MovieChat Forums > Novak Djokovic Discussion > Novax Djokodick is at it again....

Novax Djokodick is at it again....

posted a year ago by Heisenberg (6730)
20 replies | jump to latest

What the fuck...
This imbecile cannot say an intelligent thing if his life depended on it!

After barely getting out of the vaccination debacle, he had to stick his foot in his mouth yet again with inadmissible political statements that smell of racism and nationalism of the worse kind, with his comments about Kosovo.

His tennis looks intelligent, and I always considered him a brilliant player for how he managed to raise his game, but now that I think about it, running after the ball like a rabid dog is NOT really genius play, it's more like the opposite.

He is just a very tenacious guy, clearly also very tenacously stupid.

[–] Yatzo (1924) a year ago

One more slam for the world record

[–] Heisenberg (6730) a year ago

Of stupidity?

[–] stickman38 (3347) a year ago

What did he say? Got a link?

And to be honest, you don't have to say smart things when you're rich. You can pretty much say whatever you want. Poor people have to really 'watch it' when it comes to words. One false move and you're cancelled and out on the streets.

[–] JFZ (1459) a year ago

I mean if it was racist and nationalist, it was probably something logical and supported by data, facts, and statistics. All of those things are demonized by the gatekeepers of this clown world and the same people who say "Trust the science!"

[–] DMT (4373) a year ago

Kosovo is Serbia!!! 🇷🇸

[–] Heisenberg (6730) a year ago

Sure.
But first Kosovo and Serbia are Roman!!!

[–] DMT (4373) a year ago

all roads lead to Rome

[–] BillySlater (4241) a year ago

You are just salty he has broken all of Federer's records. A few years ago you said he was not close to being the GOAT, lmao.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) a year ago

Yep I did.
And guess what, now that he has broken a few of Federer's records and he has the most slams ever, he still is not close to being the GOAT, lmao.

[–] BillySlater (4241) a year ago

Yeah, no surprise your take is still just as dumb as it was then.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) a year ago

You know shit about tennis or sports in general.
It's not just about numbers.
See Borg or Laver.
Federer is the GOAT. The tennis he played was not only unmatched like no others, but also the most beautiful.

Djokovic can only dream about that. He has managed to pile up great numbers, thanks to his younger age and weak next generation (and his great tennis and determination). Good for him.
He is still a dick as a person, and not the GOAT.

My top 6 ranking is:
Federer
Nadal
Laver
Borg
Djokovic
Sampras

[–] Callahan7 (1158) 2 months ago

Dunno Heisenberg.

I heard Bill Tilden might have been the GOAT but they won't say so because he took it up the butt.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 2 months ago

I would not go that far in history (or rather, prehistory) with sports: tennis now is a world sport with stiff competition from every continent. Even Laver just saw a glimpse of that.

Tilden was certainly a great player, maybe the greatest ever back then, but modern tennis is something different, I think it's like comparing apples to oranges. And for what you are saying, he would be a banana.

[–] beauq81 (1091) 2 months ago

I do agree that Federer played more elegantly, but Djokovic beat Federer and Nadal at their prime, went toe to toe with them. The main difference age made was that Roger had a head start at making the numbers. If you want to talk age, Djokovic beat Alkaraz, who is 16 years younger (Nadal is 1 year older than Djokovic, Federer 5) and an absolute beast of a player.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 2 months ago

Federer was unbeatable at his prime.
Djokovic managed to win against both Federer and Nadal AFTER their prime, when HE was in his prime.
He lost repeatedly against both of them for the whole first half of his career. And talking about going toe to toe, when he was 38 Federer lost against Djokovic a Wimbledon final after 5 hours, for a hair...

Nobody denies Djokovic's endurance and his hunger. He certainly has been lucky with the next generation, when it took Alcaraz and Sinner to actually put up some serious resistance, and that kinda pushed him to win even more: why quit when you are on top?

[–] FootOfDavros (8173) 2 months ago

Sampras doesn't really deserve to be in that list.

He was a great player - and back in the day, I never thought we'd see his record broken. But the fact is, even at his prime, he was a bit of a joke at the French. You always knew he was going nowhere...

So I don't think you can really have a GOAT contender who couldn't play tennis on one of the main surfaces for the sport.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 2 months ago

That's why he's no.6 in my list after those other 5: Sampras had no clue about clay courts, nor was he willing to adapt his tennis, and he faced a bunch of clay specialists so it was rare to be great on every surface till the late 90s.
He was still amazing on grass and hard courts.
Agassi, who was more well rounded and better on clay, miracolously managed to complete a career grand slam, which was almost unheard of, but it was Federer and Nadal and later Djokovic that made it commonplace to dominate on every surface like it's easy.

[–] FootOfDavros (8173) 2 months ago

Not so sure about Federer dominating every surface - he certainly had his struggles on the clay, not really much better than Sampras.

I didn't realise your list was in order. Hard to see Nadal above Djokovic tbh.

I think I'd have to say Djokovic from the current era (given he's outranked the others, although Federer a bit before him, so you could argue an effect there) and Borg. The balance of his slams over a short time frame, particularly with the difference between Wimbledon and the French is probably (?) unparalleled.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 2 months ago

Clearly, clay was Federer's least favorite surface, but I doubt you can say he struggled on it:
Federer won the Roland Garros 1 time and 10 other titles, which makes him already a great clay player.
He got to the final at the French Open 5 times, and was defeated every fucking time by the greatest player on clay ever.
If it wasn't for Nadal, how many more titles would Federer have on clay?

Djokovic became the dominating player once Federer came down from his peak (solely due to his age advantage), and Nadal started to struggle against him too. He then took full advantage of the fact that everybody else was no match against these 3.
He is still an awesome player, just not as great as he looks from the stats.

[–] FootOfDavros (8173) 2 months ago

Nadal isn't even a year older than Djokovic, so I don't think ages can really be used as a definer between them. Stats wise, Djokovic is now clearly ahead.

Fair point that Federer may have won more on Clay without Nadal but then Nadal needs his mass of French titles to even be in the equation.

Like I said previously, Federer's time was slightly before, so maybe it was harder then to pick up titles (?) but then, if he's an argument for the GOAT, can it be argued that he should have picked up more majors then before Nadal and Djokovic arrived on the scene? I don't know...

I'd probably put the modern players Djokovic first, Federer second and Nadal back in third.