MoS Posted May 8, 2015 Report Share Posted May 8, 2015 To followers of Tennis, why does Novak Djokovic invoke such Cena-like reactions amongst a lot of Tennis fans, especially those who attend matches at the big tournaments? Passionately loved by some, virulently hated by others. He is clearly the best Tennis player in the world at present, but the chances of him enjoying Hogan-esque universal popularity like Federer and Nadal enjoyed in their pomp is not too great. A few people believe it is racial and ethnic discrimination; who better to understand audience reactions amongst those fault-lines than wrestling fans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted May 8, 2015 Report Share Posted May 8, 2015 Djoker is a lot like Cena trying to follow Federer and Nadal's Bret and HBK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zenjo Posted May 8, 2015 Report Share Posted May 8, 2015 His fake persona is the biggest reason. He reached the top in 2011 and was upset at not seeing the kind of sponsorship deals that Fed and Rafa were getting. So he began trying to cultivate an image as a great guy and ambassador for tennis so he'd be seen in the same light as those two. It's been a partial success. From my viewpoint Rafa actually is a genuine person and Fed is a master at manipulating the media to portray him as some kind of Demi-God. Those two also have more artistically pleasing playing styles than Djokovic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Partly it's because he was such a prat when he was younger, but he's a lot like Lendl in the 80s. Tennis fans never really warmed to Lendl. If Dimitrov can break through, he'll be the next darling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoS Posted May 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Djoker is a lot like Cena trying to follow Federer and Nadal's Bret and HBK. Kris, by Cena, do you mean Cena of 2005 or Cena of 2015? If it is the latter, I am not sure if I agree. Cena is objectively more accomplished than Bret and HBK, in as much as wrestling can be objective. And, frankly in my opinion, he is better than Shawn in the subjective art of in-ring performance as well. There might come a time when we can say the same about Djokovic vis-a-vis Federer and Nadal, but that time has not come yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoS Posted May 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 His fake persona is the biggest reason. He reached the top in 2011 and was upset at not seeing the kind of sponsorship deals that Fed and Rafa were getting. So he began trying to cultivate an image as a great guy and ambassador for tennis so he'd be seen in the same light as those two. It's been a partial success. From my viewpoint Rafa actually is a genuine person and Fed is a master at manipulating the media to portray him as some kind of Demi-God. Those two also have more artistically pleasing playing styles than Djokovic. So you are saying that one of the biggest reasons Fed is much more popular than Djokovic is that he is much better at projecting a fake image? I don't think either Federer or Djokovi are two-faced or fake. Federer is a much more successful ambassador for sport than either of the two because of a few inherent, ascriptive, structural differences: he comes from a more affluent and prosperous country than the other two; he can speak English fluently, which always helps, unfortunately; he is a lot more articulate in the eyes of big companies, partly because of the last one; so on and so forth. That also explains why he gets a lot more sponsors than Nadal or Djokovic. But that has not stopped Nadal from being beloved and hugely respected; Djokovic does not even seem to get the respect. I do agree that Nadal is the nicest of the three by far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoS Posted May 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Partly it's because he was such a prat when he was younger, but he's a lot like Lendl in the 80s. Tennis fans never really warmed to Lendl. If Dimitrov can break through, he'll be the next darling. Federer was a brat too, although that was in his junior days. I am not sure the Lendl comparison works; Lendl was stoic and impassive, while Djokovic is highly emotional and wears his heart on his sleeve. And not in a dour, unpleasant way like Murray either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 More like 2007 Cena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 Partly it's because he was such a prat when he was younger, but he's a lot like Lendl in the 80s. Tennis fans never really warmed to Lendl. If Dimitrov can break through, he'll be the next darling. Federer was a brat too, although that was in his junior days. I am not sure the Lendl comparison works; Lendl was stoic and impassive, while Djokovic is highly emotional and wears his heart on his sleeve. And not in a dour, unpleasant way like Murray either. I don't really mean it as a direct comparison as Lendl was even more unpopular than Djokovic. Lendl muscled in on Connors and McEnroe in the same way Djokovic muscled in on Nadal and Federer. Djokovic has never really been accepted as the third guy. He doesn't have a marketable playing style and his back story isn't saleable. A lot of people remember what happened between him and the fans at the US Open and he's never really been a crowd favourite because of it. He's arguably the most sophisticated of the three w/ Federer being more interested in fashion and celebrities than anything else and Nadal basically living with his family and unable to speak English well; and he's probably the most articulate of the three as well. He's just not very interesting to a general public who don't care about his homeland or his story. But mostly I think people can't get their head around him disrupting the Nadal/Federer narrative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Redman Posted May 9, 2015 Report Share Posted May 9, 2015 The last part is the key I think. If you change the wrestling analogy from "Shawn and Bret" to "Austin and Rock" it makes more sense. Federer and Rafa were two GOATs who came along around the same time, we were watching history and we got to watch classic Slam final after classic Slam final (narratively, if not in reality). Anyone who follows them is going to be a letdown, in the same way that people resent Cena for not being the Attitude Era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstar Sleeze Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Federer and Nadal are also a lot more fun to watch. Federer's forehand is so fucking gorgeous and he is so graceful. Nadal is so damn gritty and powerful out there. Nadal plays the most violent brand of tennis, well as violent as tennis gets. Djoker is more fun to watch Murray, but besides a really nice backhand, what is really eye-popping about him. He is just really excellent at everything. Throw in that Nadal is the earnest one and Federer is presented as class all the way, then you have Djoker who is labeled as a chump (retiring problems for a while) and a whiner. Hard not to have a letdown. Hey, as long as it is not Murray has always been my stance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yo-Yo's Roomie Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 Murray is way more fun to watch than Nole. Nadal too honestly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.