Novak Djokovic: Is His Dominance Good for Tennis?

For what seems like forever in men's tennis, two men dominated the game. Everything was about Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. Sure, players like Novak Djokovic, Andy Murray, Juan Martin Del Potro and Robin Soderling provided flashes of what could be, but none of them broke out.

Until this year.

Up to this point, Novak Djokovic has had a breakout year: eight titles, two majors, a 48-1 record and has taken over the top ranking in the world. He has continuously outplayed last years' top players, winning in all countries and all on surfaces. His game has transformed into the the most complete in the world.

The question is: Will his rise and sudden dominance of the sport help grow it's popularity or drive it back down to where it was in the earlier part of 2000s.

For me, there are two answers. Nadal-Federer has proven a great rivalry and the fans get a treat at the end of every tournament because there will, more than likely, be an insta-classic between the two.

The other side of the debate is that with no one true contender, the sport had become somewhat of a bore.

I will take an in-depth look at the two choices:

The first choice is obviously a very valid point. Over the course of only a few years, tennis viewers have been treated to six five-set matches and a multitude of other very exciting matches between Nadal-Federer.

The Nadal-Federer rivalry revived a sport that in the early part of the decade was in a steep decline. Players who weren't true number one players traded the top spot back and forth and no one ever got a firm grip on it.

From the start of the decade to early 2004, seven different players were the best in the world. As soon as Federer arrived, all that changed. He had the throne for a record 237 consecutive weeks.

Nadal's arrival also established a clear pecking order: it was Federer, then Nadal, then the rest. It changed tennis' whole picture. No longer would scrubs like Martin Verkerk make the finals of Grand Slam tournaments. Any player who would like to achieve that feat would run in to one of the consensus top two players in the world. Nadal and Federer did save the game—and they continue to make it exciting.

Another argument against Djokovic: Federer and Nadal were almost right away great players on the tour.

It took them about three years time to take their first major title and they didn't slow down. Djokovic hung around in the top four as an inconsistent player with tons of talent, but never breaking through. What that means is that if a casual tennis fan turns to see Novak Djokovic, they may still not see him as the alpha-dog (at least for a few more months), if the names Nadal or Federer pop up, on the other hand, it is likely to attract many more viewers,

That being said, a fresh face in any sport is almost always welcomed.

Many people were starting to get bored of watching 25 matches between two players. Sort of like watching the Celtics in the 50s and 60s or the Yankees in the 30s.

This held especially true when they would hit peak form at different times. Their more recent matches had lost some of their luster, because either Nadal or Federer was off their game at that particular point in time.

As Federer's career winds to a close, Djokovic steps in and creates a new rivalry between him and Nadal.

Now the obvious top three are battling and will be trying as hard as possible. Federer wants to win a few more slams in the twilight of his career and prove the many doubters wrong once again.

Nadal wants to find a way to beat Djokovic and show that he is still the man to beat and the top player on earth.

Djokovic wants to show that this six month run is not a fluke and keep on winning until someone finds a way to be better than him (not beating himself with mental and physical lapses).

All things considered, I think that seeing a new man at the top is great. It re-energizes Nadal and Federer to play their best, and the sport has an amazing, exciting future, at least for the next year.