Men for All Seasons

“I think in terms of the two tournaments in back-to-back weeks, this has been the best two weeks of my life, my career,” Novak Djokovic said after winning the title in Shanghai on Sunday, a week after winning in Beijing. “Honestly, that’s how I felt.”

We believe you, Novak.

Last week in Beijing, when Djokovic broke John Isner four times and beat him 6-2, 6-2 in a little over an hour, I wrote that we may have reached Peak Nole. Winning nearly half of the big American’s service points was a stunning performance, even for the game’s best returner.

If anything, though, Djokovic only climbed higher as the competition grew tougher in Asia. In his final-round win over Rafael Nadal in Beijing, and his semifinal win over Andy Murray in Shanghai, Djokovic also surrendered just four games. Even against his fellow members of the Big 4, Djokovic looked like he was in another league entirely. Against Nadal, he gave a 14-time Slam winner—who wasn’t playing badly—no hope whatsoever; against Murray, he produced a self-assured shotmaking barrage. Djokovic has now won 17 straight matches and 22 straight sets. Of the 20 sets he played in his two-tournament Asian swing, he lost more than three games just twice.

“Only one set where I got a tiebreak in two weeks is quite incredible,” Djokovic said. “So I’m very, very pleased with the way I’ve played. That’s something that encourages me to keep going and hopefully maintain that high level of performance.”

Quite incredible: Do those words remind you of anyone? They make me think of the way Roger Federer reacted to his big wins during his heyday, roughly a decade ago. Incredible: There’s really no other word for what Federer was doing then, and what Djokovic is doing now. While Djokovic didn’t face his Swiss rival in Asia, his play brought Federer—peak Federer—to mind.

“It’s the best year of my life, no question about it,” Djokovic said on Sunday. “Everything is working great.”

Djokovic does seem to have surpassed his previous best, which came in 2011. That year he also won three of the four majors and went 70-6. But while he opened that season with 41 straight victories, he didn’t win any tournaments after the U.S. Open. In 2015, he has only grown stronger since the Open, and he has looked more comfortable than ever at No. 1. Djokovic is 73-5 right now, with two tournaments to play, in Bercy and London—he’s the two-time defending champion at the former, and the three-time defending champion at the latter. If he wins both again, he could finish the year 83-5.

Is it time to start comparing Djokovic’s 2015 with Federer’s hallowed 2006? They’re beginning to resemble each other. Federer’s summit season was the second-best of the Open era; only Rod Laver’s Grand Slam 1969 tops it. Federer went 92-5 that year. Like Djokovic, he won three of the four majors, losing only in the French Open final. Like Djokovic, he was nearly twice as good as his nearest rival—Federer finished 2006 with 8,370 ranking points to Nadal's 4,470; right now Djokovic has 16,785 to Murray's 8,750. And like Djokovic, he was ridiculously consistent, winning 12 titles and reaching the final at 16 of 17 events. Djokovic has so far won nine titles and reached the finals of 13 of 14 tournaments.

The differences between the seasons are signs of the gradually changing—i.e., aging—times on the men’s tour. Djokovic’s peak, if it is his peak, has come in a year when he turned 28; Federer’s came in a year when he turned 25. Djokovic’s main rival this season has been the 34-year-old Federer, who is the only player to beat the Serb twice. In 2006, Federer’s main rival was a 20-year-old Rafael Nadal, who handed Federer four of his five losses that season. (The other came to a 19-year-old Andy Murray in Cincinnati—things really do change gradually in the men’s game these days).

Who had the tougher competition? This is, as always, exceedingly difficult to determine. Is a player dominant because he plays in a so-called weak era, or does an era appear weak because one player is so good that he makes it look that way? Without Federer, Andy Roddick might have won five or six majors; without Djokovic, this era’s Andy, Murray, might have a similar number.

Trying to answer that question may be a task for a rainy day at season’s end. For now, I’ll just list the rest of the respective Top 10 players from 2006 and 2015.

2006: Nadal, Davydenko, Blake, Ljubicic, Roddick, Robredo, Nalbandian, Ancic, Gonzalez

2015 (as of Oct. 19): Murray, Federer, Wawrinka, Berdych, Nishikori, Nadal, Ferrer, Raonic, Tsonga

I’ll say two things: (1) No year in which Federer and Nadal figure can be called a weak one. (2) While Rafa and Roger weren’t at their career peaks in 2015, Djokovic’s Top 10 competition leads in major titles 35 to 15.

We’ll see where Djokovic ends up this year, and revisit the comparison with Federer’s 2006 when the final numbers are tallied. Who knows, maybe Federer will come to the defense of his younger self and knock off Nole again.

For the moment, what we can say is that both seasons have been remarkable for their consistency. Whatever the surface, whatever the level of the event, Federer and Djokovic didn’t take a day off or allow one loss to turn into two or three. Each guy had settled in at No. 1—2006 was Federer’s third year there, 2015 will be Djokovic’s fourth—and each was a model of professionalism throughout.

Djokovic may be right in saying he went beyond that over the last two weeks. We normally think of Federer as the shotmaker, and Djokovic as the clinician. In Asia, though, Djokovic made the steady into the spectacular. His full-stretch returns that land a foot inside the baseline; his point-changing down-the-line backhand counter-punches; his sharp-angled crosscourt forehands on the run: He was clinically brilliant from start to finish.

In that sense, maybe there’s no comparison between Federer’s 2006 and Djokovic 2015, after all. The results were similar and nearly perfect, but each man reached the summit of his individual sport in his own, unmatchable way.