Stan smith: Novak's serve is the difference

There is the physicality faction on this website who try to claim that Novak and Nadal win only on physicality and fitness, or mainly as a result of big lungs as they put it. They ignore the fact that a large number of the wins these two players have last exactly 2 sets, and if it came down to fitness principally then any idiot who didn't suffer a medical condition could get fitter if he just trained harder and harder and became #1 in the world. Have you seen the hundreds of people that turn up for marathons and iron man competition all those people are fitter than Novak and Nadal. This is a not so subtle slight in order to diminish and disrespect the modern champs so that they can further elevate federer, although Roger doesn't need this apologist argument to increase his legacy it doesn't stop the fed apologists.

Lets see what multislam champ stan smith has to say:"Stan Smith, the 1971 US Open champion, and former World No. 3 Brian Gottfried both agree that Serbia's Davis Cup win, which was played on an indoor hard-court, in December 2010 was crucial to building Djokovic's confidence.

"Djokovic has improved for several reasons and I think that they all lead to more confidence," said Smith. "His serve was very erratic last year and it has improved dramatically." Gottfried adds, "He has cut down on his mistakes, improved his serve and learnt how to play every shot better. He has grown in maturity and strength, and I think he will further improve."

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/09/Features/FedEx-Reliability-Current-Hard-Court-Records.aspx

I was roundly ridiculed by the physicality phobics for my argument that his serve is the single biggest improvement in his game and that his shotmaking is breathtaking. As they ignore the fact that most of novak's matches last two sets, how does he win these matches with big lungs? Any fatso at your local club can play 2 sets without passing out and completely losing their game.

Another comedy routine moment.

So watching both men on their knees throughout a fourth set didn't tell you anything?

Nobody wants to ridicule you but your determination to deny any aspect to the Djokovic/Nadal game that isn't heroic and glorious is..... ridiculous.... because it ignores the facts in front of you.

Did Djokovic win on Monday because of a great serve? No, the serve in that match was basically irrelevent, as witnessed by a number of breaks only before seen between baseline hugging ball bashers from the WTA.

I havent got time but still couldnt resist replying.
Did you hear Nadal and Djoker's interview after the match - both mention that there is no drastic change in anything which Djoker does. Nadal mentions that his backhand was always there, no and his forehand has always been good, no (or something like that). Nadal adds that the biggest improvement in Djoker's game is his ability to consistently hit those backhands and forehands without making mistakes (i.e. less UE's while engaging in longer rallies). And Nadal should know what has changed, no?

Coming to look at micro pieces - to me, it sure looks like an improvement in forehand and serve (esp the second delivery) but one would be lying if they say that they see serve as the BIGGEST improvement as it is as obvious as daylight on Djoker willingness to run faster and longer than Nadal and not pulling trigger till he can be sure. He is undoubtedly very patient now in rallies and beats Nadal in his own game and he has much better strokes than Nadal (but that he always had as do many others).

To come from a definite 3rd to a strong No. 1 takes some doing. There are improvements galore but none more obvious than his drastic fitenss improvement and agility on court. I like Djoker's game, I really do but he looks a mix of Fed and Nadal - inferior shotmaking to Fed but superior defensive skills than Nadal and that is a lovely winning combo. But soemhow I hope that Fed starts winning again and Murray finally wins something - even one would do!

Bogbrush do they win all their two set matches becasue the world class athletes of the ATP tour tire out of less than 90 minutes? If Djokovic is such unspectacular shot maker why is widely regarded as having the best or near best backhand on tour? Why did he hit as many winners as fed in their semi with 25 less errors?

Obviously playing Nadal at the tail end of tournament in a five set match is more physical. What about the other 50 some odd two set matches Djokovic has won this year? Did all the players heave over because of exhaustion. Last year Djoko was barely in the top 50 for percentage of serve games held this year he is in the top 10. But I know you don't like facts and stats, at least those that dispell your physicality argument. Of course the better conditioning is a factor, but so his shotmaking.

Nah! The difference is that this time Fognini did not mess up with Djoko's schedule.

That is really what allowed Djoko to find his rhythm at match point...at last!

socal1976 wrote:Bogbrush do they win all their two set matches becasue the world class athletes of the ATP tour tire out of less than 90 minutes? If Djokovic is such unspectacular shot maker why is widely regarded as having the best or near best backhand on tour? Why did he hit as many winners as fed in their semi with 25 less errors?

Obviously playing Nadal at the tail end of tournament in a five set match is more physical. What about the other 50 some odd two set matches Djokovic has won this year? Did all the players heave over because of exhaustion. Last year Djoko was barely in the top 50 for percentage of serve games held this year he is in the top 10. But I know you don't like facts and stats, at least those that dispell your physicality argument. Of course the better conditioning is a factor, but so his shotmaking.

They didn't play the end of a 5 set match. Both men were seriously impaired at the end of a 6-2, 6-4, 6-7 score.

As for facts, here are a few interesting ones to chew over:

Djokovic won 65% of points when he got his 1st serve in and 44% on 2nd. Overall he won 58% of service points.
Nadal won 52% on 1st serve and 42% on 2nd, overall 49% on serve.

So clearly service was virtually irrelevent to the match. In fact of the whole 268 points, 143 or 53% were won by the server. I suspect this may well be a record for the mens game, it certainly amazed me as I calculated it and it looks much more like what I'd expect from a baseline ball basher WTA match. Looking instead at the Federer/Djokovic match we see 68% of service points won, with much higher stats for Djokovic than in the final.

Clearly what Djokovic does seems to be largely a function of how his opponent plays, which is what you'd expect of a player whose game is reactive rather than proactive.

Sorry for butting in here but it strikes me that it is Federer fans being petrified again. The same thing happened when Nadal and his period of dominance and now it is happening with Djokovic's dominance. We have Federer fans try to belittle the players game, pick holes in their talents in a bid to make sure their man is still portrayed as the best. I'd prefer it if they were honest and held their hands up and said that the current No.1 is the best player in the world at the moment, has all the shots in the book and his game does not rely on his fitness to win games. Not hard to do is it? If the impartial tennis pundits can do it why can't you?

Why not look at the arguments Craig? socal has started a thread saying it's all about Djokovic serve this year, yet in the match that he won in 4 which he lost in 4 in 2010 I have shown that serve was irrelevent.

So rather than trying to throw around accusations and insults why not just address the facts?

Sorry but it was the same when Nadal was dominant. Djokovic never got the same attention from some Federer fans as he posed no threat at that time to Federer's standing in the game. When Nadal began racking up the slams and nearing Fed's total he got his game dissected for being too physical, 'moonballing' etc etc etc and now that it is Djokovic knitting together impressive achievements that equal or threaten to surpass Federer the same thing is happening here which is really pretty pathetic.

Fitness has been labelled by some for his dominance. Nonsense. As socal says as that would not explain away is domination in the best of three set matches. Now I would agree with you bogbrush that it isn't all about his serve - more his return of serve that has been so immense. He just has such a super solid all-round game at the moment. His serve has improved and he is the best returner of serve in the world, he can outlast Nadal in long rallies if needs be and his supreme confidence in his ability just makes him pretty much unbeatable at the moment. Why even try picking holes in a game that has seen him have such an immense year?

The article says serve and EVERY shot has improved. Also don't forget his gluten free diet!

I'm beginning to admire Novak for his efforts and here's why. He prioritised Davis Cup and learned from the experience plus he did his homework after that Nadal loss and came mback stronger than ever.

A certain player closer to home could do well to learn from his efforts.

What I always admired in Djoko was actually his mental strength...even when not fully fit. I noticed that since he came on tour at 18. Against Nadal in teh final it was obvious he was also completely exhausted but never gave up.

Against Federer however, in his last 2 matches it was Djoko who cracked first in the important moments of the match....of course until they both kind of agreed the match was over.

bogbrush wrote:Why not look at the arguments Craig? socal has started a thread saying it's all about Djokovic serve this year, yet in the match that he won in 4 which he lost in 4 in 2010 I have shown that serve was irrelevent.

So rather than trying to throw around accusations and insults why not just address the facts?

Address facts, aren't you the one who says that 6 straight draws that Novak has gotten roger is statistically irrelevant? Therefore your drawing conclusions on one match where the two best returners in the world play is also completely and totally irrelevant. You focus on one match, but ignore the mountain of statistical evidence on the ATPs own website OVER THE COURSE OF AN ENTIRE YEAR. Craig is completely right, the agenda of federettes has been exposed, diminish and attack every champion after Roger to further elevate Roger. The funny thing is Roger doesn't need to be elevated any higher than the mount olympus he is on. Last year Novak was 46 in percentage of games held this year he is number 7. That is called a real fact, not the garbage you pulled out of a single match where the top two returners in the world squared off against each other. How about the fact that last year at this time Novak was the only guy in the top 20 with more double faults than aces this year he has nearly 2 and half times more aces than doubles. But that is irrelevant in your world.

Fedsfan, I actually agree that fitness is a big part of his success. But novak has been working on his fitness for quite sometime. When his serve got better at the end of last year and the beginning of this year that his when his results started to take off, he was fit last year as well, really fit. There have been a lot of little improvements all occuring at the same time that has resulted in elevating his play. And I also agree Novak is not the shotmaker Roger is, that isn't a big flaw, no one has ever been that kid of shotmaker in my mind. And Fedsfan is right Novak is a bit like a hybrid of Nadal and fed. Not as physical or heavy spin generating as Nadal and Not quite the shotmaker as fed, but very good in both departments.

Craig agree with everything you said in your post. In fact, Novak himself says the same thing. It was a series of small improvements in a lot of areas. But the biggest single and most drastic improvement has been his serve. Fitness has played a big role no doubt. As has a better and more consistent and more lethal forehand. And his return has really become otherworldy as well.

Don't get so heated, nobody is libelling anyone.

What's made the difference between USO 2010 and USO 2011? Not serve for sure. That's what you wrote the article about, not me. I didn't start this debate, you jumped on a comment from one guy and tried to use it to "prove" a point. I'm just showing you that it's much more than a change in serve, otherwise how could he turn around the 2010 result when, year on year;

* you maintain Nadal is at the same level
* Nadal had a fairly easy semi (like last year)
* Djokovic got taken to the brink in his semi (like last year)

I don't disparage Djokovic at all, I think he's a super player whose time has come. I just don't think it makes sense to overlook the effect of fitness when the USO final was decided on who could keep going longer, because Nadal managed to squeeze it to a 4th (had there been no fitness issues at all Djokovic would have won in three).
Unless you think that a cramping Nadal through the 4th set was any kind of opponent.

BB, I am not talking about just this one final and neither is the person I quoted. Over the course of the year he went from double faulting more than hitting aces to hitting 2 and half times more aces than double faults. He went from having a good forehand to a great one over the last two years. He went from number 46 in percentage of games held to #7.

I am making a point about the cause of his success over the course of a whole season not one match. His match with Nadal clearly was a battle of fitness in a best of 5 at the end of a long grandslam season. If he didn't have increased fitness he wouldn't have won this particular tournament or match. BUT THAT IT ISN'T WHAT THIS QUOTE IS ABOUT IT IS ABOUT HIS WHOLE SEASON AND WHAT HAS CAUSED HIS MIRACULOUS 2011 SUCCESS.

Socal, I think when you said 'Fedsfan', you mean 'Fedex_the_best'. Anyways, since I havent wished Nitb and you after the US Open Finals - here I go, congrats on your guy's win, he deserved it. He has been playing amazing and it was really heartbreaking to see him lose that 3rd set - I feared for the worst but good comeback and good win overall!

Caledonian, as a huge Federer fan, I would add that I personally and many like us would never disparage anybody who can beat Fed. Having watched the great man, we know what it takes to beat him once. So whenever we have anything to say about Nadal, you construe it as our attempt to raise Fed up. Far from it!!

Rafa has done well for himself and through his 'different' brand of tennis, did whatever he could to win so many slams and make tons of money but that does not mean that we should find his tennis absorbing. Had he not beaten Fed and had he not rose to No. 1, still I would have hated his 'different' aka 'ugly' tennis. It is not an attempt to malign No. 1s, its our opinion on ugly tennis. To me, he is an ugly pusher and whether he racks up 50 slams, I would never want to watch him play - just as I would not want to watch Monaco or Junqueira or Somedev play!!

And not many here have been critical of Nole. He has amazing shotmaking ability but he also has great defensive skills - amazing combination but it is just that he also resort to making it a attritional war soemtimes (esp. against Nadal) on which we sometimes comment. Not that we hate Nadal getting a taste of his own medicine but simply those matches become a pain for us to watch.

Meanwhile, you will also find that many Fed fans are fans of Nalby, Safin and sometime Tsonga also. Its not that we hate people who could or have beaten Fed - let them rise to No. 1 and we probabaly will all be happy.

Trust you will not now misunderstand our intentions when we will continue to come up with innovative ideas to further 'lampoon' Nadal brand of tennis:)

Fedex, thanks and sorry for calling you fedsfan, my bad. I personally don't have a problem with anything you have posted. But unfortunately your positive attitude is not reflected by a great number of extreme fed apologists who feel the need to disrespect and demean the ability and accomplishments of the champions that have arisen after fed. Every single post about the subject focuses on one part of the story, the part of the story that furthers their agenda. Muscular guys with big arms winning because of superior fitness. There is an agenda at work with this portion of Federer fans, not all of them, and it is meant as a slight and insult. The assertion that the world's number #1 tennis player isn't that talented a shotmaker and wins on fitness alone, that is my qualm with this type of Fed fan.

Fedex said it well. I am a great fan of what I call talented players. Those players he mentioned - Nalbandian, Safin especially - are modern era examples, headed of course by Federer himself.

I really don't like watching Nadal whatever, just as I would rather boil my head than watch someone like David Ferrer. It's not restricted to baseline attrition though; Karlovic/Isner, and before them Ivanisevic bored me. I'm not sure where I stand on Djokovic; I think I'm hugely impressed but not enthralled.

My favourite players from yesteryear are McEnroe, Borg and Lendl. Ivan is the obvious exception to the rule here, but I think he warrants credit for almost making it at two Wimbledons when it was "proper" Wimbledon.

Craig having too much cider again bringing up the ancient history Novak's serve certainly isn't much of a weakness like it was over a year ago but it's not exactly the most trickiest to deal with now is it... not too long ago even Monfils and Mardy Fish were making mockery of it

See Socal, even BB doesn't dislike your guy:) It is just that we have been spoiled enough by Fed's trickery that we find fault with many others. But deep inside, we all only dislike Nadal brand of tennis and anything which borders near to that ugliness from baseline. This is not because Nadal has beaten Fed but because he plays a game as remotely possible to Fed's game that it would be very difficult to appreciate both - I call it physical and ugly and some call it talentless moon-balling but all we feel is boredom and all we wait for is for him to lose so that tennis starts become more of tennis and not boxing!

Separately BB, I like watching Isner. Kind of gives a lot of sadistic pleasure to watch the opponent work as hard as possible to frame break points and in 10 seconds, they would be sitting on chair after 3 consecutive aces from Big John - lovely:)

Not born enough early to have watched Borg, McEnroe et al but from the players I have seen play, I have loved Sampras, Safin and Federer and have been dubfounded by some of the superlative shotmaking ability of Agassi, Nalbandian, even Gulbis, Del Potro and Tsonga sometimes

Of course tennis fans prefer a certain brand of tennis and with it a certain brand of player and I don't have a problem with that. I mean I loathe the wham-bam thank you m'am tennis we got in the 1990's and thought the Sampras era was a total bore. However, I can still recognise Sampras as one of the greatest players of all-time and pay homage to his strengths without picking at any weaknesses. That is how it should be for Djokovic and before him Nadal whether people hate their style of play or not. Instead all we hear is that they were only successful because of fitness etc which is just sheer nonsense. Also read that some think it is not skillful to construct points/rallies from the baseline and I'd say that takes a lot more skill than being able to bash down an unreturnable serve.

I actually don't have a problem with whether you guys like nadal or djokovic's style of play or not. I am an American, can't stand Sampras' game. I find big serve tennis to be horribly dull, but I would never try to say that Sampras isn't anything but an incredible tennis talent. I wouldn't try to claim that he only won because of the fast conditions or light balls or whatever.

Fedex, Nadal's style maybe not to your taste. He isn't my favorite player to watch either wouldn't even be in my top ten. But when some people come out and claim that he wins on fitness only as really a glofied talentless top 50 player who wins because of fitness and slow conditions I will defend him. And if they try to disrespect Djokovic in the same manner as a certain group of fed fans have done to both players I will dispute them with facts.

craig whoa, you literally took the words out of my mind. People have this idealized and nostalgic view of S and V tennis and big serve power tennis, I actually found it horribly dull. I don't find much interesting in an unreturnable serve or a big serve followed by an overhead or the player murdering some hospital ball forehand. I also don't like to watch two david ferrers play each other either, I like the power baseline game. Great offense and great defense.

The US Open final was all about the serve. Djokovics was better than Nadals or Nadals was worse than Djokovics.

https://www.606v2.com/t13815-it-was-all-about-the-serve

Next time it could be the other way round. Djokovic has always had a good serve. I don't see much difference in his serve between this year and last.

Spot on socal. The serve dominated game to me is just like a penalty shoot-out in football, one-dimensional and not a great modicum of skill required. Constructing points from the baseline by manoeuvering a player into a position before unleashing a winner requires cunning, skill and accurate shot application and is why I prefer it. Besides the likes of Djokovic, Federer and even Murray have a good enough first serve to rack up aces as well so there game has variety as well in my opinion.

Lol what facts? Like the facts Novak was on his way home at 3-5 fifth set until he took a wild swing at it after being bossed around... yea those facts hehe

Yes Craig, I mean look at the players in the top 10 they don't all play the same way, watching one of their matches is not the same thing. And players today still volley they just don't serve and volley off the first point as much because of the quality of the strings which help the returns. Now they have to earn their trips to the net and construct a point. Instead of just charging up to the net every point. I just don't find it particularly interesting. I don't find modern tennis to be broken, I don't think the conditions and technology need to be tinkered with to give an advantage to style of player that I loathe to watch.

Your boy lost JM, lost fair and square and this thread has little or nothing to do with the semi with Roger. I am talking about his success over the course of a year.

CC, you hint that Sampras and his era was of big serve so why cant we say (correctly) that Nadal and his ilk are physical player - what is wrong in that? Sampras did not have a great backhand, I agree to it but what is there to get upset about when I would add that Nadal moon-balls and has no great shot (good forehand but weirdly executed and not exactly devastating).

Sampras had beautiful game, in my opinion but if you say that he wins because of his serve - I would kind of agree because that was his most dominating part but I would surely add that Nadal wins because of his baseline hugging physical game!

I admire and respect the wins that he has accumulated but dont ask me to praise his game. He has done well for himself but not for me, I get no joy watching him play. To me, watching Nadal and Ferrer play is a physical and mental torture!

Whether he lost or not, Novak will still not be able to make the final at RG cause his legs can't handle clay for more than 2 sets, he's never going to complete the career grand slam with his inadequacies; beating a sloppy and confidence lacking Nadull is hardly going to set the world alight, just like he had to wait for Federer to become Olderer so he can finally get a lucky win..

Craig, you seem to be trying to put all Fed fans into the same basket.

Like others before me have stated, I'm not a fan of Nadal's game, but of course I acknowledge that he is a great champion and I've mentioned previously that his work ethic and resilience is inspirational.

As for this idea that all/most Fed fans believe that the top two currently are talentless and only win due to their physicality; what nonsense. Of course, fitness plays a big part but I've always held the view that in his prime Federer was just as fit as these two are today.

As an example, Rome 2006. Fed played two three set matches and then played five sets over five hours against Nadal all on consecutive days! Federer is one of the fittest athletes ever to play tennis - no question about it. It is only in the last few years where he has appeared to tire in the tail end of matches. No doubt we will see the same thing with Novak and Rafa when they reach their late twenties.

So just because one poster harps on about physicality, it doesn't mean all Fed fans share that same point of view.

However, having said that, by the same token, one should not deny it when a match is clearly decided by physical stamina as was the case in the USO final. By stating the obvious vis-a-vis that match, it does not mean Fed fans are denigrating Novak and Rafa and reducing them to mere physical specimens with no tennis talent.

Finally, regarding the idea that Fed fans will attack any player who they perceive to be a threat to his legacy, again, who exactly is doing that? If I hold the opinion that Fed 06 was a better player than Novak '11, do you immediately see that as a position taken from a 'fear' (as you put it) of someone being heralded more than Fed? It is my opinion based on what I have seen and what I understand of tennis, and I'm quite happy to validate it facts and reasoned opinions. According to you, the only acceptable thing to do in any of these debates would be to simply akcnowledge the point of view of Novak fans; anything else apparently is malign sour grapes.

Nope emancipator I think I did state that it was some Fed fans in a post earlier and it is clearly evident. On the old 606 it was Nadal who got the wrath as he strung together a series of slam wins and now the same people (not all Fed fans) are now trying to pick holes in Djokovic's game. Now as far I can see he is streets ahead of anyone else in the game at the moment (this coming from a Murray fan who saw his man get soundly beaten in this year's Australian Open) and in fact I would say it is perfectly fair to say that this is the most dominant season I have seen any player have as far back as I can recall and yes that includes what Federer achieved at his peak. Now it may be a short-lived domination but time will tell and I cannot help but be mightily impressed by what Djokovic has achieved.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Whether he lost or not, Novak will still not be able to make the final at RG cause his legs can't handle clay for more than 2 sets, he's never going to complete the career grand slam with his inadequacies; beating a sloppy and confidence lacking Nadull is hardly going to set the world alight, just like he had to wait for Federer to become Olderer so he can finally get a lucky win..

Are you ready to eat crow if Novak wins RG, the match against fed was very close this year. I have no worries my friend. 10-1 against Federer and Nadal this year, scoreboard that is what counts, you know it and I know it. So Novak only beat Roger when he is old huh. How about all those wins Roger got over an 18, 19, and 20 year old Novak when Roger was at his absolute peak and Novak was still a teenager, should we discount the first 5 times Roger beat Novak? Roger is a great player, no question probably the greatest of all time, the fact that Novak has fought him so well and so consistently for so long is to his credit and not to his detriment.

Funnily enough I don't think federer fans really have much of a problem with djokovic. Federer fans are probably fans for the same reason of admiring his fluid movement and shotmaking. They are less fond of nadal because they don't see this in him. Djokovic possesses these qualities in greater measure than nadal and has the double handed backhand required nowadays and so is successful against nadal. This is good then if you're a fan of federer as the guy that beat him is now being beaten by the qualities he's perceived to lack that were most admired in federer in the first place.

What really impresses me with Djoko besides his mental strength is that he does all this scrapping around the court without taping his ankles. That frankly is shocking considering how much stress they take from a 6'2" tall player.

If I were a fan, I'd be worried.

Mate you keep telling us the 'scoreboard'... if you hadn't noticed he is still 3 wins behind on Nadull and 4 from Shanky, also a massive six slams (or 2 seasons) behind a guy with his same age, not exactly doing well on the 'overall scoreboard' now, is he!

Don't worry JM if Roger and Rafa stick around I am sure that head to head record will become much nicer in favor of Novak. And I am sure that Novak's slam count also will get better. I personally don't really care if Novak surpasses either of those two guys. I am happy with the success he has had. And I look forward to the performances that he will produce in the future. I don't want to be just another fan of the goat, for me I like to buck the trend. Although right now Novak is the one everyone is pumping up. That is why I respect your odd fascination for Dolgopolov.

socal1976 wrote:That is why I respect your odd fascination for Dolgopolov.

I can't get past the pony-tail.

There's nothing odd about it, he has the skills and attitude to get the attention of proper tennis fans, even the attention of the most dry sports fans (such as that Edinburgh guy from here). Three cheers for anti glory hunters

Yeah, he is kind of kooky looking guy isn't he? I really don't like pony tails on men although in my early 20s I did grow my hair long and have one myself so I can't knock the Dog.