Who's has better natural ability out of Djokovic and Murray ?

First topic message reminder :

Djokovic has achieved more than Murray in his career, but does he have better natural ability ?


Discuss

Well could one really say federer and murrats good improv doesn't come from practice? If they didn't train at all could they still pull off the pleasing shots?  All the flashy stuff is still a product of hard work just as much as defensive work is. Tennis isn't really a game of flashy hitting, it's a game about consistency as well and affinity for that is just as much "natural ability" as the rest

There is an element in that yes, but Federer's game and style doesn't come across as totally robotic as such and enforced. It is quite a complete game he has.

Take golf. Their big winners as such as Nicklaus/Woods/Player/Palmer. Not known for 'natural ability' look at Seve and that is a game that can never be replicated. He had a shot for every situation. Not seen a golfer since who can do things he could.

Look at darts. Most of the players think Adrian Lewis is the most natural thrower of a dart they have ever seen. Yet it's Taylor with all the titles.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Look at darts. Most of the players think Adrian Lewis is the most natural thrower of a dart they have ever seen. Yet it's Taylor with all the titles.

How, in the scope of throwing a dart, can one discern who is natural and who is not?

Genuine question.

HM Murdoch wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Look at darts. Most of the players think Adrian Lewis is the most natural thrower of a dart they have ever seen. Yet it's Taylor with all the titles.

How, in the scope of throwing a dart, can one discern who is natural and who is not?

Genuine question.

Sid Waddell probably explained it better years ago when he said there were those dart players who's follow the dart in e.g the player aims for the lie of the first dart, Taylor for example with the stacker dart if he throws above the dart which misses the treble below. Oddly enough if the dart goes above the treble he can never find the treble. Something Sid always said was a weakness. Then he said their were "air" throwers. Those who aim for the treble bed, respective of the first dart being in or not. Sid always said Van Barneveld was the best "air" thrower he ever saw and some pro's shared the same view.

That was said before Lewis's titles success and since some pro's have changed their view.

We all know they practice and practice and Taylor set the benchmark, I do implore you to watch a Taylor match and look out for when he goes above the T20 bed with the first dart because more times than not he switches to T19, whereas players like Barneveld and Lewis will still find the T20 if they go above it with the first dart.

In terms of 'natural' ability, Lowe for me set the bar with the story that before he broke into darts he went to a pub when someone challenged him to a game of darts. With his first 3 darts he ever threw he hit a 140! And he never looked back!

Thanks, LK.

The world of darts is not one I'm familiar with.

I think the part where we think differently is that a robotic style of play must be one born out of an unnaturally talented player just practising constantly.
Federers style is no doubt stylish, thats part great talent and ability, but also part heavy, heavy practice. It just soo happens to me that when he put the work in his "ability type " if you like lent himself to perfect that sort of style, with heavy forehand whip and "snappy" like shots.

Nadal, similarly to Murray Novak and the other big players are all similarly able, but their ability is in different areas of tennis. Nadals is to generate godly topspin, Murrays is probably to do with slicing, and Novak is particularly good at keeping control of his shots on the stretch.

I think what I want to say is that theyre all similarly talented, but in different areas, its just that talent in some areas comes across as a more robotic style, but that still takes huge, and just as much, ability.

It's only really Sid Waddell who explained in detail the mechanics of the dart throw. My Mum played darts for years around the counties with her sister and it's only through Thursday nights I did grow a fondness of darts.

Sometimes though with the natural ability argument in tennis, there is a small degree in each player for me in the sense when they change racquet. Think about the different weight, string and racquet head size. That's a lot of change to adjust to a tour which has no gaps for proper practice. So in a sense you can practice to a point it becomes natural. Back to darts, take Peter Wright 2014 PDC World Championship Finalist. He changed his darts mid-competition a day before his Quarter Final match IIRC and still won the match! The commentators were in disbelief!

With the darting analogy, what that suggests is that Taylor is particularly good at switching his aim to different trebles on the fly, but hes not as good at hitting a blocked treble bed (apologies if this goes over peoples heads).

I dont personally believe there's a "natural" throw of a dart. There are players who look like theyre throwing it more freely, RVB and Lowes throws are very smooth for example. Then again look up a guy called Jockey Wilson, and he had the weirdest most forced looking throw ever, sometimes they didnt even come out of the same side of the hand, but theres no doubt he had huge darting ability. His ability just wasnt in a smooth throwing action.

I also think people "typecast" players way too readily.

Do we think that Murray or Novak can only play a consistent defensive game, and not attcking with great verve and improv? Of course they can

Does Fed only ever play fluidly and imrpov all the time? and cant get down and grind it out with tough defensive play? Of course not, hes one of the games better grinders.

You think Nadal cant play with great improv? Of course he can, and has done so.

A lot of the time, their tactical approach to matches can make it look like theyre not talented at something, its often they just dont employ it.

It's not a case typecasting players, just reflecting their styles and abilities. I find people easily lump one player to another to enhance their status.

In terms of natural dart players. I have seen a few. People who could literally just hit the red bit without a hint of practice or warm up and muller people.

Wilson had a strange throw, but Shayne Burgess and Tom Kirby both had very unorthodox throwing actions

temporary21 wrote:I also think people "typecast" players way too readily.

Thankfully this has retreated massively over the last few years - I barely see anybody do this now. The emergence of players at the top aside from Fedal (who created black/white narratives) has really helped diversify things a bit and add new styles.

I think everyone realises that all of the top players are very complete in the way that they play, and that the margins are actually very small. They all practice like fury, and have immense natural feel.

I miss this Murray.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTnjCZr35NI

That rally at 2:35. Oh yes.

I think most of the Murray fans miss the Murray that had the cunning of a fox.

legendkillarV2 wrote:I think most of the Murray fans miss the Murray that had the cunning of a fox.

Of course we do.

But lest we forget it was also one always coming up short at slams.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I think most of the Murray fans miss the Murray that had the cunning of a fox.

Of course we do.

But lest we forget it was also one always coming up short at slams.

Granted.

But isn't that just an illustration of what the baseline game has become.

Varied court speeds could certainly reward varied styles.

LuvSports! wrote:I miss this Murray.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTnjCZr35NI

That's the first time I've seen that since 2007 and I'm rather stunned. I must admit, I'd forgotten how expansive his game used to be.

You can tell he needs a little more physically, but only a little. The biggest surprise to me was how much pop there was on his ground strokes. He was still skinny back then but he hit the ball just fine.

Rafa outlasting people even at 20.

Who has the better serve? Djokovic or Murray?

Who has the better return shot? Djokovic or Murray?

Who has the better backhand? Djokovic or Murray?

Who has the better forehand? Djokovic or Murray?

Who has the better volley? Djokovic or Murray?

I think when Murray is on form on serve he can take the game away from players more than djoko can with his more consistent serve that has less pop on it.

Djoko, Djoko, Djoko, Murray.

hawkeye wrote:Who has the better serve? Djokovic or Murray?

Who has the better return shot? Djokovic or Murray?

Who has the better backhand? Djokovic or Murray?

Who has the better forehand? Djokovic or Murray?

Who has the better volley? Djokovic or Murray?

I'd say that the serve oddly despite Murray having a bigger serve in terms of mph is clearly in Novak's favor. Djokovic has a much better second serve, one of the best in the business. Last year he was #3 in ATP in second serve points won and Murray was 30th. Also in terms of aces at one time Murray was more likely to ace you. But last season they finished 14th and 16th respectively in aces and Djokovic actually had a higher rate of aces per match. Djokovic 6.2 aces per match to Murray's 6.0. This is indicative of Djokovic being better at disguise, variety, and precision on his first serve while lacking the big miles per hour count.

Return I would say is pretty even a tossup. Backhand I would also say is a toss up. Forehand Novak's is better and volleys Murray is better. But the FH and serve being both better for Novak is a bigger advantage than Murray's superior touch and volleys. Murray can hit the forehand very big but he has a problem in terms of errors when he goes for it he often hits himself out of a match with a plethora of forehand errors. Novak is more reliable and can go down the line more often and safer than Andy.

I agree with Socal on this.

Murray clearly the better volleyer and I'd say Novak is comfortably better on the forehand.

Andy's serve is very good when it's 'on' but Novak's is a more reliable tool. Novak's second serve is much better.

Both have excellent backhands and returns but I'd say Novak shades both because I think he does a little more with both.

socal1976 wrote:But the FH and serve being both better for Novak is a bigger advantage than Murray's superior touch and volleys.

This is a very good point.

And the gap between the two closed right up when Lendl got Murray hitting his forehand better.

For all the talk about mentality, the difference in the forehand is perhaps the key difference between the two. If Andy is less effective or less confident on the most important shot in the game, that's bound to have an effect.

HM Murdoch wrote:

socal1976 wrote:But the FH and serve being both better for Novak is a bigger advantage than Murray's superior touch and volleys.

This is a very good point.

And the gap between the two closed right up when Lendl got Murray hitting his forehand better.

For all the talk about mentality, the difference in the forehand is perhaps the key difference between the two. If Andy is less effective or less confident on the most important shot in the game, that's bound to have an effect.

Quite frankly the forehand and serve in the modern game dictate so much of who is or is not going to be successful on tour. For all the talk of fitness, touch, or variety its that 1-2 punch in tennis that plays such a big role in deciding the outcome.

Completely agree with both of you, Novak benefits more from his superior qualities than Murray does his. They're both very rounded across the board though, Murray's second serve aside. The serve has always been the most important shot and remains so.

socal1976 wrote:But last season they finished 14th and 16th respectively in aces and Djokovic actually had a higher rate of aces per match. Djokovic 6.2 aces per match to Murray's 6.0. This is indicative of Djokovic being better at disguise, variety, and precision on his first serve while lacking the big miles per hour count.

I'm flabbergasted by this, particularly Nole - were 13 people really ahead of him, even with all the matches he played and won? His service is so good that I can't even imagine 10 players above him, even including the outliers like Karlovic and Isner. Murray much the same.