This Is Novak Djokovic’s 100th Week Ranked As The No. 1 Player [Chart]

Congrats Nole!

Ajde!

September 23rd, 2013 at 10:01 am

Would Sampras have 286 weeks at No. 1 if his rivals were Federer and Nadal? Of course not, and that’s why we should take into account level of competition when we compare Djokovic to other all-time greats.

September 23rd, 2013 at 10:32 am

way to go NOLE….keep up the good work :)

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:01 am

Good job Nole. Your a damn good tennis player and even if you pass the torch there’s nothing to say it won’t come around again. If Rafa picks up #1, I think it will be the 3rd time.

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:03 am

Any second now one of the campaigners for Nadal is gonna tell us that weeks at no1 has nothing to do with being GOAT, lol!

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:28 am

Weeks at no. 1 is of course an important factor but so is degree of dominance over your main rivals.

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:36 am

It didn’t take long for a Fed fan to infest their ridiculous infatuation of hate for Rafa on a thread completely unrelated to him did it? This must be a record speed time, less than 10 posts and boom: we have a snippy Nadal comment. I’m impressed!

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:37 am

@Milan: if your good enough to be number 1 then REGARDLESS of whoever is around your era you’ll be the Number 1. Period. Nole cannot use Fedal as an excuse and nor does he to his credit.

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:40 am

Yes well its difficult to post about anything else these days, isnt it?

With the gang proclaiming Nadal Goat on just about every thread.

I just gave people a heads up.

What ridiculous hate? lol,

Brando, maybe you should read some of your good Nadal friends comments regarding Federer.

Or maybe you just want the likes of Hawkeye and slice tennis campaigning day in day out.

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:45 am

@Alex: So what? Who cares? Let them: they are completely entitled to their opinion. Who are you to ridicule them for thinking whatever they feel like? Your no one buddy! So here’s a free tip: pick up another hobby for your spare time as opposed to coming on here and policing others on what to think and what not to think as it’s plain ridiculous. PS: I think Federer is the most wimpiest player of all time when the pressure is on. A WOAT if you will. Am I out of order for thinking as such? Sue me for doing so! P

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:53 am

Brando,

And to a certain degree Hawkeye did just that!

Maybe not directly but we all know what his getting at.

—

Just call me psychic lol.

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:53 am

Brando, it’s a seriously flawed way to compare players by just looking at numbers. To get big picture you must take into account level of competition.

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:57 am

Nor would Fed have so many weeks at # 1, # of slams and year end # 1s if Rafa, Nole and Muzz had been his age.

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:57 am

^^^It is telling that on the thread where GOAT is being discussed, it is actually @WTF, @TXHC, @AD Tennis and @Jo that start the discussion but no mention of those posters.

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:58 am

”Your no one buddy! ” – Good one, ill frame it.

—-

Follow your own advice and stop being a sissy. Im entitled to my own opinion.

”So what? Who cares?”

Obviously you do, otherwise you wouldnt of replied to a comment, that wasnt even directed at you, like someone that has a cracker up there bottom! lol.

Brando,

You make me laugh so hard, but hey, keep going…

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:59 am

@Hawkeye

Its fine I don’t mind what you say, I was just making a point.

Btw from our last talks I actually kinda like you. So all good. :)

Gotta get back to work.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:05 pm

@Milan: Sure it’s a consideration, but ULTIMATELY it’s all about: what you have achieved. You cannot claim to be a player on a certain level without having the trophies, achievement to back it up. It doesn’t work like that. You want to talk big: have the records to back it up. Otherwise it’s meaningless noise.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:06 pm

Isn’t the title read “This Is Novak Djokovic’s 100th Week Ranked As The No. 1 Player”……………..

Is it really so….or I m hallucinating!!

never mind!! :/

# guyisreallyunluckytobeplayinginfedalgen

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:12 pm

Congrats to Nole on reaching 100 weeks at number 1 which is a fantastic achievement,and no mean feat considering the dominance of Federer and Nadal,and i agree with Anna in that its probable he may loose it,but thats not to say he wont get it back at some point,well done Nole.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:12 pm

LMAO: ‘Gotta get back to work.’: why of course it is. It always is time to run along when you get your backside handed to you for being exposed to your sheer idiocy. Run along pal, run along……

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:15 pm

Brando, it’s reasonable to say that Sampras would have won less than 10 slams if his rivals were Federer and Nadal. If Djokovic ends up with 10 slams it could be argued that he is greater player than Sampras.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:15 pm

@Perfectfan: WHY is he unlucky to be playing in the Fedal era? It’s not like he would conclusively excel without them when he’s losing GS finals in straight sets to others such Andy Murray or that he would do well in other eras. I don’t hear Novak complaining: so nor should his fans IMO.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:19 pm

a breeze of fresh air at 12:12 pm….thanx hippy chic for the post! :-)

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:21 pm

@Milan: ONLY for a Djokovic fan would that be the case. Beyond that it’s a simple and conclusive: NO. IF’s mean f’all in tennis as in life. Pete Sampras came, he saw and conquered. Period. IF Novak wants to be seen on that level he needs to match his records or surpass them. Period. Otherwise keep shut, be respectful and not whine about IF’s. Thankfully: nole doesn’t offer such nonsense. Here’s hoping his fans follow suit and keep schtum about IF’s.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:22 pm

Perfect Fan your welcome :-),actually i was thinking the very same about yours TBH.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:23 pm

Brando, you are wrong. Period.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:26 pm

@Milan: For a Djokovic fan- of course I am. LOL.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:29 pm

Brando, all sensible people think you are wrong.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:31 pm

@Milan: sure buddy whatever makes you feel better. Keep telling yourself that 10 slams > 14 slams. PS: are all sensible people Djokovic fans since they are the ONLY ones to think as such! LOL!

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:35 pm

appreciate ur response hippy chic….

Guess what Nole be thinking, if he happened to go thru this blog…..”there u go, I have jus achieved a great milestone of my blossoming career, and folks r talking what fedal did right and wrong. Did I chose a wrong profession for a living. Gosh!”

#Ridiculoustosaytheleast

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:39 pm

Brando, is it reasonable to say that Sampras would have won less than 10 slams if his rivals were Federer and Nadal? Yes or no?

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:41 pm

^In addition to it: can some folks spell? Geez the mistakes, almost makes we want to eat a gluten product in disgust!

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:42 pm

Milan
It will be interesting to see fed fans’ comments about your logic that competition should be taken into while measuring the greatness of a player.
By your logic Rafa is greater than Fed. I am sure you won’t find any support from them.
Alex aka Skeezer,
What is your view on this ?

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:51 pm

Alex
Stop your name calling and make your on this topic clear.

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:53 pm

Hey btw hippy chic, it jus struck me….

If I m not wrong….u r a rafa fan. But (lotsa guys will believe me for this) u happen to appreciate fed everytime in a conversation and regard him very highly….even for other players like nole, murray, delpo, etc.

Now thats a mark of a true tennis fan….way 2 go :-)

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:55 pm

*your stand

September 23rd, 2013 at 12:56 pm

And for all this discussion of whether 10 is greater than 14 or not, Nole may never reach even 10. Rafa has a better chance of adding 4 more to his tally cos of the freebies he gets at FO

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:03 pm

Brando, people who lose arguments resorts to personal attacks and that’s what you’re doing now (one more personal attack and I will report you).

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:04 pm

Perfect Fan thankyou yep Rafas my favourite followed by Murray,as hes a Brit and im a Brit and my late mother was also half Sottish so i guess it was always in the genes lol,but i like and admire Roger,Nole,Delpo etc whos achievements are amazing,its the game of tennis i love more than any one player though,the only time i get irritated and defensive is when people set out to belttle Rafas achievements,although i do defend Roger and Nole too when they are attacked unecassarily,but i critique them all too even Rafa as i dont think anybodys perfect.

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:04 pm

Congrats. Nole for #100, a great achievement.
Fed @ 302 ?
Friggin unbreakable!

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:09 pm

Tennis for Life, can you elaborate why is Nadal greater player than Federer by my logic?

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:10 pm

Jus thinking….Nole reached the 100th mark right on time coz its jus a matter of time before he passes the mantle to rafa.

Had he lost his no. 1 on his 99th week….that wud hav hurt I guess, a li’l may be.

A big achievement nevertheless….only 8 players so far…..now that deserves a pat on ur back :)

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:15 pm

@Milan:

I speak bluntly and i’m clear as to what I think.

ANY sensible individual will tell you clearly that 10 slams are not greater than 14 slams.

ANY sensible individual will tell you that penalizing someone for not facing Fedal in their era is just a ridiculous notion to even entertain let alone apply.

ANY sensible poster will tell you that: Pete Sampras > Novak Djokovic.

That will stay the same UNLESS Novak matches or surpasses Pete’s achievement.

IF you have a problem with that: go ahead report me.

For now: that’s me done on pointing out the obvious.

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:15 pm

Brando, you’ve stated that I’m being “foolish”. That’s a personal attack, and as you can see that post was deleted by the moderator.

Jimmy Connors has won more slams and reached more weeks at No. 1 than John McEnroe. According to your logic all sensible people will say that Connors is greater player than McEnore and yet an international panel of tennis experts determined that McEnroe is greater than Connors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_Greatest_of_All_Time

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:27 pm

If I were Federer or Nadal, I wouldn’t want to play a prime Sampras at Wimbledon or the USO. He’d win more than his share of matches.

In any case, I think it’s fair to say that if Sampras, Nadal and Federer all played at the same time, none of them would have broken the slam record.

I’ve seen prime Pete Sampras. He was a pretty damn scary player in his own right. Sampras played in a different era. His attacking style, huge groundies and awesome serve would have been much tougher to deal with if Nadal and Federer were taken back to the 90’s where Luxilon didn’t exist and racket technology was less sophisticated. Not saying they wouldn’t beat Sampras. Just saying it wouldn’t be the lopsided mess some posters here would like to claim it would be.

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:35 pm

@SG1:

Spot on.

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:42 pm

Sampras knew how to shorten points and in my opinion, was the best athlete to ever play. He wouldn’t have been as easily drawn into the wars of attrition that Rafa, Novak, Roger and Andy play.

Take away some injuries at the end of his career and his blood disorder issue and maybe it’s Sampras with 16 or 17 majors. No one can say for sure but I think Pete left a couple on the table. He was never close to winning in Paris which gives you an idea of how dominant he was in the other slams.

September 23rd, 2013 at 1:44 pm

Congratulations, Nole. It was good while it lasted.

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:01 pm

SG1 Says:

“In any case, I think it’s fair to say that if Sampras, Nadal and Federer all played at the same time, none of them would have broken the slam record.”

Nadal would still have been King of Clay.

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:02 pm

Brando, we Nadal fans should not behave like some of nasty Fed fans. I definitely think that Djokovic is a better player than Sampras whose game revolved mainly on serve. Djokovic’s movement( arguebly ) on hard courts,return of serve and backhand must be the best of all time. It shows the greatness of Federer and Nadal that they were able to stop him at many grand slams.Otherwise, Djokovic by now must be having more than 10 slams.

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:06 pm

“jus speculating……..”

had this zone been filled with only haters…or only admirers…or only neutrals..

TBH this place wud hav su@ked. how boring, how monotonous had it been….if any blog is getting posted continuously, it has to be understood that it is being participated by all kinds.

I m sorry mates if I’ve hurt anybody knowingly-unknowingly….u all add value to this place…u all r precious & contributors to this site.

“LET-THE-BATTLE-RESUME” ;-)

September 23rd, 2013 at 2:12 pm

Agreed Rafaeli. I think Nadal would still have been the King of Clay.

September 23rd, 2013 at 3:24 pm

Milan,

In terms of greatness (not talent), I put Jimmy above John. Connors was relevant from the early 70’s into the mid 80’s. Mac had a 5 year span of dominance and he was done. Connors beat Borg, he beat Mac and he beat Lendl. He lost to them as well but hey, you can’t win’em all right?

September 23rd, 2013 at 3:30 pm

He was never close to winning in Paris which gives you an idea of how dominant he was in the other slams.

In Australia, I dont think so.

September 23rd, 2013 at 3:34 pm

Sampras was in 3 AO finals and won 2. Not as good as his runs at Wimbledon and the USO but not at all bad given the fact the surface much slower than what he preferred. While he’s not the most dominant player at the AO, he was pretty damn good there.

September 23rd, 2013 at 3:44 pm

I agree Sampras was the best athlete ever, and had great mental toughness, something that Federer has always lacked. Of course, Federer has more slams and was a master at precision. I was always drawn more to Pete and his great serve, it was his biggest weapon and won him many matches.

September 23rd, 2013 at 3:46 pm

Sampras was in 3 AO finals and won 2. Not as good as his runs at Wimbledon and the USO but not at all bad given the fact the surface much slower than what he preferred. While he’s not the most dominant player at the AO, he was pretty damn good there.

Exactly. this is why a person should be written with the correct words

Btw, if Rafa could win Australia 2014 he will have the same titles, the same finals but with a tyny better percenteage than Sampras in the Aussie Open.

Not bad at all. with the permission of Djokovic, is the Aussie to lose.

September 23rd, 2013 at 3:53 pm

…and 100 weeks at No.1 is an incredible achievement. Hats off to Nole and his team. I’d take one day..nea, 1 hour at number 1.

September 23rd, 2013 at 4:04 pm

…even No.10.

September 23rd, 2013 at 4:04 pm

I’d love to see a peak Sampras serving with today’s racket technology. It would be an awesome sight. With all the spin that can be generated, that live & loose arm of his would’ve create some humdinging kickers and flat bombs up the middle. His second serve would be even more evil than it was. Pete went for spots and hit them with regularity. I once watched him practice against Brad Gilbert about 20 years ago. He was telling Gilbert where he was going to ace him. It was sick stuff.

September 23rd, 2013 at 5:53 pm

Milan,
You are grasping out of straws
Can you clearly state why you Nole is greater than those who have better records

September 23rd, 2013 at 9:43 pm

Wouldn’t it be fun to go back in time and be able to see how the players of today would fair against the players in the era of serve….volley….point. I don’t know if those guys could do the baseline game that we see today. I have been watching tennis a long time and I don’t remember it being as physical then as it is now. Would Rafa, Andy, Joker run them to death like they do each other??

Congrats to Novak on his achievement….he is an awesome tennis player. It’s just like Rafa said, Novak’ s great match play makes him have to play at another level to be able to beat him. I think the players respect each other so much………why can’t we fans do the same?? I think it is mature to respect one another’s opinions…….just saying…..

September 23rd, 2013 at 10:27 pm

I believe that for a few years, the number 1 ranking is going to toggle between Nole and Rafa. Andy may not be able to get his hands on the number 1 ranking for a while because he is not a major force on clay and there are tons of points there.

I’m hoping Nole can keep the points-gap to a minimum between him and Rafa. Winning the WTF and Australian open would be key for that to happen.

September 23rd, 2013 at 11:56 pm

Nadal wouldnt be that good and I beleive Sampras would school him if they play in the 90’s using a heavy small hd size racket era

September 24th, 2013 at 12:09 am

And add to that the faster courts in the 90s. As for Fed, old Sampras won 2 sets in their very first and only meeting against a guy he has never seen play. And this Fed all his life from boyhood already watching and idolizing Pete.

September 24th, 2013 at 12:17 am

well if Corretja, Muster(carpet), Philipousis, Kucera (AO), Yzaga, Korda(UO), Krajicek(w) can beat peak Sampras, Im pretty sure Nadal can beat Pistol Pete in any surface.

September 24th, 2013 at 5:01 am

And Courier, Chang ?in carpet, too

September 24th, 2013 at 5:04 am

If Sampras vs Nadal in fast grass or Nadal vs Sampras in slow clay, in 10 matches, Im certain the spaniard could beat the american at least one time. On contrary, in slow clay in ten matches, the result will be 10 0.
Sampras was a monster in Wimbledon but Nadal is a Titan in Roland Garros.

September 24th, 2013 at 5:10 am

Steve, In 10 matches between Nadal and Sampras on fast courts, I’d give Nadal at least 3 wins. Nadal isn’t your perfect tennis player but he perhaps is the biggest fighter tennis has ever seen.

Both Sampras and Nadal have proved to be better than their rivals by comfortably leading the H2H vs the top players of their time.

September 24th, 2013 at 5:25 am

Tennis for Life,

Is it reasonable to say that Sampras would have won less than 10 slams if his rivals were Federer and Nadal? Yes or no?

September 24th, 2013 at 7:03 am

Milan, yes possibly. But only because you would have the best three players of all time competing simultaneously.

However, the same would be true for Nole if he was in the same era as Sampras and Rafa for instance.

Or especially, say, Federer having at least two (or even one for that matter) of Sampras, Rafa, Nole or Murray in their prime during the dreaded Weak Era.

September 24th, 2013 at 8:07 am

hawkeye,

It does not make sense to talk how many slams would Djokovic have won if his rival was Sampras. We compare level of competition during Novak’s career and Pete’s and therefore it logical to compare Djokovic’s rivals and Sampras’s.

September 24th, 2013 at 10:39 am

Sampras beat Ivan Lendl at the USO when he was 19. He beat Becker in the finals of Wimbledon. He’s beaten Agassi on hard courts (his best surface). He best the best of his generation on their best surfaces.

I will reiterate. Make Djokovic play with Sampras era technology. And remember, even with the old technology, Sampras could serve into the low 130’s. Not so sure that Djokovic would have any kind of easy time with Sampras given that Sampras of the 90’s was at least as big a hitter as the Novak of today (my opinion of course).

September 24th, 2013 at 12:56 pm

Milan, then, likely I think Sampras would still have at least 10 majors if Nadal and Fed competed with him in the 90’s. Sampras never won at the FO and grass was faster so I think Rafa might have stopped him from winning up to a maximum of four of his seven hard court majors.

I don’t think Fed would have had any impact on Sampras’ success at majors while he was in his prime so he is a non-factor.

September 24th, 2013 at 12:58 pm

SG1,

I believe that by age 26 Djokovic would have won at least 5 French Open’s in Sampras’s era with the technology which was used then. Serve is far less important on clay. Novak is a fantastic clay courter who so unlucky to play in Era with the best clay court player ever.

September 24th, 2013 at 1:18 pm

Any answer to these hypothetical questions is correct to anybody who responds and those who believe him and wrong to all those who believe otherwise.

September 24th, 2013 at 1:21 pm

I agree with you Milan given that Sergi Bruguera won 2 FO’s essentially without a serve. I think Novak is a far better clay courter than Sergi was and would have likely won several FO’s. Of course Guga was in the mix at that time and he could beat almost anyone on clay when in good form. I wouldn’t even necessarily even count out an in-form Guga against Nadal though I do think that Nadal would still win the majority of their encounters.

September 24th, 2013 at 2:39 pm

@Polo, agreed.

September 24th, 2013 at 3:02 pm

[…] married at the end of next year. Novak nor Jelena have commented on the news yet. Djokovic, who is celebrating his 100th week ranked No. 1, is expected to play in Beijing next […]

September 25th, 2013 at 10:23 am