First round
Nadal over Tomic in 3, Kokkinakis over Sijsling in 4
Kamke over Sock in 5, Monfils over Harrison in 4
Hewitt over Seppi in 4, Haase over Young in 5
Lajovic over Pouille in 5, Nishikori over Matosevic in 5
Raonic over Gimeno-Traver in 3, Gojowczyk over Hanescu in 4
Lu over Wang in 4, Dimitrov over Klahn in 4
Dancevic over Paire in 4, Kyrgios over Becker in 4
Smyczek over Bautista Agut in 5, Del Potro over Williams in 3
Murray over Soeda in 3, Odesnik over Millot in 5
Llodra over Berrer in 5, Lopez over Devvarman in 4
Kohlschreiber over Bedene in 3, Przysiezny over Zeballos in 4
Rola over Delbonis in 4, Isner over Klizan in 3
Tsonga over Volandri in 3, Bellucci over Reister in 5
Cilic over Granollers in 4, Brands over Simon in 3
Verdasco over Zhang in 3, Stakhovsky over Gabashvili in 4
Stepanek over Kavcic in 4, Federer over Duckworth in 3
Berdych over Nedovyesov in 3, De Schepper over Wu in 5
Dzumhur over Hajek in 5, Karlovic over Dodig in 4
Anderson over Vesely in 4, Sousa over Thiem in 5
Roger-Vasselin over Berlocq in 3, Haas over Garcia-Lopez in 4
Youzhny over Struff in 4, F. Mayer over Kudla in 5
Ramos over Andujar in 5, Janowicz over Thompson in 4
Chardy over Huta Galung in 3, Dolgopolov over Berankis in 5
Johnson over Mannarino in 5, Ferrer over Gonzalez in 3
Wawrinka over Golubev in 3, Falla over Kukushkin in 5
Mahut over Ebden in 4, Pospisil over Groth in 4
Rosol over Robredo in 4, Benneteau over Carreno Busta in 5
Kubot over Davydenko in 4, Gasquet over Guez in 3
Bogomolov over Fognini in 4, Nieminen over Sela in 4
Querrey over Giraldo in 5, Gulbis over Monaco in 4
Tursunov over Russell in 3, Istomin over Baghdatis in 4
L. Mayer over Montanes in 4, Djokovic over Lacko in 3
Second round
Nadal over Kokkinakis in 3
Monfils over Kamke in 4
Hewitt over Haase in 3
Nishikori over Lajovic in 3
Raonic over Gojowczyk in 3
Dimitrov over Lu in 5
Dancevic over Kyrgios in 5
Del Potro over Smyczek in 3
Murray over Odesnik in 3
Lopez over Llodra in 4
Kohlschreiber over Przysiezny in 4
Isner over Rola in 4
Tsonga over Bellucci in 3
Cilic over Brands in 5
Verdasco over Stakhovsky in 4
Federer over Stepanek in 4
Berdych over De Schepper in 3
Karlovic over Dzumhur in 4
Sousa over Anderson in 4
Haas over Roger-Vasselin in 4
Youzhny over F. Mayer in 4
Ramos over Janowicz in 5
Chardy over Dolgopolov in 5
Ferrer over Johnson in 4
Wawrinka over Falla in 3
Mahut over Pospisil in 4
Benneteau over Rosol in 3
Gasquet over Kubot in 3
Nieminen over Bogomolov in 4
Gulbis over Querrey in 4
Tursunov over Istomin in 4
Djokovic over L. Mayer in 3
Third round
Nadal over Monfils in 3
Hewitt over Nishikori in 5
Raonic over Dimitrov in 5
Del Potro over Dancevic in 3
Murray over Lopez in 3
Kohlschreiber over Isner in 5
Tsonga over Cilic in 4
Federer over Verdasco in 4
Berdych over Karlovic in 3
Haas over Sousa in 4
Youzhny over Ramos in 4
Ferrer over Chardy in 5
Wawrinka over Mahut in 3
Gasquet over Benneteau in 3
Nieminen over Gulbis in 4
Djokovic over Tursunov in 3
Fourth round
Nadal over Hewitt in 4
Del Potro over Raonic in 4
Kohlschreiber over Murray in 5
Tsonga over Federer in 5
Haas over Berdych in 5
Youzhny over Ferrer in 4
Wawrinka over Gasquet in 4
Djokovic over Nieminen in 3
Quarterfinals
Nadal over Del Potro in 4
Tsonga over Kohlschreiber in 4
Haas over Youzhny in 5
Djokovic over Wawrinka in 4
Semifinals
Nadal over Tsonga in 4
Djokovic over Haas in 3
Final
Djokovic over Nadal in 5
Comments and your own predictions are appreciated!
[polldaddy poll=7704120]
I once held Howard Bryant in high esteem, not any more going by this rubbish article he just wrote:
http://espn.go.com/tennis/aus14/story/_/id/10268064/australian-open-novak-djokovic-needs-grand-slams-secure-legacy
“He is the world’s second-ranked player but arguably the best pure tennis player in the world, jousting for tennis superiority with Rafael Nadal.
Djokovic may rightly feel he is the better player.”
Yep. Is he Ernest Gulbis in disguise? I have 2 stats for you Mr Bryant: 13-6 and H2H (whatever it is). Sir, the better player has a positive H2H and more Slams.
“He’s played in 10 of the past 13 Grand Slam finals but has only won two of the past eight, the past two Australian Opens. ”
Hmmmm…….
“In the two years from the 2011 to 2013 US Opens, Djokovic played 10 five-set Grand Slam matches. By comparison, Nadal has played 15 such matches in his entire 11-year career”
Hmmmmm…….and you still say Djoker is the better player?
“Nadal seems to have fallen off after a historic 2013 season, having been pushed on hard courts since winning the US Open and losing to David Ferrer, Juan Martin del Potro and Djokovic twice.”
Clutching at straws, much?
“At Roland Garros, Djokovic lost just enough focus while up a break in the fifth to allow Nadal to escape. Djokovic accidentally touched the net following through on a smash, then as the match grew tighter, he complained about the watering of the court. Nadal did not blink and stole the match.”
Careful Mr. Bryant, you are beginning to sound rather shrill………….yep, Rafa stole the RG match using the net as his weapon…………sigh.
Can someone explain to me why it is okay for Djokovic to further his Slam count at one Slam (AO) but it’s a “sin” for Rafa to do so (RG)?
Also, last time a certain GOAT was playing to equal Pete Sampras’s 14 Slams it was all over the sports pages. Rafa is attempting to do the same but narry a mention from any of the sports journals. What’s up, is 14 not a magic number anymore?
OMG, definitely not gonna read that article. What is up with the term “pure” ? What is that supposed to mean? Other tennis players are tainted somehow, not pure? Most ridiculous term about an athlete of any sport and it has been used about Federer as well.
are you a Cilic fan?
Welcome to Tenngrand @marin! I like you already………………you are most welcome!
” Other tennis players are tainted somehow, not pure?”
Brilliant!
Ricky, I hope you don’t compare Cilic to The Maestro.
DO YOU????
That reminds of the article in Canada’s National Post I chanced upon yesterday:
Australian Open 2014: Five things to know about the first Grand Slam of the tennis season
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/01/10/australian-open-2014-five-things-to-know-about-the-first-grand-slam-of-the-tennis-season/
Surely one of those five things is that the current number one player. who had as good a season as just about anyone ever had, never mind after a 7 month major injury break, has a very solid chance at number 14, a second career slam, and a Novak slam, and is being touted so by at least some of the knowledgeable commentators.
Nope.
Rafa is mentioned just once in that article, as the player Novak won the no 1 position to on Oct. 7. (That is not even the correct date, #Does it?).
But interestingle the article does mention that:
Pete Sampras, a 14-time Grand Slam winner, will be at the tournament for ceremonies to mark the first of his two Australian Open titles 20 years ago; Six-time major winner Boris Becker, making his first visit to Australia in 15 years, arrives as Novak Djokovic’s new coach.
I guess the male single circuit is all about Novak this AO and in 2014. No one else has a chance or is worth mentioning.
^won to … meant to be: lost to
*interestingle meant to be: interestingly
Since there are no rafa haters here, people need to find other websites to come back and complain about them I guess?
The guy states what he thinks Djokovic needs to do to take his place among greats like Sampras, Federer, and Nadal. So what?
Not our fault there are no Rafa haters here, it’s a free blog. They are more than welcome.
If you notice, Bryant does not just state what he thinks Novak needs to do to take his place among the greats, he trots out the usual fandom nonsense (of which he is entitled to) such as Rafa stole RG 2014, something I happen to think is not true and point out (as I am entitled to do).
Rafa did not steal RG 2014, he won it fair and square. Of course haters will say the former, whatever makes them feel good…………
let’s not be TOO critical of Bryant. He is a fan of the Grandstand!
I do I keep referring to RG2014? It hasn’t happened yet. Hmmmm, my subconscious telling me something……
Nadal-Tomic “picks” – https://tenngrand.com/2014/01/13/nadal-vs-tomic-the-tennis-world-makes-its-picks/
Hahaha, Ricky! Good if Mr. Bryant is a Tenngrand fan because he will read my “take down” and respond! Seriously though, he is one of the few ESPN writers whose articles I chase so I was especially disappointed with his latest offering.
Even before I read Bryant’s article, I came to the conclusion that writers are desperate for Djokovic to justify being called an elite. His resume is very sparse at the moment and does not entitle him to be mentioned in the same sentence and Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. They are hoping against hope that he will soon.
The title of the article is:
Djokovic must get busy at majors
Already one of the top players ever, he needs Grand Slams to be truly elite
He is far from being one of the top players ever. He’s only had one good year and trails both Rafa and Roger in their h2h. He barely pips Murray at 11-8. Bryant admits that he is not truly elite.
The following excerpts confirm my take on the constant effort to big up of Djokovic:
Bryant:
“Since a breakout 2011 season in which he won three of four majors, Djokovic has stalled somewhat, partly because he is still surrounded by great players.
He’s played in 10 of the past 13 Grand Slam finals but has only won two of the past eight, the past two Australian Opens. For immortality, he knows he must reach at least double digits, and he may have to begin winning more than one major per year.
Another reason is how hard Djokovic works on the court. Part of his legend is built around stirring comebacks from the edge of elimination, ………….
In Flushing Meadows, in the second set and midway through the third, it appeared that Djokovic had returned to his pattern of pushing Nadal back and controlling space. Nadal rose, though, taking over late in the third, then destroying Djokovic 6-1 in the fourth to win the title.
As he enters a fourth career title defence in Melbourne, Djokovic will be playing not only the current field but also for a larger slice of history, one his talent demands and that in many ways he has already earned. But that will only be cemented with several more Grand Slam trophies.”
He hasn’t already earned a greater slice in history, he has to win a lot, lot more!!!!!!!
What I find amusing is Bryant is exhorting Djokovic to win MORE Australian open trophies to claim his place in the pantheon of greats. I hope he will soon write an article exhorting Rafa to win more RG trophies to cement his claim to GOATness.
haha…yeah that is funny !
Some commentators feel that someone owes Djokovic his place in history………nobody owes anybody anything. He has to beat the best constantly, year after year, not just in one fluke year when he was using the cvac chamber to boost his recovery. He has to win constantly on a level playing field.
In 2012, he ended the year as #1 because luckily for him he only had Murray and Federer to contend with, Rafa wasn’t there for half of the year.
Djokovic will never win the Olympic Gold Medal, (and it’s not for the want of trying. He didn’t even get a medal in 2012 and got a bronze in 2008)…………….you can take that to the bank.
Nadline, Although I agree Djokovic is not close to the league Nadal and Federer are in , I would rate djokovic much higher than that…
and come onnn ! “He has to beat the best constantly, year after year, not just in one fluke year when he was using the cvac chamber to boost his recovery”.
That’s unfair ! can’t discount one of the greatest years ever in tennis like that…
Vamosrafa, rate Djoker much higher than what?
I really don’t know what to say when Djoker’s great year is chalked up to a cvac chamber. Just unbelievable.
I agree that Djoker is not in Rafa and Fed’s league. But I do think that he has put himself on the map in the last few years. It can’t just be written off as a fluke.
It’s like when some Fed fans accuse Rafa of doping or faking injuries to try to demean his achievements. That’s beyond offensive. It’s also offensive to think that Djoker’s 2011 can be trashed.
Suffice to say, I do not agree.
you can have a fluke match…you can have a fluke tournament may be ..but a fluke year? lol..a year in which your first loss occurs in the semi finals of the french…a year in which you utterly dominate the giants of tennis (Federer and Nadal)…
it is also true that djokovic has had to contend with two of the best of all time ever since he has started playing outstanding tennis…
I would surely rate him much higher…
Meanwhile, Lacko is giving Djokovic a match ! it has been tough for djokovic so far…
Rod laver arena is playing insanely fast. Average strokes in rallies for lacko djokovic match is 2…
This is djokovic’s IDEAL surface, plays like a fast indoor hardcourt.
what do others think about this?
“The spectators want a bit of rallying, a bit of tactics. People don’t go to Barcelona’s stadium to watch Lionel Messi taking penalties,” Toni Nadal was quoted as saying in Spanish sports daily As.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/13/us-tennis-open-court-toni-idUSBREA0C0D220140113
But how many people understand the intricacies of the beautiful game enough to appreciate it, Uncle T?
Not to worry, as soon as Rafa’s playing days are over they will slow down the courts……..
I still say it was a fluke year of dominating tennis. He has not been able to repeat it and the only thing that has changed is that someone said the cvac chamber, though not banned, is not in the spirit of the sport, so he stopped using it. Even if that wasn’t the reason for him not repeating his great 2011 season, he has not been able repeated it. To me that makes it a fluke.
Vamos Rafa
Everyone is basing their assessment of Djoker on 2011, that’s history. It’s just one year in his whole career, he has not been able to repeat it, he’s only won 2 slams since then. Rafa is always judged on his last loss, irrespective of all he’s done in the past. They should all be judged by the same standards.
nobody is comparing him to rafa, at least I am not doing it. Rafa is one of the greatest ever so a comparison his legacy should not be the only standard to appraise djokovic,
Nadline, rafa has not been able to win 3 slams in a year other than 2010. So was 2010 a fluke year? Ah this even sounds crappy…
If a fed fan comes out and days Federer has won three 3 slams in 3 diff years while rafa has done it once so it was a fluke for rafa as he has not been able to replicate it ! that would be ridiculous ! wouldn’t it be? and you seriously believe it was the Cvac Pod that enabled him to dominate 2011???
And I am certainly not basing my verdict on djokovic just on 2011. He finished 2012 as no.1 and he is displaying incredible consistency in slams. He reached his 14th consecutive G.S semi final last year and looks poised to make it 15. He is the only player who can match federer’s streak of 23 (which many thought would stand the test of time).
Its okay to support rafa everytime but why is it necessary to demean the achievements of others. I mean , the guy is clearly not in rafa’s league in terms of legacy but he is an all-time great already in my view.
Why do you say I’m demeaning Djokovic. I was responding to the Bryant article on ESPN. Yes, I do believe that the egg gave him an advantage. A lot of people put Djokovic above Rafa purely because he dominated in 2011. That was in 2011, they should move on.
As NNY said, you will very likely get doping accuisations on rafa in response to that Pod thing. I do not think many people rate djokovic above rafa in terms of legacy. However, there are people who might rate him as the one having an edge AT THE MOMENT. While rafa is no.1 and he dominated 2013, he is the king at the moment. But, djokovic is very much with him in the current scheme of things.
Djokovic was stopped by Fed and rafa at USO and RG respectively between 2007-2009. Novak was playing excellent tennis but he was contending with the greatest on clay and the most successful player ever on hard courts. He finally overcame a potential GOAT fed in USO 2010 before being denied by another potential GOAT in the final. So, he was already making huge strides.
Why don’y you look it from the perspective that djokovic was losing matches pre-2011 just because of poor physical conditioning. We all know how much more consistent and dangerous he was become on all surfaces since overcoming physical issues.
I have no doubts djokovic is a much bigger champion .
Bryant’s article clearly has parts where he is showing bias, but to be honest, so are your posts above ! haha… I’m say it again: Djokovic cannot be compared to Rafa …rafa’s just too damn big a legend..simple…BUT, novak is an all-time great and there is MUCH more about him than 2011 alone.
Soon he will be surpassing Agassi’s mark of masters 1000s and only two men will be ahead of him in that category: Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal. I have plenty of respect for the serb’s accomplishments…
With djokovic given his due share of respect, here’s to hoping my man lifts his 14th slam in two weeks time. VAMOSSS
“Bryant’s article clearly has parts where he is showing bias, but to be honest, so are your posts above !”
@vamosrafa, herein lies the rub. If I may, I agree with you that @nadline’s posts show bias towards Rafa but that is to be expected, no? @nadline is a Rafa fan, does not pretend to be objective in that respect. She has honestly and clearly stated that she is a Rafa fan.
You correctly (in my view) point out that Bryant shows bias in his article for Novak/against Rafa so what is he, a Novak fan or an objective sports journalist?
This is my problem with Bryant’s article and tbh a lot of sports journos’ articles out there. These people are just are like us fans and yet we are supposed to put them on this “objective” pedestal so when we “out” fans respond to them we are told, “or no, you are not being objective!” Excuse me? This is dishonest!
I honestly believe all journalists should be required to state their favourites and this be clearly stated in their articles. This way, we can have honest discussions without these fans.
well, I don’t have any disagreements with you here ! I fully agree with this … This can be quite annoying. It is quite common too ! yup
However, there are SOME objective writers too… Ricky is one of them ! I know he is a fan of a great player but in his writings, you can never spot any bias. hence, plenty of respect for his writing.
what does “he is a fan of a great player” mean???
RITB,but I do think it can be done objectively even when you are an ardent fan. Trust me, when I am writing a piece for The Grandstand, I throw out my rafa-bias out of the window. If you come across any bias in the articles I write here, do point it..I am the most fanatic of rafa fans here but when I am writing I feel it is mandatory not to let that bias affect my writing. I cannot guarantee that my fanaticism for rafa 100% does not affect my writing ,but I am not even close to being a rafa fan when writing.
I don’y have much writing experience but these journalists have plenty of it and yet they can’t be professional. It’s just not write to pretend you are an objective journalist when its clear you are biased in every article you write.
right ** second last line
Bryant said that even though Rafa is #1 and Djoko is #2, Djoko is the better player; I’m just disagreeing with him. I don’t care whether people think it’s wrong to say what I think or not,
haha…I am not even referring to Bryant’s claim. You were actually talking about djokovic’s status as a tennis player and I responded to that! Don’t have anything to do with bryant’s article.
by the way, when comparing two players on a current basis, it is usually not relevant to consider whole career stats. Saying that rafa is better than djokovic AT THE MOMENT on the basis that he has 13 slams to djokovic’s six and he leads the head to head 22-17, does not really make sense I think. From that perspective, federer has 17 slams so very very hard to look past him from that perspective.
The more relevant thing to do is looking at the current rankings and how they have recently fared against each other,esp on big stages . I believe rafa DOES hold the edge even from this criteria so yea, bryant’s claim is weird and biased.
Wel, I was responding to Bryant’s article. Why would I, out of the blue, for no reason, start talking about Djokovic as a player?
@vamosrafa, the point I was making is not so much that all sports journalists are not objective but rather that fans, by definition, cannot be expected to be objective.
umm yeah I get that now… sorry for the slight misinterpretation..
“Saying that rafa is better than djokovic AT THE MOMENT on the basis that he has 13 slams to djokovic’s six and he leads the head to head 22-17, does not really make sense I think.”
Isn’t this the argument put forward by most Fedfans to buttress their Fed-is-GOAT contention? They even air-brush out the inconvenient H2H to make the point stick! The point is, the argument may not make sense to you but it sure makes sense to others………………
vamosrafa says:
January 13, 2014 at 2:13 pm
We all have our biases, we are human. That is the starting point I think. After that, some of us become writers, bloggers, professional journalists etc. while some of us just become well, fans.
You clearly have a passion for writing and you do that very well as shown by the magnificent blogs you write for us here at Tenngrand. The same goes for Ricky and others. I can only speak for myself: I enjoy your writing, your analyses and I know you are a Rafan and it is clear in your writings/analyses that you separate your fandom from your blogs. That is what separates you from me and other mere fans. Thank you for this.
You, and other writers out there, have that gift, whether by training, intuition or design or all of the above. I don’t. I am just a fan, a Rafan. I am quite happy in that little box of mine and have no interest in being or pretending to be objecting!
All I am saying is: please don’t judge me (a mere fan) by your “writer’s standard”. If you look at it like that you will probably see that @nadline is not disrespecting Djokovic’s accomplishments but rather standing up to those who do not respect Rafa’s accomplishments, who in this instance happened to be Mr Bryant! In her inimitable fan-girl way of course………….
^^sentence in above should read, “……have no interest in being or pretending to be objective!”
Thanks you for the compliments RITB, much appreciated 🙂
I can’t judge you on something which I myself have done so relentlessly over the yearslol. I don’t think anyone has defended rafa more than I have done on tennistalk when those fed-retards like torres9, maxi, madmax etc etc were present in abundance. I have done plenty of that myself 🙂 and I LIKE rafa fans standing up to defend their man… Nadline has been loyally defending rafa so she has been doing a great job in this regard..
However, I don’t think we need to call other player’s achievements flukes just to punctuate rafa’s superiority. Don’t you think rafa has earned so much himself which we can use to prove his superiority? I certainly think so ! Anyway, that is what I think…Rafa can easily be defended without calling another great player’s achievements a fluke and completely overlooking that the other player himself is a great champion but yeah not in rafa’s league ..
vamosrafa,
I see that this discussion has continued. I said to you in a previous post that I appreciated your respect for the differing opinions of others. I said that I value it very much.
I well remember what we went through on TT with the trolls. They didn’t just attack Rafa, they attacked his fans in vitriolic ways. But now they are not here and yet look at what happens.
I will stand up for Rafa no matter what. But I will not do it at the expense of his rivals. I don’t get bringing up someone who happens to write something indicating that he thinks Djoker is a better player than Rafa. So what? People are entitled to their opinions. Not everyone is going to think the same. My position is clear – I do not think that Djoker is in Rafa or Fed’s league. But I am not going to freak out because someone else thinks differently. If this guy Bryant wants to think that Djoker is the better player, then he can think it. I don’t see it as my problem. I don’t go along with censorship. Others are free to have their opinions and I am free to disagree.
This would be a very boring place if everyone agreed.
well said NNY ! agree with you 🙂