Can Djokovic sustain "leadership tennis"?

I ask this for a few reasons:

1. Against Federer last week at times he appeared to be resigned to losing; it was like the road back into the match was just too tough and that drive, the belief wasn’t there. Maybe his mind isn't on tennis right now, after all he said..."It’s been a long five, six months for me. I didn’t have much rest,” said Djokovic. “Now I’m going to take some time off and really try to keep my mind off tennis.". Not much desire to be holding a racquet there.

2. To reinforce that he also said, “You know what, I reached my goals, I made my No. 1, I won my Wimbledon last year, that’s good enough.”. Sounds like someone who feels they have already achieved what they wanted.

3. After USO11 and as #1 he's taken a big fat exhale. To be #1in your sport you can’t do that. Federer never did it. Sampras didn't do it. Novak seems to have done it.

4. Since that USO11 win he has won just TWO titles.

So what do you think, temporary blip or signs of a player mentally sliding?

I have always felt that Djokovic would struggle with accepting losses again, and that he may get frustrated. One can see it from his body language, the way he often shakes his head or laughs when the opponent produces a winner.

But surely it's too early to tell whether he's really sliding. Yes only two titles since the USO11, but big ones (AO and Miami) and quite some runner-up places as well (MC, Rome, RG).

Well, considering he is one of the three essentially tied on race points, it's not as though he's having a bad year, just not a stellar one like last season (and the likelihood of him repeating a year like that was always slim).

I think there are a combination of issues, one of which probably is a drop off in intensity - I suspect he was feeling a bit burnt out from the pressure of performing so well last year, and there is a bit of a 'what now?' question - Nadal struggled a bit after reaching #1 and it looks like Djokovic is doing as well. The one short term target was the French Open, and the non-calendar slam, and he fell short of that.

Add to that something of a drop in confidence (the aura of invincibility from last year has waned particularly after the AO), and that he simply isn't playing quite so well and you have a player returning to his level as outstanding but mortal rather than the God that he was for most of last year.

I think from that my main conclusion would be that 2011 was an exceptional year for Djokovic, and this year has seen him revert to the level that he can perform consistently at (i. e. challenging for every tournament rather than winning them all). Not sure that 'desire' is more than a small part of that.

I think you're right but it is a question of degree. I think Novak is someone who goes in cycles and he seems to be well into a post 2011 cycle right now. It was inevitable that he couldn't keep that purple patch going indefinitely.

I agree with Prostaff that it is a bit early to judge whether he is sliding - he is obviously having a very good year - similarly, he has the taste for being at the highest levels - he has been top 4 for long enough to know what it entails. I think he will rest and be a bit more selective about where he tries to play his best. Last year he couldn't bear the thought of losing. That hunger seems to have been sated.

I hadn't seen those quotes but assuming they are in context they shock me. I have never seen a quote attributed to Federer or Nadal that even approximates to them.

My guess is that the demands of having a stellar year are telling, and that the disappointment of the French Open may still weigh heavily, when he had the opportunity to do something even his peers couldn't. Well it's even worse now that Wimbledon has gone too; putting himself back in that position seems incredibly remote now. What looks worse is declaring that he's achieved objectives, it's not like he's yet reached the levels of Becker, Lendl, McEnroe etc.

I suppose it just underlines how determined Nadal is, keeping going for so long after injuries and 11 Slams, and the ridiculous long term determination of Federer who with kids, 17 Slams, and numerous 3 Slam years seems as fired up as ever.

Just one thing about Sampras; I remember when he lost the USO the year after first winning it he said something like it was a bit of a relief. Jimmy Connors basically went ballistic, as you'd expect! I never heard anything like that from Pete again.

Yes agree its not an exactly bad year but he raised the bar so ridiculously high last year...maybe too high.

Agree BB, you dont hear this from Nadal or Federer. This gives opponents an insight and opening into his mindset.

I'm not saying he's sliding down to #10 or anything, more a slide from being able to sustain #1 in the game. We know the enormous toll it can take to be at the pinnacle of the game for a long time...we have clearly seen guys like Federer and Sampras do it, and win all year round to be #1. Nadal to a lesser extent has also shown "pinnacle" tennis for much of the year, often with end of year slides though due to his clay efforts. We've also seen Nadal able to dominate parts of the season year after year.

But with Djokovic you just wonder. I wrote a thread a while back comparing Djoko11 vs Wilander88...we saw how much that stellar year took out of Wilander and he was never the same again..and after the following year he was effectively a spent force. The way Djokovic had to beat Nadal last year (and AO12 which was effectively not long after end of last year) was brutal. We know Nadal is a trojan and just keeps going, he's shown the ability to shrug off defeat and keep coming back. With Djokovic despite being around the top of the game for some time we havent really seen him lead the tour, or parts of the tour, for concerted periods of time yet. Maybe he's struggling with pressure and expectation at the top?

I always thought USO11 took a massive amount out of him. It ruined the rest of his season...and yes he won another battle at AO but that was much closer for Nadal. AO12 might have been the sucker punch that burnt him mentally. That said I agree its too early to tell much but the manner of his loss to Federer was rather tame and surprised me. Also I know people think FO was close-ish, but if not for the rain it would have been a relatively straight forward win for Nadal. Ok, again it was a final but many people fancied him as the favourite....and at Wimbledon too.

The question is - can Novak sustain "leadership tennis" like Federer and Nadal?

Well, it's a difficult one - how many times have we seen players that have a great season and then fall away? At the same time I think it's a little early to write Djokovic off - he's 75 points from the top spot, so really we are talking about fine margins here which can go either way.

Thise quotes, while surprising, need to be taken in the context of the interview, presumably after a tough semi-final loss to an inspired Fed.

Absolutely reckoner, I dont have the full interviews as the quotes were used in isolation in 2 different articles discussing Federer (on Tennis-X).

Agree he's only 75 pts off top, and Federer has been very smart with his scheduling, accumulating points at a good rate, obviously with good form.

Let's see...just thought they were interesting quotes, and the manner of his loss at Wimbledon was a little surprising in that he didnt seem to have the same desire to fight. Of course I may be adding 1+1+1+1 to get 10 here - and I dont think he's going to "do a Wilander", but against that clearly he's unlikely to repeat 2011 again - what we dont know is what 2011 took out of him to do it.

Of course, it's the old story about being harder to stay at the top than get there. Fed was probably the exception to the rule. Everyone has told him he was a future number one and until he got there he was anxious.
Once at the top, he seemed to relax into it... for 237 weeks ! Asked back in 2004 how he was coping, Rog replied "Oh, it's great being number one. I love it."
Djoko will be back, and could be number one again after the Olympics. We could get what we've not had for many years - frequent changes at the top. You can bet your life that Rafa will be in the mix as well.

lol SFP...Rafa not looking too stressed here... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2171976/Rafa-Nadal-swaps-tennis-racket-snorkel-shows-ace-body-holiday-Sardinia.html

(article came up when I googled Nadal in News! I tend to google the top 4 players names re: news most days to see if anything has come up...seen as we're into a mini off-season now...always strikes me as odd how we have 4-6 weeks off after Wimbledon but yet its so compressed before it...surely SW19 could move forward a fortnight...would allow more time after FO...maybe allow a grass Masters, and push Wimbledon deeper into british summer with better chance of good weather...)

Oh I totally agree it's an interesting topic lydian!

I remember having a discussion on here with a Djokovic fan who claimed Nole was smarter than Federer at managing his schedule and winning the points that mattered because (get this) the Serbian team had outperformed the Swiss at the Mathematical Olympics in 2008! Wonder where he is now, lol.

And sirfred - I think we have to wait until next year to see Rafa truly in contention. Unless things have radically changed, this isn't really his favourite part of the season.

lydian wrote:lol SFP...Rafa not looking too stressed here... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2171976/Rafa-Nadal-swaps-tennis-racket-snorkel-shows-ace-body-holiday-Sardinia.html

(article came up when I googled Nadal in News! I tend to google the top 4 players names re: news most days to see if anything has come up...seen as we're into a mini off-season now...always strikes me as odd how we have 4-6 weeks off after Wimbledon but yet its so compressed before it...surely SW19 could move forward a fortnight...would allow more time after FO...maybe allow a grass Masters, and push Wimbledon deeper into british summer with better chance of good weather...)

Dodgy article title in an even dodgier paper!

The first quote is similar to the Djokovic transcript post semi-final on the Wimbledon website but the tone of that is a bit more positive - off on holiday and back for the Olympics.

I can't post a link - I haven't been around long enough but here is a cut and paste of the transcript:

Q. After the third set, did you feel any different pressure inside the way that things were going?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, I thought from the beginning of the match up to the end of the third set we were quite even. You know, we split sets and we both had some break opportunities in the third, and then, you know, I dropped the percentage of the first serve in the end of the third set.

Then had, yeah, unfortunately a bad service game on 5‑4, and obviously he uses his opportunities when they're presented. You know, so you have to be always consistent; I wasn't.

In the start of the fourth set I dropped in the energy level, I thought. I played really a couple of sloppy games, very slow, with no pace, you know, very low percentage of first serves, as I said.

When you don't have free points from the first serve, you know, it's very difficult to, you know, kind of get in the rhythm and the control of the match when you have an opponent as Federer.

Q. How much of that was pressure related?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: What pressure? I don't understand.

Q. As far as falling behind in the match at that point.

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, pressure is always present, you know. Obviously being two sets to one up is better than being two sets to one down.

Q. Is that the best Roger Federer has played against you in recent years?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, look, you know, he played well. No question about it. He was the better player. In the important moments he was aggressive, you know, hitting from both sides.

Obviously that's what you expect when you play against Roger at the final four of a Grand Slam. I knew that. I expected him to be at the top level, but I expected myself, as well. You know, I needed to be very consistent in order to win this match; I wasn't. I had ups and downs throughout the match.

Unfortunately the one that lasted for, what, 15, 20 minutes, end of the third, beginning of the fourth, costed me the win today.

Q. How do you explain the drop in the energy level given that you came back twice in the US Open from sets down? You have to think you have a chance, no?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Yeah, well, you know, I tried hard to stay in the third set. He had break ball opportunities. We had some long games. As I said, I played one bad game and that costed me the loss.

You know, I didn't recover from that drop of serve. And, yeah, after that it was really difficult to come back.

Q. There's a lot of discussion about the conditions with the roof. I'm wondering if you felt that was favoring you or him. Talk about that.

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: You know, it's really hard to say. We both know what it's like to play under the roof, under these conditions. You know, I thought the beginning of the match was a little bit slippery in the back of the court. After that, you know, it was good conditions to play on.

You know, we both got used to it. As I said, we played a couple matches already this tournament, so I don't think it favored neither of us.

Q. You were winning all the long rallies until you were 3‑All in the third set. You should be more confident in your game. What happened afterwards? You start losing some serves, but...

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, he served well. He served really well. I think high percentage of first serves and really good precision and he was aggressive on his second, as well.

And I think what I did bad and wrong today was my first shot after the serve. You know, I missed a lot of those, I didn't move as fast as I was supposed to, and I didn't, you know, get on the ball.

So, you know, if you play the first shot defensively, then you are on your back foot and you have very little chance to win the point.

Q. You're younger than he is; you're defending champ. He's got a great long history here. There is a lot of sentiment for Roger. Is it possible to block that all out or did you think about this at all?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: To be honest, you know, I thought about this match really. Obviously last two days I was really focused on performing well today and trying to get a win.

I mean, of course I do have a respect for Roger and everything he has done. Of course it goes to his credit, the history that he has.

But, again, when you're on the court you don't think about it.

Q. You've been so consistently strong over the last year and a half. Was there any particular reason why you didn't feel as sharp as you were on that second ball? Did you feel good coming into today?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Not so great really. I had bad last couple days. Last five, six days I wasn't feeling great. But I don't want to talk about it now.

Q. After the last match you used the term 'I have nothing to lose.' What exactly did you mean by that? Now how do you feel about that?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, you know, I lost the match. It's not the first; it's not the last time I lost a match. I lost to a great champion, somebody that is has the most Grand Slams in the history of the sport.

I do regret that I didn't play as well as I thought I would and as well as I played maybe last couple matches.

You know, life goes on. This is sport. I have to move on.

Q. Things almost went perfectly for you last year at the Grand Slams. Was it sort of inevitable this year that they wouldn't?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, you know, comparing to last year people would say this year is not that great. But, you know, look, I won a Grand Slam, played finals, semifinals, won a couple of big tournaments, and played a lot of finals.

You know, so I'm very satisfied with the way it goes. Maybe couple of matches I'm disappointed about, you know. But, look, you know, it's normal. It's really difficult to do, to repeat what I have done last year, and I didn't expect myself to do that. Every year is different obviously.But I feel good about myself in general. I feel good playing on the major events. Confidence is there. I just need to continue on working hard and hoping for the best.
Q. Whatever happens in the other semifinal, do you think Roger Federer is favorite now for the final?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Well, considering the history that he has at Wimbledon, yes, probably.

Q. When a great champion doesn't win a big title for a couple of years people start to doubt his ability to do that. I'm wondering if you always felt like Federer was always there and capable of winning?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: He was always there. Last couple years he didn't win a major, but he was in a couple of finals and always semifinals. He's always playing close matches against whoever, you know.

This is tennis. You know, of course he was so dominant, and then you had Nadal who made a great rivalry with him. Then myself, Murray, a couple other players who were young and who started believing they can win against him.

That's what I think makes this era right now in men's tennis very interesting.

Q. If Sunday Federer will win, he will become No. 1 in the world. I don't know if you will watch it or not, but do you think about that? You don't care? In a way you hope the other one wins so you remain No. 1.

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Look, if he wins and becomes No. 1 it's going to be well‑deserved. He's played fantastic this year. He's been so consistent. If he wins, he wins. There's nothing I can do about it. The best player will win this tournament. I'm out.

Now I will cheer for my holidays in next 10 days.

Q. He's 30; he's into an eighth Wimbledon final. Pretty extraordinary. For you out there facing him, what are the qualities about Roger Federer that are so tough?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: You really like talking about Roger (smiling)? Every press conference you come up with questions about him. I have to repeat myself again.

It's his mental strength and ability to always play best in important moments.

Q. Can you tell us what you are going to do now ahead of the Olympics? Are you going to watch the final?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: No, no. I'm really going for holidays now. It's been a long five, six months for me. Didn't have much rest. Now I'm going to take some time off and really try to keep my mind off tennis.

Then of course coming back to Olympics, which I'm looking forward to.
Q. When you hit that dropshot in the last stages of the match, did that bring back memories of the US Open match when you hit that fantastic shot? Did you think you had a hope of getting back in?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Oh, you know, no, I really wasn't thinking about that. It was really hard to expect that I can do the same.

But, you know, I was there. You know, I tried my best. I tried to come back to the match.

But, as I said, when you drop a serve against Roger at this stage of the match in the tournament, there's not much chance you can come back.

Q. Is it quite nice to know you're not done yet here this year and you'll come back in three weeks?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: Yes. Olympic Games are pinnacle of all sports. I'm really looking forward to play here and see how it looks during Olympic Games, how the grass will look, as well. You know, try to enjoy every single moment of it. End.

Q. What would Pierre say?

NOVAK DJOKOVIC: I don't know. I guess he will be disappointing when I come back home. I don't know. I'll see.

lydian wrote:...................................................................................always strikes me as odd how we have 4-6 weeks off after Wimbledon but yet its so compressed before it...surely SW19 could move forward a fortnight...would allow more time after FO...maybe allow a grass Masters, and push Wimbledon deeper into british summer with better chance of good weather...)

Such a schedule change has been under consideration by the AELTC for some time (albeit by just one week rather than two) and it seems that the idea has now finally worked its way from the back burner to the front ......

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/18582314

It's understandable that some additional time to allow for "rest & recuperation" would - as mentioned in the report - be welcomed by the players "between playing an intense tournament at Roland Garros and coming to Wimbledon ".

But equally I can't help a little wry smile when I think back to how remarkably well a certain Swedish player managed the swift transition for several years without finding it too much of an issue. In fact he almost seemed to relish the challenge of what was then a much more dramatic switch.....

Well done in finding the transcript Turron

As you say, the context looks a bit more positive.

However...he still went out relatively meekly in the SW19 SF...maybe just mental wear, maybe he found it hard to elevate himself, maybe Fed just played too well!

The Olympics will tell us more no doubt.
lol, reckoner...what has maths got to do with it hey?!

Good link lags, looks positive for a move then.

Shame they cant upgrade Queens or Halle to a Masters though...

lydian wrote:what has maths got to do with it?!

What's maths, but a second hand emotion
Who needs a slide rule when a slide rule can be broken

JuliusHMarx wrote:

lydian wrote:what has maths got to do with it?!

What's maths, but a second hand emotion
Who needs a slide rule when a slide rule can be broken

What's a "slide rule"?

reckoner wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

lydian wrote:what has maths got to do with it?!

What's maths, but a second hand emotion
Who needs a slide rule when a slide rule can be broken

What's a "slide rule"?

The "What goes up must come down" rule..

To maintain the motivation and desire to stay at the top, as SFP says, requires hard work and dedication. Being #2 is not too shabby, is it? Federer was #3 a couple of weeks ago.

The schedule this year is pure hell with OG in the middle.

Maintaining the 2011 form for Djokovic is very hard work. McEnroe has a 1984 of 82-3, but 1985 is 71-9, and no slams.

I would give Djokovic some room and see how the year ends. Quite a bit of Tennis to be played yet.

Another day, another tournament, another opportunity for a big pay day, to fill another overfull coffer, and another opportunity for a trophy, and go to another function to keep the sponsors happy so that they feel they're getting something for the big bucks they have put into the swiss bank account. It's hard work but is this all there is to life ? Maintaining motivation can be difficult

All the top players take some time off away from tennis to re-charge the batteries etc. - e.g. Fed missing the Asian swing last year.
Maybe his motivation wavered a little through being a bit worn out - it only takes a very small little drop in form/fitness/belief to go from winner to runner-up - but the chances are he'll re-focus and regain any lost motivation and be back in full flow for the Olympics & US hard court season.

lydian wrote:But with Djokovic you just wonder. I wrote a thread a while back comparing Djoko11 vs Wilander88...we saw how much that stellar year took out of Wilander and he was never the same again..and after the following year he was effectively a spent force.

He's a million times better than Wilander as much as some of you Federer/Nadal radicals like to pretend otherwise, the difference is Nadal and Federer were always 1 and 2 well atleast until about 2010 and Djoker was always competing with Murray for the 3 and 4 spot, so he's mentally not adjusted to being the main man. Luckily for Federer and Nadal they came through when there was little challenge and psychologically walking out on court as 1 or 2 is far healthier than going out as 3 or 4.

Now I'm going to take some time off and really try to keep my mind off tennis.

That's what they all say when in fact they probably think more about tennis during their breaks than an alcoholic thinks about beer.

It was alway's unlikely that Djokovic could continue winning in the way that he did in 2011 especially with two players like Federer and Nadal around. I suspected there would be a slump. Admittedly the slump (if you can call it that) came later than I would have thought. Just as I expected a slump I also expect him to return to winning ways again. Although he hasn't been tested like this before and even playing at his very best it is very tricky for him to beat Nadal or Federer if they do the same.

I can't find a link atm, but do remember reading Djokovic saying that maybe he would only play tennis for another 2 or 3 years - he seemed to infer that much as he was enjoying being No 1, he was also looking forward to the rest of his life. I imagine with the experience of filming under his belt and all the other opportunities experienced by him lately he is perhaps having his eyes 'widened' from the reasonably narrow experience of professional sport - he is an extrovert after all and someone that you can easily see having a very public role in some capacity after tennis ends. Having said that, I expect him to be very much in contention for all the big prizes for the next couple of years.

I know I am in the minority, but I hated the AO final because I thought it was completely brutal and that it would take too much, both physically and emotionally, from both players. I know Nadal went on to win RG, and as I missed that completely (another story) I can't really comment on how majestically he may have been playing for those two weeks but his Wimbledon showing was not what we have come to expect aside from the fact he faced someone 'on fire'. Novak may have won the gladitorial contest at AO but he knows how close he came to losing and I don't think he has shown the desire to fight for his life in the same way since. If conditions continue to allow those two players to beat each other into submission for much longer, I don't expect to see either of them play with the same quality for much longer - but then again, what do I know

Lydian, you have pretty well summed about my concerns about Novak!

In answer to the OP, I think he has been mentally struggling since the start of the clay season.

I've mentioned this elsewhere but my feeling is that he is struggling with the plan of peaking for the big events.

At the start of 2011 he was at the level where he would aim to win as many TMS as possible and hope to, but not expect to win slams. I think his mindset would have been to train hard, give 100% at all tournaments and see what happens. What happened was he found the form to win three slams, 5 TMS, 1 TMS runner up and get to #1 but the cost was that his body gave out by September.

At the start of 2012, his outlook was different because he has moved up a level. Winning TMS would be very nice but he now knows that he will be judged by the same level as Fed and Nadal i.e. by winning slams.

The consequence of this is that, whereas previously a slam semi final or a runner up position would have been seen as a good tournament, now it will feel slightly like a disappointment. This brings extra pressure because if he fails to win, then he hasn't met his own plan, he's missed his goal and he doesn't get the love from the crowds and media that I think deep down he really needs!

I think the racquet smashing, the double faults at key points at RG, the bizarrely limp performance v Fed at Wimbledon are all symptoms of him cracking under the pressure.

Will he pull it round? I think yes but it may take a few months. Being the hunted rather than the hunter is a lesson he needs to learn.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:... so he's mentally not adjusted to being the main man...

Is that not a direct measure of the differences between 'greatness' or lack thereof?

laverfan wrote:

Josiah Maiestas wrote:... so he's mentally not adjusted to being the main man...

Is that not a direct measure of the differences between 'greatness' or lack thereof?

It is, but give him time to learn it. Greatness overcomes obstacles. Novak has just been presented with a big one. Only time will tell if he is up to the challenge.

I think Djokovic has been the victim of his own success in 2011. Anything he does now apart from repeating that year is a let down or shortfall.

I may be wrong here but in the semi I did expect him to be all over Federer in terms of court coverage and pin point accuracy in terms of his returns etc. Its difficult to imagine it was the same man who had cruised through the first 5 matches.

I am just wondering whether he succumbed to pressure. It was the first time he played Fed at Wimbledon, which in many peoples eyes is HIS court. Same I think at RG i,e it is Nadal's home and therefore mentally had maybe lack of belief.

Those comments of his I find very odd too. I mean he has got 5 years ahead of him. What can't he achieve in that time? He can surpass Federer and Nadal in terms of slams. Some players when they have a goal and those goals are achieved perhaps the enthusiasm wanes a little.

That is what is most amazing about Federer; after all he has achieved he wants to achieve even more. Did we not see Nadal take his foot off the pedal after he won Wimbledon and became number one?

How can he surpass 17 Slams? Not a snowballs chance in Hell.

I don't see him passing Nadal as it happens. He's the sort of player who could lose it very quickly.

FedsFan wrote:I may be wrong here but in the semi I did expect him to be all over Federer in terms of court coverage and pin point accuracy in terms of his returns etc. Its difficult to imagine it was the same man who had cruised through the first 5 matches.

I am just wondering whether he succumbed to pressure.

Totally agree. It's one thing to have a bad day where you miss your shots but he didn't look like he was even attempting his shots! He looked nervous and was easy pickings for Fed.

In fairness, he did say after the game that he knew he was too cautious.

An interesting article (+ subsequent contributions by many others) by lydian because it reminds us of the level of sheer focus, consistency of performance and determination required to hold on to that coveted Number One status for a prolonged and uninterrupted spell, highlighted by just how few players have managed it since the introduction of the official rankings just under 40 years ago

- Connors kept hold of his top spot for three years (July 74-Aug 77)
- Lendl also did it for three years (Sept 85- Sept 88)
- Sampras for two years (April 96 - March 98)

Federer, as we know, then took things to a whole new level with an unbroken spell of over 4 years (237 consecutive weeks), from 2004 : a record which looks pretty safe right now

Most observers recognised it was always going to be tough for Djokovic to match the excellence he achieved in 2011. It was, in so many different and impressive ways, a stellar year ; and whilst not totally impossible, it’s very, very hard (unfair even …?) to expect that he will have another one as good, let alone better, for as long he plays the game. And you sense from those comments made by Djokovic that he himself perhaps sees things that way ..... ie that his 2011 achievements were so special for him that he was always unikely to match them. Sure, his talent will see him adding to his Slam collection and there is little sign that he will not be a major figure for some time to come. But …. in terms of a single calendar year, 2011 will surely stand as his best ever once his playing career has come to an end.

For the past 9.5 years the Number One spot has swapped between just three players but it’s interesting to look at their respective records both in the year they first made Number One and then how well how they each fared in their efforts to ‘defend’ their top dog status.


Federer

- First made No. 1 in Feb 2004. He won 3 Slams that year, and finished with W/L figures of 74-6 (92.5%)

- The following year he took two Slams and held his top ranking with figures of 81-4 (95.3%)

(as a side note, Federer then racked up even more impressive figures in 2006, taking 3 Slams again and finishing with a staggering W/L of 92-5, equating to 94.8%)


Nadal

- First made No. 1 in Aug 2008. Won two Slams and finished with W/L figs of 82-11 (88.1%)

- The following year he took one Slam but fell back to Number two, finishing the year with W/L figures of 66-14


Djokovic

- First made No. 1 in July 2011. Won 3 Slams and compiled W/L figures of 70-6 (92.1%)

- The following year ….. ?? well, we’ve still got almost six months to go of course but he’s already got one Slam under his belt and can potentially take another. It’s true that he has already suffered one more loss than he did in the whole of 2011 but there is every prospect of him regaining his top spot and ending the year as No.1

In summary I’d say that Djokovic has had a more than respectable 2012 to date and of course there is a lot still to play for. Had it not been for a quite remarkable run by Federer starting immediately after USO 2011 (since when he has compiled an impressive 61-6, the most consistent performance of any player on tour) then he would still be comfortably at Number One. The next few months will tell us more about his mental stamina and overall motivation, but I'm inclined to think that he will be back fresh and strong once the disappointment of failing to successfully defend Wimbledon has eased.

The “leadership tennis” as referred to by Lydian is, without doubt, tough to maintain. Even the great Sampras needed several different spells – with various interruptions along the way – to compile what was, until this last Sunday afternoon, a record number of weeks at the top.

lags, Federers run since the US Open is even better than that - one of those losses was in the Davis Cup, which isn't even in a proper individual tournament. As far as I'm concerned he's lost 5 this year, plus a meaningless RR match.

Spare a thought for Jimmy Connors; his two great runs at #1 lasted for 160 and 84 weeks and were separated only by ONE WEEK by Bjorn Borg. But for that he would own the record sequence of 245 weeks.

Interesting point there bogbrush !

But then Bjorn the Great single-handledly deprived Jimbo of many things in his career - not least what might well have been another four Wimbledon titles

Connors still has a lot to shout about. The best of which is of course his amazing haul of 109 career titles. I don't see any of the current generation coming even close to that one .......

I know a win is a win, and Jimbo was a hell of a slugger, but weren't a fair proportion of the 109 in events without a really competitive field?

Djokovic felt the mantle of no.1 just like how Nadal felt it when he won on 2008.

Its Incredible how Fed managed himself to hold on to it for close to 5 years in a row.

Nadal felt it lot easy on 2010 to regain the no.1 , so technically its easy to regain the no.1 than holding it due to pressure, may be Djoko and Nadal will comeback harder on 2013 which could make it another interesting year.

Maybe IC but look what it took to dislodge Nadal last year but for Djokovic having a near "freak" year he would have been #1 for a good 30-40 more weeks I suppose. But with Nadal I never got the sense he was bothered about the top spot...infact he's always said that. whereas with Federer I think it was a more discernible desire. At the end of the day its tournament wins that count...and of course Federer has plenty of those!

Yep Turron, I think many events back then had smaller fields - almost invitational events. Because if you look further back I think Laver has something like 160+ titles. In the modern era which I state is 1980 onwards...Federer is the stand out player no question in terms of success.

Newsflash! Djokovic was world number 1 for the past year non stop. This year he has won Australian open and Miami, runner up at French open, Rome, monte Carlo, semis at Wimbledon. You would swear the guy has collapsed. He has had a very good year to date, to go something like 52 consecutive weeks at world number one was incredible given the amount of points he was defending to date.

I think he has backed up last year really well. If he was to win olympics or us open too I would consider it another excellent year. He is now heading arguably his strongest time of year. He won us open and Montreal last year and wouldn't see him being far away in likes of cincinnati and Paris masters. All in all looking very good for him I think.

Amazing how quickly people forget that djokovic has already won a slam this year!

Who is this Djokovic person of whom you speak?

bogbrush wrote:How can he surpass 17 Slams? Not a snowballs chance in Hell.

I don't see him passing Nadal as it happens. He's the sort of player who could lose it very quickly.

BB,
Do you think it is really impossible? He can get close though. Maybe 12? Do you see Nadal passing 17?

Djokovic would need to win an average 2 Slams a year for the next 6 (!) years. Okay, last year he won 3, but this year he may end up with only 1. I think 2 on average is pretty ambitious.

And Federer might even add 1 or 2 more :-)

Sadly the Nadal loss in Monte Carlo seemed to affect him more than it should have done. It's a shame because he's the only player with the ability and character to potentially beat Nadal at Roland Garros as Federer cakes his pants at the prospect.

Could be a further opening for Murray if Djoko decides he's happy enough with his lot.

When Federer said that by his success he had created a monster he was talking about how it was difficult for him to meet expectations going forward.

Unsurprisingly, it's also difficult for those that follow him to deal with it.

Of the top 3 it's arguably only Fed who has been let free from the monstrous expectation he created that the top dog should carry all before him for years at a time. Both Nadal and Djoko have stuggled to keep up their absolute best for more than a year (a hugely impressive feat in itself).

However, as others suggest we need to hold our horses a wee bit. Djoko is only 75 points behind Fed and if you look at the points scored this year so far there's very little between him, Fed, and Nadal. Djoko is still right up there and there's a very good chance that he'll go into the HC season more motivated than he did last year and at least as fresh as his main rivals, who have played a lot of matches. He knows he's returning to his best surface after 'playing away' on the Fedal surfaces when it's only been those two between him and another stellar year. He is a bit like Nadal last year who had only Djoko between him and a repeat of 2010 but who returned with a vengeance on his preferred surface.

FedsFan wrote:

bogbrush wrote:How can he surpass 17 Slams? Not a snowballs chance in Hell.

I don't see him passing Nadal as it happens. He's the sort of player who could lose it very quickly.

BB,
Do you think it is really impossible? He can get close though. Maybe 12? Do you see Nadal passing 17?

He's only got 5 you know. There's no way he can stay peak for all that long anyway.

No, I don't see Nadal reaching 17. Not enough Slams won off clay.

Good article Lydian

I was thinking about this the other day. I don't see him (or Murray before anyone counters ) as No.1 "leaders" - whilst Nadal and Fed are around

Long term, yes. Now, no.

bogbrush wrote:

FedsFan wrote:

bogbrush wrote:How can he surpass 17 Slams? Not a snowballs chance in Hell.

I don't see him passing Nadal as it happens. He's the sort of player who could lose it very quickly.

BB,
Do you think it is really impossible? He can get close though. Maybe 12? Do you see Nadal passing 17?

He's only got 5 you know. There's no way he can stay peak for all that long anyway.

No, I don't see Nadal reaching 17. Not enough Slams won off clay.

It's Federer's monster again - his career suggests that picking up 6 slams over a couple of years, or 8-9 in three is what the top dog does. Thus far neither Djoko nor Nadal has managed to have back-to-back multiple slam years - Djoko may still do it at the USO of course.

The problem for Nadal amassing slams seems to be injury.
The efforts of 2008 and 2010 resulted in poorer follow up years.
Not surprising given we know his style is more taxing that Feds.
Personally I think the early Wimb loss will have done him a lot of good...and he'll bounce back.
I see him ending up on around 14 slams, hard to see beyond that really...but hey what an innings.

Djokovic is a tough one to read...I still feel with him it could all slide quickly in terms of going back to his pre-2011 days.
He's yet to show dominance beyond one season.
And who knows...marriage, kids, etc...may all start to pull at him if he's feeling contented, etc.
Not that that has done Roger much harm but mentally I think Fed is very different from Djokovic.

Super D Boon wrote:Sadly the Nadal loss in Monte Carlo seemed to affect him more than it should have done. It's a shame because he's the only player with the ability and character to potentially beat Nadal at Roland Garros as Federer cakes his pants at the prospect.

Could be a further opening for Murray if Djoko decides he's happy enough with his lot.

That was a poor match, his level really started falling before that though, scraping through matches and final in AO, then in MC before the final. I would not choose him to win the US Open as it stands, this is the slam that really shows which direction he is heading, lose here and he is a one slam owner back to the depths of of being a mere mortal. His quality returns and error free rallies are now a thing of the past judging by the last 2 slams and various clay masters.

lydian wrote:The problem for Nadal amassing slams seems to be injury.
The efforts of 2008 and 2010 resulted in poorer follow up years.

I think Nadal has managed such health issues as he has very consistently since 2009.

What stuffed Nadal in 2011 was Djokovic. In 2011 he reached 10 finals and had a 69-15 overall w/l record against 9 finals and an overall w/l record of 71-10 in 2010. The difference between the two years is almost exclusively down to those 6 final defeats to Djoko, certainly not to injury. Similarly, Nadal's start in 2012 is of a pretty similar quality to 2010: the big differences are Madrid and the extraordinary defeat by Rosol at Wimbledon, both of which are one-offs. Nadal has as case for having been the most consistent player of the top 4 since 2008 with the exception of losing a chunk of 2009 to injury. His most impressive slam wins away from clay were 2008 W and 2009 Aus Open. At 2010 W and USO his main rivals were not firing on all four cylinders - his slam wins away from clay when at least one of his main rivals is really on their game are the exception, not the rule.