Originally Posted by krosero
Some of the issues here I addressed in the last post above. Just would add a few things.
Djoker's defense was insane but he was not necessarily playing to his best level -- which is arguably one reason for Wawrinka getting so close to beating him. The commentators were saying late in the match that he had been missing a good number of FH's when he went for winners. I think they said that when he had a sitter than he dumped into the net, going for a DTL winner. That was on break point; if Novak had converted he would have been serving at 5-3, for the match. It all could have ended a lot sooner.
Now on the other hand, his defense was ridiculous. I'm just saying there could be another side to that: he found himself in a greater number of long rallies, and in such a long match, because at times his offense was failing him.
yeah, djoker wasn't at his best ; the very fact that he was missing quite a few shots when he went for it indicates a lower quality ...
rather than defense, I should've mentioned 'returning' ( getting back serves that in many cases would be forced errors of the return ), thus giving more chance for UEs in the rallies ...
one funny thing about a point you mentioned in that post : nadal @ wimbledon 2006, his forehand wasn't that good in the finals, fed's slice made him cough up quite a few errors, OTOH his BH was absolutely on fire and he blasted many winners and forced many errors from federer with it ...