A sportsman’s aim is to win while playing at his best, but coming out victorious when not at the peak of his powers can arguably be more satisfying. Therefore, for a tennis player, defeating Roger Federer and a partisan crowd with a lukewarm performance lurks somewhere near the realms of fantasy. But that is exactly what Novak Djokovic did to retain his Indian Wells title and take the first Masters 1000 event of the year in the Californian desert on Sunday.
After oozing supremity in the opening set, the Serb succumbed his advantage in the second, before squandering the tie-break with a plethora of double faults. However, in defiance of the collapse, world number one Djokovic averted the fate suffered by countryman Jelena Jankovic earlier in the day (she lost the women’s final to Simona Halep), breaking immediately in the deciding set to close out a 6-3 6-7 6-2 triumph and a 50th career title.
It was a match that encapsulated the last five years of Djokovic’s career. The first set radiated the unerring dominance he acquired in 2011, the second reeked of his devastating losses to Rafael Nadal at the French Open, and his beatings by Andy Murray at Wimbledon and in New York. The closing phases indicated a man reborn, the one we have become familiar with since he staved off a Federer fightback at the latest edition of SW19, a man who has recaptured the ability to overcome adversity on the biggest stages.
The Djokovic-Federer rivalry has waged enticingly once again after the latter ended an 18-month baron run in Dubai just over a year ago. Their following six meetings have been shared (discounting Djokovic’s walkover at the World Tour Finals), with matches being played on all three surfaces—ironically, the Swiss claimed the spoils on clay while the Serb snared glory at Federer’s second home, Wimbledon.
Indian Wells provided a typically slower hardcourt, one that suited the Australian Open champion more than Federer, whose game could not penetrate his opponent’s defence with the effectiveness that he did to win their previous two contests in Shanghai and Dubai. The 17-time Grand Slam champion’s serve also failed to fire: he made only 58 percent of first serves and struck six aces, as opposed to the 80 percent and twelve aces in the Arab heat last month.
Despite costing him a routine victory, Djokovic’s serve was friend as well as foe; he caned eight aces, won 77 percent of first serve points, and secured over half of the offerings on his second delivery. This combined to present Federer fewer chances—he broke just twice in three sets—and give the Serb more opportunities to break, five of which he gratefully accepted. His proficiency in the knockout set eventually trumped both a faltering challenger and some inner demons, a stress-relieving racket smash may have helped too.
Yet still, the crowd refuse to affiliate themselves with Djokovic in the way they have for years with Federer and Nadal. They just don’t love him, and it affects him—no more so than in the heat of battle. With eight Grand Slams, 21 Masters titles, and almost 140 weeks as world number one, we are firmly in the Djokovic era. Only Nadal has been at the summit of the rankings at year-end in the past four years. He is perhaps rightfully frustrated that his patch of dominance isn’t appreciated in the way his predecessors’s have been. His on-court passion, aggression even, doesn’t tend itself to the favouritism in the way Federer’s grace or Nadal’s hunkiness does.
“So be it,” he should muse. Off-court he does little wrong. In addition to his jokey personality, he does much work for charity in Serbia, and he has recently shown his more human side upon becoming a first-time father. If, after all of that, the paying spectators still refuse to warm to him, then so be it. If he must be their anti-hero, then so be it—he should thrive on it. An aggregate of nigh on 10 million followers on Facebook and Twitter suggests the Nole Fam—an affectionate name he attributes to his supporters—is not lacking in numbers.
It’s easy to forget as one waxes lyrical over what Djokovic has achieved in the game that he is only 27. Considering Federer is nearly six years his senior, and is continuing to write new chapters, the sport’s current master has plenty of time to cement an even greater legacy. A fifth Miami Open may be next on the agenda, but his poker skills do not match his tennis expertise.
Ending years of torment at Roland Garros is the holy grail for Djokovic—one he will launch yet another assault on once the tour hits Europe. Nadal has antagonised him the past three times, with a crippling five-set semi-final loss in 2013 serving to haunt for an extended period: one he perhaps didn’t end until his Wimbeldon win over Federer. The nine-time French Open victor has not, however, performed at the pulverising heights he is capable of since holding the trophy aloft in the French capital last summer. But one loss in a decade reaffirms the severity of the quest needed to dislodge Rafa on the Parisian red brick.
If Roland Garros can finally be painted in the red, white and blue of Serbia come early June, Djokovic will have set the base to become the second man to complete the calendar Grand Slam, after Rod Laver—no man has won the first two Slams of the season since 1992, when Jim Courier managed the feat.
For now though, Djokovic can bask in the glory of another huge title. He holds a 4,000-point lead at the top of the rankings, and has exerted a consistency on all surfaces few have ever shown, at the moment, he reigns alone. Now in the prime of career, the volume of the prizes he scoops in the next couple of years, will determine whether he is remembered in the company of the greats, or in that of those he so longs to be aligned to.
