1
…and new ATP #1 player in the world Novak Djokovic!
17 Comments · Posted by Scoop Malinowski in Articles, Scoop
Novak Djokovic has often stated throughout his career that his goal was to become the best player in the world. Over the years and through all the frustrations and failures that Novak Djokovic has suffered, this dream did not always look possible, especially with Kings like Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer guarding the throne.
But Novak Djokovic has overcome the historic reign of domination by the two tennis titans and overtaken the kingdom of tennis with his semifinal four-set win over Jo-Wilfried Tsonga at Wimbledon.
Congratulations to the new world ATP #1 ranked player Novak Djokovic as he makes tennis history and joins the elite pantheon of Federer, Nadal, Sampras, Agassi, Lendl, McEnroe, Borg, Connors, Rios, Kafelnikov, Nastase, Newcombe, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, Muster, Kuerten, Ferrero, Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Moya, Rafter and Courier.
Super Serbia Djokovic makes tennis history
Gans · July 2, 2011 at 1:24 am
I was disappointed with both the matches. Now I wonder how Tsonga beat Federer. It must have been a fluke. Today he came in to the net at wrong moments, missed routine shots and played a mediocre match- didn’t looked like the guy who came to win. It was clear right in the first set when Tsonga was up a break that Djokovic would break him back. And it happened. Novak never had to do anything extraordinary. I wish Fed had come through, so we could have seen some great tennis. If we have a rematch, I am sure Fed will take Tsonga out!
Both my predictions have come true. I said Novak in four and Rafa in five though. Didn’t write to you though.
Murray lost it mentally. He played a great first set. Rafa looked hopeless. And then when it was 2-1 15-30 Murray missed an easy put away FH. That moment, I felt this is it. And it was. From then on, Nadal had to do nothing special. He kept his course and Andy literally surrendered to him. God, he is so fragile! How is he ever going to win a slam?
Sakhi · July 2, 2011 at 2:47 am
Scoop–this comment is for you. Remember when I said Murray would never win a major and you came up with a tiger (or was it lion?) analogy saying he would? Today was a good example of why he won’t win. He’s too passive and too listless in moments of pressure. Nadal played well, but not that well–Murray relapsed into his tedious massaging the ball mode. Now, can anyone see why we need folks like Federer to play on? We need something beyond the relentless baseline tennis that we can expect tomorrow.
Congrats to Nole on a much-deserved victory. Yet, did anyone but me notice how uncomfortable he is coming forward and volleying? I’ll expect another war of attrition to tomorrow. Bang Bang and we’ll see who goes down. No idea who will win.
Michael · July 2, 2011 at 5:38 am
“Congratulations to the new world ATP #1 ranked player Novak Djokovic”
#1 ranked but not the number one player.
There is no way one guy currently has 4 of the last 5 slams (which is remarkable) and the other guy has 1 Australian and is number 1. I don’t care how many matches he won this year. If and when he beats Nadal Sunday he’ll be legit #1. If he loses he’s firmly #2.
Of course you may be in the Woz is #1 camp though she couldn’t buy a Major title.
Scoop Malinowski · July 2, 2011 at 1:01 pm
Sakhi; If Murray flatlines at this level, you are right he will never win a major. But you have to think he will grow, improve, learn, take the next step, advance, whatever you want to call it. In Djokovic’s dark period it looked like he would never be strong enough to win a second major but through time he eventually learned how to become stronger and smarter and he did it. Murray isn’t there yet, but he has time on his side and I think he eventually will. If he can play one set like the first against Nadal he can play two more. Nadal is very hard for anyone to play – except Djokovic who clearly has a mental edge on him and is the only player not psyched out by Nadal. I expect Djokovic to win on Sunday for his fifth win over Rafa in a row.
Scoop Malinowski · July 2, 2011 at 1:04 pm
If Rafa wins tomorrow yes the rankings will look skewed, Djokovic has to win to be the true #1. It’s too bad they can’t figure a way to make the rankings reflect this exactly. Who do y ou think is the true #1 in WTA Michael?
Michael · July 2, 2011 at 1:41 pm
“It’s too bad they can’t figure a way to make the rankings reflect this exactly.”
They need to encourage players like Woz to play every week or they won’t have a “tour.”
“Who do you think is the true #1 in WTA Michael?”
Beats me.
Dan Markowitz · July 2, 2011 at 3:43 pm
It was mysterious or upsetting that Tsonga did not play the same tennis against Djoko as he did against Fed. But Djoko is a different animal than Fed. He doesn’t serve as well, but he makes you play so many more shots than Fed and Tsonga’s best shot led right into Djoko’s backhand, probably the best shot in tennis over Nadal’s or Del Po’s forehand and Fed’s serve, which are the next best shots in tennis. Tsonga is a very good player, as is Murray, but they’re not champions.
I also believe Djoko will take out Nadal tomorrow. And although I’m not a fan of the tennis either man plays, other than to admire their obvious skills and strong mental makeups, but a Nadal-Federer finals doesn’t excite me too much either. We’ve seen that too many times. Let’s see Nadal-Djoko in their first slam finals. It could be a war of aggression, attrition and fitness.
Dan Markowitz · July 2, 2011 at 4:18 pm
Oops, forgot that Nadal and Djoko played in 2010 US Open Finals. But that was when Djoko was just starting to break out. Amazing that he has beaten Nadal in the last four Masters events they’ve played (Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid and Rome) all in the finals.
Are these the two most family-oriented guys in the world? They have their parents and siblings, the girlfriend of Nadal’s takes a back seat and Djoko’s doesn’t even show up anymore.
Sakhi · July 2, 2011 at 4:38 pm
I have to ask you boys to show some love for Petra Kvitova’s terrific win today. I think her non-nervy win shows some hope for women’s tennis. I was so glad she didn’t blubber after her win and seemed poised as hell. and what about that ace on match point? Someone please write a piece on this very young and gifted player. And gasp, she likes moving forward!!
Sakhi · July 2, 2011 at 5:40 pm
Another question for the GOAT debate–can Nadal still be considered the best player of all time (as some of the Nadal admirers are calling for) if he loses to Djokovic tomorrow? That is, Fed’s been bashed up (his legacy allegedly tainted as GOAT) because he’s had a losing record against Nadal (let’s leave aside the obvious fact that Fed has made more clay court major finals than Nadal has on hard courts–thus making those numbers more complex than they appear). All this to say, can Nadal still claim the title of best player if he has a losing record against Djokovic post Wimbledon?? That would be 5 finals he’s lost to him in …
But we’re jumping ahead. Tomorrow’s match is too close to call. We’re having a viewing party chez nous—6 a.m. countdown begins–and have enough brunch goodies for a 5 hour marathon! May the more creative player win tomorrow.
Dan Markowitz · July 2, 2011 at 9:02 pm
Creativity’s got little to do with. Neither of these players is Picasso or John McEnroe. Nadal is the more artistic of the two. Djokovic throws in his drop shot here and there, but basically he’s going to hit the ball through you and around you. These guys aren’t going to pull an Arthur Ashe 1975 Wimbledon strategy ploy of giving Jimmy Connnors nothing balls. They’ll both hit hard, fast and run down ridiculous shots.
As for the GOAT, Nadal is on track to become it, but yes Djokovic has a chance to derail him. If he continues to own him the way he has in 2011, say for another couple of years, and wins 7-+UP slams himself, Djoko could make Roger still stand pat at GOAT. I pick Sampras as the GOAT, but I won’t go there.
Petra Kvitova, sorry, can’t help you. Didn’t see a point of the match. But women’s game has to be sad Sharapova didn’t win. Kvitova, while she might be a nice player and composed girl, does not have star magnitude.
Scoop Malinowski · July 3, 2011 at 1:22 am
Her calm and composure for winning her first slam was amazing. Even after the match point she reacted kind of like it was just another tournament. And the crowd reaction about two minutes later was total silence. Had to leave and miss the interviews and trophy presentation but I was struck by Kvitova’s calm and cool after winning, her dad showed more reaction and cried but Petra was so cool about it. Excellent win, she really shellacked Sharapova and played a pretty much perfect match over the more experienced and driven competitor – no one seems to want to win more than Maria except for Serena. Just a beautiful performance today by Kvitova, watch out for her in the future, she could become a dominant player if she really wants to. But it seems most of them really don’t want to stay at #1, they want to get there but not really stay there. It’s a lot of extra work to be #1, all the promo, interviews, sponsor requests, it’s almost more comfortable to be #2,3 or top 10 than #1. Sorry for the random thoughts, just got back from the Klitschko Haye fight party, that was a huge HWT title boxing fight in Germany in front of over 50,000 in a soccer stadium, won by Klitschko on points.
Dan Markowitz · July 3, 2011 at 2:10 am
Doesn’t sound like the Klitschko-Haye fight was a thriller. The ring was slippery from a heavy downpour. Haye supposedly flopped a few times and outside of Germany who heard of this fight? Amazing to see how far boxing has dropped in the eyes’ of the sporting public, at least in this country. Guess we should be glad that tennis is so much more in the public view. Here’s a heavyweight championship fight and outside of a small sect of people it seems, no one knew about it. Far cry from 40 years ago when Ali fought Frazier in Madison Square Garden, and all the hoopla that went into that fight.
Michael · July 3, 2011 at 5:26 am
“Neither of these players is Picasso or John McEnroe.”
Why is JMac so commonly the measure of tennis artistry. I find Fed much more “artistic.” JMac had a weird, straight take back forehand. His backhand slice was par for the course to some extent back then (Orantes laid the racket flat on the take back as well); it wasn’t unusually arty even for the time and while effective in 1978 would be eaten alive today. His serve was goofy. He stood up on his volleys. Great hands compensated for much of the poor technique. The pasty white thighs were not artistic either… Fed’s game is art.
“These guys aren’t going to pull an Arthur Ashe 1975 Wimbledon strategy ploy of giving Jimmy Connnors nothing balls.”
That’s a little unfair. The game has really changed. People don’t play that way anymore. They pound the ball like they didn’t in 1975. Connors had a lot of trouble with a low, short forehand, particularly when moving forward. (Ashe had a problematic forehand too.) Player’s worked the point more. Now they wack it from the first point. And guys like Nadal and Djoker don’t really have glaring weaknesses that you could exploit even if they were still playing 1970s style ball.
Michael · July 3, 2011 at 5:41 am
I’ll go with Nadal.
His winning appears directly related to the intensity of his whining about injuries and the amount of tennis matches played/appearance fees earned.
So on that basis he looks solid for his third in a row and to retain his #1 position based on holding 5 of the last 6 slams !!!
And, again, doing the French/W duo while barely being able to walk.
Dan Markowitz · July 3, 2011 at 7:45 am
Federer is artistic in his form, but not as artistic as McEnroe in his style. Mac might have looked awkward in certain shots, but he hit a wider variety of shot. Even now when I see him play, I’m awed by the way his feet move or the volley, zero backswing.
Also, probably because he’s a lefty, Mac does angles unlike any player. He hit the angle serve out wide on the ad side beautifully. He took the ball earlier than any player I’ve ever seen and his volleys were sick in their angles.
Watching him was like watching ballet, even the preening. He did get up on his toes a lot, but the half-volleys, the minimal back swing (remember Fed has Sampras’s backhand with the high back swing), the foot work and the imagination. Maybe playing with the wood racquet had something to do with it, too.
I found Rafter somewhat artistic, and Edberg, too. Fed’s game is a lot more conventional. He can’t serve and volley or attack the net much because he doesn’t have the arsenal of volley these guys did or the inclination to create at the net.
But the lefties are often more artistic. I’m thinking Leconte, who was very dynamic to watch, Gianluca Pozzi, who played a poor man’s Mac game, and of course, Vilas, who was like a bull-fighter. I don’t remember Orantes’s game much, but know he had one-hander, too.
Of course, today the Frenchman, Gasquet, Monfils, and Santoro play or played artistic games.
Michael · July 4, 2011 at 7:23 am
“(remember Fed has Sampras’s backhand with the high back swing), ”
I think Fed’s backhand is a vastly better looking shot than Pete’s.
“Maybe playing with the wood racquet had something to do with it, too.”
Definitely. The game was generally more graceful/artistic with the wood.
“Fed’s game is a lot more conventional. He can’t serve and volley or attack the net much”
He did earlier and then he changed with the game.
By the way, I don’t think it’s controversial for me to point out that Edberg’s forehand was fugly.