Novak Djokovic: Everything In Life Is A Lesson

"WHAT DOES IT take to become the best when your competition is already the best ever?

That's the question of sports in the 21st century, the age of
superlatives, when the fittest athletes train harder than ever before,
aided by the smartest tactics, the most money and the best equipment.
Marathoners lower the world record every few years. Golfers launch
drives so far as to render courses obsolete. Football players weigh more
and move faster.
But no sport has advanced in the past decade like men's tennis, where a
rivalry among three once-in-a-generation players has accelerated the
game's evolution. First Roger Federer, then Rafael Nadal, now Djokovic -- progression in the form of a battle royal."




Interesting article, showing what Novak Djokovic does during an "average" day at work.

IN the talent vs work debate, this story will certainly highlight the level of dedication a professional athlete requires just to stay at the top: the talent, the team, the hours.

No wonder the release of agony and ecstasy we saw after the final on Sunday came mightily as they did.

http://espn.go.com/tennis/story/_/id/8132800/has-novak-djokovic-become-fittest-athlete-ever-espn-magazine

On how the game has moved on:


"NOT LONG AGO, even the very best players possessed only a few
weapons. There were big serve-and-volleyers like Pete Sampras and Boris
Becker, great returners like Andre Agassi, artful net players like
McEnroe and relentless baseliners like Jimmy Connors and Bjorn Borg.
Their games were defined by strengths but also by weaknesses. "It was,
'Can I take advantage of this guy's soft spot again and again?'" says
Patrick McEnroe, who played professionally in the '80s and '90s before
coaching the U.S. Davis Cup team. "Now with these guys, you can't find
the soft spots, and sometimes they barely exist."

Almost every player in the ATP top 10 travels with a full-time
fitness coach and a trainer. Everyone can serve ... and return ... and
volley ... and chase down angled shots that look like clean winners ...
and generate enough power while stretching for a ball on a dead sprint
to send those shots back with heavy topspin. "It takes five winners to
finish one point," says Janko Tipsarevic,
the No. 8 player in the world entering Wimbledon and Djokovic's best
friend on tour. "One point now seems like a full workout." Rallies
stretch for 20 or more shots. Matches can take five hours. The modern
professional tennis calendar lasts almost 11 months."

I actually very much disagree with that last post. I felt players were more complete in the past. They knew how to serve, how to volley, how to hit great FHs and very often great SHBH with variation, sliced or flat. I would put in that category, Mc, Becker, Sampras, Edberg, Rafter. There was no realy weakness but the best was the one able to deliver the best serve on those fast surfaces.

Those who did not have as much variation were from the Bolitieri school: Agassi, Courrier, Chang but there were players who had all teh shots but preferred to stay back: Korda, Medvedev, Rios, Kuerten.

Probably the most complete players were in teh 2001-2006 era with Blake, Nalbandian, Coria, Gonzalez, Federer, Ljubicic. Problem is that it's about that time they slowed the conds and that a 1D player was able to win everything thanks to his fitness....like Bruguerra was doing on clay back in the 90s.

In fact stamina and mouvement are the only weapons of Murray, Djoko and Nadal and this is why as soon as the conds speed up or rather get still like under a roof, they can't stay with the old man who can display the variation and talent of his game.

Not many will be impressed by the quality of shots pulled by Djoko and Nadal in those 4 and 5 hours finals. The FO final was also very poor where the sliced loopy BH got the better of Djokovic.

That's where Tsip is right, it takes 5 winners to win a point against those top 4 players, but the chance is that most players will have made an UE before that giving the match away to those super fit players.

I find it hard to either agree or disagree because playing conditions and equipment are different.
One thing is for sure, players are a lot fitter now and my feeling is that there are more quality players now than 20 years ago (I'm talking top 100).
The problem is that slower conditions and strings also cover up for a multitude of sins and allow percentage play.

That's why I am reluctant to write off players of today. I think there are a lot of great players but the conditions are not allowing them to play more all-court tennis.

At the same present conditions encourage safer play and more power, so players get taller, loose footwork and without footwork tennis magic is gone.

I think these two would look great in any era:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWPN1nETtS0&feature=related

Well that's my point. We have great players now but I woudl say those at the top bar Federer have not got amazing weapons....bar their fitness of course.

I see your point. Although Fed has just about everything plus that forehand on top, I like to believe that young Nole had no problem hanging out with him before the slowdown.

No, no no...once and for all :x Federer cannot be talked about in the same bracket as the other top 4 when talking about fitness. Broad shoulders won't make you move faster and run longer. Fed did not win this wimby by extending the rallies. He knows he cannot last the distance and this is why he takes risk. This is partly why he lost in 3 in Paris but won in 4 in London. Rallies were much shorter and it suited him.

The day Federer will line up 2 5setters of 5 hours each made of 20 shot rallies I will reconsider...but not until then.

Am in the gym between two sessions. Will tackle this one when I'm back

Tenez wrote:No, no no...once and for all :x Federer cannot be talked about in the same bracket as the other top 4 when talking about fitness. Broad shoulders won't make you move faster and run longer. Fed did not win this wimby by extending the rallies. He knows he cannot last the distance and this is why he takes risk. This is partly why he lost in 3 in Paris but won in 4 in London. Rallies were much shorter and it suited him.

The day Federer will line up 2 5setters of 5 hours each made of 20 shot rallies I will reconsider...but not until then.

You keep misunderstanding me, Tenez!
I don't know what made you write what you did, but that's not what I said or think.

My point was that Novak can hang out with Fed on any surface, i.e. unlike Murray and Nadal he would not need to be a fitness freak in order to beat Federer on faster courts.
I also think that Nole would've much rather things go back as they used to be than the way they are now, despite the fact that he plays his best tennis on slower hard courts at the moment.

I remember Nole in 2006/7 he was very very good.

My turn to dash....I will get back to you tomorrow. :bball:

noleisthebest wrote:

You keep misunderstanding me, Tenez!
I don't know what made you write what you did, but that's not what I said or think.

"Although Fed has just about everything plus that forehand on top,
..."

By this I meant you said that Federer was as fit as the other 3.....as we were talking about fitness. And to me I think it is very clear he isn't. He is extremely fit and probably the best athlete out there. But he has never defied the human boundaries of fitness. Neither by the volume of his mucles, or that ability to keep on lining up 20shot rallies.

My point was that Novak can hang out with Fed on any surface, i.e. unlike Murray and Nadal he would not need to be a fitness freak in order to beat Federer on faster courts. I also think that Nole would've much rather things go back as they used to be than the way they are now, despite the fact that he plays his best tennis on slower hard courts at the moment.

I remember Nole in 2006/7 he was very very good.

I don't think Djoko 2007 was that close to Fed on faster surfaces. As his record on grass and USO confirms. And he still relies on his amazing mouvement and retrieving to stay with Federer. He never won by dictating Federer. Djoko has probably teh best defense out there, because he is the player able to turn defense into attack best. I don't see this as being a pure attacking player and therefore not someone who would do too well on faster conds. I note that like Nadal he never won Cincy and did not win Wimbledon by blasting Nadal off court but outrallying him.

No, no no...once and for all :x I didn't meant that .

"everything plus that forehand" was related to the quality of his shots variety, they are all brilliant plus he has an extraordinary forehand on top!

As for the rest.....look forward to their next match. Hope to see Nole release his forehand a bit more.

Remember when yuo said you did not think Federer would win Djoko again after that USO semi?

He did it on the biggest match!

Tenez wrote:Remember when yuo said you did not think Federer would win Djoko again after that USO semi?

He did it on the biggest match!

I don't remember, but if you say I did - I did. I'm good at eating humble pie.

Is that true you forgot? Nevermind....I actually thought you could be right too at the time.

Tenez wrote:Is that true you forgot? Nevermind....I actually thought you could be right too at the time.

Of course it's true! I remembered it in the meantime, anyway. I thought I was right as well. This humble pie tastes yuk, by the way.

Back to the main topic, then, what do you see is going to hapen at the USO?
One thing is certain, Fed and Nole will NOT be in the same half of the draw there after all those years...
I would love to see the two in the final.

Yes, this is a very good news. I am just hoping Fed can get back to his usual form. Then of course, I am hoping for another Rafa/Djoko semi with Federer waiting in the final!



But frankly, I have no clue of what coudl happen next.

Tenez wrote:Yes, this is a very good news. I am just hoping Fed can get back to his usual form. Then of course, I am hoping for another Rafa/Djoko semi with Federer waiting in the final!



But frankly, I have no clue of what coudl happen next.

Very wise, neither do I!
Had enough of humble pie this season....

Yes, you and me. As you know I expected a Djoko v Nadal final after seeing how slow was Wimby. But surprisingly it happened to be quick enough. I think it has probably to do with covered roof, allowing easier flatter timing..which certainly increases the pace of the game quite a bit.

yes. the roof had a lot to do with it, which I didn't mind. I'm just annoyed I couldn't see all of Nole Fed match, had to go at the point o noticing Nole's feet stopped moving.
With this weather, it's quite likely the roof will feature a lot during the Olympics, which would be actually great.
I've had enough of Nadal winning on grass, under the roof, best of 3, he could easily fall to almost anybody.

Agreed. He relies so much on his fizzy ball to be even more uncontrollable under the element to break his opponent and bring the level down to his poor shot making level so that his physique can make the difference.

Isn;t that Nadal's summary strategy?

Tenez wrote:Agreed. He relies so much on his fizzy ball to be even more uncontrollable under the element to break his opponent and bring the level down to his poor shot making level so that his physique can make the difference.

Isn;t that Nadal's summary strategy?

it is. I actually thought about it today, he's the exact opposite from Federer in every possible way, right down to playing conditions: on thrives on uniterupted ball-flight, indoor conditions, the other on messy dirt, ideally windy and rainy at the same time...one on timing the ball into attacking winners, the other on bludgeoning the ball down the middle as if to slap you in the face.
One happy to move forward, the other happy to run to the ends of the earth until you run out of will to breathe.

It's exact;y what I have been saying for years. Blunting the "edge" of his opponent and install that physical dimension. Nadal takes the ball very late so his timing is much easier.

This is why I have always argued that nadal woudl struggle talent wise to make the top 50. But people don;t understand the dynamics of tennis. They do not believe me when I say that someone like Kholi is more talented than Nadal, quite a bit more actually.

Or I should say more precisely that we do not know how talented is Nadal cause he doesn;t rely much on it to win. He relies on his big muscles. This is also why Toni had no problem banking on having him play on his Left arm. He knew he was not going to make him do wonders with teh ball.

I'll write another thread on JA about it! To annoy a few more Rafa fans.