Reflections on Shanghai Final and Current State of Play

Long article (not far shy of 2,000 words), but if you're busy now, please have a look some other time.

I wonder how many times Murray was 2 points away from winning, must have been a ton, and 5 championship points (CP) as well. But Murray did not do much wrong on those CPs.

CP 1 – Murray drops one a little short (under a little pressure) and Djokovic hits the winner.
CP 2 – Rally and Djokovic hits winner on or near the line, from his back corner.
CP 3 – Good serve from Djokovic, too powerful, Murray didn’t connect properly, returns into the net.
CP 4 – Strong Djokovic serve, draws short (but low) return and puts away whip topspin forehand under pressure.
CP 5 – Murray somewhat in charge in the rally before Djokovic produces a great backhand down the line and Murray hits the net.

Djokovic's topspin forehand (at I think 30-30 or Deuce when Murray served for the match) onto the line from low under the net was impressive as well. Djokovic underlined that he is the strongest player mentally on tour. Not that Murray himself is mentally weak. He saved 2CPs himself as well as numerous set points, I think it was just a case of evenly matched and could have gone either way to some extent. Another possible analysis is that the first set was decided on shot making and talent, the second by mental strength, and the third by physical conditioning. Murray did look slightly fatigued to me in the decider, and just a little bit like that can affect your timing.

The one mistake that sticks in my mind from Murray was not to follow the lob in at 7-5 5-4 30-0. Had he followed the lob in, he would have had (from the between the legs shot) a fairly easy forehand volley a pace or two to his right at a nice height, that any top 10 player would win the point from 9 times out of 10, and he would have probably won the match. Why don’t players follow lobs in any more?

Anyway, Djokovic avoids a 6th straight defeat against fellow big 4. His last big-4 win was Federer at the French Open SF, before falling to Nadal in the French Open final, Federer in the Wimbledon SF, Murray at the Olympics SF, Federer in Cincinatti SF and Murray in the US Open F. Djokovic’s likely return to number 1 in time for the year end win, if it happens, will not be based on superiority over his fellow top guns. Here are the head to heads so far in 2012:

Djokovic 2 Federer 2 (Clay 2-0, Hard 0-1, Grass 0-1) (Slams 1-1)
Djokovic 1 Nadal 3 (Hard 1-0, Clay 0-3) (Slams 1-1)
Djokovic 3 Murray 3 (Hard 3-2, Grass 0-1) (Slams 1-1)
Federer 2 Murray 2 (Hard 1-1, Grass 1-1) (Slams 1-0)
Federer 1 Nadal 1 (Hard 1-1) (Slams 0-1)
Nadal 0 Murray 0 (They have not played this year)

Totals
Djokovic W6 L8
Federer W5 L5
Murray W5 L5
Nadal W4 L2

Slam Totals
Djokovic W3 L3
Federer W2 L2
Murray W1 L2
Nadal W2 L1

Interesting stuff, this is as neck and neck between a top 4 in head to heads as you could ever hope for, Rafa’s lead is not significant really because he played the clay part of the season, where he excels, before missing due to injury big 4 matchups on the fast surfaces, which are the hardest for him.

So, as I said, it is not Djokovic’s superiority vs top players that have caused him to get within touching distance of the no 1 ranking again. No, it is rather due to consistency against the lower ranked players. He is the only player to reach three slam finals this year, the only one to reach all four slam semis, and the only one to not lose at a slam to someone outside of the top four (Berdych for Fed, Rosol for Rafa, Ferrer for Murray).

While the lowest ranked player to beat Djokovic this season is Isner (ranked 11th), and that was in a match he won more points in and was unlucky to lose, the others do not boast such a record. Federer has, in addition to also losing to Isner, fallen to Haas (87) and Roddick (34). Nadal of course lost to Rosol (100) as well as Kohlschreiber (34), Verdasco (19) and Monfils (16). Murray has been beaten this year by Raonic twice (when ranked 15 and 25), Chardy (38), Mahut (65), Gasquet (22) and Garcia Lopez (92). (Rankings are at the time of the defeat.)

And so the lack of defeats against lesser players is why Djokovic will probably go back to number 1. In terms of analysis of game, the reasons he has been the best player in both 2011, and 2012 so far:

---1. Strength on both sides. If Nadal and Federer have say 7/10 backhands and 9/10 forehands, while Djokovic has 8/10 for both, then Djokovic has an average 8/10 groundshot. Federer and Nadal's average would be nearer 7.5 since you hit the majority of shots to their backhands, so Djokovic is the best. Interesting to see Djokovic and Murray trying to avoid each other's forehands to some extent today, there is normally no point, especially in Murray's case, but his forehand has improved, changing the dynamic of the rallies a bit. Although if Djokovic's forehand is an 8, Murray's is perhaps still a 7, which is why (or one way to look at it) Djokovic is ahead of him as well in the rankings. But..if Murray keeps this forehand form up, we have an interesting time ahead certainly. At the moment (and today) his forehand in rallies is still not as sharp as on returns though.

---2. Mental Strength. Some said Djokovic's famous 40-15 forehand service return winner, against Federer, from match point down at the US Open, was a lucky swing that could have gone anywhere. But the funny thing is he won the next point as well, and he did this MP save twice against Federer, and what about the cracking shot at 5-5 40-40 against Murray in the AO semi final's deciding set. And what about the MP saves against Tsonga at the French, was it four of them? And what about the 5 CP saves today. This guy has a lot of lucky swings when it matters.

---3. Consistency. In so many ways, in the results, in the way the ball keeps coming back time and again with so few errors, in the depth he can get. It can be unerring. Definately not so much of an inevitable feel about his shots in 2012 as in 2011, but still enough to get the job done most of the time.

---4. Defence. A major thing that separates the real big-time players from the rest. Del Potro, Berdych, Raonic, Tsonga to name but a few are just not in the same league as Djokovic. And Djokovic is surely as good as any of the big 4 players at this, especially on a hard court. A classic Djokovic shot is stretching to play the ball in the corner on his backhand, with his racket a little behind him, and, in order to get the ball, at least one of his feet twisted to an angle that looks hard not to fall over or twist an ankle from. And he not only makes you play the extra smash, you often have to do it from behind the service line.

I think I can characterise those as the 4 reasons why he's the no 1 (in waiting). I'm being marginally disrespectful to Federer, sorry about that.

Those four reasons for me are also the reasons I would put Djokovic at no 1 at the end of 2013, if I had to take a guess. But guess is all it really is, since we have a real big 4 now, and (we seem to say this every season) 2013 is really set up now to be an exciting season. Absolutely Murray can challenge for number 1. On form since and including Wimbledon he probably is the number 1. As for Nadal, I see him as a top 2 player IF he gets back to full fitness (although as he's missed so much of 2012, No 1 can't really be a realistic target until Autumn 2013). I know he has said he doesn't see ranking as a priority, and his injury could be prolonged or ultimately lead to retirement or for him to play a reduced schedule, but IF he gets back to full fitness, he has to have a chance of some sort. He was clearly the no 2 player in 2011, and was clearly no 1 in 2010, so can't be discounted yet. And as for Federer for year end no 1 next year, marginally less likely than the others, but then who saw his performance this year coming? His decline continues to be very slight - or even none at all. When he brings good form on a fast surface he is still the best, still probably the best agressive forehand, the best serve of the top guys.

With Djokovic now 90% sure of finishing no 1 at the end of the year, the who will be no 1 after Australian Open/French Open/Wimbledon races are perhaps of more interest (slams are where the biggest points swings are likely of course). Due to Nadal's injury, they are likely 3 horse races.

Since Wimbledon: (i.e. race to be no 1 after Wimbledon 2013)
Djokovic 4570, Murray 3710, Federer 2170, Nadal 0.
Analysis: 2 clear leaders in this one, but still a lot to play for.

Since French Open: (race to be 1 after FO 2013).
Djokovic 5290, Murray 4910, Federer 4320, Nadal 90.
Analysis: Murray's best chance. I expect his 2013 clay season to see an improvement on his 2012 season. Federer also likely to stay in the hunt for no 1 until the clay season, due to his Wimbledon triumph. 2013 FO may see Fed for the last time ever going into a tournament with a chance to take no 1 if he wins it? We will see. Could easily have a situation where all 3 of them can take #1 by winning the title here. Having said that, of the three of them, Djokovic is still going to be the favourite to score most on the clay, so if he can score about the same points as Murray (and Federer) at the AO and Indian Wells and Miami, then he would stay favourite to be ranked no 1 after the FO.

Since Australian Open:
Djokovic 9410, Federer 8445, Murray 6540, Nadal 5400.
Analysis: Looking at that for Murray to get no 1 after the Australian Open 2013 he not only has to win the thing, but also needs to heavily outscore Djokovic in the rest of the 2012 season. Looks like a long shot. Federer and Djokovic may both end up in a win AO to take the no 1 position, but we'll see. Looks like a 2 horse race between those two. Potential for Djokovic to be no 1 after the Australian Open without holding a slam (last time we saw that in men's tennis??? there's a challenge for someone to dig that up), and if Murray wins it, he would probably get the "locker room no 1" at least from Djokovic. Djokovic has to be favourite to be no 1 after the Australian Open as well, simply because you would expect him to score as many or more points than Federer at the AO.

Actually, Djokovic looks favourite to be no 1 for every moment after World Tour Finals 2012 to after Shanghai 2013, based on current points. But he can't afford to have the others make too many big gains against him. And, although I see him as deserving the no 1 position based on the reasons I gave above, he needs to win a slam soon to back that up. If he doesn't win the AO that will become a grey area.

Fantastic article

But Murray did not do much wrong on those CPs.

He could've approached the net on 1 or 2 or played 1 of his famed drop shots. Chose the baseline option, which was a shame because you look at his stats he won 23 from 23 net points

I read every word Henman Bill some good points. I think you are being a bit unfair when you say Djoko has an 8/10 backhand. If Fed and Nadal have 9/10 forehands in your scale then you got to score the Djoko backhand as 9/10 as well. Also I think you are correct Novak this year as number #1 might be more of a first among equals #1 than a dominanting #1 performance. I agree with your thesis though that he is poised again and looks most likely to get back the number #1 in 2013. I think Novak's h2h against his main rivals also had a little to do with playing a rejuvenated Nadal in those clay court finals. And frankly he looked really out of sorts in the clay court season. Good work, a lot of good analysis.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:

But Murray did not do much wrong on those CPs.

He could've approached the net on 1 or 2 or played 1 of his famed drop shots. Chose the baseline option, which was a shame because you look at his stats he won 23 from 23 net points

Yes I also saw the stat shown at one point that he had won 100% of net points. Making it all the more frustrating that he didn't follow the lob into the net. You lose all the advantage and go back to the rally on an even level. I wonder if Sampras and Henman were watching, they must be pulling their hair out or a bit bemused watching players these days do that so often. These guys would follow service returns to the net. Not following lobs to the net must look wierd to them.

It Must Be Love wrote:Fantastic article

thanks a lot. Hope it can start some debate. Any particular comments?

socal1976 wrote:I read every word Henman Bill some good points. I think you are being a bit unfair when you say Djoko has an 8/10 backhand. If Fed and Nadal have 9/10 forehands in your scale then you got to score the Djoko backhand as 9/10 as well. Also I think you are correct Novak this year as number #1 might be more of a first among equals #1 than a dominanting #1 performance. I agree with your thesis though that he is poised again and looks most likely to get back the number #1 in 2013. I think Novak's h2h against his main rivals also had a little to do with playing a rejuvenated Nadal in those clay court finals. And frankly he looked really out of sorts in the clay court season. Good work, a lot of good analysis.

Well, first of all, 10 out of 10 means perfection to me, so I don't give it out easily. e.g. a 10 out of 10 rating in a football match would be less than once a year, I have never given a movie a 10. Well after seeing Nadal's forehand implode in a Wimbledon final it can't be a 10. But it can't be any lower than 9, so it must be 9. Federer's forehand is a beautiful shot, the elegance and power and control: it's shock and awe, it can't be lower than 9. But it can't be a 10. There are too many errors.

And for me Djokovic's backhand is not as devastating in attack as Federer's forehand, or quite as rock solid reliable as Nadal's forehand. Going to the net on Nadal's forehand and not getting within a few inches of the line is tennis suicide, and if you leave him a high bouncing ball on clay on the service line, you may as well hold your hand up and concede the point in the same way that golfers concede a short put.

For me, Djokovic's strength is more his lack of weakness than his strength. You cannot attack the weak point because there isn't much of one.

Henman Bill wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:Fantastic article

thanks a lot. Hope it can start some debate. Any particular comments?

Well I agree with the majority of the article
As for the shot rating thing- mine slight differs from yours:
Nadal 9.5/10 FH; 8/10 BH
Federer 9.5/10 FH; 7/10 BH
Djokovic 8/10 FH; 9/10 BH
Murray 7.5/10; BH 9/10

Well of course Novak's bh isn't going to be as devastating as Fed's forehand in attack but that isn't because of a lack of quality with the shot it is the nature of the backhand. On tour Novak hits about as many winners with his backhand as anyone and it breaks down hardly ever. The role of the backhand in tennis is generally that of being rock solid and counterpunching with it, as such you can't compare Novak's backhand in terms of winner creation with other peoples forehands, if that was the case no backhand would ever be highly rated. That is like rating Novak a 7/10 on his return because he doesn't hit as many winners with it as other players do with their serve. No one returns off that wing and defends his backhand corner as well as Djoko probably ever. If Nadal's forehand and fed's forehand are 9/10, Novak and Andy's backhands are 9/10. I agree with your scoring criteria, I just don't think you can hold a backhand up to the same standards of winner production as a forehand.

Superb article, HB, loved it.

I agree with all the points but I think there is a significant caveat on the mental strength category.

Novak has produced some amazing tennis when the chips are down. He has been excellent at digging himself out of a hole.

I've felt this year though that he hasn't been great under what I can only call "standard pressure". By that I mean things such as being 6-5 down and serving to stay in the set or consolidating a mini break in a tie break. The kind of pressure isn't last chance saloon, just normal pressure as a game progresses.

It's this problem that has forced him into situations that require great tennis to pull back from the brink. Against most players, he has pulled it off. Against the top 4, it has cost him.

IMBL if Nadal's forehand is 9.5, djokovic's backhand is at least 9.5 how often does Novak misfire when Nadal goes cross court forehand to Novak's backhand? Hardly ever. The fact is that backhand wise I rate Murray and Djokovic as the two best on tour, whether you rate federer and Nadal as the two best forehands on tour is not as clear cut or me.

socal1976 wrote:IMBL if Nadal's forehand is 9.5, djokovic's backhand is at least 9.5 how often does Novak misfire when Nadal goes cross court forehand to Novak's backhand? Hardly ever. The fact is that backhand wise I rate Murray and Djokovic as the two best on tour, whether you rate federer and Nadal as the two best forehands on tour is not as clear cut or me.

Did you see how many BH errors Nole made today? This year it's been unreliable.
I agree with HB on this, Djokovic's BH is damn good no doubt, but I don't see it as lethal as Nadal or Federer's FH.

Here is my ratings, I think a 100 point system is better:

Federer: fh 95, bh 82

Nadal: fh 93, bh 87

Djokovic: fh 88, bh 95

Murray: fh 83, bh 95

socal1976 wrote:Well of course Novak's bh isn't going to be as devastating as Fed's forehand in attack but that isn't because of a lack of quality with the shot it is the nature of the backhand. On tour Novak hits about as many winners with his backhand as anyone and it breaks down hardly ever. The role of the backhand in tennis is generally that of being rock solid and counterpunching with it, as such you can't compare Novak's backhand in terms of winner creation with other peoples forehands, if that was the case no backhand would ever be highly rated. That is like rating Novak a 7/10 on his return because he doesn't hit as many winners with it as other players do with their serve. No one returns off that wing and defends his backhand corner as well as Djoko probably ever. If Nadal's forehand and fed's forehand are 9/10, Novak and Andy's backhands are 9/10. I agree with your scoring criteria, I just don't think you can hold a backhand up to the same standards of winner production as a forehand.

OK, I accept there is some truth in that. Although there are some players like Gasquet, and maybe Warwinka, that can rip off BH winners from the baseline that are a bit more beautiful and glorious. I guess it's implicit in my rating system that the average forehand is more effective than the average forehand, so typically a forehand would score higher, so my rankings are absolute or relative to the average of any shot, rather than having a rating relative to that particular shot. In other words in my ranking a player with a 6/10 forehand and a 6/10 backhand might have a worse than average forehand but a better than average backhand. Hope that makes sense.

My points were only trying to illustrate my main point anyway, which was that Djokovic's strength on both wings is key and eliminates the possibility to target the weaker side.

By adding a bit more fine detail on the rankings, your scores Socal and IMBL might be better.

IMBL, Nadal's BH doesn't look that natural a shot to me, at times he seems to be kind of grappling with it, maybe that's why I rated it only a 7.

HM Murdoch wrote:Superb article, HB, loved it.

I agree with all the points but I think there is a significant caveat on the mental strength category.

Novak has produced some amazing tennis when the chips are down. He has been excellent at digging himself out of a hole.

I've felt this year though that he hasn't been great under what I can only call "standard pressure". By that I mean things such as being 6-5 down and serving to stay in the set or consolidating a mini break in a tie break. The kind of pressure isn't last chance saloon, just normal pressure as a game progresses.

It's this problem that has forced him into situations that require great tennis to pull back from the brink. Against most players, he has pulled it off. Against the top 4, it has cost him.

Yeah. Or in other words he could do better and not getting into as many situations which require powers of recovery and mental strength. After all, mental strength isn't the only explanation for match point saving, there is also some chance. I bet the next time Murray or Tsonga has 4-5 MPs it will be a different outcome. He can't keep doing this forever. Some of the time someone will hit an ace or get a bit of luck, if nothing else.

Great article HB and a good read, a sterling effort

In terms of shots, we generalise.
For BH it needs to be broken down in topspin and slice...DTL and CC.
For FH it needs to consider DTL, CC, off-FH and running FH.
For either shot, returning off either wing, passing shot and mid-court clean up is important as well.

Murray has a much better slice than Djokovic, as does Nadal or Federer. Djokovic has the best DTL BH, Federer has the best DTL FH. Nadal has the best CC and off-FH, plus probably best running and mid-court too.
Djokovic has best BH return, Federer probably best FH return. Nadal is even both sides but not as good as the others on either.

I suspect the scores are very close in total...with nuances on the various shots above. I think Nadal has the best FH on balance, Djokovic best BH. But there re other variables too...serve, volley, drop shot, etc.

Nadal`s FH on clay might be the greatest non-serve shot in tennis history Its literally like a punch to the gut, repeatedly until you can no longer keep it at bay, and concede the point. I think with every player at their best, Nadal has pretty much the best weapon with his forehand. Djoko's backhand is a pretty good stroke, best on tour, but the ungainly way he hit his slices at USO indicate Fundemental problems, or at least aesthetic ones. All in all Djoko's best weapon, like all the greats in most sprts which require running for möre than 9.63s, lies between his ears.

True. Mental strength is key.

I think Nadal's forehand is the most effective shot in tennis on clay but not on grass judging by his last Wimbledon final (maybe because he can't afford bounces to be anything less than really "true" given the margin for error with high topspin perhaps?) and not on a fast hardcourt because his strength comes to the fore when he can really set himself on the forehand and wind it up (perfect for clay), not when he has to react quickly to low balls fizzing past him.

Hm. Just noticed. Is there some clever targeting with the adverts. Just looking at this article and the other one linked on mental strength and the adverts coming up at the top on this site were something about the importance of mental strength and then one about "state of mind" for one of the armed forces. Maybe it's a coincidence..or not...?

Henman Bill wrote:Hm. Just noticed. Is there some clever targeting with the adverts. Just looking at this article and the other one linked on mental strength and the adverts coming up at the top on this site were something about the importance of mental strength and then one about "state of mind" for one of the armed forces. Maybe it's a coincidence..or not...?

yes the adverts keep on doing that...

Someone sees adverts?

My mind blanks them out. All of them, on TV too. Anyone marketing to me wastes their money, at least I hope they do.

Henman Bill wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Well of course Novak's bh isn't going to be as devastating as Fed's forehand in attack but that isn't because of a lack of quality with the shot it is the nature of the backhand. On tour Novak hits about as many winners with his backhand as anyone and it breaks down hardly ever. The role of the backhand in tennis is generally that of being rock solid and counterpunching with it, as such you can't compare Novak's backhand in terms of winner creation with other peoples forehands, if that was the case no backhand would ever be highly rated. That is like rating Novak a 7/10 on his return because he doesn't hit as many winners with it as other players do with their serve. No one returns off that wing and defends his backhand corner as well as Djoko probably ever. If Nadal's forehand and fed's forehand are 9/10, Novak and Andy's backhands are 9/10. I agree with your scoring criteria, I just don't think you can hold a backhand up to the same standards of winner production as a forehand.

OK, I accept there is some truth in that. Although there are some players like Gasquet, and maybe Warwinka, that can rip off BH winners from the baseline that are a bit more beautiful and glorious. I guess it's implicit in my rating system that the average forehand is more effective than the average forehand, so typically a forehand would score higher, so my rankings are absolute or relative to the average of any shot, rather than having a rating relative to that particular shot. In other words in my ranking a player with a 6/10 forehand and a 6/10 backhand might have a worse than average forehand but a better than average backhand. Hope that makes sense.

Fair enough henman bill don't get me wrong there is much in your article I agree with but it is hard to have a discussion on what you agree on it is more fun to try to sift through the differences. Out of curiosity, without weighting the shots based on importance what would you score the 4 guys on forehand and backhand on a 100 point scale. To me and I have said this before I think Novak is the most complete baseliner we have ever seen on tour. That is when you look at forehand, backhand, and defense combined.

lydian wrote:Great article HB and a good read, a sterling effort

In terms of shots, we generalise.
For BH it needs to be broken down in topspin and slice...DTL and CC.
For FH it needs to consider DTL, CC, off-FH and running FH.
For either shot, returning off either wing, passing shot and mid-court clean up is important as well.

Murray has a much better slice than Djokovic, as does Nadal or Federer. Djokovic has the best DTL BH, Federer has the best DTL FH. Nadal has the best CC and off-FH, plus probably best running and mid-court too.
Djokovic has best BH return, Federer probably best FH return. Nadal is even both sides but not as good as the others on either.

I suspect the scores are very close in total...with nuances on the various shots above. I think Nadal has the best FH on balance, Djokovic best BH. But there re other variables too...serve, volley, drop shot, etc.

Interesting points lydian. In terms of whose forehand is better Rafa or Fed's I always see it as a function of the surface really. On a 100 point system I rate Rafa's forehand 98 or 99 on clay, by far the highest rating I would give to any of the players shots on one particular surface. On clay I would want to hit with Rafa's forehand, but on hardcourt, indoors, or grass I think fed's is better. To me the best forehand ever bar none. Yes it can go off the rails at times but that is because he asks so much of that shot so often and it for the most delivers.

I think Murray has an exceptional cross court forehand and inside out, but the down the line FH for me is no as consistent or lethal. By far his favorite forehand is cross court, he really hits it extremely well.

kingraf wrote:Nadal`s FH on clay might be the greatest non-serve shot in tennis history Its literally like a punch to the gut, repeatedly until you can no longer keep it at bay, and concede the point. I think with every player at their best, Nadal has pretty much the best weapon with his forehand. Djoko's backhand is a pretty good stroke, best on tour, but the ungainly way he hit his slices at USO indicate Fundemental problems, or at least aesthetic ones. All in all Djoko's best weapon, like all the greats in most sprts which require running for möre than 9.63s, lies between his ears.

Well I think you are being a bit harsh on Novak's slice it has traditionally been his weakness and to judge it in a windstorm against the master of the chips and dinks in murray is not an accurate sample. I agree of the top 4 guys his slice is the weakest but it has become much better and he actually I think hit it very well against Murray at shanghai on a court that took slice well he didn't lose out really against Murray when both of them decide to go with the knife on the backhand side. He drew a few forehand errors off of murray with his slice. Also his block back slice floated return and his slice lob from defensive position is just ridiculously good. When gets it working it almost seems like he remote controls those floaters onto the line. I do agree with you though on Nadal's FH on clay that lethal fizz and spin he gets on the ball must be murderous on his opponents rebounding off that clay. Yet, Nadal's forehand on hardcourt in my mind is not nearly as strong.

Just wonder if Djoko will have much left for a late-season assault which would see him top for a long time in 2013.
He's played a lot of matches since the USO and will probably get the year-end number one without necessarily having to do that much. Will he, for example, decide to skip Paris, especially as London follows straight away.
Normally, Fed would probably have missed Paris too but will almost certainly play as defending champion this year.

Interesting point. I was thinking yesterday that the Shanghai result, with a Djokovic win and a Federer semi final loss, was completely the wrong one for the Paris tournament. Instead of being pivotal, and perhaps decisive to the year end battle, it now becomes more anecdotal. Mind you, Djokovic could mathematically secure the title there and the tournament could get to present the trophy, so debatable actually, depends how you look at it.

Federer might be wondering what is the point in going to Paris to battle for no 1 when he will likely lose the ranking even if he plays. Incidentally, if he doesn't play Paris (or any other additional tournament) the race is conceded with mathematical certainty.

Djokovic might be thinking I can skip Paris and get the y/e 1 anyway. So a poor Shanghai result for the Paris tournament director. I imagine s/he was praying for Federer to win the tournament.

Although it does depend on what Federer does at Basle. A title win or at least a final could make things a little more interesting, cutting the deficit from 2155 today to 1655 with a tournament win.

And then if the deficit were 1655 Djokovic couldn't afford to skip Paris incase Federer takes the full 1000 which would mean he only takes a 655 lead to London, meaning he would need to reach the final without losing a group stage match to ensure staying top.

It's not quite over yet. I think they should both go.

bogbrush wrote:Someone sees adverts?

My mind blanks them out. All of them, on TV too. Anyone marketing to me wastes their money, at least I hope they do.

To be fair I've been on this site for ages and only just noticed, I think we largely think alike.

Turning the volume up on adverts also doesn't work with me, since it causes me to get annoyed and turn the volume right down until the adverts are over.

Djokovic isnt playing the week of Basel I believe so should have 2 weeks off now before Paris/WTF.
Federer and Murray have the harder runs...a week off then Basel > Paris > WTF without breaks.

http://live-tennis.eu/playersSchedule

IMBL's ratings
Nadal 17.5
Djokovic 17
Federer 16.5
Murray 16.5

Socal's ratings
Djokovic 183
Naal 180
Murray 178
Federer 177

Both of you have your favourite player top, funny that!

Alright, let me have a go as per Socal request

I think logically Federer has the best serve and good volleys, and in rallies is marginally the weakest, so therefore he could be the lowest for groundstrokes. On the other hand, maybe the groundstrokes are asessing the ability. Maybe physical condition and mental strength, and the way they effect the ground strokes as well as the rest of the game, is separate and additional. So maybe Federer's groundstrokes don't have to be the lowest.

Federer FH 90 BN 72
Nadal FH 92 BH 73
Djokovic FH 82 BH 83
Murray FH 76 BH 81

Not sure there's more value in trying to do it to the nearest 1, anyway that's the best I can do. Remember what I said about rating the shots absolutely, so the average backhand score should be lower than the forehand.

lydian wrote:Great article HB and a good read, a sterling effort

In terms of shots, we generalise.
For BH it needs to be broken down in topspin and slice...DTL and CC.
For FH it needs to consider DTL, CC, off-FH and running FH.
For either shot, returning off either wing, passing shot and mid-court clean up is important as well.

Murray has a much better slice than Djokovic, as does Nadal or Federer. Djokovic has the best DTL BH, Federer has the best DTL FH. Nadal has the best CC and off-FH, plus probably best running and mid-court too.
Djokovic has best BH return, Federer probably best FH return. Nadal is even both sides but not as good as the others on either.

I suspect the scores are very close in total...with nuances on the various shots above. I think Nadal has the best FH on balance, Djokovic best BH. But there re other variables too...serve, volley, drop shot, etc.

Well you segment something as much or as little as you want at the end of the day. Although the difference between a forehand and a backhand is an absolute and clear distinction. The difference between down the line and cross court is a little more subtle. There is no absolute point where a DTL becomes a body shot. Anyway, I lack the knowledge to assess things at such a detailed level.