While the final in Basel pointed to Nadal making steps towards his best and offered a good look at Federer at his aggressive best, it is still hard to look beyond a certain Serbian to be overwhelming favourite at all the tournaments that count next year. I believe Djokovic has ‘Grand Slam’ on the mind and here are some reasons why he should be reasonably optimistic.
He has no real rivals over five setters. Roger Federer and Andy Murray have challenged and beaten Novak this year, turning in stellar performances. But these wins were over three sets. They have been unable to really take a tilt at Djokovic at the Slams. Murray lost to Novak easily in Melbourne and folded in the fifth at Paris. Federer played a match for the ages in his Wimbledon semifinal against Murray, but was always playing catch-up in the finals. At New York, almost everything went Federer’s way - he played short matches, not dropping a set and being as fresh as possible, the crowd at Flushing Meadow was not even remotely fair, resembling a Davis Cup crowd rather than a neutral crowd and he managed to play superbly for two and a half sets. But the signs were always pointing to trouble. He came into the final not having dropped serve over two or more tournaments and found himself under severe pressure in almost every game in the first set. It really seemed as if Djokovic could break at will. And in a two-horse race, Roger was always second best. Beyond Murray and Federer stand Wawrinka, who plays his best at the business end of tournaments and does not suffer from the pressure of performance there and actually competes well with Novak especially in Melbourne and Paris, and Nadal (if he continues to work his way back and even then, only on clay probably)
He is thinking about it. During the US Open, Novak was asked about his chances of winning the Grand Slam one year. His answer was very informative. Instead of the usual ‘take it one match at a time’ platitude that players love trotting out, he just said to the interviewer ‘from your mouth to God’s ears’. I think all the attention on Serena’s Grand Slam pursuit has put it firmly in his mind.
He ended up with a better Slam year than Serena in 2015: Djokovic had a better year in the Slams than Serena (27-1 to 26-1). Wawrinka played lights out tennis in Paris and that is pretty much what it takes to beat Djokovic anywhere. His pursuit of the calendar Grand Slam is more realistically achievable than anyone since Federer in 2005 (before you-know-who came and bossed the clay). His celebrations of late have become more muted, which seems to indicate that he is chasing history.
He is not being stretched: After winning three Slams, Djokovic won the next two tournaments convincingly. Every match and every set was dominated except for one set against Tomic. On average, he broke his opponents twice each set they played. And he always seemed to have an extra gear. Who would bet against him running the table through to the end of the year?
 |
| Will Novak solve the riddle of Roland Garros in 2016 and achieve a Grand Slam? |
He has no real rivals over five setters. Roger Federer and Andy Murray have challenged and beaten Novak this year, turning in stellar performances. But these wins were over three sets. They have been unable to really take a tilt at Djokovic at the Slams. Murray lost to Novak easily in Melbourne and folded in the fifth at Paris. Federer played a match for the ages in his Wimbledon semifinal against Murray, but was always playing catch-up in the finals. At New York, almost everything went Federer’s way - he played short matches, not dropping a set and being as fresh as possible, the crowd at Flushing Meadow was not even remotely fair, resembling a Davis Cup crowd rather than a neutral crowd and he managed to play superbly for two and a half sets. But the signs were always pointing to trouble. He came into the final not having dropped serve over two or more tournaments and found himself under severe pressure in almost every game in the first set. It really seemed as if Djokovic could break at will. And in a two-horse race, Roger was always second best. Beyond Murray and Federer stand Wawrinka, who plays his best at the business end of tournaments and does not suffer from the pressure of performance there and actually competes well with Novak especially in Melbourne and Paris, and Nadal (if he continues to work his way back and even then, only on clay probably)
He is thinking about it. During the US Open, Novak was asked about his chances of winning the Grand Slam one year. His answer was very informative. Instead of the usual ‘take it one match at a time’ platitude that players love trotting out, he just said to the interviewer ‘from your mouth to God’s ears’. I think all the attention on Serena’s Grand Slam pursuit has put it firmly in his mind.
He ended up with a better Slam year than Serena in 2015: Djokovic had a better year in the Slams than Serena (27-1 to 26-1). Wawrinka played lights out tennis in Paris and that is pretty much what it takes to beat Djokovic anywhere. His pursuit of the calendar Grand Slam is more realistically achievable than anyone since Federer in 2005 (before you-know-who came and bossed the clay). His celebrations of late have become more muted, which seems to indicate that he is chasing history.
He is not being stretched: After winning three Slams, Djokovic won the next two tournaments convincingly. Every match and every set was dominated except for one set against Tomic. On average, he broke his opponents twice each set they played. And he always seemed to have an extra gear. Who would bet against him running the table through to the end of the year?
