Yes, I mean the USA.

Great post HM, I think you have it spot on !

I actually think Novak has a big fan base, 3.5 million Facebook fans for example, compare this with 2 million for Murray.

However Rafa has 12 million and Roger 13 million. I think these two guys just have such a history in the game and they have been world beaters for so long. The others have had to catch up.

It is a bit of a mystery to me as I find Djokovic a very likeable guy and I have always been drawn to his talent from a young age and grown to admire him even more facing adversity time and again and battling to the top. I have also started to appreciate Murray more in the past couple of years but still dont particularly like his style of tennis and personality on court.

I do sense as well that there is a snobbish element that goes against Djokovic coming from Serbia. I dont understand this but I feel it may be an issue for some people, hope I am wrong.

At the end of the day, Djokovic is a superb tennis player and he conducts himself so well in interviews and particularly in defeat. Even during matches he is quick to applaud his opponent. I have always been a Novak fan and always will be, such a talent and for Federer fans, they should be delighted. Without him, Nadal may have already tied Federer's grand slam record.

I admire all the top 4 for different reasons but most of all Novak because of how he has overcome adversity and how he plays the game and has fun doing so.

Excellent speculation from HM that I'd agree with. Wrong time, wrong place for Novak in terms of his emergence in tennis history. It's harsh on him. I quite like the man and think he's a fantastic player.

To be fair though, I think the playing style could well be quite key. Whilst in recent years Novak has become more focused on offensive play, like Julius mentioned he's extremely clinical, efficient - 'robotic' was how I heard it described yesterday. It could be perceived as boring by certain fans. For me personally, I could watch his technique and shotmaking all day long, but against certain players I frequently find myself reaching for the remote. His point construction, while stellar, is sometimes rather bland and gets quite samey after a while.

The lack of variety displayed in his game doesn't help him either, though in that case he's a victim of the current conditions more than anything else. Murray is much the same - has all the shots, won't use them because he doesn't need to/it's not the best strategy. Federer in particularly displays enormous variety in comparison, and has a more natural flair to his game...and fans tend to like the aesthetic players. It's unfortunate, but this is a stumbling block that he won't get around, and it's not very frequently discussed as a reason for the disparity in popularity. Maybe it really is as simple as that?

Another possibility is that the roaring etc is more damaging than we think. My housemate was ranting about how Novak was 'false' and 'arrogant' yesterday, and that his celebrations are more about showing off to the crowd and his box than actually geeing himself up - he may have a point there.

I like Djoko:

a. Most of all he is a gracious opponent in victory and defeat, quick to compliment his opponent and he's not one for inane praise and generalities, when he says something gracious he's obviously thought about it and means it. What he had to say after losing the Wimbledon final should have won him many friends. I noted that when I watched him in the early rounds at Wimbledon he was very popular with the crowd.

b. He is the only man who can really stop Nadal

c. His rivalry vs. Fed has produced, for my money, the best matches between members of the big 4 - those USO semi-finals, that RG semi-final 2011.

Having said all that, he doesn't light my fire though, I think it's because he has perfected the art of being an excellent generalist, a man whose game depends upon its absence of weaknesses, rather than some identifiable specific strength. I hope the fact that he's relatively in the shadows compared to Federer and Nadal doesn't frustrate him too much, but I understand why it is.

HM Murdoch wrote:I suspect style may play a part too. Roger and Rafa are both have idiosyncratic styles at opposite ends of the spectrum. Novak has what is in essence a very conventional style but excecuted brilliantly. To my mind, he displays the qualities of both players. To me, that makes him more compelling. To others, if he's not fire or ice, then he's luke warm water.

This is intriguing me, HM. Do you mind elaborating?

Some good posts on this subject. Could be that Djoko will be more loved towards the end of his career. By then more people will have come to know him and to admire his play and also - and this particularly applies in Britain - he'll be older and more vulnerable and therefore more supportable.
  At present he's playing alongside - and generally beating - two of the greatest and most-popular and charismatic players of all time. The spotlight is sometimes not able to shine on all the stars.

You know you are allowed to like more than one tennis player, just like Nadal fans laugh at EVERY Federer loss, it will come back just as nice the other way. I truly believe Novak will end Nadals clay reign in RG if he isn't tired and is still hungry. LK, we will see when Nadal has a losing H2h vs Nole, will Nadal fans cheer Nole's defeats? You can guarantee it.

Before I lay in with any criticism I will qualify it by saying I like Djokovic... He is a great player, a media dream and has this cute way of wanting to be liked so desperately.  

But he still has a lot to learn...

Shirt ripping over the top celebrations do not prove your a super hero and can be a big turn off to many. As are antics like dancing with a smiley tennis ball whilst your beaten opponent walks off the court. Like it or not (probably not...) Djokovic is playing with two legends of the sport who both have huge fan basis. They have made tennis popular and attracted huge amounts of money to the sport that all players benefit from including Djokovic. He should be very careful to treat them with respect (not with his play obviously Ha ha! anything short and weak should be punished with a viscous BHDTL) So he should be careful what he says about them and forget the patronizing clapping when they produce an everyday shot (for them) to beat him. He should also give his family a bit of media training.

All this would help but what he really should have done is be born in the USA or Britain. Somewhere with a lot of people who would see the potential for them (not him) to make a lot of money out of his popularity. I hope Djokovic didn't read any of todays British papers. Not much about him winning the WTF as most of the tennis coverage focuused on Murray and how he has flown out to Miami for training. On the radio this morning it was mentioned that Djokovic won the WTF but then we heard an interview with Murray reminiscing about about his Wimbledon win. Maybe Djokovic does get all the attention in Serbia but that will be less influential world wide. For example a sponsor would always choose a player who will get the most coverage over a player who may win more.

Did Djoko actually dance with a smiley tennis ball at the same time as his opponent walked off court? Not saying he didn't, as I don't watch post-match stuff, but I hadn't heard about it.
Was there music playing at the time, or was it a spontaneous music-less jig?

^ Yes he did! Music started up the smiley tennis ball appeared with a chorus line of ball kids and they all did a pre arranged dance...

legendkillarV2, I think you are somewhat correct in that analysis. I have not read all the posts up here but I for one was keener on a Djokovic win. Purely because 2013 has been all Nadal and another predictable result looked very certain going on his form throughout the week.

I have liked Djokovic especially in the early years before he became a multi slam winner/#1 as after that he became a bit more serious about his tennis and less of a the antics. His parents keeping their opinions to themselves was necessary for all sorts of reasons.

I cannot fully give myself over to Djokovic, that is just not going to happen but I would like to see him do well especially against Nadal as he does not wilt at the thought of facing Nadal. I respect him as a player and last night I was amazed at just how well he moves as some of those 'gets' were ridiculous. I had forgotten just how well he moves and to produce it against Nadal, under pressure deserves credit. Versus Federer here and in Paris the crowd was behind Federer and it is hard to play second, even third, fiddle despite his achievements. I think what drives him to win is a desire to get some of this respect or adoration Fed/Nadal get wherever in the world they are.

On a side note, i always wonder just how much more he would have won had he not almost always end up in Fed's side of draws as he often would be beaten by Fed who would play Nadal in a final.

hawkeye wrote:^ Yes he did! Music started up the smiley tennis ball appeared with a chorus line of ball kids and they all did a pre arranged dance...

I remember that - hadn't realised his opponent was still on the court. Must have lingered around awhile for all that to be set up.

Why didn't the opponent just join in and give a jig. Might have lifted his spirits

^ When Rafa beat Djokovic in that particular tournament I was expecting the smiley ball to appear and they both could have joined in. It would have been fun. But sadly Djokovic didn't summon the smiley ball and ball kid dance troupe on this occasion

Silver wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:I suspect style may play a part too. Roger and Rafa are both have idiosyncratic styles at opposite ends of the spectrum. Novak has what is in essence a very conventional style but excecuted brilliantly. To my mind, he displays the qualities of both players. To me, that makes him more compelling. To others, if he's not fire or ice, then he's luke warm water.

This is intriguing me, HM. Do you mind elaborating?

Gladly! 

Let me first of all precede my comments by saying that I don't think he has all the qualities of both players!

Roger has many gifts but his game ultimately derives from the mastery of angles. His game is that of the shotmaker. In his pomp, if it was within the laws of physics for a ball to hit a certain spot, Roger could hit it.

I don't think Novak has the same imagination or technique as Roger but I do think his ability play the angles of open court is remarkable. Rafa said that one of the things he tried to do in the US Open final against Novak was to NOT open up the court because he knew Novak could play them better than him. This week we saw a couple of examples - that forehand pass v Wawrinka, the defensive lob on break point v Rafa... even 'The Shot', frequently dismissed as a hit and hope, was in fact the perfect angle. It's a very overlooked part of Novak's game.

Rafa built his reputation as the ultimate competitor. His movement, endurance and the ability to fight out of difficult positions were extraordinary. Yet I consider Novak to now be the better mover. A more economical style gives him arguably better endurance. And how many times has Novak saved set and match points over the last few years? 4 v Fed at two US Open, 4 v Tsonga at RG12 leap to mind but they are not isolated incidents. He is now just as difficult as Rafa to 'put away'.

I rate Rafa as a breathtakingly composed competitor. One of the greatest fighters the sport has ever seen. He has a psychological hold over pretty much the whole tour. The only player capable of getting inside his head, the only player capable of taking Rafa to dark places pychologically, is Novak. I consider that a compliment to both players.

So I don't consider Novak the sum of both players by any stretch. But I think that key qualities that people admire in Nadal and Federer are also found in Novak. I'm often surprised at how often they either get missed or ignored.

As we can see from this clip @ 0.24, the music has started, but the actual dancing doesn't start until after his opponent has left the court. The smiley ball is later on.
"dancing with a smiley tennis ball whilst your beaten opponent walks off the court" - let's call it a hawkeye-ism.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXP9yTYVaag

Unless it happened on a different occasion?

Hawkeye, the opponent was not on the court when he did the dance. Check the videos.

It happened after the on court interview.

He is only a hero to the marketers of the capitalist system.  He is not a hero as in "Jonathon" of Rollerball fame (set in 2018).  He needs to bring the whole global corporate militaristic system down before I would consider him in the hero league.

Nore Staat wrote:He is only a hero to the marketers of the capitalist system.  He is not a hero as in "Jonathon" of Rollerball fame (set in 2018).  He needs to bring the whole global corporate militaristic system down before I would consider him in the hero league.

I think he said in a 2012 interview "My ultimate goal is to bring the whole global corporate militaristic system down...after I win the French Open".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqeHFpVbaWw

He didn't even ask Istomin to join in

Josiah Maiestas wrote:You know you are allowed to like more than one tennis player, just like Nadal fans laugh at EVERY Federer loss, it will come back just as nice the other way. I truly believe Novak will end Nadals clay reign in RG if he isn't tired and is still hungry. LK, we will see when Nadal has a losing H2h vs Nole, will Nadal fans cheer Nole's defeats? You can guarantee it.

You should not generalise Josiah ... a Rafa fan I might be but I do not laugh at every Federer loss.. or cheer at Nole´s defeats.. I find that comment offensive. Dont judge everyone by yourself as you obviously cheer at every Nadal loss it seems

hawkeye wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqeHFpVbaWw

He didn't even ask Istomin to join in

Presumably to save him the embarrassment.

^ Julius. So I was right wasn't I? I don't make up stuff. Life is interesting enough not to have to resort to that

HM Murdoch wrote:

Silver wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:I suspect style may play a part too. Roger and Rafa are both have idiosyncratic styles at opposite ends of the spectrum. Novak has what is in essence a very conventional style but excecuted brilliantly. To my mind, he displays the qualities of both players. To me, that makes him more compelling. To others, if he's not fire or ice, then he's luke warm water.

This is intriguing me, HM. Do you mind elaborating?

Gladly! 

Let me first of all precede my comments by saying that I don't think he has all the qualities of both players!

Roger has many gifts but his game ultimately derives from the mastery of angles. His game is that of the shotmaker. In his pomp, if it was within the laws of physics for a ball to hit a certain spot, Roger could hit it.

I don't think Novak has the same imagination or technique as Roger but I do think his ability play the angles of open court is remarkable. Rafa said that one of the things he tried to do in the US Open final against Novak was to NOT open up the court because he knew Novak could play them better than him. This week we saw a couple of examples - that forehand pass v Wawrinka, the defensive lob on break point v Rafa... even 'The Shot', frequently dismissed as a hit and hope, was in fact the perfect angle. It's a very overlooked part of Novak's game.

Rafa built his reputation as the ultimate competitor. His movement, endurance and the ability to fight out of difficult positions were extraordinary. Yet I consider Novak to now be the better mover. A more economical style gives him arguably better endurance. And how many times has Novak saved set and match points over the last few years? 4 v Fed at two US Open, 4 v Tsonga at RG12 leap to mind but they are not isolated incidents. He is now just as difficult as Rafa to 'put away'.

I rate Rafa as a breathtakingly composed competitor. One of the greatest fighters the sport has ever seen. He has a psychological hold over pretty much the whole tour. The only player capable of getting inside his head, the only player capable of taking Rafa to dark places pychologically, is Novak. I consider that a compliment to both players.

So I don't consider Novak the sum of both players by any stretch. But I think that key qualities that people admire in Nadal and Federer are also found in Novak. I'm often surprised at how often they either get missed or ignored.

Thumbs up, thanks for explaining that one. For what it's worth, I would probably agree with what you're saying to a large extent

hawkeye wrote:^ Julius. So I was right wasn't I? I don't make up stuff. Life is interesting enough not to have to resort to that

Yes, you were right - the one I saw was a different one.

I think you made this bit up though "They have made tennis popular". Tennis was popular before Fed and Rafa - it was on TV and everything. Sometimes people even paid to see it

Nore Staat wrote:He is only a hero to the marketers of the capitalist system.  He is not a hero as in "Jonathon" of Rollerball fame (set in 2018).  He needs to bring the whole global corporate militaristic system down before I would consider him in the hero league.

If he did, some people would still say it was just because the corporate militaristic system was either injured or past its prime.

Others would lament the fact he danced afterwards.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

hawkeye wrote:^ Julius. So I was right wasn't I? I don't make up stuff. Life is interesting enough not to have to resort to that

Yes, you were right - the one I saw was a different one.

I think you made this bit up though "They have made tennis popular". Tennis was popular before Fed and Rafa - it was on TV and everything. Sometimes people even paid to see it

I could be wrong but during the 90's I think there were only about 12 people that paid to watch tennis (the men that is)

JuliusHMarx wrote:

hawkeye wrote:^ Julius. So I was right wasn't I? I don't make up stuff. Life is interesting enough not to have to resort to that

Yes, you were right - the one I saw was a different one.

I think you made this bit up though "They have made tennis popular". Tennis was popular before Fed and Rafa - it was on TV and everything. Sometimes people even paid to see it

But in a postmodern world where everyone creates their own universe with their own past: Hawkeye is right from her frame of reference cos the pre-Hawkeye time was a mythical time of wobbly shapes holding sticks of celery batting away green blobs of floaty fluff while the crowds were at Tower Hill cheering the latest version of Executioner versus Robin Hood of Soderling as the music sounded and the froobies danced their dance of meloncolic raspberries in honour of the Duke of Nadal. Amen

hawkeye wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

hawkeye wrote:^ Julius. So I was right wasn't I? I don't make up stuff. Life is interesting enough not to have to resort to that

Yes, you were right - the one I saw was a different one.

I think you made this bit up though "They have made tennis popular". Tennis was popular before Fed and Rafa - it was on TV and everything. Sometimes people even paid to see it

I could be wrong but during the 90's I think there were only about 12 people that paid to watch tennis (the men that is)

I know this is tongue in cheek.

But 90's tennis was as great. Andre Agassi alone made Tennis eminently watchable!

HM Murdoch wrote:Well, he's already my favourite player!

It's a good question you raise though. I'll offer some speculation.

I really don't buy into this idea of Federer and Nadal being more inately 'charismatic' than Novak. I see their progression being thus:

First, the emergence of Federer as an insanely talented, massively successful, multi-lingual nice guy. He naturally draws lots of fans. He lacks though, a genuine rival.

Then another massively talented, polite, good-looking guy emerges who is stylistically the opposite of Federer, and is at first a rival and then a nemesis. He attracts fans in his own right but also serves as the 'anti-Federer'. Those who don't like Federer's perceived smugness are attracted to Nadal.

The legend of both grows in the context of this (in my opinion over-rated) rivalry. I would guess that one of these two players are the favourite of over 90% of fans.

Cue 2011 and the emergence of Novak. What are the circumstances under which he would be the crowd favourite? When he plays Federer and Nadal, he is playing the two most popular players in the world. He is, however, so good that any other opponent is the underdog and therefore gets a lot of support. So Novak is cast as the perennial party pooper.

I'd also speculate that the roaring, the occasional racquet smash and tantrums lose him some fans. In much the same way that Andy's moaning and all Rafa's ticks lose them fans.

I suspect style may play a part too. Roger and Rafa both have idiosyncratic styles at opposite ends of the spectrum. Novak has what is in essence a very conventional style but excecuted brilliantly. To my mind, he displays the qualities of both players. To me, that makes him more compelling. To others, if he's not fire or ice, then he's luke warm water.

One last observation. It only seems to be the really devout fans of Federer or Nadal who dislike him. For many, although he's not their favourite, they like him and respect his talent. And I think that most Murray fans seem to like him too - maybe it's solidarity among those outside the Fedal legend!

Great post  

Sorry to contradict again .. on behalf of Rafa fans.. I dont like Djokovic that is true.. but I do respect his talent without question

Johnyjeep wrote:

hawkeye wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

hawkeye wrote:^ Julius. So I was right wasn't I? I don't make up stuff. Life is interesting enough not to have to resort to that

Yes, you were right - the one I saw was a different one.

I think you made this bit up though "They have made tennis popular". Tennis was popular before Fed and Rafa - it was on TV and everything. Sometimes people even paid to see it

I could be wrong but during the 90's I think there were only about 12 people that paid to watch tennis (the men that is)

I know this is tongue in cheek.

But 90's tennis was as great. Andre Agassi alone made Tennis eminently watchable!

In fairness, I suspect HE mainly watched Wimbledon. A lot of the matches at Wimbledon wrre fairly dull as the players then generally were fairl serve dominant on that surface. However, some of the tennis at other, slightly slower, events was a high standard.

Novak's big problem is that he has funny sounding name and comes from a small unpopular country. Nadal gets a large amount of fans for his looks, and from the Spanish speaking world. Federer has a huge following in the states because his name while not American could pass for one. Prejudice and racism are alive and well, one of Djokovic's biggest detractors often points to crimes of Serbia that Novak had nothing to do with. Look at Lendl same issue as to why he was never embraced by the western media and fans. But I will say that the more he wins the more fans he will get and he conducts himself really well for the most part, does he do stupid things sure everyone is human, but he is generally been exemplary as Fed and Nadal have been as well.


But I will say this, he has been my favorite player for nearly 7 years now, and to me I like the fact that Novak fans are small club. I don't really care about popular opinion. And on the flip side while Novak's Serbianess hurts him abroad he is worshipped in his home country more than any of the top 4 are worshipped in their own nations. Being a poor and small nation he has almost taken on demigod status there. Who knows maybe one day he will president of Serbia, that certainly would be more of an accomplishment than having 8 or 10 million more facebook fans.

It may be more related to Novak's immediate surroundings that distract from Djokovic's Tennis. His affiliations get questioned, his parents devotion to Novak can also be a deterrent to liking Novak himself.

He is a wonderful player, who cheers his opponents' winners, sometimes emotional and OTT in his mannerisms and celebrations, but that comes with the territory.

On 606v2, sometimes fans and players are treated as synonyms of each other, which may be another reason for a transference of any dislike, between the player and the corresponding fans.

Jahu has an axe to grind with Novak, which, IMVHO, is still a mystery to me.

Djokovic wants to usurp the throne, which still has a king, albeit a geriatric one. Till The King abdicates, the Princes will always be just that.

socal1976 wrote:Novak's big problem is that he has funny sounding name and comes from a small unpopular country. Nadal gets a large amount of fans for his looks, and from the Spanish speaking world. Federer has a huge following in the states because his name while not American could pass for one. Prejudice and racism are alive and well, one of Djokovic's biggest detractors often points to crimes of Serbia that Novak had nothing to do with. Look at Lendl same issue as to why he was never embraced by the western media and fans. But I will say that the more he wins the more fans he will get and he conducts himself really well for the most part, does he do stupid things sure everyone is human, but he is generally been exemplary as Fed and Nadal have been as well.


But I will say this, he has been my favorite player for nearly 7 years now, and to me I like the fact that Novak fans are small club. I don't really care about popular opinion. And on the flip side while Novak's Serbianess hurts him abroad he is worshipped in his home country more than any of the top 4 are worshipped in their own nations. Being a poor and small nation he has almost taken on demigod status there. Who knows maybe one day he will president of Serbia, that certainly would be more of an accomplishment than having 8 or 10 million more facebook fans.

Concerning the first part of your post Socal I can only agree in part.
To be a fan of Rafa´s because of his looks or because you are Spanish or come from a Spanish speaking country is simply not true.  True I live in Spain but Im English.. and my reason for nailing my colours to Rafa´s mast isnt even out of loyalty to my adoptive  country.  I care not what his nationality is I support Rafa for his tennis as I did Borg and Im not Swedish either.  First and foremost I am a fan of tennis .. no matter what nationality. There are reasons why I dont particularly like Novak, there are other players I dont like either he is not singled out for special treatment but as I have already said I do appreciate his tennis. I watch them all when I can and I dont cheer if he loses, but I dont lose any sleep either.

I am not saying that Rafa  does not attract the kind of fans you mention but there have been a couple of generalisations on here today that simply do not apply to  many fans of tennis even though they prefer one play above all others.

Haddie don't you think his name and nationality play a role in his status, I am not saying it is the only role, I am not saying you dislike him because he is Serbian everyone has there on personal reasons for liking or disliking a player. And if I generalize is because we are trying to look at broad trends while we can't ignore that for any particular person those traits don't apply. You like Nadal for your own reasons, but look at how much support he gets from Spain and Latin America the larger trend is there. Or how many female fans he has because of his looks. It doesn't explain away 100 percent of his support that is not what I contend. Just like Novak's name and nationality doesn't explain away all of the people who don't like him or are indifferent to him. But it explains a large group or trend in the pattern.

I don't think Novak has anything to learn. If I think of all things he has done, the roaring, the shirt ripping, the racquet smashes... The only one that even slightly irked me was the Wawrinka shirt rip. But looking back was it that bad? Not really. Players celebrate big wins. It's the name of the game.

If you think of Wimbledon and the US open, he's a very dignified loser. His words about the pressure on Murray's shoulders 'making his success even bigger' was a wonderful sentiment.

In terms of game style, charisma, box office appeal, and personality he's comfortably my second favourite player. Any slam that Murray doesn't win I hope Novak does. With Delpo a distant third.

Nothing wrong with any of his behaviour really. None of the top guys are perfect, whether it be barging into opponents, swearing out loud, swearing at the opponent... They've all made the odd mistake.

Haddie-nuff wrote: ... my reason for nailing my colours to Rafa´s mast ...

Now there's a euphemism and a half  

It is strange why we like and dislike players.

I nearly always want Rafa to lose.

But I really don't know why! He seems like a very nice guy and he's undoubtedly a brilliant player. I'm not mad keen on his style but nor do I hate it. It must be something in his on court persona that bugs. Possibly the grunting, fist pumping, fidgeting and Vamos-ing irritates me.

Yet it's not as if Novak is a shy violet on court, so I don't know why Rafa should bug me!

socal1976 wrote:Haddie don't you think his name and nationality play a role in his status, I am not saying it is the only role, I am not saying you dislike him because he is Serbian everyone has there on personal reasons for liking or disliking a player. And if I generalize is because we are trying to look at broad trends while we can't ignore that for any particular person those traits don't apply. You like Nadal for your own reasons, but look at how much support he gets from Spain and Latin America the larger trend is there. Or how many female fans he has because of his looks. It doesn't explain away 100 percent of his support that is not what I contend. Just like Novak's name and nationality doesn't explain away all of the people who don't like him or are indifferent to him. But it explains a large group or trend in the pattern.

When it comes to tennis socal I really seldom if ever think of their nationality. They are performers, showmen if you will. The same as actors.. I like or dont without questioning their origins.  I like to think I am a pretty good judge of character and, rightly or wrongly, I go on instinct. (Had a similiar discussion with JM recently). With regard to Rafa´s support and popularity from the Spanish and Latins as a whole, you need to understand that these people are very patriotic.  The are also tribal. There loyalty to their own starting from family, extended family, friends and  one of their own countrymen is quite unbelievable You only have to look at Rafa´s camp
He had three uncles, his father, his mother, his sister, and girlfriend... plus two coaches, trainer and Uncle Tom Cobbly and all in support.. There is something I cant  put a finger on with Novak socal and I dont want to criticise him because I dont know him.. Its a feeling I get that is inexplicable but one Im not comfortable with.

Interesting thread, and the part where Hawkeye was proved completely right was a somewhat unexpected and entertaining turn of events. Hope you're all well.

Does Novak try too hard?

Other factor is, you develop more popularity as an elder statesman. I am sure less people purred over Federer when he was a racket throwing 20 year old and not a record breaking legend.

HM Murdoch wrote:It is strange why we like and dislike players.

I nearly always want Rafa to lose.

But I really don't know why! He seems like a very nice guy and he's undoubtedly a brilliant player. I'm not mad keen on his style but nor do I hate it. It must be something in his on court persona that bugs. Possibly the grunting, fist pumping, fidgeting and Vamos-ing irritates me.

Yet it's not as if Novak is a shy violet on court, so I don't know why Rafa should bug me!

Maybe it's just prejudice? I mean prejudice doesn't require rational explanation - so maybe that's the reason  

Could be, Nore Staat, could be.

Not sure exactly what my prejudice would be against though?

Actually, I don't like Toni Nadal either, so perhaps I'm prejudiced against Nadals.

I tend to think Murdoch's first post hit the nail on the head. There were two opposite but very successful players when Novak rose. There was therefore no immediate place for him to fit in and both sets of fans resented him a bit for crashing the party. Couple that with the fact his game initially was very mechanical and it wasn't a recipe for an explosion of Novak supporters.

He seems a great guy (even though I disagree with him on Troicki) who is a good role model, as are all of the big 4. I do think some of the dancing etc probably does put some people off him - particularly in Cool Britannia.

Okay.

Well I think Nadal is fine - I like his never say die attitude - he always gives his best ... to the point of breaking his body.  But he grunts a bit & his matches tend to go on and on.

Now we have all seen many that don't like Nadal & they call him Nadull.  I think they get too emotional & carried away.  But they make the claim that he is "destroying the sport they claim to love" - that he lacks versatility, that his style is based on ping pong tennis (heavy top spin) and stamina.  That heavy top spin bouncy ball that defeats Federer more or less every time - they call a moonball.  They get upset that Federer has to win the point five times before actually winning - because Nadal always tends to get the ball back.  So they make the claim that Nadal tends to win not with winners but by the opponent ending up making UE or just running out of puff.  

Because of all the energy Nadal expends on each point, it is only natural that he is going to take a little extra time between points but that brings the claim he is "cheating" because he is taking more time than the allotted amount.  My view is that it is in the hands of the umpire - maybe the umpire decides that more time is needed after lengthy rallies - I mean it is his call & he is allowed to make that call according to the rules.

Djokovic has developed a means to keep up with Nadal & I believe he has better on court intelligence & versatility & that is why he can beat Nadal when they are both on top form.

That lack of on court intelligence (relatively speaking) from Nadal makes the coaching from the sides by Toni Nadal more important & more irritating to some.

Personally I can't "blame" anyone for their style of tennis - if it works then great - & they should keep doing the same thing until something changes & they have to adapt or lose.  But then again you will get the various supporters or non-supporters complaining.  Sure let them complain but don't go on and on - it makes them seem a bit boorish & psychologically weak.