However, the question remains of how he will perform in 2012. Of those players who won three Grand Slams in a year, neither Jimmy Connors nor Mats Wilander won a Grand Slam the following year; while Nadal was only able to muster a single Slam. Indeed, Wilander would never even reach a Grand Slam final again.

Before this year, Djokovic was entrenched at No. 3 in the world with a single Grand Slam title to his name. The real springboard for him was leading Serbia to victory in the Davis Cup in late 2010.

Circumstances certainly helped him in the first Grand Slam of the year. The injury problems that plagued the 2009 champion, Rafa Nadal, ruled out one challenger, while he would certainly have been happier playing Andy Murray in the final than Roger Federer. However, we can take nothing away from the Serb, who was a worthy champion.

From this point, his confidence was sky-high and, for a long spell, he was unbeatable. The problems came once injuries and fatigue began to take their toll, and it remains to be seen whether he will come back at the incredibly high level that he found for much of 2011.

The later part of the season saw a few disturbing problems returning for the Serb. The shots that he had worked hard to improve during the year began to show some of their previous inconsistency. The serve in particular, which had improved measurably during 2011, began to show major signs of weakness, particularly in London.

Nadal will have spent the winter studying and planning how to defeat Djokovic as well. Boosted by a stunning Davis Cup win, just as Djokovic was at the end of 2010, Nadal will be back better than ever in 2012.

Despite claims of a disappointing season, Nadal reached three Grand Slam finals, five Masters finals—winning one—and picked up one additional title in Barcelona. Six of his seven losing finals came at the hands of the Serb, and by the end of the year, you got the impression that Nadal felt he could not touch Djokovic.

One month off, you suspect Nadal will come back with renewed confidence and desire. Roger Federer also hinted in the latter part of the year that he was still a contender. The first player to beat Djokovic this season in Roland Garros, he should also have beaten him at the U.S. Open, when he had two match points on his serve for a place in the final.

However, following that disappointment, Federer did not lose again in 2011, racking up 17 straight victories, dropping only six sets, as his rivals faded. His run has raised suspicions that those writing him off could be premature, and he goes into the Australian Open as a real contender for the title.

The one major question mark over Federer is his desire and motivation for the game. He has already said that his major goal for 2012 is an Olympic gold medal, the one accolade that is missing from his record-breaking career. However, on his day, he is still capable of beating any player, including an on-form Djokovic.

Andy Murray remains a mystery. He reached the final four of all four Grand Slams, including the final in Australia, but still that first Grand Slam title eludes him. He shows glimpses of the talent that he undoubtedly possesses—his consecutive titles in Bangkok, Tokyo and Shanghai was evidence of that, especially his demolition of Nadal in Japan—but he still struggles to produce on the big occasions.

Djokovic will not have another season as good as this I would predict. Nadal will be back with a vengeance, buoyed by his Davis Cup triumph, and a new game-plan to beat his latest rival. Federer will continue to be a danger on his day—he may not have the consistency that he had a few years ago, but his top level is still enough to beat any player on tour.

Murray and Juan Martin Del Potro will remain a real threat for any top player in any given tournament. Whether they have the consistency to win a slam next year remains to be seen, but they could easily take out one of the big three.

It would be surprising if Djokovic followed in the footsteps of Connors and Wilander and failed to win a slam in 2012—there is no real weakness in his style of play for opponents to exploit as those two experienced. However, it would be just as surprising if he was able to emulate Federer’s 2007 season and repeat his three slams, or come close to Roger’s 81-4 season in 2005 or his 92-5 season in 2006.

He will rightly go into the Australian Open as the favourite with the bookmakers. I would be surprised, though, if he comes out as the winner at the end of the fortnight. However, if he can back up his 2011 with a similar season in 2012, he will move up alongside the likes of Federer as a true long-term dominant champion.

If you enjoyed this, follow @sportdw on Twitter or visit DW on Sport for more articles.

Read more Tennis news on BleacherReport.com

No one would have foreseen such a successful season for the Serb. Coming into the year, Djokovic had never been ranked No. 1, and had only one major title under his belt—the 2008 Australian Open.

Djokovic came out of the gate on fire.

He began the season with a 41-match winning streak. Djokovic won three of the four major titles—losing only to Federer in the semis of the French Open.

He won 10 titles and totaled over 12 million dollars of prize money. His current record of 70-6 in 2011 speaks for itself. He was practically unbeatable.

Everything came together for the Serb this season.

He was already a polished player coming into the year, he just needed to take that extra step. All facets of his game improved. His serve became more of a weapon.

Djokovic displayed his flawless movement again and again. He put pressure on the server with his pinpoint returns.

Maybe the biggest thing Djokovic did to achieve what he has was get in the best shape of his life. In many matches prior to this season Djokovic would be gasping for breath late in matches. In some matches he was forced to retire.

This season, due to his great play, he was able to finish matches quickly, which helps with fatigue late in tournaments. But with his gluten-free diet, among other things, Djokovic was in great shape. Barring a few minor injuries, Djokovic stayed healthy throughout his impressive season.

Djokovic’s level of play in 2011 was nothing short of remarkable. Unfortunately, since tennis is not one of the most-followed sports in the United States, he probably will not get the credit he deserves.

But why is Djokovic deserving of the title of the best athlete of 2011?

It’s hard to argue against Aaron Rodgers, who led the Green Bay Packers to a Super Bowl Championship. The Packers had not lost a game since December of 2010 before the Chiefs handed the cheeseheads their first loss of the year.

Unlike football and most other sports, tennis is a solo sport.

Of course we are talking about singles, not doubles. You have no one to rely on but yourself on the court. If you are having an off day, no teammate can pick up the slack for you. Everything falls on your shoulders.

Djokovic came through consistently in the big moments in 2011. Djokovic was the guy everyone was after. Instead of being the hunter, he was now the hunted.

Djokovic played through all of the chatter and pressure that comes with an undefeated streak. After finally losing his first match of the year, Djokovic rebounded strongly with a championship at Wimbledon.  

What is most impressive about Djokovic’s play was his consistency.

The tennis season is grueling. It requires a great amount of mental and physical fortitude to deal with the nonstop season. A player must travel all the time, and always be ready to play every day.

In this day and age there are no easy matches on the ATP World Tour. Any player will tell you the competitiveness is at an all-time high. Djokovic had to play a tough opponent every match, and for him to go 70-6 is incredible.

Prior to the 2011 season Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal took turns winning the majors every year. Djokovic took a big step forward, and for the first time believed that he could beat the two great champions.

He did just that.

Djokovic solidified himself as the next king of tennis in 2011. Time and time again he beat the best—and for that, Djokovic deserves to be named the best athlete of 2011.

Read more Tennis news on BleacherReport.com

But the best commentators haven't necessarily been those players. There are those that perceive the game better than others without necessarily being more skilled.

Here are some players we'd love to see commenting in the sport right now.

Begin Slideshow

The video of Roddick's performance is embedded above.

After he gets introduced, two things immediately jump out at you.

First, he's wearing one of the ugliest Christmas sweaters of all time—and that's saying something.

Secondly, why is he carrying a drink in his hand? Seems like he should have left that backstage or at least used it as a prop to smash on his forehead.

As for the actual singing, it isn't much better. Give him credit for not forgetting the lyrics, but he won't be winning any Grammys for his performance. It's hard to focus on his rhythm when he's pulling some weird dance moves at the same time.

Of course, just when you think it couldn't get any worse, it does.

Perhaps two of the worst backup dancers of all time later emerge to show off their lack of skills. It isn't so much dancing as it is moving their bodies in the most abnormal ways possible. Maybe they'll just blame it on Roddick's bad singing—that's what I would do.

This is probably one of those times where it probably seemed like an awesome idea to Roddick beforehand, but about halfway through he remembered he'll now be on YouTube forever and it suddenly wasn't so awesome anymore.

Even though his rapping ability isn't so hot, he's still married to model Brooklyn Decker. Roddick must be doing something right.

Read more Tennis news on BleacherReport.com

He ended the year with a 70-6 record, three Grand Slam titles and five ATP World Tour Masters 1000 titles.

With the 2011 season of Djokovic dominance behind us, let's take some time to preview the men's favorites at the 2012 Australian Open.

Begin Slideshow

With the Williams sisters on the decline, Henin retired and Kim Clijsters likely to follow, there is a distinct lack of any real superstars in the sport.

Not having any truly dominant women on tour does allow for more parity, but could equally be considered a negative in that there isn't the elite level of player that we have seen in the past to rival the ever-increasing profile of the male equivalent.

The past 12 months has confirmed that any one of those rated in the top 30 of the women's world rankings are capable of winning "Grand Slam" tournaments.

To add substance to this view, the top ranked player in the world currently, Caroline Wozniacki, has never won a "Grand Slam" and for the matter, she has only made it to the final of one and that came over two years ago at the US Open.

The same applies to the world No. 3, Victoria Azarenka, who has never made a "Grand Slam" final at all!

In fact, each of the four "Grand Slams" in 2011 was won by different players and of those four, only Kim Clijsters was a previous "slam" winner; she in fact took the Australian Open but she was barely seen again all year.

The Belgian did make the second round of the French Open but injury forced her to miss out Wimbledon and the US Open. Her long absence is the reason why she is now down to No. 13 in the World Rankings with retirement a possibility.

Winner of the French Open, Li Na, is currently ranked No. 5 and she at least made two "Grand Slam" finals in 2011.

She was defeated by Clijsters in Australia before winning at Roland Garros but failed to make another final in any other tournament all year. Her season effectively ended after her win in Paris; she was knocked out in the second round at Wimbledon then fell at the first hurdle at Flushing Meadows. Whether she has the game to repeat that success in the key events of 2012 remains to be seen.

Having won Wimbledon this year, tennis pundits and fans became more and more excited regarding the potential future of the Czech Republic’s Petra Kvitova.

She had performed well in Australia, losing in the quarterfinals, she made the fourth round at Roland Garros before winning Wimbledon but a first round exit at the US Open was a huge disappointment.

Wins later in the year in Istanbul and Austria moved the rangy left-hander up to No. 2 in the rankings and she will start 2012 as one of the biggest hopes in the women's game.

Australian Sam Stosur was very much a surprise winner of the US Open, particularly as she defeated three-time champion, Serena Williams, in the final. That however was her only win all year and although she is still ranked at No. 6, she, like most of those above her in the rankings, is a frustratingly inconsistent player.

Serena Williams' injury issues have clearly taken their toll. If she manages to get back to full fitness, then yes, she will be a major factor in 2012, but that is a big "if" and the American is not getting any younger.

Maria Sharapova has at least got herself back in the top echelons of the rankings, but she too failed to land a "Slam," although she did make the final at Wimbledon, losing to Kvitova.

Sharapova, who seems to have been around forever, is still only 24, but whether she can get back to the form she showed as a younger player is anyone’s guess right now.

All things considered, it would appear unlikely that much will change in the ladies game in 2012.

The top four players, Wozniacki, Kvitova, Azarenka and Sharapova, will be hard to dislodge at the top, particularly as those closely following are mostly past their best.

Serena is clearly a major threat if fit and still capable of winning.

There is plenty of optimism regarding the emergence of German, Sabine Lisicki, who made the semifinal at Wimbledon, the fourth round at the U.S. Open as well as winning a couple of tournaments during the year, but it is a lot to expect of the 22-year-old.

As it currently stands, women's tennis is in desperate need of the kind of superstars that its male equivalent has enjoyed in recent years and as it stands, it is unlikely that one will emerge any time soon.

Read more Tennis news on BleacherReport.com

Those three men have been ranked No. 1-3 in different order for almost every single week since mid-2007. A good year later, Andy Murray joined them at the top of mens' tennis and the four of them have occupied those four spots ever since apart from a few weeks. 

They are commonly known as the Big Four, and this year they've been as dominant as ever winning all the Slams and the Masters (and a brief period as Juan Martin del Potro shot up the rankings, we were even talking about the Big Five). 

Some, however, prefer to refer to them as the Big Three, leaving the Slam-less Andy Murray out of the good company. 

Yet others say that it's really the Big Two, since Djokovic and Nadal have been the ones competing for the vast majority of the Slams in the past two years with four going Rafa's way and three going to Djokovic. 

Finally, it we only look at this year, one could make a case that it really only is the Big One as the season has evolved around one man, and one man only: Novak Djokovic. 

While Rafa has played an important role as his sidekick (and has won one Slam), he hasn't been able to win a single match against the Big One and in the last four matches between them, he is 2-10 in sets. 

Obviously, how we chose to label the men at the summit of tennis is nothing more than semantics and, in this sense, this is a non-technical, non-analytical and lighthearted article. 

But with that disclaimer in mind, what wording makes the most sense?

The Big One given Djokovic's utter dominance this season? 

The Big Two given Nadal has made all those finals and has been the one winning most Slams if we count the last two years (no wonder he prefers a two-year ranking system)?

The Big Three given they are the only multiple Slam winners in the field who still have a very decent shot at the majors (sorry, Lleyton Hewitt, but that ship has sailed)?

The Big Four given that Murray is a fixture at the top of the rankings, though not a Slam-champion yet?

The Big Five envisioning Del Potro's comeback at the top of the rankings? 

Or are the semantics of what we call them entirely irrelevant? I, for one, am of the opinion that the terms we use has a descriptive meaning and thus says something about the state of the game as of now in very few words. 

Naturally, it doesn't predict who will win a given tournament, but it is a quick way to declare the favourites and say who's the dominant player(s). 

Personally, I tend to favour either the Big Three or the Big Four, but as stated above, there are reasons for all of them. 

What do you think—if you care? 

Read more Tennis news on BleacherReport.com

Although it is easier to see players improving at earlier stages of their careers, there have been examples lately of players getting better in their late 20s or even 30s.

Players like Pete Sampras and especially Andre Agassi, may have set examples of how important it is to work even harder when one is in the second half of his or her career, in order to make up for the inevitable natural decline, particularly on the physical side.

The following list is an attempt to analyze who, among the men, is still getting better as a tennis player, no matter how high he is ranked or how old he is.

Begin Slideshow

Things have changed, though, and next year could be very different in terms of the top contenders for not only those tournaments, but the Australian and US Open as well. 

This article will examine each surface and my opinion on the top four candidates who could take the titles, taking into account their current form and likelihood of having a solid 2012. 

Begin Slideshow

However, the big question is, will one of them ever win a Grand Slam title, becoming the first Frenchman since Noah to do so?

Between them, Tsonga, Monfils, Simon and Gasquet have notched wins against Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer, the greatest players of their generation. They've also had success at the Grand Slam level, with three of them—Tsonga, Monfils and Gasquet—having made the final four at one of the premier events. However, Tsonga is the only one to have finished runner-up at a major: the Australian Open in 2008.

It's been nearly 30 years since Noah's surprise win at his home event, the French Open. In the process, he became a national hero as he also put an end to a drought (37 years) of Frenchmen winning one of the game's grandest prizes.

The current crop of stars still have a little bit of time before reaching that mark, but perhaps what has been most perplexing is the talent level the country has generated. From 2001 to 2006, Sebastien Grosjean made four major semifinals and five quarterfinals. Arnaud Clement shocked the tennis world when he advanced to the Australian Open finals in 2001. That's nothing to say of players that preceded them, such as '88 French Open runner-up Leconte, or current Davis Cup captain Forget, who was once ranked as high as No. 4 in the world but never made a Grand Slam semifinal.

Among the four Frenchman sitting in the top 20 today, Tsonga is probably pegged as the best chance to bring a major title to the country. The second half of 2011 was one to remember for the 26-year-old, as he made the semifinals of Wimbledon, the quarters at the U.S. Open and finished runner-up at the ATP World Tour Finals.

Monfils also put together a solid season. However, his lack of aggressive play is reflected in his career win-loss record in finals (4-11). He's also battled a number of injuries, keeping him off the court for significant stretches.

Simon has had his share of injuries, too, but when he's healthy, he's shown what he's capable of. He lifted his ranking back into the top 15 this year after dropping to the 40s.

Probably the biggest questions surround Gasquet, long-heralded as one of the most talented players on Tour. When focused, he's a threat to anyone, but when he's lacking in the concentration department, he can be beaten by anyone.

Granted, these four are playing in one of the toughest eras in tennis history. Still though, they're all in the prime of their careers and should be able to count themselves among the major-title contenders. Will it be next season? Each has the ability to win, it's just a matter of ensuring they're up for the challenge.

Read more Tennis news on BleacherReport.com