Djokovic - Is the Grand Slam on this year?

Djoko's form of late suggests we'll have to seriously think about the Grand Slam being on this year. But even for a guy in scintillating form it's still a big ask. One off day, one opponent on fire, an injury, (dare we mention the 2011 "Fognini effect") - and the chance has gone.
What's always stopped Fed and Djoko having a real go at the calendar slam is the French and a certain Rafa Nadal. Now I still think Rafa will have a big say in what happens at RG but obviously he's far less of a favourite than in previous years.
So can Nole do it? Thoughts please.

I highly doubt it will happen, for precisely the reasons you mention. I don't think he will go another 21 slam matches without either having an off day and/or an inspired opponent.

Should he win RG, my feeling is that he may be a bit flat at Wimbledon. Winning in Paris will, I think, be such a relief that it may be hard to head into battle again so soon after.

The USO has also proved to be a tough nut to crack. Only 1 title there for such a good HC player is a surprisingly low haul.

If he doesn't win at least one more slam this year though, that would be very disappointing.

Yes and I have a tenner on it. One big day for his opponent could put him out, but it would have to be 3 hours straight of perfect tennis to have him.

His main boundaries are.
Nadal at the French
Murray/Fed at wimby
Practically noone except maybe Murray at the US.
Far as im concerned its all about Novak. If hes geed up for all three, he should do it.

temporary21 wrote:Yes and I have a tenner on it.

What odds did you get?

About 5/1, I didnt do it till recently

No.

I think Murray or Dimitrov at Wimby. And then Andy or Kei at the US Open, particularly if it's hot and hence faster conditions, give him too much to do

Let's remember Murray gave him a good match at the Aus final, which I'd argue are the most favourable for Nole of these three slams, for a couple of hours and wasn't quite himself

Of course Novak could do it, but I don't think it will happen

temporary21 wrote:About 5/1, I didnt do it till recently

I think those are pretty stingy odds - but of course they are related to betting patterns

Yes. I don't think that anyone can stop him.

Very tough ask, if he can win the French I think it would provide such a huge confidence boost ! That for me is still the biggest obstacle, the mental baggage of completing the career slam particularly with expectations so high now!

I can see him winning the us open this year. Wimbledon is hardest to predict but Murray could well be there or thereabouts with his recent form. I also believe federer might win one last slam and that could be it.

If Djoko wins the RG, I assume he will get into Stan long mood of wining nothing then, and might be some time till he will win another GS.

Pressure is too big for him to win it this year, if he does not, it will be a hard hit on  him, if he does win it, it will be such a relaxation, he will not care for some time to win again.

No.
I can see him winning two but no more.
Slams are a very different kettle of fish to bo3.

I remember saying this a few months ago, and no one (indcluding bookies) seemed to think it would happen.
I'm very confident Djokovic will do the Grand Slam, and I don't think he even has to play as well as he did in 2011.

It Must Be Love wrote:I remember saying this a few months ago, and no one (indcluding bookies) seemed to think it would happen.
I'm very confident Djokovic will do the Grand Slam, and I don't think he even has to play as well as he did in 2011.

Nah!!!

I can't see it. Despite being in unstoppable form of late, it's a mighty ask. Would be amazing if he could.

If only Federer had had such urine poor competition for one year of his career when he was in his prime...

He did. It was called 2004.

greengoblin wrote:If only Federer had had such urine poor competition for one year of his career when he was in his prime...

Agree, if only Federer had such competition for one year when he was in his prime

Are we saying that Novaks poor competition, includes Federer at number 2?

temporary21 wrote:Are we saying that Novaks poor competition, includes Federer at number 2?

What's your opinion on it?

Karlovic and Isner have beaten Djokovic in conditions that favour the Serb. They both have big serves and don't play long points on return games - that is the best chance to beat him atm.

Federer could be number 1, 2 or 50, still doesn't change the fact that it is a poor year for tennis, with the odd rare break through.

Thanks for all the responses. JM - not sure it's been all that bad this year, or do you mean it's been a bit samey in that Djoko has scooped nearly all the top prizes?
I would say that in Kyrgios and Coric, not to mention Kokkinakis, we have some good young players. I see the bookies are being their usual ungenerous selves when it comes to the odds on Djoko for the Grand Slam.

At best I would say that Novak 15-1 to do the grandslam. He of course is in a wonderful position as he is the only one who can do it. The Grandslam is truly on if he wins wimbeldon, even then I would still think there is a long way to go with how pressure packed each and every match would be and the coverage of it in NY if he is three quarters there. It isn't very likely, but the competition in regards to his top rivals are down this year. Murray I think is the biggest threat at wimby and the USO.

legendkillarV2 wrote:He did. It was called 2004.

Yeah maybe if we put coria on crutches, distracted Nalbandian with a box of doughnuts, and gave Roddick a deadleg before the wim final I might agree with you.

temporary21 wrote:Are we saying that Novaks poor competition, includes Federer at number 2?

That's a very good indicator of poor competition actually. Federer is 1/2 the player he was 6 or so years ago.

If Djoko wins 4 GS this year, so the real GS, I will quit watching tennis and become a shemale.

If these Masters were Bo5 as they were, then the number would be much different for the Top 4.

Bo3 is Girly WTA Masters.

The real irony would be that Rafa, that perpetual wrecker of GS hopes, could still spoil Djoko's chances by staging a resurgence that would take him to either the Wimbledon or USO crown.
Rafa must be due a decent Wimbledon and for once he won't have worn himself out on the European clay-court circuit.

Now that Rafael Nadal is on his last legs, the pressure has increased on Novak Djokovic to finally win the French Open.

Just look back to 2011, he was 45-0?, he had Nadal's number. But got hammered by Roger Federer in the final. Yes many point to the W/O by Fognini, but the pressure was on against Federer and Djokovic couldn't handle it.

Even in 2012, after breaking Nadal's heart in Melbourne, Djokovic openly said winning the French Open was his dream. But in the final 'The King of Clay' wasn't in the mood to hand over his championship.

Then the most telling match 2013 semi final. Djokovic had the match in his pocket...but then he touched the net. And we all know what happened after that.

Novak Djokovic's form looks very handy but can he this time deal with the pressure of being undisputed favourite?

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:He did. It was called 2004.

Yeah maybe if we put coria on crutches, distracted Nalbandian with a box of doughnuts, and gave Roddick a deadleg before the wim final I might agree with you.

Is the field injured??

The level of bottling in 2004 is just as high as 2015.

Jahu wrote:If Djoko wins 4 GS this year, so the real GS, I will quit watching tennis and become a shemale.

If these Masters were Bo5 as they were, then the number would be much different for the Top 4.

Bo3 is Girly WTA Masters.

Don't understand your point. Firstly only the finals were Bo5. So same players would get to the finals Secondly who has won most of the the Bo5 slams (and been runners-up) over the past 8 years ? The same Top 4. So what would be different ?

Silver wrote:

temporary21 wrote:Are we saying that Novaks poor competition, includes Federer at number 2?

What's your opinion on it?

Well if we're going for some weekerra argument when ROGER is still there and playing well is huge disrespect to the big man.

Calder, numbers of titles between the top 4 would be different, now Djoko will have 35+ I guess, who knows all those finals if they were Bo5 would of ended?

That was the point.

I'll give him 50% for the FO, 30% for Wimbledon, and 50% for the US Open. That makes 0.5x0.3x0.5.
That makes 13-1 or 7.5% chance.
I think this thread's a bit early, I prefer to join the discussion more after the French Open, it's always a long shot, we've had this discussion before about other players, and no-one ever wins the French Open.

Henman Bill wrote:I'll give him 50% for the FO, 30% for Wimbledon, and 50% for the US Open. That makes 0.5x0.3x0.5.
That makes 13-1 or 7.5% chance.
I think this thread's a bit early, I prefer to join the discussion more after the French Open, it's always a long shot, we've had this discussion before about other players, and no-one ever wins the French Open.

Hate to be a bug bear, but thats only right if winning one was independent of the other.
50-50 for the french? Personally Id go 60-40, IF he gets that though I think his odds on the other two go up

The CYGS was never in play in 2004. It wasn't expected and he wasn't good enough. During the first half of that year he lost to Tim Henman, Dominik Hrbaty, the young and lowly ranked Rafa, and Albert Costa at Rome coming into the French Open. The expectation of utter dominance wasn't there yet. He only had 2 slams to his name going into the FO. In 2002 and 2003 he lost in the FO in the first round; there would have been no expectation of him winning the event. Coria had been the best player in that clay season (despite a loss to Federer in Hamburg) and was favourite to win the FO. Coria was not remembered as a great, but he was great for 1 season, that season. Although Federer was not in Coria's half and Coria did suffer nerves and physical issues in the final. Had Federer got to the final....

Federer's dominance perhaps didn't start to the second half of 2004 and perhaps peaked at the US Open when he looked very good. There was no bottle at the FO, it was only with the benefit of hindsight that it might have been an opportunity missed. Especially when Rafa properly came onto the scene in 2005.

Federer never won the CYGS because he couldn't beat Rafa on clay. If Federer had been a year ahead in when he was peaking, or Rafa a year behind, it might have been a different story.

I agree with you, and have made the same point in the past myself years ago probably on this forum. They are not indepdent of each other, but I already factored that into my analysis.

If Djokovic wins the FO and Wimbledon, his odds of winning the US Open increase to 0.5 in my estimation as he would be on a roll and playing well. At the moment it's about 0.4.

Winning FO doesn't increase the odds of winning Wimbledon though, I don't think. In fact it makes the physical recovery and surface transition that bit harder.

I think 50% for Djokovic at the French, 30-35% for Rafa, remember others can win it too, must be 5% for Federer, 5% for Murray, 2% for Ferrer, 5% chance of a surprise youngster win...

Henman Bill wrote:I agree with you, and have made the same point in the past myself years ago probably on this forum. They are not indepdent of each other, but I already factored that into my analysis.

If Djokovic wins the FO and Wimbledon, his odds of winning the US Open increase to 0.5 in my estimation as he would be on a roll and playing well. At the moment it's about 0.4.

Winning FO doesn't increase the odds of winning Wimbledon though, I don't think. In fact it makes the physical recovery and surface transition that bit harder.

I think 50% for Djokovic at the French, 30-35% for Rafa, remember others can win it too, must be 5% for Federer, 5% for Murray, 2% for Ferrer, 5% chance of a surprise youngster win...

Fair enough.

Was it Guga who took out fed at the French in 04? He probably was too young in 04, hed only won his first slam a year before that. 2005 might have been his best chance, but he wasnt all that great against Nadal in the RG semi, had he out more pressure on him...

OK, I was going to wait 'til after the FO, but I've been sucked in.

I've just been looking at the FO odds http://www.oddschecker.com/tennis/french-open/mens/winner and wow, you can get 3-1 on Rafa. I may take that even though I think Djokovic will win. Temp 21, the bookies are closer to 60% than 50% on average, especially when you factor in their profit margin, so they agree with you and not me, or did you already use them as your source?

As to the other part of it, how the FO might affect the other odds, let's test the theory. Today the odds for Djokovic at Wimbledon are mostly 11/8 or 6/4 and for the US Open majority are 6/4 with a minority between 6/4 and 1/1. If he wins FO let's have a check after that. I predict his odds for Wimbledon will be unchanged if he wins FO, but his odds for US Open will go to evens or odds on if he wins French Open and Wimbledon.

Well I know it was Kuerten who beat Roger in FO, although I never saw any of that match. I did watch the 2005 FO match and the quality was fairly low, perhaps some nerves. I thought 2011 was their best FO match and perhaps '06 and '07 as well although don't remember those as much, not sure if I watched the whole matches. 2011 and 2005 I did watch and a shame because I think 2011 Federer would have won the French Open in 2004 or 2005.

A bit surprised that the bookies have Novak at virtually the same odds for Wimbledon and the US Open, at first glance that doesn't look right, with a greater threat from Murray and Federer at Wimbledon. I suppose there could be some reasoning behind it though:
- Lack of threat from Rafa at Wimbledon based on previous years and current form.
- US Open always said to be more open - e.g. underdog like Cilic blasts through and wins, not much chance of that at Wimbledon.
- Djokovic is the current champion of Wimbledon after all, but not at US Open.
- Djokovic is currently on top form which might carry through to Wimbledon, but could change by US Open.
- Djokovic hard court dominance had been more true in the slightly slower IW, Miami and Australian Open, but his record isn't as good on the bit faster courts, is it zero Cincinattis and 1 US Open?

Great form though he is in, way too early to contemplate calendar year slam.

In his illustrious career he has thus far won combined three titles at the FO, W and the USO. He would need to double that in the next four months.

I will check back if he wins the FO and is in the final of Wimbledon. Anything prior to that is too early for me.

Henman Bill wrote:The CYGS was never in play in 2004. It wasn't expected and he wasn't good enough. During the first half of that year he lost to Tim Henman, Dominik Hrbaty, the young and lowly ranked Rafa, and Albert Costa at Rome coming into the French Open. The expectation of utter dominance wasn't there yet. He only had 2 slams to his name going into the FO. In 2002 and 2003 he lost in the FO in the first round; there would have been no expectation of him winning the event. Coria had been the best player in that clay season (despite a loss to Federer in Hamburg) and was favourite to win the FO. Coria was not remembered as a great, but he was great for 1 season, that season. Although Federer was not in Coria's half and Coria did suffer nerves and physical issues in the final. Had Federer got to the final....

Federer's dominance perhaps didn't start to the second half of 2004 and perhaps peaked at the US Open when he looked very good. There was no bottle at the FO, it was only with the benefit of hindsight that it might have been an opportunity missed. Especially when Rafa properly came onto the scene in 2005.

Federer never won the CYGS because he couldn't beat Rafa on clay. If Federer had been a year ahead in when he was peaking, or Rafa a year behind, it might have been a different story.

The CYGS is in play every year, unless of course they cancel one of the slams. Whether Federer was ready is debatable. I think it is quite laughable for the suggestion that the competition levels are lesser in 2015 than in previous years.

Nothing could be lesser than one shot Andy and slim fast dave in terms of top level competition Murray literally craps on any competition fed faced on a fast court till about 2008. And I am talking about Judy Murray.

If we are talking about Novak getting his career grand slam by winning the French Open then there is certainly an excellent chance of that. If we are talking about winning all four slams this year well that is a different matter. Now I know Djokovic has won Wimbledon before but I always get the feeling he is more vulnerable there. I wouldn't say he was the greatest grass courter in the world put it that way. Also someone made a very good point earlier and a pertinent one. Should he win the French Open after so long striving for it I suspect it may leave him flat for Wimbledon. As for the US Open he will be the very warm favourite but if consistency has remained and he mops up a string of Masters titles then how much will there be left in the tank for a two week push to that title?

I think at this moment in time another slam win for him this year is a definite, two more is possible but far more difficult and three well I just don't see it.

Jahu wrote:Calder, numbers of titles between the top 4 would be different, now Djoko will have 35+ I guess, who knows all those finals if they were Bo5 would of ended?

That was the point.

Ok thanks. However if you look at Djokovic's record since he lost at Cinci in 2012 he has only lost one other Bo3 final (Dubai to Federer this year in a 500 event). In fact since 2010 he has lost 4 Masters 1000 finals and 3 of them were in 2012. So it looks like when he gets to these finals he rarely loses. Therefore although there may be some slight differences in number of titles between the top 4 if the finals were Bo5 I don't think it would be a significant difference.

summerblues wrote:Great form though he is in, way too early to contemplate calendar year slam.

In his illustrious career he has thus far won combined three titles at the FO, W and the USO.  He would need to double that in the next four months.

I will check back if he wins the FO and is in the final of Wimbledon.  Anything prior to that is too early for me.

In the bold bit, sound you a bit like yoda, me thinks.

LuvSports! wrote:

summerblues wrote:Great form though he is in, way too early to contemplate calendar year slam.

In his illustrious career he has thus far won combined three titles at the FO, W and the USO.  He would need to double that in the next four months.

I will check back if he wins the FO and is in the final of Wimbledon.  Anything prior to that is too early for me.

In the bold bit, sound you a bit like yoda, me thinks.

I sense a great disturbance in the Slams. Master Djokovic must not become a CYGS winner!

"The level of bottling in 2004 is just as high as 2015."

This I have to disagree with because there wasn't the same expectation of Federer at the time as i explained above.

As to the competition level which is perhaps what you really mean, in my view it's slightly harder to do it now because Djokovic had to compete with Federer, Murray and Nadal, however with Federer and Nadal apparently on the decline it is easier to do it now than a few years ago.

If he had managed it in 2011, that would have been truly incredible, because Nadal was still playing at or close to his 2010 level (look at Nadal's record 2011 vs 2010 - it's basically the same if you take out the final defeats to Djokovic) and Federer was also playing at or close to his best (again, look at who Federer lost to in 2011, mostly Nadal and Djokovic in semi finals which he was consistently reaching, none of these losses to players like Robredo).

I am not sure tiredness is going to be a problem for Djokovic at the US Open. If you look at 2011, he was extremely tired at one of the events going into the US Open, causing him to lose the match, and was tired as well after the US Open, but managed to peak for the US Open and play at the level of the first half of 2011.

There is plenty of recovery time in July before the US hard court season and additionally if Djokovic does reach the FO and Wimbledon finals and have long matches he could look at skipping one of the 2 US masters that come next to each other.

Another thing for Djokovic is to get Cincinatti so he can have all 9 masters, however that can always wait for another year.

Henman Bill wrote:"The level of bottling in 2004 is just as high as 2015."

This I have to disagree with because there wasn't the same expectation of Federer at the time as i explained above.

As to the competition level which is perhaps what you really mean, in my view it's slightly harder to do it now because Djokovic had to compete with Federer, Murray and Nadal, however with Federer and Nadal apparently on the decline it is easier to do it now than a few years ago.

If he had managed it in 2011, that would have been truly incredible, because Nadal was still playing at or close to his 2010 level (look at Nadal's record 2011 vs 2010 - it's basically the same if you take out the final defeats to Djokovic) and Federer was also playing at or close to his best (again, look at who Federer lost to in 2011, mostly Nadal and Djokovic in semi finals which he was consistently reaching, none of these losses to players like Robredo).

My comment was aimed at the field and not Federer himself.

I don't find there is an expectation for Djokovic to do it either. I find that the view is who in the field can stop Djokovic at this moment in time which is the same question posed each and every year to the in-form player. HMM made a great point that Novak has only 1 US Open to his name given his dominance on that surface in recent time.