A case study in (non)competitive consistency, or how Berdych attained peak ranking while being absolutely hopeless at the highest level

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
Top 8 mainstay Tomas Berdych briefly reached his highest ranking of #4 prior to 2015 RG. Ranking-wise, that was also the start of his decline as he slid down the rankings with each successive season until retiring in 2019. His peak level that could trouble even Big 3/4 at times, however, had already evaporated in 2014. The following analysis of Berdych's 52-week performance at the time of 2015 RG offers some proper insight into it.

Top results:

Slams: 1 SF, 2 QF; Masters: 1 F, 3 SF, 3 QF; YEC: 1-2 RR; lesser: 2x 500 F, 250 W, 250 F

Very consistent, though not a great slam record for #4.

Now look at his record against fellow top 8 players in completed matches:

Matches: 1-11

The lone win was crushing Nadal in 2015 AO - we know how ungodly poor Rafaello was, getting destroyed by his ultimate pigeon. Didn't help Berdych's success against top players in other matches.

Set record: 7-23, but 4-23 without that ridiculous match, more specifically:

7-6: 1-1

7-5: 1-2

6-4: 2-5

6-3: 0-5

6-2: 0-3

6-1: 0-3

6-0: 0-4

Moreover, Berdych got one set in his four slam losses combined. Gulbis and Cilic twice dealt with Berdych in straight sets, only Murray lost the first set but then bagelled him anyway.

The specific scorelines were:

6-0 6-2;
6-2 6-2;
6-1 6-1;
6-2 6-0 7-6(5) - win;
6-7(6) 6-0 6-3 7-5;
4-6 6-3 6-4;
6-0 5-7 6-4;
6-4 6-0;
6-4 6-4;
5-2 ret. - win;
7-5 4-6 6-3;
7-6(3) 6-1;
6-3 6-3



Let's take a look at the first third of Berdych's 2015 specifically to highlight the particularly egregious differential between consistency and competitiveness:


Berdych played 9 tournaments until (not including) RG - Doha 250, AO, Rotterdam & Dubai 500, all five Masters - and lost to top 10 players only: Djokovic, Federer, Murray all x2, Wawrinka, Nadal, Ferrer all x1.

Set record in wins: 68-7 (90.7%)

Game record in wins: 435-263 (62.3%)

Set record in losses: 4-19 (17.4%)

Game record in losses: 86-136 (38.7%)

Dominated the rest of the field but got dominated almost as bad against his betters - only won 1% more games in losses than lost in wins. Peak cumpetishun, more like the most tiered field ever. Sad, wasn't it?
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
Berdych himself is very handsome, has a hot wife and retired a ga-zillionaire in his early 30's. That's more exciting/interesting than anything he ever did on court, no?
220b12adcfb6f4679039fa8803d5cba8.jpg
 

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
Only in an extremely jaded world can Berdych’s career be viewed so poorly.

He was no favorite of mine but he gets an inordinate amount of scorn.

Note the timeframe.

2010-13 Berdych was cool with multiple Big 3 wins and some other nice matches. Post-2014AO Berdych declined in peak level but a more consistent base saw him stay a top player for three more years. That's when Bird was a sad one.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
You went to a lot of effort to tell us something we already know - namely that Berdych turned into Bendych when facing his betters.

But if it makes you feel like an intellectual (I really would like to know what you do IRL, as you obviously think you're highly intelligent, though I've seen little evidence of that), then go ahead and keep making these threads.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster
Literally every discussion about Berdych eventually digresses into "who cares, he's got a hot wife".
Exactly... because his game was so damn boring and one dimensional. Talking about Berdych's game is ZZZville. At least I threw in that Berdych himself is very handsome and clearly 100 times better looking than Fed, Rafa or Djoker. Since 85% of TTW is male, this fact is overlooked. I'm an equal opportunity appreciator of good looks. :D

_bIMVTMsTfoIK7CBSk9V7j1Z4VTI6Vg0cEKfAYISd9K6MQiN2Tm3_cI7mnaoKBcPGOIxUwGy1VHJ0sw69lIzoT1VN_sxksymVEeVfrsOgJNzkKFIE6RJnNgAkWF5o3Sx0eIk_fA


Berdych is clearly way, way better looking than anyone else in this selfie.

9a4dce47d93127de08a71975cb5127a3.jpg
 
Last edited:

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
Exactly... because his game was so damn boring and one dimensional. Talking about Berdych's game is ZZZville. At least I threw in that Berdych himself is very handsome and clearly 100 times better looking than Fed, Rafa or Djoker. Since 85% of TTW is male, this fact is overlooked. I'm an equal opportunity appreciator of good looks. :D

_bIMVTMsTfoIK7CBSk9V7j1Z4VTI6Vg0cEKfAYISd9K6MQiN2Tm3_cI7mnaoKBcPGOIxUwGy1VHJ0sw69lIzoT1VN_sxksymVEeVfrsOgJNzkKFIE6RJnNgAkWF5o3Sx0eIk_fA


Berdych is clearly way, way better looking than anyone else in this selfie.

9a4dce47d93127de08a71975cb5127a3.jpg
Do Stan and Novak just not exist or something? Stan looks literally perfect in that!

Also on main point: Berdych isn't even that boring, he has beautiful groundstrokes and can get some serious power. Easily more fun to watch than, say, Cilic or Zverev.
 

Cashman

Hall of Fame
Dominated the rest of the field but got dominated almost as bad against his betters - only won 1% more games in losses than lost in wins. Peak cumpetishun, more like the most tiered field ever. Sad, wasn't it?
In general, tennis has gravitated towards being more ‘processional’ or tiered over the last 20 years. Surfaces are more similar, seeds have increased, equipment changes have generally favoured risk-avoidant play.

If you can rise to a certain level, there are advantages that make you more difficult to dislodge. It is harder to get into the top 100 than stay there. A player with a seed has an easier draw than one without.

Players with consistency - generally beating who they are expected to beat, and losing to who they are expected to lose against - thrive under this system. David Ferrer was a classic example. Guys who are more mercurial have a tougher time.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
Note the timeframe.

2010-13 Berdych was cool with multiple Big 3 wins and some other nice matches. Post-2014AO Berdych declined in peak level but a more consistent base saw him stay a top player for three more years. That's when Bird was a sad one.
Let me get this straight....so Berdy started his decline around 2014, and Fed, who is 4 years older, apparently started his peak around the same time. I'm I missing something here?
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Slam finals/semifinals against players with less than 50% of wins over top10:

Federer 38
Nadal 27
Djokovic 25
 
Last edited:

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
Let me get this straight....so Berdy started his decline around 2014, and Fed, who is 4 years older, apparently started his peak around the same time. I'm I missing something here?
Federer won 16 of the last 17 sets against Berdych.
 

Standaa

G.O.A.T.
his game was so damn boring and one dimensional.

you don’t know what you’re talking about. Berdych had a nice attacking style made for fast courts and a great serve. Many times he outplayed Federer by cleaning the lines. you can’t complain about boring defensive pushers and then dismiss a style that’s trying to do the exact opposite and that’s so close to your beloved Kyrgios.
 

smalahove

Hall of Fame
Also on main point: Berdych isn't even that boring, he has beautiful groundstrokes and can get some serious power. Easily more fun to watch than, say, Cilic or Zverev.

I agree. His attacking baseline tennis was much more entertaining than most other players. When he could control the rallies, he was merciless. Unf. he was a bit on the slow side, so against the big 3, that was his downfall. You need Delpo firepower to stand a chance against the big three if you're a bit slow.
 

Phoenix1983

G.O.A.T.
In general, tennis has gravitated towards being more ‘processional’ or tiered over the last 20 years. Surfaces are more similar, seeds have increased, equipment changes have generally favoured risk-avoidant play.

If you can rise to a certain level, there are advantages that make you more difficult to dislodge. It is harder to get into the top 100 than stay there. A player with a seed has an easier draw than one without.

Players with consistency - generally beating who they are expected to beat, and losing to who they are expected to lose against - thrive under this system. David Ferrer was a classic example. Guys who are more mercurial have a tougher time.

Very intelligent and insightful post, unlike the OP. Thanks for your contribution.
 
Top