The Master Of The Unspectacular

I like Novak. He's got a great personality. More than that he is mature, intelligent, appears to have a great sense of fun, is very sporting (apart from when he gets carried away but that can be forgiven) and not only understands the media side of his job but knows how to use it to his advantage. If he was American he would be a huge star. However tennis is not a popularity contest...

Often as tonight when he's playing I find myself losing interest. His style to me has always been a little like Davydenko. Nothing wrong with that but unless he's playing someone who brings their own interest not exactly exciting to watch. In the end I stopped watching and only tuned back in for the post match analysis. Andrew Castle described his style perfectly. He called him "The master of the unspectacular". He also went on to say how Djokovic does "The basic things, the simple things beautifully". IMO that sums him up perfectly.

Its hard to look at another player after Federer and be truly impressed,we've simply been spoiled too much.If you took Federer out of the equation, Novak would be more the master of the spectacular,rather then the master of the unspectacular

And Nadal would be The humble master of spectacularly ugly ....

I think the OP perhaps a little harsh on Novak but I understand the point being made.

I really enjoy watching Novak because of the drama of many of his matches. His returning ability and mental strength mean that you can never count him out of a match when he is behind. Rome last year v Murray, USO 2011 v Federer (that return!) and AO this year v Nadal were all matches that looked to have got away from him but he pulled them back.

Yes, I can accept that maybe he doesn't have the same level of artistry as Fed at his best (who does?!) but he is hardly a slouch in the great shots department, particularly on the BH.

noleisthebest wrote:And Nadal would be The humble master of spectacularly ugly ....

Or the art of looking clueless.

Djoko unfortunately misses a big visible weapon. It's actually his athletism and retrieving skills which are outstanding but it hasn't got the wow effect of a great FH.

If nadal was clueless in winning 24 games and losing an epic GS final, then I guess fed was hugely clue-full during his FO final 2008

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:And Nadal would be The humble master of spectacularly ugly ....

Or the art of looking clueless.

Djoko unfortunately misses a big visible weapon. It's actually his athletism and retrieving skills which are outstanding but it hasn't got the wow effect of a great FH.

Nole does not miss anything. That's his "problem". He's got the universal trademark game not the trademark shot, except of course, The Shot, i.e : the balls of titanium steel. Rare commodity among people, let alone tennis players these days.

Soon, he'll have something else...in the meantime just sit back and enjoy

HM Murdoch wrote:I think the OP perhaps a little harsh on Novak but I understand the point being made.

I really enjoy watching Novak because of the drama of many of his matches. His returning ability and mental strength mean that you can never count him out of a match when he is behind. Rome last year v Murray, USO 2011 v Federer (that return!) and AO this year v Nadal were all matches that looked to have got away from him but he pulled them back.

Yes, I can accept that maybe he doesn't have the same level of artistry as Fed at his best (who does?!) but he is hardly a slouch in the great shots department, particularly on the BH.

Have to agree with Murdoch a very good post, Novak doesn't have the natural elegance and is not as good a shotmaker as Roger. Yet in some areas he even does surpass the maestro, that is saying a lot. I think he has the best backhand in the game and can really hit some vicious down the line backhand winners. And his returning ability is truely amazing and among the very best that have ever played the sport in that respects. He also has the nerve racking quality of somehow getting involved in a lot of great matches by being a bit up and down at times. Just look at the wars he has had with likes of Fed and Nadal over the last few years particularly from Madrid 09 till the present.

Hawkeye the esteemed OP is just going to have to transition out of his fedal myopia. Novak interestingly in my mind as a player who has evolved and a great student of the game, I believe has honed his style in many ways to be a fedal hybrid. A player who borrows a lot from fed and Nadal. He grips his forehand like Nadal, but hits it flatter and earlier like fed, although with more spin generally than Federer. He plays a bit counterpunching like Nadal at times, but positions himself aggressively in the court like federer and tries to attack much more.

One area of his game quite overlooked, but that in my mind is far superior to either member of Fedal duopoly is Novak's superiority in changing direction off both wings and going up the line. He seemingly is just as comfortable going up the line off both sides as he is going cross court. This is a very important weapon and strength that doesn't get enough focus. And in this area I would rate Novak superior both to Roger and Nadal.

Nitb, you are funny, I agree got to love the courage. I actually don't think people understand the level of swagger it takes and the amount of courage Novak displays in his game. "The shot" was voted by tennis channel officially as the "shot" of 2011. It may be the shot of the decade frankly with what was at stake, not necessarily in terms of artistry. But lets just say he hit the p#ss out of it and the maestro left the court quite incredulous.

Socal,

Novak is very elegant, all his shots are quite beautiful.

Anyway, who am I debating here with? One person quoting the other, does anyone here have their own opinion except Tenez and moi ?

Nitb, I agree Novak's shots are beautiful, fed has that smoothness about him and the luxury of getting more free points and meatball returns off of his serve. For me there is no contest who I prefer to watch, Novak.

By the way you are right Tenez's opinions are original, no one living in the real world could come up with that kind of originality.

socal1976

Such flattery! I am honoured although I am a she and not a he.

As for Djokovics ability to change direction. I agree he is excellent. In particular his backhand down the line is probably second to none especially when he adds his own shout of triumph when he knows he's hit a good one.... But isn't that an example of (as Andrew Castle says) "doing the basic things, the ordinary things beautifully"?

His ability to take the ball early, stick to the base line and change direction is also what reminds me of Davydenko. Davydenko is also a master of the unspectacular. This is not meant as an insult as IMO Daveydenko is a great player its just that he's unspectacular.

Djokovic has been involved in some of my favourite matches (I could list quite a few) but it takes the spectacular play of another player to make them so. But often like last night without such opposition his game lacks interest. Of course for loyal Novak fans this might not be the case...

noleisthebest Tenez

Sigh... Nadal is "ugly" and "clueless"? Only to those that are blind and stupid.

This was not vintage Novak or anything like it last night.

The Novak of the beginning of last year was very, very spectacular. I know that people wax lyrical about his epic marathons at the US and this year's AO - and they were remarkable for his tenacity in both, and Rafa's in the AO - quite incredible spectacles of courage and endurance and athleticism and excellence in parts.

However, I would like to see the return of the truly imperious Novak of the beginning of 2011 - the one you felt couldn't be beaten.

I think Andrew Castle's comment should be upgraded to "doing ALL the basic things beautifully".

Tenez said earlier in this thread that Novak doesn't have a big 'visible' weapon and, with the possible exception of BH down the line, I think I would agree with that.

The other side of this though is that he does not have a big visible weakness either. Fed's SHBH, Nadal's default defensive positioning, Murray's second serve are all chinks in their armour that opponents have exploited. With Novak, it's difficult to think of any holes in his game that his opponents can target. They just have to produce their best game and hope it's enough on the day.

I also really like the way that Novak plays differently against different opponents. If Nadal wants to grind out a 6 hour marathon, Novak can go toe-to-toe with him. When Novak plays Fed, he plays shorter points like Fed. When he played Tsonga at Wimbledon, he was even able to play in a "Tsonga-ish" way with all that crazy stuff at the net.

If you contrast this to his peers, Fed always plays like Fed, Nadal always plays like Nadal. This distinct style of each has perhaps contributed to their popularity... but recently it has cost them a few matches against Novak's versatility!

hawkeye wrote:

As for Djokovics ability to change direction. I agree he is excellent. In particular his backhand down the line is probably second to none especially when he adds his own shout of triumph when he knows he's hit a good one.... But isn't that an example of (as Andrew Castle says) "doing the basic things, the ordinary things beautifully"? .

Is that so?? Watch these guys here with the DHBH https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNO_t4gibkk and then rethink.

socal1976 wrote:Nitb, you are funny, I agree got to love the courage. I actually don't think people understand the level of swagger it takes and the amount of courage Novak displays in his game. "The shot" was voted by tennis channel officially as the "shot" of 2011. It may be the shot of the decade frankly with what was at stake, not necessarily in terms of artistry. But lets just say he hit the p#ss out of it and the maestro left the court quite incredulous.

I'm no fan of going on about a single shot, especially one which has a high tariff of luck about it.

That exactly why I don't go on about a similar type of shot that had much bigger implications than just winning a US Open; the shot by Federer onto the sideline at 4-4 break point down, 2 sets down, in the 2009 French Open when he got his career slam.

HM Murdoch wrote:I think Andrew Castle's comment should be upgraded to "doing ALL the basic things beautifully".

Tenez said earlier in this thread that Novak doesn't have a big 'visible' weapon and, with the possible exception of BH down the line, I think I would agree with that.

The other side of this though is that he does not have a big visible weakness either. Fed's SHBH, Nadal's default defensive positioning, Murray's second serve are all chinks in their armour that opponents have exploited. With Novak, it's difficult to think of any holes in his game that his opponents can target. They just have to produce their best game and hope it's enough on the day.

I also really like the way that Novak plays differently against different opponents. If Nadal wants to grind out a 6 hour marathon, Novak can go toe-to-toe with him. When Novak plays Fed, he plays shorter points like Fed. When he played Tsonga at Wimbledon, he was even able to play in a "Tsonga-ish" way with all that crazy stuff at the net.

If you contrast this to his peers, Fed always plays like Fed, Nadal always plays like Nadal. This distinct style of each has perhaps contributed to their popularity... but recently it has cost them a few matches against Novak's versatility!

Exactly; his greatest attribute is the ability to get to almost anything and play a meaningful shot off it. Of course he can do many other things, but it's that aspect which is the defining element of his game.

Nice link raiders.
For me, and I've said it often on here, Agassi has best DTL BH ever. When you consider the guy was 33yo here it's just staggering really, and his shots were even more venomous circa '94/95 before the wrist injury.
I like to watch Novak play and he's great at drilling the balls up and down both lines (thats his trademark play) but there's no way his groundies are as creative as Nalby or Agassi could conjure up.

HM Murdoch wrote:I also really like the way that Novak plays differently against different opponents. If Nadal wants to grind out a 6 hour marathon, Novak can go toe-to-toe with him. When Novak plays Fed, he plays shorter points like Fed. When he played Tsonga at Wimbledon, he was even able to play in a "Tsonga-ish" way with all that crazy stuff at the net.

Though it's a clear deliberate choice to get into long rallies v Nadal, I don;t think it's his choice to play shorter points v Federer.

Nadal hasn't got the shots to hurt Djoko so the latter can rally at will securing his win over the distance. He actually tries to play longer rallies v Federer but he knows any average shot will be punished unlike v Nadal which means he has to find the lines and go for more. Unlike Nadal, Djoko is not LH and hasn't got the spiny shots which means Federer can pretty swiftly attack any average shot from Djoko, forcing therefore Djoko to go for more risky shots.

However it's easy to see that Djoko tries to extend the rallies as much as possible v Federer and many other players too cause he knows too well that Federer is likely to lose his edge as the rallies extend.

time please wrote:This was not vintage Novak or anything like it last night.

The Novak of the beginning of last year was very, very spectacular. I know that people wax lyrical about his epic marathons at the US and this year's AO - and they were remarkable for his tenacity in both, and Rafa's in the AO - quite incredible spectacles of courage and endurance and athleticism and excellence in parts.

However, I would like to see the return of the truly imperious Novak of the beginning of 2011 - the one you felt couldn't be beaten.

Imperioius Novak does not need to prove himself or chase the rankings any more . He's saving his invincible self for the history pages that are coming in a few months. God willing, I shall be there and go maaaaaad. GO NOLEEEEEEEE

HM Murdoch wrote:I think Andrew Castle's comment should be upgraded to "doing ALL the basic things beautifully".

Tenez said earlier in this thread that Novak doesn't have a big 'visible' weapon and, with the possible exception of BH down the line, I think I would agree with that.

The other side of this though is that he does not have a big visible weakness either. Fed's SHBH, Nadal's default defensive positioning, Murray's second serve are all chinks in their armour that opponents have exploited. With Novak, it's difficult to think of any holes in his game that his opponents can target. They just have to produce their best game and hope it's enough on the day.

I also really like the way that Novak plays differently against different opponents. If Nadal wants to grind out a 6 hour marathon, Novak can go toe-to-toe with him. When Novak plays Fed, he plays shorter points like Fed. When he played Tsonga at Wimbledon, he was even able to play in a "Tsonga-ish" way with all that crazy stuff at the net.

If you contrast this to his peers, Fed always plays like Fed, Nadal always plays like Nadal. This distinct style of each has perhaps contributed to their popularity... but recently it has cost them a few matches against Novak's versatility!

And I was beginning to despair that nobody would spot the obvious. Nole's got the game, not the trademark weapon. He can follow a player on just about anything and then ask him to go an extra mile, that's where he crushes them to dust , he invites to give him all they've got, matches them and then turns the heat on. That is tenez in its essence, isn't it Tenez ?

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

hawkeye wrote:

As for Djokovics ability to change direction. I agree he is excellent. In particular his backhand down the line is probably second to none especially when he adds his own shout of triumph when he knows he's hit a good one.... But isn't that an example of (as Andrew Castle says) "doing the basic things, the ordinary things beautifully"? .

Is that so?? Watch these guys here with the DHBH https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNO_t4gibkk and then rethink.

That's an unbelievable link Raiders... And as one of the comments says, I actually lost count of the DTL BH winners by Nalby!!!

And as Lydian says elsewhere, Agassi literally tire his opponent out... You can see Nalby lost his length in 3rd set!!

It's the mental strength, consistency and the fact that he just doesn't miss, that is setting him apart.

Strength on both wings is also really important and has been under rated and under noted.

Djokovic's strength on both wings has been underrated by who? I think most know this is his strength...?

Despite the title of this article as I said IMO Djokovic has an engaging personality so I was surprised to read that in Indian Wells he lost the popularity contest to Almagro. If it hadn't been for his loyal fan noleisthebest at the top of the stands he would have been all alone out there...

The crowd here in the desert was decidedly on Almagro's side. There were many chants of "Nico" and "Nicolai," and one of the only times a fan in the upper levels called out for Djokovic, she did so alone. In the seventh game of the second set

http://blogs.tennis.com/racquet_reaction/2012/03/indian-wells-djokovic-d-almagro.html

noleisthebest. Only once! tut...

Well, Tenez, and BB;and the usual cast of characters lydian have underrated Djoko's strength off both wings. I find it funny that people say that Novak doesn't have a signature shot. His forehand is easily is among the top 10 on tour. His backhand is the best or very near the best. And he is leading the ATP tour in breaking serve again like he did in 2010 and 2012. So ostensibly he is widely regarded as having both the best backhand on tour and the best return, and one of the best forehands and yet we hear this silliness about his great strength is just retrieval and he doesn't do anything really spectacularly.


Hawkeye didn't know you were a lady, I do agree that Djoko is very well rounded but I will have diverge with some of your points. For example, I think Davy is a very spectacular tennis player in terms of hitting the ball for winners from the baseline, I would say Davydenko, pound for pound is among the best I have ever seen at blasting winners from the baseline. He is bald, not a handsome man, and not the best interview with limited english skills. But a very spectacular ball striker if you ask me. As for Novak its fine that people don't view anything he does as spectacular, but if breaking serve 40 percent of the time on the ATP tour isn't spectacular or his down the line backhand and forehand aren't spectacular, well then we should all be so unspectacular.

Hawkeye, I have been to IW he gets a lot of fan support every time I have visited. Watched the almagro match people started to get behind Nico in the second set, which happens a great deal when fans cheer for the underdog to put up a fight and take it to the third set.

socal1976 wrote:Well, Tenez, and BB;and the usual cast of characters lydian have underrated Djoko's strength off both wings. I find it funny that people say that Novak doesn't have a signature shot. His forehand is easily is among the top 10 on tour. His backhand is the best or very near the best. And he is leading the ATP tour in breaking serve again like he did in 2010 and 2012. So ostensibly he is widely regarded as having both the best backhand on tour and the best return, and one of the best forehands and yet we hear this silliness about his great strength is just retrieval and he doesn't do anything really spectacularly.


Hawkeye didn't know you were a lady, I do agree that Djoko is very well rounded but I will have diverge with some of your points. For example, I think Davy is a very spectacular tennis player in terms of hitting the ball for winners from the baseline, I would say Davydenko, pound for pound is among the best I have ever seen at blasting winners from the baseline. He is bald, not a handsome man, and not the best interview with limited english skills. But a very spectacular ball striker if you ask me. As for Novak its fine that people don't view anything he does as spectacular, but if breaking serve 40 percent of the time on the ATP tour isn't spectacular or his down the line backhand and forehand aren't spectacular, well then we should all be so unspectacular.

Socal,

when will you learn that Hawkeye does not judge a player by his tennis skill, she only goes by the number of Facebook fans, and how humble a player is. It helps if he's a wonderful person.

hawkeye wrote:socal1976

Such flattery! I am honoured although I am a she and not a he.

As for Djokovics ability to change direction. I agree he is excellent. In particular his backhand down the line is probably second to none especially when he adds his own shout of triumph when he knows he's hit a good one.... But isn't that an example of (as Andrew Castle says) "doing the basic things, the ordinary things beautifully"?

His ability to take the ball early, stick to the base line and change direction is also what reminds me of Davydenko. Davydenko is also a master of the unspectacular. This is not meant as an insult as IMO Daveydenko is a great player its just that he's unspectacular.

Djokovic has been involved in some of my favourite matches (I could list quite a few) but it takes the spectacular play of another player to make them so. But often like last night without such opposition his game lacks interest. Of course for loyal Novak fans this might not be the case...

noleisthebest Tenez

Sigh... Nadal is "ugly" and "clueless"? Only to those that are blind and stupid.

From now on I am going to start assuming everyone on here is a woman.

socal1976 wrote:I do agree that Djoko is very well rounded but I will have diverge with some of your points. For example, I think Davy is a very spectacular tennis player in terms of hitting the ball for winners from the baseline, I would say Davydenko, pound for pound is among the best I have ever seen at blasting winners from the baseline. He is bald, not a handsome man, and not the best interview with limited english skills. But a very spectacular ball striker if you ask me. As for Novak its fine that people don't view anything he does as spectacular, but if breaking serve 40 percent of the time on the ATP tour isn't spectacular or his down the line backhand and forehand aren't spectacular, well then we should all be so unspectacular.

Davydenko does what Djokovic does. They both are able to take the ball early, hit with length, change direction and hit winners from the baseline. In terms of skill they are right up there but they are as Andrew Castle described "the simple things" but they do them again as Castle described beautifully. I'm not sure why you threw in the rather unflattering description of Davydenko. Like I said in the article tennis is not a popularity contest or rather it shouldn't be. If it was Djokovic would beat Davydenko.

As far as serve stats or any other stats go last year Djokovic had an incredible year. He also won a few trophies... but I was and can only presume Castle was talking about his style of play not his achievements.

Fair point about the crowd cheering for Almagro. Perhaps they did just want another set.

Well, I mean hawkeye I respect your opinion if you say that you don't find Novak's game as appealling aesthetically that is fine. That is your taste. But the analysis that Novak doesn't do anything spectacularly or that he doesn't have a defining shot is simply a logical non-starter. What other tennis player on tour is rated as having two weapons each of which is arguably the best on tour? Its not federer, its Djokovic. Novak has weapons and elite shots in spades, that is what has gotten him to number #1. You can easily make the point that you don't enjoy his game as much, but you can't claim that he lacks a signature shot or weapons as some have claimed. The ATP stats people might have something to say about that especially on the return.