Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Fedfan34, Apr 16, 2012.
You mean after a car crushed his knee?
Ivanisevic is by far greater player than Karlovic, but I think Karlovic has the better serve ..
Aces are not the measure of a better server. Look at the previous statistics I displayed. Goran had way more doubles than Karlovic.
If aces made someone a better server than another player, then Goran would have a better serve than Sampras, and we all know claiming something like that is the utmost blasphemy.
I concur. Plus Ivanisevic had the added advantage of serving on fast surfaces of the 90s while Karlovic had to serve on the molasses courts of today. Crucial difference.
When Goran was on song, he was better than Sampras at serving, certainly at first serves. The problem is, Sampras could stay on song while Goran was volatile as hell and easily went into slumps.
To be honest, I don't really see the big deal about year end no 1 or consecutive year end no 1.It's not on my list of greatness defining criteria becuase you have another stat called 'weeks at no 1' which is an accurate representation of how long you were dominant.
I'll go with Ivanisevic's serve. I'm biased, since he is my all time fav.
but it is for several others , who don't really look in depth at the facts ....
yes, real unfortunate . But facts remain .....
I've heard this argument before. Understandably, any player's numbers will typically go down when they play a higher ranked player. I was having a similar discussion against someone a year or two ago who claimed that Federer's serve was better than Karlovic's and that Karlovic's numbers were inflated bc he doesn't play higher ranked players as often.
I put this claim to the test and found that even against top 10 players, Karlovic still held his serve around 90% of the time.
Now to your point, I looked at how Karlovic's performed against Roger Federer in their 11 matches. In these matches, below are Karlovic's ace and service hold statistics:
164 aces in 896 serves: 0.185 aces/serve
123 service holds in 140 service games: 87.9 service hold percentage
Both of these measures are greater than Ivanisevic's corresponding values against the field in general (0.171 aces/serve and 86% career service hold percentage). So, Karlovic has better serving numbers against Federer than Ivanisevic does against the field in general.
What are his numbers like against Murray?
It seems established that Karlovic is a stronger server than Ivanisevic. No, unless we are in a weak returning era..?
They've only played 3 matches, which isn't as big a sample size as I would like. In those 3, Karlovic has served 0.151 aces/serve and held serve 76.7% of the time. Not as high, but still very impressive against a returner of Murray's caliber.
i do quite enjoy when people prove their arguments. making the opposing arguer look quite foolish
Its just a weak era in everything. Petey's backhand was better than Rafa's forehand, didn't you know? Also, his movement on clay was far superior.
No those stats aren't as high.
In addition, Goran had multiple years of serving ruined by his shoulder injury where he served hardly any aces or else served ridiculously high double faults, if you subtract them you'll see where you went wrong in your calculations.
goran had a better first serve than sampras. if you had ever watched them play its quite easy to decipher this. sampras was obviously better at alot of that other stuff you do on a tennis court.
Sampras was better at literally everything else you do on a tennis court. But his first serve couldn't hold a candle to Goran's, no comparison really.
Injuries are part of the game and happen to all players. If you want to look at how good a player was throughout his whole career, it doesn't make sense to only look at his numbers during his best years.
Regardless, if you tell me which years these are, I can take those out of the equation and provide you with the result comparing Ivanisevic's best years with Karlovic's career average (which includes his shoulder and back injuries in 2004). I'm fairly confident that Karlovic would still come out on top.
Of course injuries are part of the game but if you're going to compare how dominant their serves are it's more important. Best thing to do is compare Ivanisevic's best year where he hit nearly 1500 aces to Karlovic's best year.
Then you'd have the add up the rankings of all Karlovic's opponents and see what their average ranking was, and do the same for Ivanisevic.
main rival? was Agassi ranked #2 the whole time Sampras was #1? talk about revisionist history... Sampras dominated a fragmented era, and for that he should thank his stars. Still, his domination pales in comparison to what Federer was able to do.
How does holding on to #1 despite sucking in the clay season amount to being great against his main rival?
I disagree. One year does not make a great serve. Consistency is as important as dominance, as is the case in any discussion regarding greatness. By that criteria, if Raonic retired from this year, he'd already be one of the greatest servers in tennis history.
Anyway, here are some of the single-year stats you asked for. I don't have the average rankings for the opponents.
1449 aces in 6677 serves: 0.217 aces/serve
1029 holds in 1153 service games: 89.2%
(Note that both these values are still below Karlovic's career averages)
1318 aces in 5217 serves: 0.252 aces/serve
820 holds in 868 service games: 94.5%
1,477, not 1,449.
Is this from 1996?
My numbers are taken straight from the ATP website.
Ranking is pretty important.
Oh. Yet another thing they've got wrong. 1,477 was the figure widely reported at the time.
Actually I think this is the fairest assessment yet and I agree with this statement. Federer would still win multiple slams at every non French venue, but less than he did today, in the Sampras era. On the other hand despite the much greater clay court depth, he would have a good shot at sneaking out atleast 2 French Opens in a non Nadal clay era, but not made as many FO finals as he did this era either. The problem is most ****s like to potray Federer's era as the toughest era (when in fact in most respects it was anything but) and claim he would have won not just as many, but more slams at every venue than he actually has in this era, in any other era.
I think I see where the discrepancy comes from. The ATP website does not have the numbers from the Grand Slam Cup
You're probably right. The Grand Slam Cup was an ITF event that wasn't officially recognised by the ATP until 2000 when it merged with the World Championships to become the Masters Cup.
K as OP I feel it my duty to steer this obnoxious thread back to its pretentious beginnings.
aka stop talking about effing Goran and miserable Karlovic
One way to put them on a level playing field is to look at how they did against a rankings range, say against the top 10.
Against the top 10:
240 aces in 1033 serves: 0.232 aces/serve
139 holds in 164 service games: 84.8%
180 aces in 835 serves: 0.216 aces/serve
128 holds in 137 service games: 93.4%
I found it interesting that Ivanisevic's ace count increased against the top 10, while his service hold % decreased. Karlovic's predictably decreased slightly in both cases. One reason for this was because a number of Ivanisevic's matches against the top 10 took place on indoor carpet, where he was serving around 0.35 aces/serve. Karlovic played no matches on carpet. Another reason was because Ivanisevic took more risks on his serve against the top players. I also looked up their DF stats to see if this was true.
Ivanisevic (1996): 76 DFs in 1033 serves: 0.0736 DFs per serve
Karlovic (2007): 15 DFs in 835 serves: 0.0180 DFs per serve
Ivanisevic was serving about 4 times as many DFs per serve as Karlovic while their ace frequency was on a more similar magnitude.
Still, I think the fact that Karlovic was able to hold his serve 93.4% of the time against the top 10 is the most impressive stat of all. This would be near impossible for even the best players in any year and he did it with the worst ground game in the top 100.
I'm done making my point...always feel obligated to give Ivo's serve some much deserved love.
If Pete had played half his matches on clay vs his rivals - I don't think he would have had a dominant record. You know what I am referring to.....
It doesn't. That's a strawman. Having a winning record against his main rival, as would be expected of any GOAT candidate, does.
You opened the door. Don't complain when others walk through it.
The funny thing is that Karlovic's service technique is a disaster. If he had Ivanisevic's or better, Sampras', service motion, it would be a lot better.
So Ivanisevic was better against the top ten?
Are you really surprised?
Karlovic's aces come from his insane power, he has probably the highest average mph in history. Power is less effective against the top returners. His placement is very good too mind you, but it's mainly the power.
Ivanisevic's came from good power, but insane placement and lefty spin. Which is effective against pretty much everyone.
Fed's era wasnt really weak per say. He was just Flat out better than everyone else. He was really the first one to show an all round game on all surfaces and now the rest of the tour has picked up. He was just more advanced than his peers.
As for the serve. Obviously Sampras has the better serve. Federer wins most of the free points from smart placement. One can argue that Fed's serve has better placement but Sampras wins the serve.
Now the volley, Sampras is one of the greatest volleyers of all time!! But the reason i put fed ahead is because he's volleyed against Nadal who can generate the most top spin ever. Obviously it isnt sampras's fault that he never got to play against Rafa. But the fact that Federer has had exposure to hard flat balls and spin ranks him above.
So who wins overall, I think fed does because even in his 30's hes keeping up with djokovic and nadal. If you compare statistics Sampras is not even close to federer at all but he has leverage by winning one more wimby and having one more week at no1. I think its fairly conclusive feds the better player because of his 23 straight GS semis and blah blah blah but if these were to happen as well it would be as much of a fact as the earth revolving
No, what? I would much rather have Karlovic's numbers against the top 10, even when only comparing their best years. He aces about as frequently as Ivanisevic (despite not playing on carpet, if I took out Ivanisevic's matches on carpet Karlovic again has a higher ace rate), DFs 4 times less frequently, and holds serve at a significantly higher rate despite a weaker ground game. If the last fact doesn't prove that Karlovic is a better server, then it must follow that Ivanisevic's groundgame is even worse than Karlovic's. And if that's the case, then you are not doing any favors to the "Sampras had tougher competition" crowd.
1 Sampras, Pete (USA)
2 Rios, Marcelo (CHI)
3 Corretja, Alex (ESP)
4 Rafter, Patrick (AUS)
5 Moya, Carlos (ESP)
6 Agassi, Andre (USA)
7 Henman, Tim (GBR)
8 Kucera, Karol (SVK)
9 Rusedski, Greg (GBR)
10 Krajicek, Richard (NED)
1998 year end ranking. not a bad list but cmon, rios and corrretja 2-3? and agassi underperforming in slams again? doesnt sound that "deep"
Karlovic came within around 150 aces of Goran's 1996 mark in 2007, despite playing nearly 40 less matches. Karlovic also led the tour in aces in 2008 and 2009 despite playing less than 60 matches both times. All of this in an era without carpet (the surface Goran won most of his titles on and dropped OVER HALF HIS ACES ON in 1996) and with every other surface slowed down. Did Goran have the best serve of the 90s? Yes. However, is it better than Karlovic's? No chance in hell. Goran does everything else better than Karlovic, and I have no idea why some of the people in this thread are trying to argue otherwise, but I'm sorry, trying to say Goran had a better serve than a guy who can drop 155 MPH bombs from the tops of trees is just silly.
This is rich. Kafelnikov a clay court specialist? 3 of his 26 titles came on clay. Moya? Fed's never lost a match to him, and Moya was still playing top ten level tennis up to 2005. Bruguera? Has said Federer is "10x the player that Sampras was". As for the most plausible name you mentioned, Kuerten, JCF peaked earlier than Fed and has an even H2H record against Kuerten on clay, beating him in an epic final in Rome in 2001 and losing in an epic semi at RG the year before. I bring up JCF because he's never beaten Fed on clay, even in his best year of 2003. Federer would have won his fair share of French Opens in the 90s.
Lol, so much for the mighty Sampras 2nd serve. I told you guys, Roger has a better serve. Look at thos stats and they are on slowed down surfaces too!
if it doesn't they why did you bring it up?
c'mon limpin, were Rosewall's slice BH clocked at 80 MILES per hour or 80 METERS per hour? please enlighten us those who haven't had the fortune of watching muscles live
you're not going to find any Petetard give a reasonable explanation for it...
Well the logical explanation of course is that we're in a weak returning era. I mean the great Yzaga clearly had a better return than Djokvoic.
better run than *Djokovic
Goran played many more matches in 1996 than Ivo in 2007, so it's no secret that he had more aces. However.....Ivo average more aces per match than Goran, that's a better metric(or insightful data) to compare. And don't forget Ivo is serving on a slower court than Goran in the 90s.
That is such a crucial difference. Goran's serve wouldn't be anywhere close to the effectiveness it had on today's molasses courts.
Sane post! Well said!
Separate names with a comma.