tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Compare that to competition that Rafa faced.
Mental strength: Federer and Djokovic
- Thread starter La_Para
- Start date
Compare that to competition that Rafa faced.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
What do you mean?
The Dark Knight
Legend
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Why do you even feel the need to state that cc0? :???: You're hardly the first person to say something nice about someone without liking him.
Last edited:
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
You are trying to tell me what I can or cannot post now?
I'm simply saying that there's no need to state it when saying something nice about someone you dislike. Who cares whether or not you're a fan of Djokovic?
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
I'm simply saying that there's no need to state it when saying something nice about someone you dislike. Who cares whether or not you're a fan of Djokovic?
Obviously you do. :twisted:
I will state what I want in a post. Thanks for the advice.
S
Sirius Black
Guest
Don't quote yourself to qualify your point. Don't even quote yourself at all.
Actually, yeah, go quote yourself, Affleck.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Obviously you do. :twisted:
I will state what I want in a post. Thanks for the advice.
It's not a prerequisite though. You make out that some anonymous poster on an internet forum will think worse of you if they assume you're a Djokovic fan. No one cares! :?
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
But clearly it bothers you if I state I am not a Djokovic fan. Just because you like attention-seeking players such as Djokovic and Navratilova and I don't, it is not my problem. :twisted:
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
Yet it is rather rare. It really is. At least in this forum.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Lol, it doesn't bother me, I just don't know why you feel the need to state it in the first place. Like I said, no one on here cares who you like. And it's not my problem that you don't like the fact I like attention-seeking players. Deal with it! :twisted:
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
I don't believe you. :twisted:
You don't like the fact that I dislike Djokovic. Yet here I am still defending Djokovic against posters like tennisaddict of all posters who was trying to say that Djokovic was not a rare talent who had the promise of winning slams from a young age. Clearly Djokovic showed tons of promise at a young age.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Couldn't care less who you like or dislike, I just think from now on you don't need to state beforehand that you're not a fan of a player that you're complimenting at the time. Jeez cc0, anyone would think I'm asking for world peace.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Couldn't care less who you like or dislike, I just think from now on you don't need to state beforehand that you're not a fan of a player that you're complimenting at the time. Jeez cc0, anyone would think I'm asking for world peace.
Last edited:
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
What part of my post makes you think I'm a crybaby cc0? :?
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
You're beginning to sound like Chico, buddy. Stop it already.
The Dark Knight
Legend
Feds loss to joker will go down in history as one of the top ten greatest chokes of all time
Fed was up three match points and then blew it big time.
I'm working from memory here but after the return that was heard around the world came a missed forehand and a double fault....that's the way I remember it ......
But the fact is he had match point and after his knees buckled from that return he lost the next 17 out of 21 point .....now that's the factually the biggest choke I have ever seen in my life .
It's one thing to lose a point or two ....it's another to lose the next 17 points from having not one but three match points.
Fed was up three match points and then blew it big time.
I'm working from memory here but after the return that was heard around the world came a missed forehand and a double fault....that's the way I remember it ......
But the fact is he had match point and after his knees buckled from that return he lost the next 17 out of 21 point .....now that's the factually the biggest choke I have ever seen in my life .
It's one thing to lose a point or two ....it's another to lose the next 17 points from having not one but three match points.
The Dark Knight
Legend
Fifth Set Records
You may have watched your favourite player draw on an inner strength to win a match in a fifth set.
Johan Kriek, who leads the FedEx ATP Reliability Index for the best fifth set record since 1973, explained to ATPWorldTour.com three key components of winning these lengthy battles.
“Fitness is a must,” said Kriek, who has a 18-4 (.818) fifth-set record.
“Secondly, if you have a clear picture of why you win or lose a fourth set, you know what to change or not change in the fifth set. I call that “reading skills” of the match.
“Thirdly, a player ought to be willing to go for it when it counts. Sometimes, just one point can change the momentum of a fifth set. After many hours of hard work, it can come down to a split second shot.”
Bjorn Borg is tied second overall at .800 in fifth sets with a 24-6 mark alongside Ross Case at 12-3.
World No. 1 Novak Djokovic and 11-time Grand Slam champion Rafael Nadal lead the current generation of fifth-set ironmen. Both have .750 records: Djokovic at 18-6 and Nadal at 15-5 in fifth sets.
Kriek admits, “Physically fit guys are always able to push themselves much harder than guys that are not.
“At the 1983 US Open, Roscoe Tanner had eight match points on me and I still beat him. It was due to my fitness that I was able to continually pass him even off his huge serves and volleys. Being very fit allowed me to be very accurate on my passing shots.”
It can be mentally beneficial if you serve first in a fifth set. But “serving second can also help you stay focused more,” says Kriek, who learned a lot from Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe.
“They were masters at the ‘calculated’ risk. I was not afraid to risk losing it all. That tactic paid off more than not. Djokovic, today, is extremely good at delivering when the chips are down."
Feds fifth set record is rather average
You may have watched your favourite player draw on an inner strength to win a match in a fifth set.
Johan Kriek, who leads the FedEx ATP Reliability Index for the best fifth set record since 1973, explained to ATPWorldTour.com three key components of winning these lengthy battles.
“Fitness is a must,” said Kriek, who has a 18-4 (.818) fifth-set record.
“Secondly, if you have a clear picture of why you win or lose a fourth set, you know what to change or not change in the fifth set. I call that “reading skills” of the match.
“Thirdly, a player ought to be willing to go for it when it counts. Sometimes, just one point can change the momentum of a fifth set. After many hours of hard work, it can come down to a split second shot.”
Bjorn Borg is tied second overall at .800 in fifth sets with a 24-6 mark alongside Ross Case at 12-3.
World No. 1 Novak Djokovic and 11-time Grand Slam champion Rafael Nadal lead the current generation of fifth-set ironmen. Both have .750 records: Djokovic at 18-6 and Nadal at 15-5 in fifth sets.
Kriek admits, “Physically fit guys are always able to push themselves much harder than guys that are not.
“At the 1983 US Open, Roscoe Tanner had eight match points on me and I still beat him. It was due to my fitness that I was able to continually pass him even off his huge serves and volleys. Being very fit allowed me to be very accurate on my passing shots.”
It can be mentally beneficial if you serve first in a fifth set. But “serving second can also help you stay focused more,” says Kriek, who learned a lot from Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe.
“They were masters at the ‘calculated’ risk. I was not afraid to risk losing it all. That tactic paid off more than not. Djokovic, today, is extremely good at delivering when the chips are down."
Feds fifth set record is rather average
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
The first thing I learned on this forum, about 6 months ago, is that any time you criticize a player, for any reason, even a very legitimate one, you will immediately be labeled as a hater, or prejudiced.Couldn't care less who you like or dislike, I just think from now on you don't need to state beforehand that you're not a fan of a player that you're complimenting at the time. Jeez cc0, anyone would think I'm asking for world peace.
That's why I always qualify with an opinion now.
Last edited:
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
1.
a. I must have been clearer. Nadal is more a rival for Djokovic than Federer. Nadal has all sorts of number advantage when it comes to Rafole rivalry than Fedal rivalry. In other words, if we consider the prime years and assuming that is till 2010 for Federer, there is 2011 and beyond where Nadal-Djokovic are giving each other a competition. Along the same line, Federer had Nadal too from 07-10 period. Before that period Hewitt, Safin, Roddick were Federer's chief rivals. When you take Nadal out of Djoker's era his competition will look weaker. The number of times Djokovic met Nadal alone in Slams is roughly the same as the number of times Federer met Safin-Hewitt-Roddick combined. Nadal was a factor for Federer for 4 years, or even to stretch it, for 6 years. Nadal to Djokovic is 8 years and running.
It will be clearer if I reverse what you're doing: "the 3 players from Djokovic's weak era, ie, Nadal, Murray, Potro/Ferrer probably have more wins against the top 3 - Federer, Djokovic, Roddick - than a "X" size of guys that reached top 10 in 04-07".
In other words, taking out Nadal makes Djoker's competition look weak. With your line of logic, the only argument you make is Roddick-Nalbandian-Davydenko are better than Murray and co outside Nadal. That's a fair point, except it's irrelevant as it doesn't define "competition" for Djokovic.
b. In any case I dont even know how much sense those h2h make. Roddick doesnt have a Slam edge against Djokovic, neither Davydenko against Nadal. Most of Nalbandian's wins against Federer has come you know when. Davydenko and Nalbandian are not even among Federer's biggest rivals. I can see how you chose the players.
2. It is. Just bear in mind he is no.3 overall today. Just that Nadal is out of station.
3. Robredo is a former top ten player. During Federer's time. What's different now when he is in top 20? He always has been inside top 30 for a long long time.
4. I didnt see the points, I dont know. I dont get you either. You mean Spadea at 18 held more points than Melzer at 9?
My point is that players around 30 has all the time been in the 10-30 bracket. I dont specifically see whats your point with the likes of Melzer, Robredo etc.
5. Ferrer is in a different league altogether among the players you mentioned. He is a late bloomer. His first season starts at the age of 20. That is late for anyone to have started tennis today. His first major season was at 22 in 2005 where he finished inside top 15. As I said before back in those days Ferrer was more a hard hitter but today he is more a high % player which is relevant today. He has turned out to be really consistent. He has maintained his fitness for a lot more than others. It's not like he evidently declined physically.
Ferrer was never a weak player. His h2h against his contemporaries are quite decent. He leads Roddick 7-4 and from 05-09 he leads Roddick 4-3 and only one match happened on clay. He leads Hewitt 2-1 but it proves nothing. He is 1-1 with Safin and again proves nothing. He is 9-5 against Nalbandian, and from 05-07 he is 3-3. Davydenko has 4-2 edge over Ferrer though.
As I said before Haas beating Djokovic or Hewitt beating Wawrinka who went on to beat so and so proves nothing at all in the context. Those were one off matches.
Last edited:
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
Which can also mean Djokovic was that much better. In 2003, Roddick had no... well you know it.
Last edited:
kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
1. :lol::lol: I quite empirically presented the causality I was talking about. Yet as usual you come up with blunt denials and one line rebuttals without a single line of logical reasoning why it doesn't make sense. At least I dont evade your points.
2. So what exactly are reliability indices on their site? They categorize the specific index under "on pressure situations". What more do you want? I tried to dumb it down to you that players do choke after having the lead. To not choke is mental strength. Someone cant see it. And cant see it the ATP site too see it that way. You are not being fair or reasonable.
Last edited:
Sysyphus
Talk Tennis Guru
It|s impossible to answer you back when you don't:
- Understand what I write.
- Respond to actual things I write.
- Use concise terminology, or don't present a semblance of understanding of the topics you speak about.
That makes discussion meaningless.
And no, you didn't show anything empiracally. Do you know what that means? Did you make predictions and test it experimentally? No. Take a science or stat class. What you did was to create just-so stories by using stats. That doesn't prove anything. It's like claiming eating ice cream leads to drowning because of the statistical correlation.
ImmorTAL Big 3
Semi-Pro
40-15×3
25 matches lost after having MP.
End of the discussion.
25 matches lost after having MP.
End of the discussion.
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Better to get to match point than not get to match point, no?
Similar threads
- Poll
