The revolutionary reign of Novak Djokovic
Almost four years ago, Novak Djokovic began his ascent to the zenith of the men’s tour in earnest, in a few short days climbing over each player above him in the rankings like rungs on a ladder. Showing the magnificent force and dominance of a future No. 1 player, he beat the world’s top three players of the year in three consecutive matches to win the 2007 Rogers Cup in Montreal.
Third-ranked Andy Roddick, bridesmaid Rafael Nadal and King Roger Federer, respectively, all fell to Djokovic in the quarterfinal, semifinal and final of the third-oldest tennis tournament, an early sign he was ready to upset the tour’s well-cemented establishment.
Heading into that final, Federer had won seven of the past nine Grand Slams (every single one except for the French Open) and 16 straight matches at the Rogers Cup. He was amid his greatest and most bossy run. But as a 20-year-old, Djokovic had collected only his sixth title just after rocketing into the Top 20 for the first time and had yet to make a Grand Slam final. In the following month, he advanced to his first final at the US Open and won the Australian Open title right after, his first major win. But even if just for a single tournament in Montreal, he took on each of the globe’s best and ruled them all, a moment that provided evidential basis for the earliest of hypotheses on the rise of this Serbian. He impressed the tour with his promising play.
Almost four years later, Djokovic has kept all of his promises. Djokovic officially became the No. 1 player in the world after beating Jo-Wilfried Tsonga in the semifinal of this year’s Wimbledon and a couple of days later beat two-time champion Rafael Nadal, a player whom Djokovic defeated in their previous four meetings in 2011 (all of them Master Series finals) but never in a five-set match, for the title. A winner of three Grand Slams at 24 years old, Djokovic broke through the iron wall of dominance cast by Federer and Nadal, a reign between the two lasting more than seven years as the top players in the game.
[php snippet=1]
A win over Tsonga, who dispatched Federer in their quarterfinal match, earned Djokovic the No. 1 ranking and led him to utter one of those immortal quotes that sum up a generation in a single sentence, the kind that gets repeated by sports historians in the years and decades succeeding a time of such historical weight. “I guess you need to lose only one match in seven months to get there,” Djokovic told reporters after his semifinal.
That’s exactly what he did, holding a 48-1 record in 2011 along with eight titles. His individual loss came against Federer – whom Djokovic bested in three matches prior – in the semifinal of the French Open, losing in what some call Federer’s best match on clay. Before then, Sports Illustrated ran features on Djokovic, CNN did interviews with him about his importance as an ambassador to and inspirational leader for a once broken country of Serbia. The media hyped him as something the world hadn’t seen in almost a decade: a player other than Nadal or Federer bearing the flag of the sport.
In his first Wimbledon final, Djokovic out-ran and out-hustled Nadal. He raced to shots with the speed of a sprinter off the block, chased down balls before they hit the ground for a second time. At one point, Nadal hit a fantastic drop shot into the upper corner of Djokovic’s court, landing near the net. Djokovic dashed to not only catch the ball in flight, but to hit a cross-court winner that many once thought only Nadal himself could hit. Whatever nervous tension Djokovic had coming into the final was channelled into ferocious, free-swinging forehands. He’d engage in 20-stroke rallies with Nadal regularly, winning most of them. He changed the destiny of shots coming to and from him. He returned shots fated to be winners. When Djokovic exposed Nadal, he struck the Spaniard’s serve. Winning five of six break points presented to him during the entire match, Djokovic converted every point essential to a victory over a scrambler like Nadal.
This year, Djokovic won all five contests against Nadal, a player who hadn’t fallen to one particular player – not even Federer – more than three times in a single season. His first Wimbledon final yielded a first Wimbledon trophy. And while a season of success vacated for Djokovic only the No. 1 ranking, and made him the biggest threat to pick off the greats of the game in succession like cans off a fence, his pursuit of and win at Wimbledon was not only a real and factual turning point in his career, but one for tennis. Like Gatsby and his mysterious green light, tennis fans were finally given time to realize the significance of this moment in history, that Djokovic’s win over Nadal was not only monumental, but symbolic of a change in competition, that there was the possibility of something that had once been out of reach.
Before Wimbledon, a change was palpable, a dominant run from Djokovic provoking more questions than answers. He was just like Gatsby’s green light as it shone across the bay, without anyone really knowing what and if he meant something significant. A moment of clarity, a climax, crystallized during NBC‘s annual Breakfast at Wimbledon on the first Sunday of July. Djokovic isn’t simply the flavor of the month(s) in 2011. Over the years, he’s asserted himself as a qualifier, a challenger and a champion. He’s more than that now. Djokovic is the first player in the men’s tour not named Federer or Nadal to win two Grand Slams in a calendar year since Andre Agassi in 1999. He’s the reason the men’s tour is evolving.
In the past two months, Federer has beaten Djokovic, Nadal has beaten Federer and Djokovic has beaten Nadal. No one really sits atop any of them. There’s a chance at diversity in the draw, the kind of diversity of a multicultural city. Even if Federer, who will be turning 30 years old in a month, does end up winning another Grand Slam or two before he closes out his career, perhaps winning one even as soon as this year’s US Open, the events and results of the past 12 months have shaken the core of the men’s tour. The tectonic plates of the tour’s constitution are shifting, a sensation every tennis fan feels.
It’s encouraging to think about the tour without a dominant Federer. He’s gone six Grand Slams without winning one and in no way has the tour abated or suffered. It’s fun to imagine Juan Martin del Potro jockeying for a second Grand Slam title or Bernard Tomic restoring Australian pride in tennis and becoming the first Australian to play in a Wimbledon final since Mark Philippoussis in 2003. It’s refreshing to think about the future, not to simply sit in awe at the proceedings of the present – though fun while it lasted.
If Federer hadn’t played the greatest clay-court match of his life, Djokovic may possibly be unbeaten in 2011, may have possibly collected three of three Grand Slams and could’ve possibly been on his way to becoming only the second player in the history of the open era to win all four Grand Slams in one calendar year.
But that’s the exactly the point: Federer may not be great enough to win consecutive Grand Slams anymore or to make 10 consecutive Grand Slam finals as he did between 2005 and 2007. After all, against Tsonga at Wimbledon Federer lost a match in which he had won the first two sets for the first time in 179 Grand Slam appearances, a sign he can no longer dictate as he did. But he’s still a great player capable of, even just slightly, knocking the tour off balance, keeping the door to another championship ajar. And just as Federer had to answer the challenges of Nadal, Nadal will have to answer Djokovic. One official week at the top of the rankings doesn’t make Djokovic a guaranteed champion in the next five Grand Slams; he’s got to continue to push Nadal, to continue to breakthrough as he has so far, to continue to apply pressure against the glass encasing of the men’s pro game until it shatters.
Just as the Romans once established hegemonic rule over the Mediterranean, Federer reigned over the game for so long no one remembers how it functioned without him at the top. But he no longer needs to anchor the sport to keep it relevant, fresh and exciting. Even Federer said Djokovic’s turn at the top of tennis is good for the sport. Even the man who once held a scepter for a racquet only a few years ago, a man who’s been the pinnacle of consistency when he presided over the game like a benevolent dictatorship thinks it’s time for a new look.
[php snippet=1]
