Skip to main content

The Significance of Djokovic


Is Novak Number One?

Novak Djokovic, Roger Federer, and Rafael Nadal each entered the US Open with one slam title this year.  A victory by any one of them would make a strong argument for being #1 for the year. Djokovic nailed the title and it was enough to move him from #6 to #3 in the rankings.  It also moved him to #2 in the yearly race.  But is his record enough to consider him the year’s #1?

How significant are the ITF-controlled slams in the yearly accounting?  Martina Navratilova has spoken out claiming she feels they’ve gotten too important compared to the WTA- and ATP-controlled tours that consist of the all the other tournaments at the 250 point level or higher.  In her era players often skipped the slams for more lucrative tournaments.

But that was then.  Now the slams have assigned point values for the world rankings that have been relatively stable for the last 29 years.  This year Federer has won 14 matches at the slams (missing Roland Garros) while Djokovic and Nadal have each won 21.  But while Djokovic started the year slowly, recovering from an elbow injury, he has been gaining momentum steadily.  Novak has accumulated 4540 ranking points at the slams this year, and Rafa has an impressive, but smaller, 3800 points.  So there’s no question Djokovic is the winner from the slam perspective.

Outside of the slams, Nadal has lost only once in the five tournaments he’s played.  Djokovic had a rough start and at one point leading up to Rome, he lost six of nine matches. But since then he’s 26-4.  In the yearly race he trails Nadal by 1045 ranking points, however, I have a feeling he will thrive in the home-stretch and is likely to finish #1 by year’s end.  Even if he doesn’t, most pundits will probably regard him as #1 for 2018 based on his two slam trophies.

A yearend #1 finish would be Novak’s fifth, tying him with Federer for second place in the Open era (since 1968), one behind Sampras who had six year-end #1’s. (Connors was ranked yearend #1 by the ATP computer for five years from 1974-78 before the algorithm was as refined as it is now, and most experts consider him #1 for only two of those years).

Djokovic ties Sampras with 14 slam titles, and given his current form I expect he will add significantly to his haul.  Steve Tignor at Tennis magazine has predicted that Djokovic, Nadal, and Federer will each end up with 20 slam titles.  Currently Nadal has 17 and Federer 20. 

When Djokovic (and Murray) went AWOL for a year and a half, Nadal and Federer scooped up three slams each.  It was largely Djokovic who stopped their ascendance when he began dominating in 2011.  In the five years from 2012-2016, Fedal claimed five slams, averaging only one per year between them, until Djokovic struggled in 2017.  Now that he’s back, can we expect him to suppress Federer and Nadal the way he did in the past?

Djokovic has a winning record against Federer 24-22 and against Nadal 27-25: a unique and significant achievement. He’s still a little behind in the slam count.  But give him a few years, at the rate he’s going he may one day be considered the GOAT.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Roland Garros Men – 2025 Preview

  Will anyone beside the Top Two make the final of the French Open at Roland Garros this year? Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz look a class ahead of the field.   But with Sinner’s rust and Alcaraz’s occasional inconsistency, the door may open for others – Casper Ruud, Jack Draper, Alex Zverev, maybe even Novak Djokovic…   Top Quarter Jannik Sinner has just returned to the tour after a probably-undeserved three-month suspension for doping. The locker room is visibly nervous about receiving a similar fate; they are on edge as the sword of Damocles hangs over all, seeming to strike randomly. A re-working of the doping protocols is probably in order.   Regardless, Sinner performed reasonably well in his first tournament back in Rome last week, making the final.   He will likely have some ups and downs, but playing best three of five sets in slams will likely give him time to find his game if he should start a match on the wrong foot. He was close to winning...
Post a Comment
Read more

Roland Garros Women – 2025 Preview

There’s not really a favourite for this tournament – which feels a bit weird, since Iga Swiatek has won it four of the last five years.   She’s also been #1 much of that time, but as of today is ranked only #5.   In her absence, Aryna Sabalenka has been entrenching herself at the top with multiple finals played this year, winning three of them.   The six clay tournaments since Miami have seen six different winners, so the answers are not clear cut.   Maybe Jasmine Paolini who won last week in Rome, in conditions very similar to Paris, should be regarded as the first horse.   She was indeed runner-up in the City of Lights last year.   Top Quarter Aryna Sabalenka has been burning up the tour this year. The top seed has opened her lead at #1 to nearly 4000 points.   Other than wobbly performances in Doha and Dubai, she has been a factor in every tournament she’s played.   Impressively, she’s 11-2 on clay.   It’s hard not to regard her a...
Post a Comment
Read more

Victory Points - Djokovic vs Connors, Lendl vs Sampras

Novak Djokovic has just won his 63 rd main tour title with his victory in Miami last week.  It seems like a lot of tournaments and is almost as many as Nadal has won with 67... or Sampras with 64.  But it’s still a lot less than Jimmy Connors’ open era record of 109 titles.  Here’s the title list for the top 20 of the Open Era (since 1968 when professionals were allowed to play with amateurs). 109 Connors 94 Lendl 88 Federer 77 McEnroe 67 Nadal 64 Sampras 64 Borg 63 Djokovic 62 Vilas 60 Agassi 58 Nastase 49 Becker 46 Laver 44 Muster 41 Edberg 37 Smith 35 Murray 34 Chang 33 Ashe 33 Wilander That list may or may not agree with various lists published on the ATP website or Wikipedia, and that’s because there was a fair bit of confusion in the early days of the open era (1968-1973) about what tournaments counted and which were exhibitions.  Some supposed ‘tournaments’ had draws of only four players or were ‘invitational’.  But after ...
Post a Comment
Read more