Why Novak Djokovic Is One Of The All Time Greats
When we think of sporting greats from decades gone by, we tend to focus on the athletes who have won the lot. That is to say, there is nothing missing from their trophy haul.
Will Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo ever be regarded in the same light as Pele or Diego Maradona? Many will say the latter two have the edge because of their international pedigree, which is a harsh comparison to make given that Messi and Ronaldo, in particular, do not have great teams around them on that particular stage unlike Pele and Maradona, who were surrounded by world class teammates.
Is Pete Sampras considered to be in the same league as Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal in the highest echelons of Tennis? Not for most, despite currently equalling the latter’s number of Grand Slam titles and having held the overall record until 2009 when Federer eventually broke it. This is due to the fact that Rafa and Roger have won all four of the Grand Slams at some point – a feat Sampras didn’t manage.
Messi, Ronaldo and Sampras have surely done enough to be mentioned in similar esteem to their more legendary sporting counterparts, but their lack of trophies across the board has unfairly been their undoing. It is with this in mind that I will raise the idea of Novak Djokovic being an all time great in the Tennis world – a lot of people say he has to win the French Open in order to justify that label, but for this observer he is already there.
Sport, arguably more than in any other walk of life, is largely dependent on circumstance. For example, many say Lionel Messi cannot be compared to Maradona until he wins a World Cup. In the final in Brazil last summer Messi’s teammate Gonzalo Higuain had a great chance to give Argentina the lead, but squandered it. Had he taken that opportunity, and his team had gone on to win the tournament, Messi would now be regarded by many to be worthy of comparison to his Argentine predecessor.
However, when analysed in the cold light of day, this does not make any sense. How can the reputation of one man be shaped by the actions of another in one miniscule moment of time? If circumstances had worked out in Messi’s favour, he would be the greatest of all time, but because they didn’t, he is not.
The fickle nature of this can be compared to the case of Novak Djokovic. The world number one has eight majors to his name (with many more surely on the way), has won 24 Masters 1000 titles, claimed three World Tour Finals crowns and is redefining what we previously thought possible in the sport from a physical standpoint.
Yet despite all of this, some will put forward the notion that he will not go down as one of the greats at this moment in time. The reason? There is one tournament, amongst a calendar full of competitions on all different surfaces from all corners of the globe, that he has yet to win.
The French Open. Historically it is the toughest Grand Slam to collect, due to the demanding nature of the surface combined with the toll it takes on your body and mind over the course of a fortnight. In the modern era, winning Roland Garros has turned from being a challenge into a near impossible mission, such has been the dominance of Rafael Nadal in the French capital.
This is where the argument of circumstance comes into play. It is always dangerous to compare other eras, but it is with a great deal of certainty that I can state Djokovic would have a career Slam to his name in any other period of time. Unfortunately for him, he has ran into by far and away the greatest clay-courter of all time.
Many experts and former players have argued that to be one of the best clay-court players of all time, you will have had to have won the French Open. This is dangerous territory, however. Yannick Noah and Michael Chang have lifted the Coupe des Mousquetaires, but can anyone seriously argue that those two players had a better pedigree on the dirt than the Serbian? Surely not.
Between the two of them, Noah and Chang reached three French Open finals, winning one. Djokovic has already made three finals in Paris, and was desperately close to another one in 2013. Again, the theory of circumstance can be brought in here – had Djokovic not unfortunately touched the net while smashing a ball past Nadal in the fifth set of their semi-final two years ago, when he was a break up, the consensus is he would have gone on to reach the final, where David Ferrer was waiting – an opponent you’d put all your money on being an eventual loser in that match-up.
Djokovic has lost to Nadal on six separate occasions at Roland Garros, and if we are looking at matters with relativity in mind, you cannot imagine anyone in the history of the game doing any better than the eight-time major winner in these clashes. The unfortunate thing for the Serb is that he has come across a man who is a complete freak of nature on the surface, the likes of which we have never seen before, and will surely never see again.
If the world number one were to swap eras with Noah and Chang, can anyone really say that the latter would still have French Open titles to their names with Djokovic still without one to his? I can’t be the only one who finds this incredibly unlikely.
The only argument against Djokovic in this instance is that this year he came up against someone in the final who wasn’t a left-handed Spaniard who had nine Roland Garros titles in his trophy haul. In fact, in Stanislas Wawrinka, he came face to face with a player who had just one major in his collection of titles (won against an injured Nadal) and a player who he had a dominant head-to-head record against.
In the end, as we all know, the Swiss man won in four enthralling sets to collect the title. Is this a slant on Djokovic’s clay-court pedigree, seeing as he couldn’t get the better of the clear underdog when history seemed destined to be made? Not for me.
It is important to note that excuses are not being made for Djokovic here, as he didn’t perform to his best level, but Stanislas Wawrinka played by far the best match of his life on Sunday afternoon. Winners were being struck from all angles of the court, and not only did his level not let up, it seemed to get better as the match wore on.
If the two were to contest another final in the Parisian heat tomorrow, Djokovic would again go in as the heavy favourite. Why? Because Wawrinka will not recreate performances like that on a regular basis, despite his obvious talent and ability. It was one of those days where everything went right for the Swiss star, which is not to say he was not a fully deserving champion, given the outstanding form he displayed over the full two weeks.
In his previous three tight, but ultimately unsuccessful, tussles with Rafa at the French Open, Djokovic’s level would have been enough to see off Wawrinka on Sunday. It just so happens that the world number one’s worst display of the tournament, and in recent memory at Roland Garros, came at a time when other factors had played into his hands, but he couldn’t make the most of it.
As has been previously mentioned, the theory of circumstance cannot be understated in sport, and quite simply, circumstances have not worked out for Novak Djokovic in Paris as of yet.
However, it must be remembered, aside all of his incredible records on other surfaces, he has won 11 tournaments on clay and has reached the French Open final on three occasions, all at the age of 28.
He may not be there yet in the eyes of some, but if and when he wins Roland Garros, Novak Djokovic will go down as an all time great in Tennis. And not before time.