Djokovic's popularity outside North America, Western Europe, Australia

[Obsi]

It's been said many times that Djokovic lacks popularity compared to Federer and Nadal.

But is this the case worldwide or it's restricted to North America, Western Europe and Australasia. Look how popular Novak is in Latin America or Far East for example. In Acapulco the majority of the crowd supported him in all three matches.

 

[mrzz]

I can tell you he is quite popular here in Brazil. He would be popular anyway, but his (seemingly at least) fine relationship with Kuerten surely helped.

 

[britbox]

It's been said many times that Djokovic lacks popularity compared to Federer and Nadal.

But is this the case worldwide or it's restricted to North America, Western Europe and Australasia. Look how popular Novak is in Latin America or Far East for example. In Acapulco the majority of the crowd supported him in all three matches.

Compared to Nadal and Federer he's third fiddle but that doesn't mean he isn't popular.

I did a social media following post a few months ago... a little out of date now, but he's still a very healthy third...

http://discuss.tennis/tennisforum/threads/the-top-10-social-media-kings-of-mens-tennis.886/

Sure, social media isn't everything - but it's one dimension.

 

[isabelle]

he's much loved and praised in France, he had a standing ovation when he won RG last year

 

[Moxie]

It's been said many times that Djokovic lacks popularity compared to Federer and Nadal.

Obsi, you can stop your point right there. I know that Novak's fans hate that he gets treated as the third wheel, "compared to Federer and Nadal," but that's just a fact of life. Djokovic came into his own in a world that was already divided up into Roger and Rafa fans. As we can see, it still is. It doesn't diminish Novak, and I'm sure he has many fans throughout the world. He is very, very popular, clearly. But if you compare his popularity to Federer and Nadal, it's not the same. Which is not even about comparing his tennis. It's just that they got there before him, and they are considered one of the greatest rivalries in sports. He's a very popular champion, no doubt. But there's not much he can do about crashing against the behemoth in the public imagination that is Fedal. That's just unlucky timing, I guess.

 

[Obsi]

Obsi, you can stop your point right there. I know that Novak's fans hate that he gets treated as the third wheel, "compared to Federer and Nadal," but that's just a fact of life. Djokovic came into his own in a world that was already divided up into Roger and Rafa fans. As we can see, it still is. It doesn't diminish Novak, and I'm sure he has many fans throughout the world. He is very, very popular, clearly. But if you compare his popularity to Federer and Nadal, it's not the same. Which is not even about comparing his tennis. It's just that they got there before him, and they are considered one of the greatest rivalries in sports. He's a very popular champion, no doubt. But there's not much he can do about crashing against the behemoth in the public imagination that is Fedal. That's just unlucky timing, I guess.

Federer is more popular Nadal. Does it mean Rafael lacks popularity compared to Roger?

 

[Ricardo]

None of them lacks popularity, it's just that Fed is slightly overall more popular than Nadal who himself is slightly more popular than Novak.....Novak has a huge fan base, it's just that many Novak fans carry the attitude that people under-appreciate him if he is not the most popular.

Maybe it's time Novak fans should think twice before feeling like victim again and again, and the question is simple: would it be fair if he is more popular than Fedal who have achieved more and established for longer? consider especially the fact that they are looking more likely to hang up their racquets sooner than later. Fans need to be less self-centred and self-absorbed.

 

[Obsi]

Moxie, you haven't answered to this question:

Federer is more popular than Nadal. Does it mean Rafael lacks popularity compared to Roger?

 

[Moxie]

Moxie, you haven't answered to this question:

Federer is more popular than Nadal. Does it mean Rafael lacks popularity compared to Roger?

How are you measuring popularity, btw?

 

[mrzz]

Am I missing something in the semantics? Saying that A has more popularity (or is more popular) than B isn't the same as saying that B lacks popularity compared to A?

If it is not the same, then the only possible explanation is that B's level of popularity is "enough", so he does not lack popularity, regarding A or anyone else, simply because he does not want/care/perceives/whatever.

Of course this is not the point but I am trying to understand it to begin with.

 

[Obsi]

How are you measuring popularity, btw?

How are you measuring popularity?

Am I missing something in the semantics? Saying that A has more popularity (or is more popular) than B isn't the same as saying that B lacks popularity compared to A?

If it is not the same, then the only possible explanation is that B's level of popularity is "enough", so he does not lack popularity, regarding A or anyone else, simply because he does not want/care/perceives/whatever.

Of course this is not the point but I am trying to understand it to begin with.

Saying B lacks popularity compared to A isn't the same as saying B lacks popularity that A has.

 

[mrzz]

How are you measuring popularity?



Saying B lacks popularity compared to A isn't the same as saying B lacks popularity that A has.

I am still missing it... I´ll put a scenario to see if I can get there.

Let say there is a 100 people group.

Case 1: 40 people are fans of A, 30 are fans of B, we don´t if some belong to both groups or not. All we know is that A has more fans. So, B lacks popularity compared to A.

Case 2: 40 people are fans of A, within this group 30 are also fans of B. So, in this case, does B lack popularity that A has? Is this?

Or, are you talking of something completely different, like the level of affection (or whatever better word) each has. Sorry to insist but you got me curious, and I guess maybe more posters are not being able to make the distinction.

 

[Moxie]

I don't get it, either. If someone is more popular, they simply are. I'd still like you (@Obsi ) to say how you're measuring popularity. We all go with the conventions, but it's very hard to measure. Except perhaps Roger. He is possibly the most popular tennis player ever, given how global the sport has become. He's been a "brand" for a long time, before there was really even a Rafa, and the "ear" test tells us how much the crowd appreciates him basically everywhere he goes. I'd say that Rafa is pretty close to as-popular, with one of the differences being how much Federer fans dislike Rafa, whereas Nadal fans tend to be fairly neutral/appreciative of Roger. (The recent AO final notwithstanding.
) So are we judging by the subjective assessment of crowd support? Facebook and Twitter fans? Who sells the most gack? How do we determine who has the most fans? And does it really matter?

 

[Ricardo]

Nadal fans tend to be fairly neutral/appreciative of Roger

delusional as usual, especially coming from you.

 

[Carol]

I'm not sure if Federer is the most popular but I'm sure Rafa is the most hated by many of Roger's fans which like to make too much noise in the blogs and where many Rafa's fans don't like to go through

 

[Obsi]

40 people are fans of A, 30 are fans of B, we don´t if some belong to both groups or not. All we know is that A has more fans. So, B lacks popularity compared to A.

No. In such scenario B lacks popularity that A has.

If you say B lacks popularity compared to A, it means you claim that, relatively speaking, B isn't popular in comparison with A.

I'd still like you (@Obsi ) to say how you're measuring popularity.

Why shouldn't you say how you're measuring popularity?

We all go with the conventions, but it's very hard to measure. Except perhaps Roger

You're contradicting yourself. Last Monday you said it's a fact that Nadal is more popular than Djokovic.

 

[Nekro]

Federer and Nadal are nice guy characters, Nole is an anti-hero or bad guy. So obviously more people will like the good guys, they are much more palatable and easy to digest.

But who cares? it's like comparing Madonna and Judas Priest.

Fed and Nadal are 2 "wise" guys who always say the right things, well, maybe Fed seems a bit arrogant sometimes but he's a smooth and nice guy too.

Djoker is a real beast. It's less likely people will love him at first sight, he's more of an acquired taste kinda guy, lots of people will never like him but who cares???? He's a cool player too, tennis would be crap without him

 

[Moxie]

No. In such scenario B lacks popularity that A has.

If you say B lacks popularity compared to A, it means you claim that, relatively speaking, B isn't popular in comparison with A.



Why shouldn't you say how you're measuring popularity?



You're contradicting yourself. Last Monday you said it's a fact that Nadal is more popular than Djokovic.

Dude, it's your OP that declares that Fedal is more popular in some places and perhaps Djokovic in others. I offered as to why Fedal are so popular, but then it occurred to me to ask how you define popularity, or measure it, one player to another. I'd ask how any of us do. We are convinced we know, but do we? But I think it's incumbent upon you to define measures, since you started the conversation.

 

[mrzz]

If you say B lacks popularity compared to A, it means you claim that, relatively speaking, B isn't popular in comparison with A.

I am all for clarity and a good use of words, but in this case you just changed the words. First you have used the only the expression "lacks popularity" and never "isn't popular". The distinction you were trying to make was different. But ok, now I get the point.

Anyway, back to original point, Djokovic is popular enough anywhere for his die hard fans not to worry about it. Yes, as Moxie said Federer and Nadal got there first, so with their head starts it is understandable that they are overall a bit more popular (even if where I live I guess it is not true). Of course more could be said but frankly we have better subjects to discuss, tennis wise, than who is more popular (well, at least IMO).

 

[Obsi]

Dude, it's your OP that declares that Fedal is more popular in some places and perhaps Djokovic in others. I offered as to why Fedal are so popular, but then it occurred to me to ask how you define popularity, or measure it, one player to another. I'd ask how any of us do. We are convinced we know, but do we? But I think it's incumbent upon you to define measures, since you started the conversation.

In my OP I provided an opinion but in your reply you said it's a "fact of life" that Federer and Nadal are more popular than Djokovic. Opinion cannot be proven so I think it's incumbent upon you to define measures considering that you stated it's a fact that Fedal are more popular than Novak.

I am all for clarity and a good use of words, but in this case you just changed the words. First you have used the only the expression "lacks popularity" and never "isn't popular". The distinction you were trying to make was different.

You asked me to clarify the meaning of "B lacks popularity compared to A". If someone tries to make a statement easier to understand it's logical that they will use different words.