Novak Djokovic

Surprised to see no mention here of the epic Australian Open final between Djokovic and Nadal. I only managed to see parts of it, but it was yet another epic battle between two of the stars of what is a vintage period in men's tennis.

Watching these guys makes you appreciate just how exceptional they are as sportsmen. Tennis, at that level, is a wonderful blend of power, speed, balance, stamina and huge skill, all on on display for anywhere up to 6 hours. I have no idea how anyone does so many short sprints with countless changes of direction for that length of time, yet still retains the ability to hit powerful shots with such spin and accuracy. And then you also have the mental war that all great 1-on-1 sports have.

Tennis is as good an all-round test of a top sportsman as you will find, and Novak Djokovic can now consider himself as one of the 2 or 3 finest sportsmen in the world today.

While I have nothing but the height fo respect for Nadal as he is an absolute warrior on the court, i cannot warm to his tyle of tennis at all.

Was just logging on to start a topic on this very subject TC.

I have always admired Djokovic for his attitude to the game, but more so in the last 3 years when he refused to be simply a top 5 player but bust his b@lls to be the best! He put the extra yards in, not to get closer to the level of those ranked higher than him like Murray has done, but to overtake them and bring the game to a level higher than i have seen in a long time! He has a while to go before i rank him better than Becker (simply because i loved his style of play), Sampras and Federer at their peak (of the players i have seen play), but he is still only 24!!

The match with Nadal showed all that is good with his attitude, he was dead on his feet for most of the 5th set, but kept plugging away and showed why it is important to never give up on anything when you have half a chance!

An astounding statistic is that he played almost 12 hours of competitive tennis in 48 hours, never mind that they were in the Semi and Final of a Grand Slam!

I know what you are saying, Puke, but Nadal's style is not so different from everyone elses, even Federer, although Federer moves with such grace that he style just looks more appealing.

The reality is that most players are now employing the same tactics, mainly engaging in baseline rallies and only venturing to the net when they have to. This is largely because the grand slams are now all played in similar conditions (grass is slower, clay has got faster, carpet no longer exisits), so one tactic largely suits all.

It is a shame, as part of the attraction of a Borg/McEnroe or Agassi/Sampras rivalry was the contrast between baseliner and serve-volleyer. People used to criticse Tim Henman, but he was great to watch, attacking the net at every chance. It would be lovely to have someone like him, or a Pat Rafter or Stefan Edberg in the top 4 now, but there are so few around.

One of the most stylish players I can recall was the mercurial Czech Miroslav Mecir, who was one of the most naturally gifted players of the 80s. His lack of fitness and power would have meant that he would not have survived in the modern game.

bald eagle wrote: He has a while to go before i rank him better than Becker (simply because i loved his style of play), Sampras and Federer at their peak (of the players i have seen play), but he is still only 24!!

What Djokovic has achieved in the last 12 months has been phenomenal, but I'd agree that he is still quite a long way off being regarded as one of the greatest ever to play the game.

Considering players only from the 'Open Era' (1968 onwards), I'd have Djokovic in my top 15, but not yet in the Top 10. He simply hasn't won enough grand slams, nor has he won them over a long enough period to be rated in the same league as some of the greats, although that could change in the next couple of years.

As for some of the others, you could sneak Becker into the top 10, but then you might have to leave out the likes of Mats Willander or Stefan Edberg, both of whom would be just as deserving.

When ranking the tennis greats, it is always difficult to compare across eras, as it is now much easier for a baseliner to win wimbledon, or for a serve-volleyer to win Roland Garros. For example, Ivan Lendl's failure to win Wimbledon is often cited as a reason for him not being one of the absolute best, but he would have found it much easier to win if playing today.

It also gets tricky when you are debating between achievement and potential. For instance, Lendl, Andre Agassi and Jimmy Connors all won more slams than John McEnroe, but they all also played at the top for much longer. McEnroe was phenomenal for 5 years, winning 7 slams in that period, but then lost interest. Bjorn Borg was exactly the same, winning 11 in 7 years, all of them at either Paris or Wimbledon.

I'd rank McEnroe ahead of Connors, Agassi or Lendl, on the basis that, at his very best, I think he was better than the others. But that argument has limits too, as although I think he was more talented than Sampras also, Sampras won twice as many grand slams, and that would tip the balance in the younger man's favour.

Overall, I'd have Federer and Laver out in front, followed by Borg, Sampras, McEnroe and Nadal, probably in that order. At 7th/8th/9th Connors, Agassi and Lendl are interchangable, while the final slot in my top 10 would go to Wilander, Edberg or Becker.

Djokovic is outstanding at present, but has a long way to go before he jumps above a lot of those names.

Djokovic's celebration at the end was reminicent of the night Bocerty won the darts night down the local (after both players were on double 1 for 20 minutes).

RMDrive wrote:Djokovic's celebration at the end was reminicent of the night Bocerty won the darts night down the local (after both players were on double 1 for 20 minutes).

I heard Boc spent 20 minutes looking around the board for a 1/2 ....

[quote="RMDrive"]Djokovic's celebration at the end was reminicent of the night Bocerty won the darts night down the local (after both players were on double 1 for 20 minutes).[/quote

you dont know how close to the truth that actually is RMD!!!!!

RMDrive wrote:Djokovic's celebration at the end was reminicent of the night Bocerty won the darts night down the local (after both players were on double 1 for 20 minutes).

Brilliant, but how long did it take them to get to double 1?!?

bald eagle wrote:

RMDrive wrote:Djokovic's celebration at the end was reminicent of the night Bocerty won the darts night down the local (after both players were on double 1 for 20 minutes).

Brilliant, but how long did it take them to get to double 1?!?

63 darts each BE!!!!

Vlade Divac was in the crowd supporting Djokovic. Another legend.

RMDrive wrote:Vlade Divac was in the crowd supporting Djokovic. Another legend.

Was that the big bloke with the beard - looked like something out of one flew over the Cuckoos nest

OMAR wrote:

RMDrive wrote:Vlade Divac was in the crowd supporting Djokovic. Another legend.

Was that the big bloke with the beard - looked like something out of one flew over the Cuckoos nest

That was him all right. The documentary "Once Brothers" from the 20 for 20 series was about him and Drazen Petrovic and the effect that the Yugoslavian war had on them. A really fantastic doc (like most of the 20 for 20) and not one which requires you to be a bball fan.

RMDrive wrote:

OMAR wrote:

RMDrive wrote:Vlade Divac was in the crowd supporting Djokovic. Another legend.

Was that the big bloke with the beard - looked like something out of one flew over the Cuckoos nest

That was him all right. The documentary "Once Brothers" from the 20 for 20 series was about him and Drazen Petrovic and the effect that the Yugoslavian war had on them. A really fantastic doc (like most of the 20 for 20) and not one which requires you to be a bball fan.

You mean 30 for 30

The Puke wrote:

RMDrive wrote:

OMAR wrote:

RMDrive wrote:Vlade Divac was in the crowd supporting Djokovic. Another legend.

Was that the big bloke with the beard - looked like something out of one flew over the Cuckoos nest

That was him all right. The documentary "Once Brothers" from the 20 for 20 series was about him and Drazen Petrovic and the effect that the Yugoslavian war had on them. A really fantastic doc (like most of the 20 for 20) and not one which requires you to be a bball fan.

You mean 30 for 30

Some brilliant films on the 30 for 30 series alright, i particularly liked the one called "The Two Escobars", wonderful insight into the rise and spectacular fall of the Colombian soccerball team and more importantly Andres Escobars sad ending.

Haven't seen them all but Run Ricky Run and the one about Reggie Miller v the Knicks are excellent as well.

The one about Evert and Narvatalova(sp) is complete sh1t though

Yeah 30 for 30. Great series. The Reggie Miller one is brilliant.

Superb comeback again this evening in Rolland Garros. What a competitor this guy is