Will Novak Djokovic Win Calendar Slam in 2016?

...is the hottest question for the fans of ecord-breaking atm.

So far, only Laver has been able to do it.

This is what he says:


===============================================================================
''I think he's got a good shot at pulling it off and I'd be happy seeing it. 'You don't own the territory. It's a feather in his cap if he can pull off a Grand Slam. He's got two already.
Owning  the four at one time, it's one hell of an effort.
I was thrilled it happened for me. You don't start off by thinking, `I'm going to win a Grand Slam.' My thoughts were just, `Hey, I'm in the event. I entered. That's what happened in `69. I told my wife, `I want to enter all the tournaments.' 
That was just the start of it. 'I was happy with the way I played. You've got to be fortunate to not have any injuries or sicknesses or colds. That helped for me.
'I was fortunate to play some of my best tennis at the right time. That's what you've got to do. Serena had that chance to do it and then she played a so-so match in the semifinals at the U.S. Open. Was there pressure? What was it? I never really got an answer from reading about it. Did she feel she got nervous? Did she just play a bad match? Did the other player play out of her mind? That can happen.'

'It's bone on bone in my wrist. Itjust stings too much to get out there to play. I'd like to be able to. Not that I could do very well. At least I wouldn't have to go to the gym as much.'
Djokovic has ''got a great game. Just his consistency and the depth in his groundstrokes. He not allowing any of the guys to take advantage of a shorter ball and try and penetrate. If the ball is too deep you can't do too much.'
''It'll be a tough test. The only thing he's got to worry about, the only thing I worried about, was that you've got to play seven matches. That's all you've got to play. ... I think it's very possible he can pull it off.'
================================================================================

if he does then it would be very hard to shut those who trumper weak era theories down
winning the calender slam would mean that he won 6 majors in a row...that seems rather unlikely to happen

Veejay wrote:if he does then it would be very hard to shut those who trumper weak era theories down
winning the calender slam would mean that he won 6 majors in a row...that seems rather unlikely to happen

Those don't know much about tennis.

Let's not forget who started the whole "weak era" talk...

I like Laver's graciousness. Mac was the same when Nole broke his Streak record.
Unlike Pete who if I remember well was late for that Wimbledon final when Federer equalled his record.
And wore dark glasses to hide his tears.

What a miserable and vain character Pete was...I never liked Aggasi much but loved how he took the Mikey out of Sampras who couldn't control himself even at some charity match a few years ago...unbelievable!

Even in that clip in Tenez's thread you can see he is cheering for Nole to break Fed's slam record, not because he'd be happy for Nole but because he still hates Fed.

How childish!

"Unlike Pete who if I remember well was late for that Wimbledon final when Federer equalled his record.
And wore dark glasses to hide his tears."

lmao!! i do remembr him being "fashionably late" but i didnt know the dark glasses was to hide the tears...lol
seriously to win 6 majors in a row,the wear and tear on that much physicality in that time frame would never be able to be achieved the way the game is played today without some serious  help from the medical depsrtment
back when federer dominated it may have been possible with his style of play
just watching cibulkova at eastbourne...could that me the crazziest service motion youve ever seen?
shes definietely on nandrolone,look how bloated her muscled are..lol

If you want a crazy service motion look no further than Sara Errani, esp if the camera catches her face.

Veejay wrote:"Unlike Pete who if I remember well was late for that Wimbledon final when Federer equalled his record.
And wore dark glasses to hide his tears."

lmao!! i do remembr him being "fashionably late" but i didnt know the dark glasses was to hide the tears...lol
seriously to win 6 majors in a row,the wear and tear on that much physicality in that time frame would never be able to be achieved the way the game is played today without some serious  help from the medical depsrtment
back when federer dominated it may have been possible with his style of play
just watching cibulkova at eastbourne...could that me the crazziest service motion youve ever seen?
shes definietely on nandrolone,look how bloated her muscled are..lol

There he is...



Not a big deal, just funny to see someone refusing to grow up like that.

No, he won't. He won't win Wimbledon without a v nice draw.

FedererKing wrote:No, he won't.  He won't win Wimbledon without a v nice draw.

Who's going to beat him?

Veejay wrote:"Unlike Pete who if I remember well was late for that Wimbledon final when Federer equalled his record.
And wore dark glasses to hide his tears."

lmao!! i do remembr him being "fashionably late" but i didnt know the dark glasses was to hide the tears...lol
seriously to win 6 majors in a row,the wear and tear on that much physicality in that time frame would never be able to be achieved the way the game is played today without some serious  help from the medical depsrtment
back when federer dominated it may have been possible with his style of play
just watching cibulkova at eastbourne...could that me the crazziest service motion youve ever seen?
shes definietely on nandrolone,look how bloated her muscled are..lol

The thing is when you have a physical edge over your opponents, 4 or 6 slams in a row is not that special. Winning slams by slamming the balls down the line with a SHBH is a completely different matter.

So for me, it desn't really matter how many slams Djoko wins...it's not at 29 that he is going to start playing with grace and style. He is got a very effecient game on today's strange conditions but that's all we can say.

FedererKing wrote:No, he won't.  He won't win Wimbledon without a v nice draw.

You make me nervous! All your predictions and analyses were wrong lately.

Talking of Federer's grace...I was reading an article about his BH grip.

The guy who wrote it dissected every detail, like a child that opens a watch and gets all the little cogs out...and then can't put them back together.

When you verbalise all the steps he makes finishing with the still head and eyes that follow the ball you realise it is impossible to replicate.

Tenez wrote:

FedererKing wrote:No, he won't.  He won't win Wimbledon without a v nice draw.

You make me nervous! All your predictions and analyses were wrong lately.

All?  I've only made around two predictions.  You are relentlessly wrong on pretty much everything. Incidentally, he's had a very nice draw. But on grass and at his age, he'll still find it difficult. You guys make it sound like winning a slam is a piece of cake. It isn't.

noleisthebest wrote:

FedererKing wrote:No, he won't.  He won't win Wimbledon without a v nice draw.

Who's going to beat him?

Sam Querrey.

Hahahaha, what a match, Djoko totally crushed, shouting at his box, getting coached, etc etc.

Sam will lose next match, but at least has saved Tennis.

Monaco in tears tonight 

FedererKing wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

FedererKing wrote:No, he won't.  He won't win Wimbledon without a v nice draw.

Who's going to beat him?

Sam Querrey.

don"t tell me you've known this personally

Good on old Sam!
he went for it and really spiced up this Wimby!

No   - but I did have a very big feeling that Djokovic would not win Wimbledon.  I don't think he'll win US either. Or the next Aussie Open.  He does have a slam or two left in him, though.  But his time is coming to an end.  

Maintaining the form and winning slams is not an easy task approaching 30.  Some people out there are assuming he'll just win 2 for the next 5 years and he won't.

Also, I bottled the bet on Querrey.  I was going to put a few quid on him at the start - but ended up betting 40 pounds on him at 2-0 up.  95 return.

Calender slams are overrated. To win all four over a longer period is easily as good. Winning all four in one year tells there's something really wrong with the competition. You're incredibly lucky if that happens in a year when you're 100% fit throughout.

gallery play wrote:Calender slams are overrated. To win all four over a longer period is easily as good. Winning all four in one year tells there's something really wrong with the competition. You're incredibly lucky if that happens in a year when you're 100% fit throughout.

I think it is a gret achievement if you win through sheer talent, if you strength is actually your fitness, then it's certainly less of an achievement....and recently winning slams has all been about fitness.

gallery play wrote:Calender slams are overrated. To win all four over a longer period is easily as good. Winning all four in one year tells there's something really wrong with the competition. You're incredibly lucky if that happens in a year when you're 100% fit throughout.

Absolutely agree. Its overrated just because no one has been able to achieve it since 1969. But has everyone even tried to get it? I don't think so.

Slams were quite different for many years and not before Pete's haul of 14, even this count of slams was given as much importance. I see in 80s, 90s many players didn't even both to play all slams. So developed likeness for one surface and would prepare all year for that.

Tenez wrote:

gallery play wrote:Calender slams are overrated. To win all four over a longer period is easily as good. Winning all four in one year tells there's something really wrong with the competition. You're incredibly lucky if that happens in a year when you're 100% fit throughout.

I think it is a gret achievement if you win through sheer talent, if you strength is actually your fitness, then it's certainly less of an achievement....and recently winning slams has all been about fitness.

If talent alone was being accounted for, then none of the double-handers would even feature in a greatness list.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

Tenez wrote:

gallery play wrote:Calender slams are overrated. To win all four over a longer period is easily as good. Winning all four in one year tells there's something really wrong with the competition. You're incredibly lucky if that happens in a year when you're 100% fit throughout.

I think it is a gret achievement if you win through sheer talent, if you strength is actually your fitness, then it's certainly less of an achievement....and recently winning slams has all been about fitness.

If talent alone was being accounted for, then none of the double-handers would even feature in a greatness list.

There are quite a few fantastic DH players...Borg, Agassi, Seles...though if it was me, I'd ban the shot yesterday!

And I  think Nole's  4 slams is a brilliant achievement.

Federer couldn't do it.
Nadal couldn't do it.

He beat Nadal in RG (in straight sets)
And he beat Federer twice in the final of Wimbledon.

Nole has certainly won his slams the hard way.

If anything, it would have been easier to do in the non-physical era.
Now, it's the body that's stopping players from competing.

Nole's been carrying a shoulder injury since RG.

nitb wrote:There are quite a few fantastic DH players...Borg, Agassi, Seles...though if it was me, I'd ban the shot yesterday!

Of course there are. You missed  Nalbandian and Djokovic himself. But I always see playing single handed needs much more skill than DH.

nitb wrote:And I  think Nole's  4 slams is a brilliant achievement. 

Its good, but look how crazy crazy the tennis world has gone seeing this. quite cold for something that only happened last in 1968, isn't it? I think Stan's RG win last year drew far more attention.

nitb wrote:
Federer couldn't do it.
Nadal couldn't do it.

Who is there chasing Dokovic? if Murray is the solid 2nd ranked, then there is severe dearth of quality among the field. 

nitb wrote:Nole's been carrying a shoulder injury since RG.

Nole doesn't want to talk about it. Except that he did.

I am a double handed player and, yes, single handed requires more skill.  Your timing has to be much more precise - which takes more ability.  I didn't become a double handed because of lack of skill though, it's because my one handed back hand is so weak as to be useless. It's arm strength that is usually the deciding factor.