Putting Things In Perspective (Indian Wells And Monte Carlo)

First topic message reminder :

It's always sad when a winning streak comes to an end. Nadal couldn't add to his 8 consecutive titles at Monte Carlo and Djokovic wins the first battle on clay this season. This was of course an important win for Djokovic but those writing Nadal off because of this one loss are perhaps getting a little ahead of themselves and forgetting about Indian Wells.

Djokovic won Monte Carlo (His first Masters title this year) beating Monaco, Nieminem, Fognini and Nadal in the last 4 rounds

Nadal won Indian Wells beating Gulbis, Federer, Berdych and Del Potro in the last 4 rounds.

They are one a piece in terms of Masters Titles. Nadal with a hard court title and a clay court final. Djokovic with a clay court title. It could be argued that Nadals draw at IW was a bit more tricky than Djokovics draw at Monte Carlo (apart from the final. Ha ha!). They both have one 500 title too. Djokovic has Dubai on Hard and Nadal has Acapulco on clay.

So since Nadals return they both are close. Both have a mixture of Hard and Clay titles.

The game moves on socal, of course...all the players sharpen their games, etc. But its the further slowing of surfaces that has created the need for huge stamina gains...this is where we see all the top players having to improve. And Djokovic has improved more than any of them.

I'm kind of stuck though...you say recent Djokovic is much better than Djoko08, you also say recent Nadal is much better than Nadal07/08. In relative terms what gives then? Is Nadal still better than Djokovic given Nadal on form was clearly beating Djokovic in 2008 on clay? Or if that's not the case, are you merely saying that Djokovic has therefore improved more technically than Nadal since then? In which case that's odd because it's Nadal who has won all surface slams since RG 2008 not Djokovic.

I think the biggest difference gains aren't technical but physical. Djokovic has improved out of sight in that area to make him more consistent. He's always had the game, just not the run of results before. Additionally, as BB says he's also now got much older opponents in Federer and Nadal to get the better of - they cant all stay prime forever. Murray isn't on the same tier so I don't count him in this, plus where's all the other challengers? Its still essentially the top 4 slugging it out and within that we have the Nadal/Djokovic 13 vs 08 comparison. You think Djokovic is far better technically, I think physically...you think Nadal is far better too. I disagree, Nadal 08-10 was his peak...doesn't mean he cant play at that level still from time to time but he wont do it again across the course of a year.

I think if people are arguing that the Nadal of 08' had some tough opposition and came through it all in better shape than now, then I agree

I still think that the 2010 version was better - as illustrated by his three rivals all making major decisions about how to get better

Such was Rafa's form, that he deserves great respect for driving the standards up so we got that great 18 month spell from January 11' to June 12' - when all four played their best Tennis often at the same time , culmulating in the very good Wimbledon final

It's fair comment to say now that the standard has slipped. It's unlikely that Roger can raise his game once again and Rafa is not as good as he was. It might only be a 1% drop in both, but it's enough to for the standard to fall slightly.

lydian wrote:The game moves on socal, of course...all the players sharpen their games, etc. But its the further slowing of surfaces that has created the need for huge stamina gains...this is where we see all the top players having to improve. And Djokovic has improved more than any of them.

I'm kind of stuck though...you say recent Djokovic is much better than Djoko08, you also say recent Nadal is much better than Nadal07/08. In relative terms what gives then? Is Nadal still better than Djokovic given Nadal on form was clearly beating Djokovic in 2008 on clay? Or if that's not the case, are you merely saying that Djokovic has therefore improved more technically than Nadal since then? In which case that's odd because it's Nadal who has won all surface slams since RG 2008 not Djokovic.

I think the biggest difference gains aren't technical but physical. Djokovic has improved out of sight in that area to make him more consistent. He's always had the game, just not the run of results before. Additionally, as BB says he's also now got much older opponents in Federer and Nadal to get the better of - they cant all stay prime forever. Murray isn't on the same tier so I don't count him in this, plus where's all the other challengers? Its still essentially the top 4 slugging it out and within that we have the Nadal/Djokovic 13 vs 08 comparison. You think Djokovic is far better technically, I think physically...you think Nadal is far better too. I disagree, Nadal 08-10 was his peak...doesn't mean he cant play at that level still from time to time but he wont do it again across the course of a year.

Djoko is better now than in 2008. Simply because he's more consistent. Now that probably is a physical thing - so 'better' might be the wrong word

I fail to see how anyone can think Rafa is better than 2010 or 2008 - simply because we hardly seen anything of him (i.e. no slams) since his comeback

It seems that it takes a massive drop off before it becomes common knowledge that a player has fallen away. It's only now that Federer is playing like a veteran that he's seen as past his best, yet in reality this process has been happening for a number of years. He masked it by adapting his game but he reached his very best level a good 5/6 years ago; ever since then it's been about maximising results despite handicaps. It's still been good - they don't just collapse overnight - and there are times it all comes back together, just less and less frequently.

Nadal will be the same, and in perhaps a year suddenly we'll be hearing how Rafa is 'obviously' managing his game to reduced circumstances, forgetting that some called it a while back.

banbrotam wrote:


Djoko is better now than in 2008. Simply because he's more consistent. Now that probably is a physical thing - so 'better' might be the wrong word

I fail to see how anyone can think Rafa is better than 2010 or 2008 - simply because we hardly seen anything of him (i.e. no slams) since his comeback

If Djokovic is so consistent why could he not even make a final of the two hard court masters in IW and Miami? They are played on his best surface. Nadal won the one Masters he played on hard court and got to the final of the 1st Masters on Clay. Since his comeback and despite not yet being at his best Nadal has been the more consistent.

hawkeye wrote:If Djokovic is so consistent why could he not even make a final of the two hard court masters in IW and Miami? They are played on his best surface. Nadal won the one Masters he played on hard court and got to the final of the 1st Masters on Clay. Since his comeback and despite not yet being at his best Nadal has been the more consistent.

If Djokovic is NOT consistent, care to explain how he has amassed 12,900 ranking points?

Or how he scored more points in both 2011 and 2012 than Nadal did in his stellar 2010?

This is desperate stuff, Hawkeye, it really is.

HM Murdoch wrote:If Djokovic is NOT consistent, care to explain how he has amassed 12,900 ranking points?

Or how he scored more points in both 2011 and 2012 than Nadal did in his stellar 2010?

I'm sure HE will have a logical explanation

lydian wrote:The game moves on socal, of course...all the players sharpen their games, etc. But its the further slowing of surfaces that has created the need for huge stamina gains...this is where we see all the top players having to improve. And Djokovic has improved more than any of them.

I'm kind of stuck though...you say recent Djokovic is much better than Djoko08, you also say recent Nadal is much better than Nadal07/08. In relative terms what gives then? Is Nadal still better than Djokovic given Nadal on form was clearly beating Djokovic in 2008 on clay? Or if that's not the case, are you merely saying that Djokovic has therefore improved more technically than Nadal since then? In which case that's odd because it's Nadal who has won all surface slams since RG 2008 not Djokovic.

I think the biggest difference gains aren't technical but physical. Djokovic has improved out of sight in that area to make him more consistent. He's always had the game, just not the run of results before. Additionally, as BB says he's also now got much older opponents in Federer and Nadal to get the better of - they cant all stay prime forever. Murray isn't on the same tier so I don't count him in this, plus where's all the other challengers? Its still essentially the top 4 slugging it out and within that we have the Nadal/Djokovic 13 vs 08 comparison. You think Djokovic is far better technically, I think physically...you think Nadal is far better too. I disagree, Nadal 08-10 was his peak...doesn't mean he cant play at that level still from time to time but he wont do it again across the course of a year.

In answer to your question Nadal matured earlier and Novak battled both a disastrous service change in 09 and 10 and serious respiratory and allergy issues. In recent years I can't think of single player who has improved technically more than djoko and that is principally why he is in the position he currently is at. Nadal improved as well but Novak improved more. The argument wasn't about 8-2010 Nadal, the point I made was about comparing Nadal in 07/08 so a subtle shift to include Nadal's best year when that isn't what we were talking about is simply moving the goal posts. What I stated quite unequivocally in my argument is that Nadal of recent years is a better player than the player he was in 07/08.

I provide evidence in a marked improvement in Nadal's serve and 10-12 miles per hour on his serve is spun off as irrelevant or actually by some to a negative in his game. I bring up technical improvements in Djoko's slice, volleys, and weight on his forehand and you acknowledge it but instead of saying he improved as a ball striker you say he "sharpened his game" and that he isn't a different player than he was in O8, just better physically. Again I don't know where to go with this because it seems that I am arguing against fast held preconceived notions. I mean when 10 miles an hour on a first serve is deemed irrelevant or a negative I don't know what I can to dissuade those that hold these kind of illogical notions. And somehow the idea that you either improve physically or technically and that they are somehow mutually exclusive is one of the main problems I see in your analysis. You acknowledge these technical improvements, and just say they aren't significant. What happened to fine margins at the top of the game that you often talk about Lydian?

Frankly, it seems that we have reached an impasse because none of these arguments make sense to me. Nadal has played in 4 straight finals, won at indian wells, and just last year won the French open. Now all of sudden Novak has no competition I love it. Between RG 2011 and RG of 2012 Nadal played in 5 straight slam finals, I guess this clearly shows how degraded he is from 2008 in some people's books. I just remember watching him beat poor Ferrer senseless at Acapulco but now all of sudden he loses to Novak and Novak's success is deemed as resulting from weaker competition.

Djokovic went from an asthmatic teenager, highly talented with great shots to what we see today. Apparently, Novak must lack the basic aptitude for tennis because he is at his physical peak, has trained like a Spartan, brought in the best coaches and he is no better a ball striker than he was at age 19. He must be even more talentless than you guys paint him to be. Or this is just another shallow knock on today's game and big upping of the Federer period, I go for the latter. And if that is the case then you can't be persuaded by anything I say. When 10 miles an hour on a first serve is deemed a negative or irrelevant, when Novak's volleying goes from club level to pretty good and this is deemed irrelevant as well. Or when he changes his forehand to get more spin and consistency and this also is deemed to be irrelevant and the party line is that Nadal is worse than 08 and that Novak is no better than 08 except physically, well then I guess we have to just agree to disagree.

Yes, attributing Novak's improvement to getting fitter is a huge (and surprising for some) simplification.

How many times has he come back from the brink of defeat? He's saved match and set points left, right and centre. And overwhelmingly these were not long, grinding points. They were usually well executed two- and three-shot combinations.

This composure doesn't come from fitness. It comes from mental toughness and good technique in execution.

Is it really being suggested that the only improvement in a 20 year old breaking into the game and a 25 year old, multi-slam winning number 1 is fitness?

Has anyone said Djokovic hasn't improved? I don't think so.

However you're in the small minority in thinking Nadal is anywhere near '08. He just isn't, and hasn't been or some time. Neither has Federer, as has now become obvious to anyone but was clear to some of us for a few years.

The three together never met at their peaks.

bogbrush wrote:The three together never met at their peaks.

This is about right.

Although I'd argue that 2011 saw Nadal and Djokovic overlap. Nadal had a three slam year in 2010 and made loads of finals in 2011. If Djokovic hadn't emerged in 2011, that may well have ended up being Rafa's best year of results.

HM Murdoch wrote:Yes, attributing Novak's improvement to getting fitter is a huge (and surprising for some) simplification.

How many times has he come back from the brink of defeat? He's saved match and set points left, right and centre. And overwhelmingly these were not long, grinding points. They were usually well executed two- and three-shot combinations.

This composure doesn't come from fitness. It comes from mental toughness and good technique in execution.

Is it really being suggested that the only improvement in a 20 year old breaking into the game and a 25 year old, multi-slam winning number 1 is fitness?

Exactly, Murdoch we hear that the margins at the top of the game are small, yet marked improvements in Novak's forehand, volleys, and slice backhand in comparison to 08 are deemed to be inconsequential or minor. It is frankly part of an agenda that we have seen online to denigrate the ball striking of today's players and the game and to put the onus on fitness alone. We are to believe that the talented world #1 after 6 years on tour going from 20 to 25 has basically stagnated as a ball striker, in a period of time that most other players in the modern game improve.

HM Murdoch wrote:

bogbrush wrote:The three together never met at their peaks.

This is about right.

Although I'd argue that 2011 saw Nadal and Djokovic overlap. Nadal had a three slam year in 2010 and made loads of finals in 2011. If Djokovic hadn't emerged in 2011, that may well have ended up being Rafa's best year of results.

By the way Murdoch, as soon as Nadal started to lose to djokovic all of sudden we hear that Nadal degraded vis a vis 08 to recent years. From RG in 2011 till RG 2012 Nadal played in the finals of 5 grandslams and lost 3 of those slams to one guy in close matches. Apparently, 5 straight grandslam finals shows how degraded Nadal was from his 07/08 years. In 2011, and even in 2012 prior to his injury Nadal even including defeats to djokovic had one of his best periods for winning against top ten players in terms of percentage. Even today he is coming off of injury he has been to the final of every tournament he has entered in. Novak brought Nadal back to earth in 2011, the rest of the tour basically rolled over for him in that period. Apparently, no one had informed the rest of the tour that Nadal was passed it. This is more rewriting of history to slag today's game and today's players because frankly they don't like the style of play.

Rafa's 2011.

1 slam, 1 Masters, 2 slam runner ups and 4 Masters runner ups.

A great season in itself. But remove the guy who beat him in all 6 events where he was the runner up and we'd likely be looking at a monstrous season. Maybe his best ever.

HM Murdoch wrote:Rafa's 2011.

1 slam, 1 Masters, 2 slam runner ups and 4 Masters runner ups.

A great season in itself. But remove the guy who beat him in all 6 events where he was the runner up and we'd likely be looking at a monstrous season. Maybe his best ever.

Exactly, it is almost like Novak gets dinged for beating up on Nadal and deflating Nadal's standing in the eyes of fans. If Djokovic was beating him 7 times in a row, all in finals then he couldn't be all that good. But the funny thing is I doubt you will find a year in Nadal's career were he dominated the rest of the tour like 2011, he lost to one guy and that was basically it, and many of them were close matches and all were in finals.

bogbrush wrote:Has anyone said Djokovic hasn't improved? I don't think so.

However you're in the small minority in thinking Nadal is anywhere near '08. He just isn't, and hasn't been or some time. Neither has Federer, as has now become obvious to anyone but was clear to some of us for a few years.

The three together never met at their peaks.

Yes, Lydian and yourself claim that all his improvement comes from fitness and that as a ball striker he is basically no better in a material way than what he was in 2008, no one says he hasn't improved the issue at question is whether he is a better ball striker. This is what gets frustrating you move the goal post again. Do you believe that Novak djokovic, shot wise is equal or poorer to where he was in 08? Fitness wise we all agree, maturity and confidence wise we all agree, do you concede that he is better at hitting a tennis ball now then in 08, that is the question that Lydian and yourself seem to be answering in the negative although virtually every other commentator, myself included, I have watched a couple hundred of his matches over the years greatly disagree.

I think the Nadal that played the French and Wimbledon 08 was the highest level he has ever played, however I think he became an all round better player in 2010, 11. The 07/08 Nadal was still posting incredible results but was still vulnerable to a defeat to a Fernando Gonzalez, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga.

In my opinion he does not lose those matches in his 2010/11 and early 2012 form. I know Tsonga was unreal that day but I do honestly believe Rafa of 24/25 would have somehow worked something out. However, the best tennis he ever played was that 8 month period when the clay court season of 08 started all the way to the 2009 Australian Open.

CAS wrote:I think the Nadal that played the French and Wimbledon 08 was the highest level he has ever played, however I think he became an all round better player in 2010, 11. The 07/08 Nadal was still posting incredible results but was still vulnerable to a defeat to a Fernando Gonzalez, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga.

In my opinion he does not lose those matches in his 2010/11 and early 2012 form. I know Tsonga was unreal that day but I do honestly believe Rafa of 24/25 would have somehow worked something out. However, the best tennis he ever played was that 8 month period when the clay court season of 08 started all the way to the 2009 Australian Open.

I agree with this CAS, I think Nadal was much better as an all around player and on all the various surfaces later in his career. He did however play incredibly well obviously in 08 and 09 the results back that up as well. I think it is fair to say that Nadal developed early, did suffer many injuries, but at the same time he has also grown a great deal from the early years. 08 and 09 he was pretty close to a finished product but he was much more susceptible to a hot power player on a quick court. In terms of his consistency and variety he is just a better all around player. If you actually look past the fact that one player beat him in 7 straight finals you will see that his results, winning percentage etc. were in line with or superior to his career averages. I am not saying that 2013 Nadal is the best Nadal we have ever seen that would be 2010 in my estimate, but again he hasn't played in a while and the early indications are really good for a player less than two months removed from a lengthy layoff. If his legs hold up there is no reason that he can't win more slams, but of course that is the big IF that has always surrounded Nadal since his earliest days.

lydian wrote:LK, actually you bring up a really good observation and point. I think since he changed to RPM Blast from Duralast in 2010 he's been losing length consistently more over time. OK, 2010 was a great season but since then he's not been able to find the length like he used to do unless he's absolutely on top of his game. The RPM string creates so much spin that its easier than before to end up dropping the ball short if the horizontal follow through gets reduced - which it does when you get tight, etc.

I think he needs to look at his string set-up, maybe take the tension off a little, make it slacker like Federer has done. Remember Fed's FH is not massively different to Nadal's, he also hits with huge FH topspin RPM but uses much slacker strings 46-50 vs Nadal's std 55lbs tension. That's 10% lower ... meaning a lot more power and therefore length from the same amount of energy put into horizontal striking. Nadal rarely hits long...so adding some more length through tension could restore what he lost moving to RPM Blast.

Indeed I think he needs to look at the string set up and his tension. In his early days he had the Hurricane blast and that enabled him to hit flatter. Now many many will say well if he hit flatter in his early days why did it not materialise into success at the US Open or Australian Open, well simply put Nadal wasn't a good mover on the HC IMO. Also the power hitters got more purchase out of the surface too. It was only when the AO re-laid the courts in 08 I think that it played much slower.

In Djokovic now we have the best mover across all surfaces at this moment in time. I think that right now is key to his success. He has a real good opportunity to complete the Calendar Grand Slam this year. He is light years ahead of the field.

Socal, my point is that physical gains are the area Novak has achieved MOST since 2008. Not technical. Nadal didn't need physical gains and has increased his HC prowess (serve, better lateral HC footwork) but the discussion was about 2013 vs 2008 clay form and Nadal is no better on clay, not better at all.

I don't get this vulnerability to Gonzalez/Tsonga stuff. Re: Gonzalez they were 1-1 on HC in 2007 and 2008, Nadal beating Gonzalez in straight sets at Bo5 at the Olympics 2008. Likewise with Tsonga, they played on HC 4 times between USO07 and Rotterdam 09, that's only 18 months...Nadal was 3:1 up.

By late 2008 Nadal's HC development was already much in place given he won AO09 just 5 months later. I still believe his massive clay/grass/Canada/Olympics run in 2008 cost him dear at USO otherwise we might well be saying 2008 was a great HC year also. It's a myth he made massive gains later, he didn't...his main development was in 2008 when he won at Queens, Wimbledon, Canada Masters, Olympics HC and deep on many other HC events - that year was his huge step forward in terms of serving ability and his movement into wide areas on HC where before he was still stuck in clay mentality. Its this ability from 2008 he carried forward into AO09 and beyond.

So the point is that he didnt develop much in 2010 besides gaining a few more mph on serve and footwork gains (which helps ground strokes be more effective) - please tell me where else he improved after 2008 because I haven't seen it then. He's always vulnerable to a power guy on a quick court, always has been, always will be - they cant be the very best at everything. Ok, I'm not saying he's going backwards (yet) but he's been blighted by injury since early 2009 (Miami) and its killed his season to season continuity. I agree he can win more slams but he's a long way off that right now.

So.....my point is that Djokovic faced a sub-standard Nadal at MC13, nowhere near the clay-Nadal of 2008 who was at the very peak of his explosive powers in my opinion. Likewise I'm not convinced Djokovic is miles and miles technically better than 2008...a bit yes, but his stamina has changed out of sight so that alone changes his game radically with confidence to go for shots and outlast opponents. We'll have to just disagree there.

Nadal could maybe get back to clay peak 2006-2008 occasionally but I'm not so sure having taken so long out of the game. He looks slower, less sharp, less fit, less focused, more brittle but yes he's still one hell of a player on clay nonetheless. I suspect had Nadal come back to a HC or grass season then he wouldn't have got to 5 straight finals.

socal1976 wrote:Yes Djokovic in 2008 would get crushed by today's djokovic. Not only is today's djokovic fitter and more confident he is a much better player in general. The forehand is better and heavier, which bears directly on how he plays on clay. His slice backhands and volleys are much better as well. You made the comparison of Nadal's victory over 2008 Djoko on clay, I can't think of another serious commentator who views Djokovic of today less favorably to Novak of 08. He is better technically and of course fitness wise.

If only other guys like Delpo and Tsonga would try to improve their games as much as Djok..

bogbrush wrote:I doubt anyone is suggesting he's not better. He is, though, playing less impressive opponents. That's pretty much indisputable.

Do you mean that the decrease in standard of Fed and Nadal since 2008 more than offsets the improvement in Murray and that the #5 player is unlikely to be better now than he was in 2008?

There'd be much less to talk about in tennis if it were possible to measure standards objectively!

What needs improving about Delpo's and Tsonga's games?

lydian wrote:Socal, my point is that physical gains are the area Novak has achieved MOST since 2008. Not technical. Nadal didn't need physical gains and has increased his HC prowess (serve, better lateral HC footwork) but the discussion was about 2013 vs 2008 clay form and Nadal is no better on clay, not better at all.

I don't get this vulnerability to Gonzalez/Tsonga stuff. Re: Gonzalez they were 1-1 on HC in 2007 and 2008, Nadal beating Gonzalez in straight sets at Bo5 at the Olympics 2008. Likewise with Tsonga, they played on HC 4 times between USO07 and Rotterdam 09, that's only 18 months...Nadal was 3:1 up.

By late 2008 Nadal's HC development was already much in place given he won AO09 just 5 months later. I still believe his massive clay/grass/Canada/Olympics run in 2008 cost him dear at USO otherwise we might well be saying 2008 was a great HC year also. It's a myth he made massive gains later, he didn't...his main development was in 2008 when he won at Queens, Wimbledon, Canada Masters, Olympics HC and deep on many other HC events - that year was his huge step forward in terms of serving ability and his movement into wide areas on HC where before he was still stuck in clay mentality. Its this ability from 2008 he carried forward into AO09 and beyond.

So the point is that he didnt develop much in 2010 besides gaining a few more mph on serve and footwork gains (which helps ground strokes be more effective) - please tell me where else he improved after 2008 because I haven't seen it then. He's always vulnerable to a power guy on a quick court, always has been, always will be - they cant be the very best at everything. Ok, I'm not saying he's going backwards (yet) but he's been blighted by injury since early 2009 (Miami) and its killed his season to season continuity. I agree he can win more slams but he's a long way off that right now.

So.....my point is that Djokovic faced a sub-standard Nadal at MC13, nowhere near the clay-Nadal of 2008 who was at the very peak of his explosive powers in my opinion. Likewise I'm not convinced Djokovic is miles and miles technically better than 2008...a bit yes, but his stamina has changed out of sight so that alone changes his game radically with confidence to go for shots and outlast opponents. We'll have to just disagree there.

Nadal could maybe get back to clay peak 2006-2008 occasionally but I'm not so sure having taken so long out of the game. He looks slower, less sharp, less fit, less focused, more brittle but yes he's still one hell of a player on clay nonetheless. I suspect had Nadal come back to a HC or grass season then he wouldn't have got to 5 straight finals.

Again, Nadal is difficult to gauge because he seems to continually be either coming back from injury or rehabbing, I am sure it eventually does take a toll. I agree with you that Nadal can and will play better than the match he played at MC. And we are in agreement on the fact that he can and probably will win more slams in the future. Now lets get to the one specific point that I really disagree with you on. In regards to Djokovic I would like to think that I have a fair bit of knowledge about his game and career. I think this area is where I have the most issue with you regarding his improvement.

First off in your analysis you don't take into account the fact that Djokovic suffered from terrible serving issues in 09 and 10 as a result of changing his motion. I know that you want to focus on 08 Djokovic, but if the question is why is djokovic so improved and the current #1, well that story can not be told without looking at the serving issues of 09 and 10. I think without the serve issues we would have seen djoko 2.0 a year possibly 2 years earlier. Djokovic lost way more matches in this period of time due to a badly malfunctioning serve than withdrawals or breathing issues. In 2010 he was 23rd in hold percentage, he is currently ranked 6th hold percentage. If you want to compare Djokovic's serve in 2011-2013 to his serve 09,10 etc. you will find a vast improvement. So if you want to compare Djokovic's improvement and the causes of his improvement the improvement of his serve from in 2011-13 vis a vis 09/10 is actually the biggest factor, even more so than fitness. Novak in 08 would not get tired and winded or MTO in every match, but through his serving yips period every single service game was a battle. Looking at what in djokovic's game has improved the most it isn't his fitness it is his serve.

I believe and the numbers also bear this out, that the biggest change in Djokovic's results came when you compare 09-10 till today. Why is Djokovic number 1 today and a six time slam champion, fitness is a big part of it but the improved serve vis a vis 09 and 10 is by far the biggest part of it. It was horrific in 09. Now I agree in 08 he had a very strong serve, but right now he has the best second serve by the numbers on tour. Now if you want to compare 08 djoko today technically and to look for the area where he has most improved as #1 compared to previous years it is the improvement of the serve from 09/10 till 2011-2013. Mix that in with a heavier more consistent forehand, better slice backhand, better volleys and you see that the technical improvements in his case over the course of his career are at least as important as his fitness, in my own opinion his fitness ranks second behind his resurgent serve, a distant second.

I understand you want to compare djoko 08 to Djoko 13, but no comparison gives the full picture without taking into consideration the serving yips of 09/10 and his struggle to get his serve back. To the point where he is in the top 6 this year for hold percentage and #1 I believe in second serve points won. Comparing it 09/10 and it is a massive improvement. For me Djokovic with 09's serve would struggle to finish #4 in today's game. What has separated Djoko the multislam winner from the also ran of 2010-09 period, well if I had to pick the most important factor without question it is the serve. Fitness would be second, and a distant second, he wasn't MTOing or panting in every match, but every other game he would have to hold his serve. Fitness wise remember his issues were sporadic, he played Nadal 4 hours of blockbuster tennis in Madrid of 09.

In short, while djoko today compared to 08 djoko is a better volleyer, has a better slice backhand, a heavier more consistent forehand. Compare the current number 1 to djoko of 09/10 the biggest change is his serving improvement. Without question the biggest reason he finished #1 and had 3 slams in 2011 was the serve. No way he puts up the numbers he did with serve of 09 and 2010.

lydian wrote:What needs improving about Delpo's and Tsonga's games?

A, Plan B?

Djokovic's biggest change was his serve, it was terrible for a couple of years.

Look at his motion in this match https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpJE2JzMLLo

compared to this one 4 years later https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNn-n8MWf3A

It looked so messy back in 2009

It was a totally different action with a higher toss as well back in 09, really the djokovic serve is the bellweather of his game and the upward trajectory of his results. He cans martin and the new motion prior to wimbeldon of 2010, second half of 2010 semi at wimby, final at USO, Davis cup, and then Australia at the start of 2011. Also we see a small pick up in serving numbers between 09 and 2010. By Davis cup of 2010 he served lights out in the final and just demolished his opponents in those two ties.

Again the fitness is certainly a big help I don't doubt that at all that it helped to change his results as well. But Djokovic struggling with large numbers double faults and a low hold percentage could run like a jack rabbit all day long and he would finish as world #1. I think people who never studied his game closely or were hardcore tennis fans got wrapped up in the glutten free and the clearing up of his allergies and asthma. Djoko sort of became the free golobal poster boy for the glutten free craze, people who did not understand tennis or follow his game closely starting to chalk all his success up to his new diet and the affect it had on his allergies. The serve improvement between 09-2011 seemed to get completely lost in the shuffle and fitness alone was credited for his success. But a lot of other technical ball striking factors went in to it over the long haul.

Again compare djoko to 08 and he is better FH wise, in volleying, and with the slice. Compare djoko at distant third in 2010 to djoko today and you see that serve and fitness were added to the package.

Socal did you know Novak actually had an operation to cure his breathing problems? I was unaware of this until recently, he had a deviated septum. He couldn't have got so much fitter in the space of a few months from Roland Garros 2010 to the Davis Cup, I think the fitness was there a while before but his game was not right. Everyone says it was that which improved most, while it obviously did, a switch didn't just go off at the start of 2011, I think it was his ability to trust he could hold serve, that must be a huge burden knowing you have to battle every service game.

The French Open he lost from 2 sets up to Jurgen Melzer, and was poor against Berdych at Wimbledon, the match that he impressed me most in was his SF match against Federer at Toronoto 2010, it was one of my favourite matches of the year, he was down 1-6 0-2 15-30 and he came storming back and almost won the match, I think it was that match that helped him beat Roger at the US Open soon after as there were similarities in that match late on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd2JhMC7dVk for anyone who hasn't seen it, its well worth a watch. During this match you can see Novak's serve is starting to click back

CAS wrote:Socal did you know Novak actually had an operation to cure his breathing problems? I was unaware of this until recently, he had a deviated septum. He couldn't have got so much fitter in the space of a few months from Roland Garros 2010 to the Davis Cup, I think the fitness was there a while before but his game was not right. Everyone says it was that which improved most, while it obviously did, a switch didn't just go off at the start of 2011, I think it was his ability to trust he could hold serve, that must be a huge burden knowing you have to battle every service game.

The French Open he lost from 2 sets up to Jurgen Melzer, and was poor against Berdych at Wimbledon, the match that he impressed me most in was his SF match against Federer at Toronoto 2010, it was one of my favourite matches of the year, he was down 1-6 0-2 15-30 and he came storming back and almost won the match, I think it was that match that helped him beat Roger at the US Open soon after as there were similarities in that match late on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd2JhMC7dVk for anyone who hasn't seen it, its well worth a watch. During this match you can see Novak's serve is starting to click back

CAS I am well aware of the deviated septum surgery but that didn't end up curing the breathing and respiratory issues he had. Novak has a well documented history of breathing and respiratory issues which seemed to clear up with the gluten free. That is part of the reason I took such a dislike to Roddick and Federer for their public criticisms of his mtos and withdrawals and how they almost took glee in calling him a faker and soft. It was clear to me as someone who regularly watched his matches that he had some sort of medical issue because one match he could play extremely well for 3 or 4 hours and then a little bit later in the season he would look winded early in the first set.

Interesting post CAS and I agree fully, he changed his motion back right before wimby and right after the melzer loss, then it took him awhile to get the timing back on the old serve but the serve kept getting gradually better and better till Davis Cup of 2010, if you ever get a chance go back and watch some of the two ties in that Davis Cup, all of sudden Novak was serving lights out in the final. He hadn't served like that really in two years. What this shows is that you have a player who is dynamic and continually working on the totality of the package, fitness and technical shotmaking. What else is interesting is that Djokovic reads a lot of self-help and motivational books and does a lot of yoga. I think in the future we will see a lot of players try to imitate that sort of flexibility in the future.

The guy has taken big risk with his forehand and serve to get better, the serve changes were a disaster and maybe cost him two years of development that he will never get back, the forehand change eventually worked out really well. The idea that you can reduce the majority of his improvement to his fitness improvement and deem him the same in terms of ball striking (for the most part) to the player he was in 08 or 09 or 2010 I think is not accurate.

Socal all you keep repeating is his 2009/10 serve. He changed it right at end of 09 then reverted back to his 2007/8 technique around mid 2010, from there he just had to rediscover his groove again which he did towards end of 2010 plus he'd been working on his conditioning/diet as well as know. It all started to come together (again) from DC final in late 2010.

Look at this vid highlight of Djokovic playing Fed at AO08: https://www.youtube.com/watch?=1&v=FNlyrcsUDBw

His serve was always fantastic, his FH was always fantastic. BH too, he was already a complete player in 2008. Infact I'd argue his serve in particular was better then than now. The problem is he forgot the old adage of if it isn't broke don't fix it. Martin got him dropping his arm and taking the elbow bend out which was just plain mad, he must have been paid by Federer, lol. His FH was explosive but then suffered a little when he changed racquets from Wilson to HEAD...again, too much tinkering going on in 09/10.

His shots in 2008 were already top drawer...so again, I say he hasn't improved technically, he's just gone back to how he played before but added in stamina and some better court tactics in playing Nadal.

Figure this Socal....in 2008 he served 493 aces from 81 matches, in his stellar 2011 he served 343 aces in 75 matches. That's 150 fewer aces in 6 matches less - his serve was far better in 2008! Infact, in 2007 he served 518 aces from 87 matches! Likewise I see no improvement technically on the FH side - other than he's got back to where he used to be with it when he played with Wilson.

For me all these so-called technical improvements are a myth...it just appears so because of his recovery back from all the 09/10 tinkering he did. He was a fool to start tinkering and yes it probably did cost him big for a year or so. But that video link above from Jan 08 clearly shows he was hitting the ball every bit as good as now, infact I'd say he was more explosive back then and I enjoyed watching him play more back then before he resorted to his current drill-like DTL tactical play (effective as it is notwithstanding). The problem was that Federer and Nadal were also at the height of their powers on HC and clay respectively in 07/08.

I fail to really see why all of the debates here. To me it is obvious.

In the last couple of years Djokovic has improved physically, mentally and elements of his game and in the last 18 months Murray has done the same. At the same time Federer and Nadal (for differing reasons) have headed in the other direction.

As BB alights to I don't think they have ever met with each at their peak. Nadal fans can argue that Rafa's defeats are because he is (currently) not the player he was and likewise Djoko fans would be right to argue that the Djoko of say 2008 was not him at his peak also.

All the top players can do is fill their boots with as many slams as they can and then when their career ends we judge from there.

I never stated he didn't have a good serve in 08 and 07, but he lost the serve much earlier in 09 than you indicate. Additionally, the forehand was more prone to breaking down. He did not have the same cross court short angled forehand that he currently has mainly because of the added weight. His forehand wasn't a radical change it was not like he overhauled it as much as fine tuned it and added more variety. In my analysis I make clear that his serve in 08 and 07 was a very good serve, I don't ever state that he couldn't serve in 08. The FH became heavier and more consistent, and in particular he really added a great short cross court forehand to open up the court.

Additionally, he was not as good a volleyer and didn't have as good a slice backhand. I would say that while he is no llodra or stepanek in this regards he is significantly better.

If you believe that Djokovic peaked as a ball striker in 08 at the age of 20 then you are free to it. But I think I have detailed here quite clearly how he improved in numerous areas and provided the numbers showing it. I don't doubt his fitness, confidence, a maturity played a huge role as well. The technical improvement myth as you have dubbed it, has actually been commented on by numerous paid tennis experts and legends of the past as I have stated I can't think of many people I have read who share your opinion that Djokovic peaked in 08 as a ball striker. Is he just as comfortable in the forecourt now as he was in 07/08? Is his slice the same? I think the answer is no.

I think it defies logic to assume that djokovic is the same quality at hitting a tennis ball as in 08, the results say otherwise, and my own viewing on the subject says otherwise. Did he have a good forehand in 08, hell yeah but it doesn't mean that he didn't make real technical refinements to it that bore good results. As he did in numerous other areas which you deem immaterial.
Was Nadal a degraded product in 2011? Interesting why exactly did Nadal kick the living tar out of pretty much the rest of the tour? Now I suppose this will be chalked up to the weakness of the competition.

CaledonianCraig wrote:I fail to really see why all of the debates here. To me it is obvious.

In the last couple of years Djokovic has improved physically, mentally and elements of his game and in the last 18 months Murray has done the same. At the same time Federer and Nadal (for differing reasons) have headed in the other direction.

As BB alights to I don't think they have ever met with each at their peak. Nadal fans can argue that Rafa's defeats are because he is (currently) not the player he was and likewise Djoko fans would be right to argue that the Djoko of say 2008 was not him at his peak also.

All the top players can do is fill their boots with as many slams as they can and then when their career ends we judge from there.

I agree wholeheartedly, I have never argued about the stamina or mental improvement and obviously Federer isn't the same player as 07 Federer either. But to chalk up virtually all of djokovic's improvement to fedal degradation and stamina is not factual. As a close observer of Murray do you think Murray was just as good at hitting a tennis ball in 07/08 as he is today? I know I don't believe that about Andy or Djokovic, they are in the position they are in because of the improvements they have made in numerous areas. Sure Federer got older, is there anyone who doubts that, I don't was he not supposed to? But I don't buy the Nadal degradation especially in 2011, between RG of 2011 till RG of 2012 he made 5 straight slam finals on three different surfaces. I guess that to will be chalked up to how weak the rest of the tour became. The same people who argued with me vociferously that there are no weak eras, or that eras are incomparable, and that weak era conversations are evil incarnate; are now the same people basically saying that djokovic is winning so much because of weak competition and stamina.

I don't think that Djokovic changed in the way of technique. Yes he did tinker with his serve when he had Martin on board, but I think Djokovic addressed this with more pace on his first serve.

In terms of where he is now, yes he got fitter but also the change in diet was massive and also the DC victory in 2010. Given that his gluten free diet then stopped him appearing sluggish in long matches his conditioning with a confident mindset changed everything.

It all begun with his domination of Nadal in 2011. I had said for a long time that many of Nadal's opponents did not punish the short balls he played. That ties in with the points lydian and myself made about how the string change hampered Nadal's length. Djokovic punished Nadal's short length and this evident in the Miami and Rome clashes they had that year.

Now we move forward. 2012. Yes it wasn't a vintage year for Djokovic, but for me Federer and Murray became much more consistent and Djokovic's levels dipped. He no longer went after short balls and was guilty of being passive. This is clearly something he has rectified in 2013 and hence why the signs of a 2011 domination of the tour seems evident again. He is showing aggressive play when on top in matches and isn't so quick to resort to soaking up the pressure and playing the percentage energy sapping tennis.

Djokovic has always been a class player and for me I think his attitude more than anything prevent consistent success after his AO 2008 victory. 2010 was massive turning point for him in his career and he is certainly making up for lost time.

From a Murray view point his forehand has improved immeasurably and his serve has got better but biggest strides for me has come in the mental side of the game.

The points being raised here about players at their peak or past it just strengthens why it is impossible to judge certain things in tennis. At the end of the day just wait and see what pans out before judging is what I say.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Now we move forward. 2012. Yes it wasn't a vintage year for Djokovic, but for me Federer and Murray became much more consistent and Djokovic's levels dipped. He no longer went after short balls and was guilty of being passive. This is clearly something he has rectified in 2013 and hence why the signs of a 2011 domination of the tour seems evident again.

Excellent assessment.

He definitely wasn't at his best mentally in 2012. I don't think you can pinpoint one reason but I suspect it was a mixture of off-court issues, the pressure of defending all the points, the pressure of the Novak slam and, in Federer and Murray, having two rivals who were playing better than the previous year.

Time after time in his interviews, he would lament that he was being too passive, that he was doing nothing with his shot after the serve but it seemed to take ages before he addressed this.

As with most sportsman, where his mind goes, his body follows. That's why I was so encouraged in his comments before playing Rafa at MC, that he was not coming just to play his best, he was coming to win. If he's tooled up mentally, he's tough to beat.

As a side note, I think a lot of Novak's improvement is down to pyschological work he has done. He really puts high stock on positive emotions and playing in the moment. Although it sometimes sounds a bit vague and hippyish when described, it's clearly had a huge benefit.

Good points LK, agreed. Yes also agree CC, with Murray there have been more issues to sort out. He's changed from W to SW later on so he's had to iron that out and is still prone to topping the ball though. His 2nd is getting better but it's never going to be a strength.

Socal, I'm not suggesting Djokovic was at peak in 2008 - clearly he's improved strength, fitness, tactics, confidence, etc. But you are not listening to me - his actual technique on
a) serve is no better, arguably not as good now as 2007/8 actually
b) his FH is no different in technique...his racquet is different, also what you're talking about is tactics, i.e. use of FH
c) slice is no different technically...just grooved a little more perhaps under pressure
d) volleys are a little better but his technique is no different...and his volleying in 2008 wasn't bad actually

You're confusing base technique with application of technique and tactics. Djokovic was a very complete player in 2008 - he was a prodigy don't forget, hence why he raced up the rankings almost like Nadal did.

Re: dates, he got Martin on board at the END of 2009 because some glitches had cropped up from a shoulder injury. Martin thought he could change the action (reduce elbow height and some other trophy position aspects) to reduce injury but it never needed changing, just needed the injury to go. Novak then realised it wasnt working and sending him backwards, so started reverting back to his old technique from around Apr/May 2010 but it took 6 months to fully harmonise again. It all seemed to come together around DC Final 2010 and that launched him into 2011.

HM Murdoch wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Now we move forward. 2012. Yes it wasn't a vintage year for Djokovic, but for me Federer and Murray became much more consistent and Djokovic's levels dipped. He no longer went after short balls and was guilty of being passive. This is clearly something he has rectified in 2013 and hence why the signs of a 2011 domination of the tour seems evident again.

Excellent assessment.

He definitely wasn't at his best mentally in 2012. I don't think you can pinpoint one reason but I suspect it was a mixture of off-court issues, the pressure of defending all the points, the pressure of the Novak slam and, in Federer and Murray, having two rivals who were playing better than the previous year.

Time after time in his interviews, he would lament that he was being too passive, that he was doing nothing with his shot after the serve but it seemed to take ages before he addressed this.

As with most sportsman, where his mind goes, his body follows. That's why I was so encouraged in his comments before playing Rafa at MC, that he was not coming just to play his best, he was coming to win. If he's tooled up mentally, he's tough to beat.

As a side note, I think a lot of Novak's improvement is down to pyschological work he has done. He really puts high stock on positive emotions and playing in the moment. Although it sometimes sounds a bit vague and hippyish when described, it's clearly had a huge benefit.

Exactly.

Look at his FO 2012 campaign. He outlasted both Seppi and Tsonga and that was without hitting winners. He just soaked up the pressure and they didn't have the fitness to hit him off the court.

I agree things off court clearly impacted his mindset on court and at times didn't appear to want to be on court sometimes. These are things that can happen in a players lifetime. Who could forget the impact Andy splitting with Kim Sears a few years back and how his form on court dipped. Nadal with his parents divorce, affected his form. Players are human.

Well lydian that seems like you are agreeing that Djoko has improved in all areas (fitness, mentality and parts of his game) so in essence you are agreeing with socal.

Like I say I don't think we have seen peak Nadal playing peak Djoko so we cannot judge who would win. The judgement on who is/was the better player will have to be left to be judged on final career achievements.

If there's such a thing as a "bad win", I think AO12 was one for Novak.

It was a great performance but, ahead of a season full of titles to defend, part of his mind just said "I have to go through that every time?!!".

There were lots of occasions in 2012 where he just didn't seem willing or able to fight a war on court. I really think that AO final fried him a bit!

But that's what a player who is number 1 has to learn to deal with - you become the hunted. (Incidentally, I have a feeling that Nadal prefers being the hunter rather than hunted too. Given a choice, he may prefer to be number 2 rather than number 1).

That, to my mind, is one of the most startling things about Federer. Year after year of the pressure of your opponent being geared up for "the big one" and still managing to get the win.

I've gone way off topic again!

HM Murdoch wrote:

...................................................................................

But that's what a player who is number 1 has to learn to deal with - you become the hunted. (Incidentally, I have a feeling that Nadal prefers being the hunter rather than hunted too. Given a choice, he may prefer to be number 2 rather than number 1).

That, to my mind, is one of the most startling things about Federer. Year after year of the pressure of your opponent being geared up for "the big one" and still managing to get the win.

Good points here HMM, both wrt Nadal as hunter rather than hunted, and also the pressure which was so well handled by Federer in his prime for month after month and year after year.

As you imply, the sheer pressure cooker factor that comes with being Number One is sometimes under-estimated. If Nadal were to end his career in his current position of "only" 7th in the all-time list of total weeks at Number One, I think he would understandably regret the many many weeks he was kept off the top spot by Federer, and now by Djokovic.

No I'm not (agreeing with socal) per se CC. Yes we agree he's a better overall player now - clearly no doubt - but he's not particularly swinging his racquet (which has changed) any differently from 2008 - that's been my assertion from the outset. His actual technique of swinging the racquet has hardly changed at all - I've watched videos of him and studied his technique (for coaching purposes). What has changed is his use of tactics, his application of technique. The huge differences are in his head and in his body (both connected of course).

HMM, it wasn't pressure that caused loss of many #1 weeks for Nadal...his biggest regret is being born with a foot that has caused him so much injury through diverted pressure on his knees. But for that who knows what his full potential was - how many more weeks, how many more slams. Remember he had to miss Wimbledon 2009 as defending champion - then came back to win in 2010. Federer got back to #1 there - so until Djokovic wrested it from Nadal grasp in '11 you could argue he might have had at least another 50 weeks or so but for injury. We'll never know...but that will be his biggest regret I suspect - although of course he cant help having a deformed foot bone. Nonetheless, its a wonder he's achieved what he has playing through pain for all these years now with modified shoes he could barely walk on to start with and caused him to miss AO'06 immediately.

So, I say it the other way - perhaps Federer was the beneficiary of more weeks/slams from Nadal rather than the pressure from Federer the other way round?

Re: Djokovic, surely the biggest transformation was winning that DC final, he's been a mentally different player ever since. Being able to outlast everyone else helps too.

lags72 wrote:If Nadal were to end his career in his current position of "only" 7th in the all-time list of total weeks at Number One, I think he would understandably regret the many many weeks he was kept off the top spot by Federer, and now by Djokovic.

I find this a tough one to call.

I get the impression from what Rafa says that he feels he's achieved way more than he ever expected and is very content with his lot. I also think that psychologically he likes being able to say "I'm not the favourite".

Then I see the player on the court who so desperately wants to win and the person who is so competitive and I think it must niggle him for a player to be higher ranked.

Bit of an enigma is our Rafa!

lydian wrote:HMM, it wasn't pressure that caused loss of many #1 weeks for Nadal...his biggest regret is being born with a foot that has caused him so much injury through diverted pressure on his knees.

Oh, I wasn't suggesting he fell away from the pressure. It's just my impression that Rafa prefers the role of being the challenger taking on the top man, rather than the top man taking on a challenger.

This may because he relentlessly trots out in interviews the idea that he is not the favourite. I used to think that was just media-friendly guff but, having read his book and seen how Toni shaped his mental approach, I do believe that there may be some genuine sentiment behind it.

lydian wrote:Re: Djokovic, surely the biggest transformation was winning that DC final, he's been a mentally different player ever since. Being able to outlast everyone else helps too.

That, and the role he played in it, was a big life event for him, for sure. The way he deals with pressure "in the moment" has improved immeasurably too.

'The Shot' has been discussed to death but Novak always said that part of the whole sequence was that he was trying to feed of the energy of the crowd and get a positive feeling. It wasn't "what might happen?", it was "how do I deal with this?". That's a huge development he has made.

I think it's a deliberate pattern he employs too, rather than a big personality change. That would also explain why, at non-critical times he can act like he's dying and everything is against him but, when it's truly make or break, he can be so cool under pressure.

HM Murdoch wrote:

lags72 wrote:If Nadal were to end his career in his current position of "only" 7th in the all-time list of total weeks at Number One, I think he would understandably regret the many many weeks he was kept off the top spot by Federer, and now by Djokovic.

I find this a tough one to call.

I get the impression from what Rafa says that he feels he's achieved way more than he ever expected and is very content with his lot. I also think that psychologically he likes being able to say "I'm not the favourite".

Then I see the player on the court who so desperately wants to win and the person who is so competitive and I think it must niggle him for a player to be higher ranked.

Bit of an enigma is our Rafa!

I agree with that - my perception of the three of them suggests to me that Federer and Djoko adore the mantle of being #1 along with all the stuff off the Court that it brings and, accordingly, it has fitted them both very well. Nadal, however, would seem to me to have been delighted to have made his imprint on the #1 lists chiefly because of what it says about his achievements on Court, but that's about the limit of it and his real interest lies more in day-to-day scrapping for wins in the tournaments. If he cares for numbers it will be tournaments won that he looks at - and having seen the progression on his racquet cover with the different coloured stars representing each slam win I believe that he is particularly interested in those numbers.

If that's true, it also makes sense from an objective logical point of view; since most of the points are available for HC tournaments which cause his body the most harm, it doesn't really pay Nadal to get hugely concerned about his overall points tally. That's something he'll have known about ever since his first foot problems, very early in his career. He certainly tries very hard to win big HC tournaments, but his season is usually focussed on a few of them and the difference between his stronger and poorer periods of HC performances across each season has always been pretty big.

barrystar wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I doubt anyone is suggesting he's not better. He is, though, playing less impressive opponents. That's pretty much indisputable.

Do you mean that the decrease in standard of Fed and Nadal since 2008 more than offsets the improvement in Murray and that the #5 player is unlikely to be better now than he was in 2008?

There'd be much less to talk about in tennis if it were possible to measure standards objectively!

Yeah, I'd say the drop off in Federer alone more than covers the improvement in Murray. After all, Murrays gone from very good to very very good, but Federers gone from Supernatural to very very good. Top Fed changes the whole feel of an era. Top Murray just means there's a really good player around.

bogbrush wrote: Top Fed changes the whole feel of an era. Top Murray just means there's a really good player around.

Security! We've got a live one!

What I want from each and every one of you is a hard-target search of every gas station, residence, warehouse, farmhouse, henhouse, outhouse and doghouse in that area. Checkpoints go up at fifteen miles. Your fugitive's name is bogbrush. Go get him.

I'm usually in the doghouse, if that's any help.

Meanwhile, I've shaved my beard off and I'm off in pursuit of the one-armed socal.

HM Murdoch wrote:

bogbrush wrote: Top Fed changes the whole feel of an era. Top Murray just means there's a really good player around.

Security! We've got a live one!

What I want from each and every one of you is a hard-target search of every gas station, residence, warehouse, farmhouse, henhouse, outhouse and doghouse in that area. Checkpoints go up at fifteen miles. Your fugitive's name is bogbrush. Go get him.

I think he meant the Open Era

bogbrush wrote:I'm usually in the doghouse, if that's any help.

Meanwhile, I've shaved my beard off and I'm off in pursuit of the one-armed socal.

Good fugitive reference. LOL! Let me know if you need to be thrown over a waterfall, I am always willing to help.