Nadal, Djokovic And Murray In The Same Category?

Recently I have noticed that the game styles of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray have been grouped together. I do not see the similarity. Federer is the unique one and Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are in the same category? Rubbish! IMO yet another way to down play Nadal's achievements and talk up Federer's. Pfft! I would put both Federer and Nadal in a class of their own. Not only in terms of achievement but because they both play a unique game in terms of style that no one else can emulate.

How should these four players be categorized? What are the similarities and differences between the game styles of these four players?

Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are fantastic defenders who can also attack pretty well.

Federer is a fantastic attacker who can also defend pretty well.

Oh wait ... now I grouped them in the wrong way!

HE, Nole and Murray have more or less modeled their game on Nadal, or we can put it this way Nole, murray and Nadal all modeled their game looking upto a defensive baseliners.

While Murray is very good he is not of Nole's standard, while Nole is better than Murray he is not of Nadal's level, while Nadal is the best of the 3, he is not the greatest which [title] remains with Fed.

But yes the three have more or less similar style.

Simon Bolleli of Italy has a very similar style of Fed, do that mean Fed should be ashamed of himself? , end of the day talent and style doesnt matter what counts is the result.

Game style wise Murray and Djokovic are incredibly similar. Novak probably uses a touch more pace consistently, Murray a touch more variety... But their strengths are very similar. Movement, return, DHBH...

Rafa has a very unique looking game style, but at a high level I agree with prostaff. The three of them are as good as it gets defensively, and very good offensively. Roger is the other way around.

So in that sense, much as it may annoy HE, I think the three of them should be categorised together and Roger alone.

I'd say Nadal and Djokovic are more similar than Murray is to those two.

Interesting Gerry. I'm interested to hear your thinking...

Danny_1982 wrote:Interesting Gerry. I'm interested to hear your thinking...

I think Nadal and Djokovic have the perfect balance between attack and defence. They can defend like hell, but can blaze winners from all over the court.

When they play against each other, it's like a chess match.

Obviously Rafa is a leftie and Novak is a righty, but when they play each other it's like each one is looking into a mirror.

I don't feel Murray is as closely matched. That's just my observation though.

I see Murray and Novak as close to a mirror image. Interesting you see it differently Gerry.

I think this article may be aimed at me, as I mentioned these 3 players in the same comment

If I had to rank these 3 players in terms of talent it would have to go Nadal, then Djokovic, then Murray.
Nadal's Forehand in particular is simply sensational. The revolutions he can generate on the ball... the topspin and angles he can create; it's nearly a joke.
Djokovic of course is talented, just watch his play for the last few years for evidence. Especially his AO semi-final against Fed 2011.

And in my eyes Murray is a SUPERB player, I think possibly one of the most underrated players in the ATP at the moment. His touch is sensational... look at his volleys... classy drop shots... etc. His reflex shots on defence are spectacular. Watch his annihilation of Fed in Shanghai 2010 to see him at his best.

How does a player who is not as talented beat someone else who is more talented 7 times in a row, across different surfaces?

However I think the article is more about the approach to game, strategy and tactics, in which case I'd say Murray and Nadal are fairly similar. Djoko is more adaptable - plays differently according to the opponent.

It Must Be Love

But what are the common factors between the styles of these three players?

I certainly don't see enough to put them in the same category. Nadal I see as unique maybe even more so than Federer (although Federer makes himself unique because he is so much better than everyone else at what he does). Nobody plays like Nadal apart from Nadal.

Certainly not Djokovic who's aggressive baseline game is based on taking the ball early unlike Nadal. And Murray's game is way more defensive than either of the other two (apart from his first serve which is more aggressive but not as reliable) This is because unlike Nadal, Djokovic or even Federer he doesn't have a forehand he can dictate with. Nadal's whole game is based on getting the ball on his forehand because then he is able to take control. Federer and Djokovic also do this a bit as do most players but not to the same extent as Nadal. Murray doesn't have a forehand he can use in this way. But hey that's why he comes up with all his defensive stuff (or variety) and it does make his game different and attractive to some.

JuliusHMarx wrote:How does a player who is not as talented beat someone else who is more talented 7 times in a row, across different surfaces?

However I think the article is more about the approach to game, strategy and tactics, in which case I'd say Murray and Nadal are fairly similar. Djoko is more adaptable - plays differently according to the opponent.

I must have missed Djokovic changing his game. As far as I've seen it he rarely changes anything at all. Of course, there is no need for him to mix it up. If he plays his game well only Federer or Murray have any hope against him. I would agree though that Nadal and Murray both have a safety first mindset, whereas Djokovic will roll the dice. The only one of those three really capable of variety is Murray although sadly we don't get to see it often enough.

hawkeye wrote:It Must Be Love

But what are the common factors between the styles of these three players?

I certainly don't see enough to put them in the same category. Nadal I see as unique maybe even more so than Federer (although Federer makes himself unique because he is so much better than everyone else at what he does). Nobody plays like Nadal apart from Nadal.

Certainly not Djokovic who's aggressive baseline game is based on taking the ball early unlike Nadal. And Murray's game is way more defensive than either of the other two (apart from his first serve which is more aggressive but not as reliable) This is because unlike Nadal, Djokovic or even Federer he doesn't have a forehand he can dictate with. Nadal's whole game is based on getting the ball on his forehand because then he is able to take control. Federer and Djokovic also do this a bit as do most players but not to the same extent as Nadal. Murray doesn't have a forehand he can use in this way. But hey that's why he comes up with all his defensive stuff (or variety) and it does make his game different and attractive to some.

See, it's a bit harsh on Nadal doing him down in this way. You are correct that he does rely on one shot far more than the other three but he does have some other shots which aren't terrible. Some of the touch volleys he plays are excellent and he has a competent slice.

It is an interesting question though. If you took away each player's best shot (and replaced it say with Lleyton Hewitt's) who would be most affected?

Born, does Djoko play the same way against Rafa as he does against Federer. I don't think he does. Rafa and Murray tend to play the same way regardless.

I agree Murray has more potential variety - certainly a few years ago. I guess he figured less variety, more fitness was the way to win these days - and he turned out to be right.

JuliusHMarx wrote:How does a player who is not as talented beat someone else who is more talented 7 times in a row, across different surfaces?

However I think the article is more about the approach to game, strategy and tactics, in which case I'd say Murray and Nadal are fairly similar. Djoko is more adaptable - plays differently according to the opponent.

Ha ha! Nadal and Murray similar. I just don't see it. Forehand? Definitely No. Serve? No. Backhand? No. Movement? Can Murray slide... No. Mental approach? No. The way they train (Court or Gym)? No. Although I agree that they are both tennis players.

Strangely I did see someone play a bit like Nadal. It surprised me as I've seen him play many times before and not seen the similarity. It was of all people Gasquet! In the final at the weekend against Davydenko. Towards the end of the match he was taking control with his forehand, standing at the centre of the court and running Davydenko all over the place. I'de never noticed before but Gasquet even hits his forehand in a very similar way to Nadal. Loopy and with a prolonged backswing. Probably never noticed because every time Gasquet plays I'm totally dazzled by his backhand...

I'd say he plays the same style but the fact his opponent plays differently makes it look a different match. What does he do differently? Murray most definitely does play differently against Fed than against Rafa (or at least he does when he has his head screwed on right and doesn't try and match Rafa for fitness).

I agree with your second point. I'm still hopeful we may at some stage see Murray expand his horizons again to incorporate a lot more net play.

Born Slippy wrote:

hawkeye wrote:It Must Be Love

But what are the common factors between the styles of these three players?

I certainly don't see enough to put them in the same category. Nadal I see as unique maybe even more so than Federer (although Federer makes himself unique because he is so much better than everyone else at what he does). Nobody plays like Nadal apart from Nadal.

Certainly not Djokovic who's aggressive baseline game is based on taking the ball early unlike Nadal. And Murray's game is way more defensive than either of the other two (apart from his first serve which is more aggressive but not as reliable) This is because unlike Nadal, Djokovic or even Federer he doesn't have a forehand he can dictate with. Nadal's whole game is based on getting the ball on his forehand because then he is able to take control. Federer and Djokovic also do this a bit as do most players but not to the same extent as Nadal. Murray doesn't have a forehand he can use in this way. But hey that's why he comes up with all his defensive stuff (or variety) and it does make his game different and attractive to some.

See, it's a bit harsh on Nadal doing him down in this way. You are correct that he does rely on one shot far more than the other three but he does have some other shots which aren't terrible. Some of the touch volleys he plays are excellent and he has a competent slice.

It is an interesting question though. If you took away each player's best shot (and replaced it say with Lleyton Hewitt's) who would be most affected?

Leyton Hewitt? I presume he gets to keep all the best shots.

Hmm, Gasquet wins a match by grafting from 10 ft behind the baseline and wearing down an injured opponent, having been outclassed for two sets. Most people bemoan the fact he still hasn't learnt how to make the most of his talent but applaud his increased fitness. HE sees the new Nadal!

Born Slippy

Now I know that you didn't watch that match. Gasquet is an artist and not a grinder. He does not score highly for physical fitness. Indeed in my recent poll "Who's got the biggest muscles" he scored zero points.

Lol, I saw the match. Gasquet has the shots of an artist but the mind of a grinder. His first movement on nearly every occasion is backwards. He played most points either from the Doha sign or just behind it. You are right though, he doesn't have the physical gifts of Nadal, which is why it is a terrible tactic for him.

Hawkeye, you seem to be playing down Murray's abilities quite a lot.

I'm starting to think you don't like him.

Born Slippy - agree with you about Murray needing to come to the net more. After the big forehand improvements and more proactive approach of last year, his net play is what I'd like to see him do more of this year.

He has such great volleys and I've never really understood his reluctance to use them more.

hawkeye wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:How does a player who is not as talented beat someone else who is more talented 7 times in a row, across different surfaces?

However I think the article is more about the approach to game, strategy and tactics, in which case I'd say Murray and Nadal are fairly similar. Djoko is more adaptable - plays differently according to the opponent.

Ha ha! Nadal and Murray similar. I just don't see it. Forehand? Definitely No. Serve? No. Backhand? No. Movement? Can Murray slide... No. Mental approach? No. The way they train (Court or Gym)? No. Although I agree that they are both tennis players.

Ah, so when I said "strategy and tactics" you thought I said "technique". I need to spell more clearly.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

hawkeye wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:How does a player who is not as talented beat someone else who is more talented 7 times in a row, across different surfaces?

However I think the article is more about the approach to game, strategy and tactics, in which case I'd say Murray and Nadal are fairly similar. Djoko is more adaptable - plays differently according to the opponent.

Ha ha! Nadal and Murray similar. I just don't see it. Forehand? Definitely No. Serve? No. Backhand? No. Movement? Can Murray slide... No. Mental approach? No. The way they train (Court or Gym)? No. Although I agree that they are both tennis players.

Ah, so when I said "strategy and tactics" you thought I said "technique". I need to spell more clearly.

It was her article in fairness, so she presumably has some idea what point was being made. I'd take a guess it was Nadal good, Murray bad.

Interestingly, I'd say movement (both very strong with a solid sprinter's technique), mental approach and the way they train are all fairly similar but HE may find that a bit upsetting.

Ha ha! Of course I'm not upset if anyone thinks Murray plays tennis like Nadal. I bet he and many others wish he could.

Julius. What tactics and statagy have you seen from these players that binds them together?

I agree that they're similar, but also think that Nadal is more 'unique' than either Djokovic or Murray. Djokovic seems very one-dimensional, but you can't really blame him when that dimension is as good as it is. Murray's variety seems to have been stamped out in accordance with his rise into the very elite echelons of the game - maybe there's a connection? I doubt we'll see him coming into the net more, simply because it's just not as viable a tactic as it used to be. You either need a phenomenal approach or excellent hands, and preferably both - even then you can still get passed on a frequent basis with the technology in the hands of the players these days, not to mention court speed. I hope I'm wrong though, I'd like to see Murray get into the net more often.

Incidentally, do you think that the other three would be as closely grouped if Federer wasn't around? As the other member of the top four, perhaps comparisons with Federer's game are the reason that these guys are bundled together as they are in the eyes of some.

HE I command you to hug my nuts!

LK

hawkeye wrote:Ha ha! Of course I'm not upset if anyone thinks Murray plays tennis like Nadal. I bet he and many others wish he could.

Julius. What tactics and statagy have you seen from these players that binds them together?

No, you're right, one's an attacking front foot agressive player and the other stays on the baseline and rallies a lot in a classic counter-punching style.
One seeks to shorten points by hitting risky winners, but the other is content to wait for the right opportunity and/or an opponent's mistakes.
One gets to the net frequently while the other rarely volleys unless drawn in, or a clear-cut chance presents itself.

legendkillarV2 wrote:HE I command you to hug my nuts!

Has anyone got a squirrel for lk's nuts? Ouch.

Silver wrote:I agree that they're similar, but also think that Nadal is more 'unique' than either Djokovic or Murray. Djokovic seems very one-dimensional, but you can't really blame him when that dimension is as good as it is. Murray's variety seems to have been stamped out in accordance with his rise into the very elite echelons of the game - maybe there's a connection?

I see Nadal as by some distance the most one dimensional of the three. He really only has one plan - get it on the forehand. Djokovic's run of success against him was largely due to the fact he neutralised Rafa's forehand. Once 'Plan A' was removed from the equation, Rafa didn't really have anywhere to go.

If anything, I think he has regressed with the passing of time. IMBL posted a link of the Miami 2004 highlights v Federer and Rafa's backhand was amazing back then. It is far less potent nowadays and I think that is because of the huge emphasis on his forehand.

Djokovic's game isn't to everyone's taste but he at least has the ability to use either wing dangerously.

I think they are easily categorised together because the core strength of their games percieved by many is their fitness and speed around the court.

Once you strip that element of thinking away, you are left with 3 different players. I don't think Nadal is so one dimensional. Yes his BH has dropped down a few levels, but for me like Murray he has a better BH slice than Djokovic. The spin Nadal generates is still something that all of the top players struggle to contain. Djokovic if anything incorporated more topspin in his game to rally with Nadal. However, Djokovic for me is the flatter hitter out of the 3. Murray does have more variation to his game, though recently has incorporated the topspin rally approach to his game which at the moment is the winning formula.

The only thing unique about Nadal's game is the incredible top spin he generates. Aside from the his game is as 1-D as it gets in modern tennis.

Nadal's game is based on his lethal forehand.
His back-hand is also a very underrated shot- his BH DTL is one of the strongest shots in tennis- but his CC BH is not as good as it was a few earlier days.

Emancipator- considering you think that Nadal 'struggles' in the first week of Wimbledon- despite reaching every single final he's entered between 2006-2011- shows your bias against him.

Amritia, the fact that you think Nadal's DTLBH is one of the strongest shots in tennis shows how little you actually appreciate the sport.

Nadal's inside out FH is by far his strongest shot followed by his cc FH. The dtlbh is virtually non-existant in his armoury. When he plays it it's usually a loopy ball to buy time. Only on the BH CC is he able to consistently flatten out the stroke and hit winners.

the phrase "pot calling the kettle black" comes to mind, we are all biased whether you admit it or not (you obvs won't as you said you consider your self unbiased).

just because he reached those finals does not mean he didn't struggle in the first week of wimbledon.
06 - kendrick 5 setter.
07 - soderling 5 setter (then youzhny 4th round)
08- tough 4 setter vs gulbis (probs his best wimby year nadal was brilliant)
'10 - haase, petzschner 5 setters
'11 - was relatively plain sailing 2bh.

I don't think that is being biased, but most of the time his longer matches occur in the 1st week and not the 2nd week, usually from the quarters onwards he gets on a roll.

Surely, the equal could be said of even Roger Federer could it not. Dig deep enough and you'll find five setters against Falla and other big struggles but at the end of the day we look at the end result and Rafa's end results at Wimbledon are mighty impressive - that can't be denied and the same can be said of Federer.

I've always seen Fed as the aggressor
Rafa and Murray as defensive baseliners
Djoko is pretty strong all-round

Interesting HM and I see what you mean. I guess I approach it from a different perspective, when I think of Nadal's technique - exemplified by the forehand - I see it as unlikely to be taught anywhere in the future or applied to many players. Whereas I reckon Djokovic is the prototype player of the future, very strong all-around and excellent off both wings, a true 'offensive baseliner'. I think that style of play could well become more prevalent in coming years and even dominate the game. Hence, less unique than Nadal. I agree that you can see it either way though

I wonder why Nadal's backhand went off the boil since his earlier years - why did he focus so much on dictating with the forehand? Ironically everyone talks about his game matching up perfectly against Federer's, but perhaps he's guilty of overspecialising in that area and has become susceptible to other players in the process. I miss those cracking winners he used to hit for fun crosscourt, especially when pushed miles off court.

CC

I think it's fair to say that Nadal has had more difficulties in the first week of Wimbledon over the years than the others in the top 3. Whether this is because of (relative) struggles with faster court conditions or that his schedule gives him less court time to transition between clay and grass (given how much he plays on clay, and so the necessity of a rest period after RG rather than playing to win in one of the grass warm-up events) is a point to debate.

In very general terms I think classing Nadal, Djokovic and Murray as similar players is fair - their games are largely based on court coverage and defence with the ability to counter-attack when the opportunity presents itself. There are differences though:
Nadal is most focussed on getting the ball onto one particular shot (his forehand from the backhand side) as a way of getting penetration - it's either a winner or a shot that gets a weak return and allows an easy put-away.
Murray has most variation, and tries to manipulate his opponent more by varying pace, spin and direction. Also is the one of the three who can really damage an opponent on serve.
Djokovic has just become a complete wall, with incredible speed and flexibility. Still has exceptional ability to convert defence into attack off either wing as well.

IMHO:

FH: 1) nadal 2) djoko 3) murray
BH: 1) djoko 2) murray 3) nadal
serve: (toughy) really dunno! - murray has the biggest but least consistent, nadal maybe? djoko? hell im stuck
slice: 1) murray 2) nadal 3) djoko
return 1) djoko 2) murray 3) nadal
overhead: 1) nadal 2) murray 3) djoko
volley: 1) murray 2) nadal 3) djoko
defence: 1) nadal 2) djoko 3) murray
attack: 1) nadal 2) djoko 3) murray
talent: 1) djoko 2) murray 3)nadal

Silver wrote:Interesting HM and I see what you mean. I guess I approach it from a different perspective, when I think of Nadal's technique - exemplified by the forehand - I see it as unlikely to be taught anywhere in the future or applied to many players. Whereas I reckon Djokovic is the prototype player of the future, very strong all-around and excellent off both wings, a true 'offensive baseliner'. I think that style of play could well become more prevalent in coming years and even dominate the game. Hence, less unique than Nadal. I agree that you can see it either way though

I can see where you're coming from. Nadal's style is very idiosyncratic. I don't think his tactics and approach could be executed by anyone who didn't have his strength or particular mindset or, for that matter, was right-handed!

I think the lesson that future players might take from Djokovic is that you can no longer afford to have a 'weaker wing'.

Rafa says in his book that when playing Federer, the plan is always to go after the backhand. When he plays Novak though, he says that there isn't really a weakness to target.

If this poses a conundrum for a player of Rafa's ability, it must be a huge asset to have.

LS

I know you say it's just your opinion, but I'd change a couple of those round -

Serve is interesting. Certainly on his good days, Murray's first serve is more of a weapon than the other two, but he does have more off days and has a ropey 2nd serve. I'd rate Djoko as a bit better than Rafa, but there's not a huge amount in it - both Djoko and Nadal have serves that are 'good enough' rather than great considering the level the rest of their games are.

Overhead, I'd actually rate Murray as the weakest of the three - it's the one area of his forecourt game that really is a weakness. Nadal on the other hand I can't recall missing a smash - OK, not Sampras level (because he doesn't come in on difficult balls), but very solid indeed.

I'd now put Djokovic ahead even of Nadal for defensive skills - his court coverage over the last couple of years has just been phenomenal, and his ability to get a meaningful shot back when in poor position is amazing (in part because he is so flexible).

As for attacking skills, I'd shift Rafa to #3 and agree that Djoko has the edge over Andy. However, I don't think there's a huge difference between any of them. I rate Nadal lowest because he is more dependent on one wing than either of the others.

I'd also add a couple of additional categories:
'Feel' for the ball - Andy quite well ahead of either, I think with Rafa 2nd

Mental toughness - One of Nadal's greatest assets, but again something that Djokovic probably edges him on now (at least through 2011 and most of last year, based on the confidence of having so many wins under his belt). Murray, while improved, still falls a way behind the other two here.

LuvSports! wrote:IMHO:

FH: 1) nadal 2) djoko 3) murray
BH: 1) djoko 2) murray 3) nadal
serve: (toughy) really dunno! - murray has the biggest but least consistent, nadal maybe? djoko? hell im stuck
slice: 1) murray 2) nadal 3) djoko
return 1) djoko 2) murray 3) nadal
overhead: 1) nadal 2) murray 3) djoko
volley: 1) murray 2) nadal 3) djoko
defence: 1) nadal 2) djoko 3) murray
attack: 1) nadal 2) djoko 3) murray
talent: 1) djoko 2) murray 3)nadal

Good post. Although I'm starting to think Murray has the best defence of the three. Perhaps his relative inconsistency compared to the others hides this.

LuvSports! wrote:IMHO:
serve: (toughy) really dunno! - murray has the biggest but least consistent, nadal maybe? djoko? hell im stuck

I think this is biggest difference between the three of them. I'd say Nadal's is the worst. He's proved he can hit big serves (USO10!) but a lot of the time it just looks like a way to get the rally started. His grip, which is so crucial to the rest of his game, must make it hard to hit a really productive serve.

Murray's serve improved so much last year. He's definitely the most powerful of three and seems more consistent now too. I'd say his was the best of the three.

Novak's serve is all about setting up the second shot. When it's on it's very effective but it's also the shot most likely to let him down. I'm still recovering from the double-fault horror shows of the RG and Cincinatti finals!

LuvSports! wrote:IMHO:

FH: 1) nadal 2) djoko 3) murray
BH: 1) djoko 2) murray 3) nadal
serve: (toughy) really dunno! - murray has the biggest but least consistent, nadal maybe? djoko? hell im stuck
slice: 1) murray 2) nadal 3) djoko
return 1) djoko 2) murray 3) nadal
overhead: 1) nadal 2) murray 3) djoko
volley: 1) murray 2) nadal 3) djoko
defence: 1) nadal 2) djoko 3) murray
attack: 1) nadal 2) djoko 3) murray
talent: 1) djoko 2) murray 3)nadal

That's almost exactly how I see it, except I'd put Djoko ahead of Nadal in the attack category.

Also a great breakdown by Dummy Half

Novak's overhead is abysmal. Easily the worst of the three. I've seen him routinely dump so many in the net.

Rafa's is the best of the three by a distance.

But the best BH overhead - Federer by a mile.

Nadal, Djokovic And Murray In The Same Category?

Well none of them had a chance against good old Roger when he was at his best (apart from that clay court bully Rafa that is)

newballs wrote: Nadal, Djokovic And Murray In The Same Category?

Well none of them had a chance against good old Roger when he was at his best (apart from that clay court bully Rafa that is)

newballs. I think you have got a bit confused when making this comment. I will correct it for you. Rafa can beat Roger at his best. Djokovic and Murray didn't have a chance. So that definitely means you put Rafa in a different category to the others.

IMO both Rafa AND Roger are bullies though. They have spent their whole careers "beating" other players.

Nadal's forehand isn't a defensive shot. He may not choose to go for outright winners with it because he doesn't have to. This is because he can take control of the ralley with it. When he has control he can choose to stay in the rally a bit longer and wait until he can go for a higher percentage shot. That's very different from staying in a rally with defense. Played well this technique puts the opponent under increasing pressure and into a more defensive position with each shot. And played well it can end with to me is one of the most impressive shots in tennis. A high percentage (or low risk) winner. Nadal is easily the best player at doing this.