ATG mental strength (poll)

Which Open Era ATG had the strongest will on court?

  • Total voters
    119
Aren't Borg like completely quit tennis, after just 1 or 2 tough losses to McEnroe!? I like Borg, but that isn't very mentally strong imo.;)
 
I think in terms of stats. Which of those guys came back most frequently when losing the first set (out of 3) or two sets (out of 5)? There have been lots of great front-runners in tennis history. Anyone have those stats? That's probably the mental toughness measure... when a guy doesn't bring his A game and is still able to find a way to win. Who in history has dug themselves out the highest percentage of the time? I say "highest percentage" because I think Federer is around the top in numbers of matches coming back from 2 sets down, but look at how many more matches he has on the books than others.
 
Winners or Errors said:
I think in terms of stats. Which of those guys came back most frequently when losing the first set (out of 3) or two sets (out of 5)? There have been lots of great front-runners in tennis history. Anyone have those stats? That's probably the mental toughness measure... when a guy doesn't bring his A game and is still able to find a way to win. Who in history has dug themselves out the highest percentage of the time? I say "highest percentage" because I think Federer is around the top in numbers of matches coming back from 2 sets down, but look at how many more matches he has on the books than others.
Click to expand...
I thought Tennis Abstract had these numbers but I couldn't find them. Closest I found is % of deciding sets won, with Nole among the best with 74.5%.
 
Last edited:
Phoenix1983 said:
But you replied, saying:



Presumably then you thought there was a definition for mental weakness, that all players had experienced?

To be honest, I didn't think my initial question was so hard. I thought you would come back with specific periods where the players I mentioned were supposedly mentally weak.
Click to expand...
I probably should have asked you what you meant by mental weakness. It seems we all have different definitions in our minds.
 
some numbers about clutchnes:

vs hole tour:
https://www.atptour.com/en/stats/le...er&surface=all&versusRank=all&formerNo1=false

vs top10 (some players did not have inaf matches vs top10 so their stats are misleading):
https://www.atptour.com/en/stats/le...&surface=all&versusRank=Top10&formerNo1=false

nole vs rafa on MP:
nole saved MB in 12 matches which he won, he rescued 40 MB in them and he lost only 3 matches where he had MB, vasted combined 7 MB in them matches. Rafa won 13 such matches, rescued 30 MB in them and lost 8 matches where he vasted 22 MB.
 
Phoenix1983 said:
Er, you stated that all other players had gone through a period of mental weakness.

It's up to you to define what that is.
Click to expand...
Just as a followup (and for some strange reason two of our posts appear to have been deleted) I think the hard part is separating when a player is simply not playing well (which can include injuries) from a player that loses focus. That's why I like something like % of deciding sets won. Presumably at that point they are playing roughly equal. Other indicators could be matches won when facing MP (or lost when holding MP). Something along those lines.
 
Djokovic2015 said:
The questions about Federer's mental toughness were not first raised in 08-early 2010.

From 03-06, Federer went 3-6 in 5th sets vs lower ranked players (and the AO 06 win vs Haas was hardly a display of mental strength after blowing a 2-0 set lead, with a 2nd set bagel, to needing a 5th to finish off). It just wasn't talked about as much because Federer's level was so much above the field then that his mental toughness deficiency was rarely a factor, but people recognized its existence even then.

Djokovic, in 05-mid 06, when he was rising from top 100 to top 20 in the world, managed to force six 5th sets vs higher ranked players and go 3-3 in them and then after hitting the top 20 went 14-2 in 5th sets from DC 2006 - AO 2012. Novak had left no questions raised about his mental strength when he hit his down period of RG12-RG14 (outside of the sole choke vs Melzer at RG 10) and after that period has again rebounded to go 9-1 in 5th sets.

Fed's best show of mental strength in his entire career has actually been in 17-present.
Click to expand...
Why are you lumping 2003 with 2004-2006 to begin with?

And second of all, where are those 6 losses that you speak of? Safin AO 2005, Nalbandian WTF 2005, Nadal Rome 2006 and that was it.
 
GabeT said:
Just as a followup (and for some strange reason two of our posts appear to have been deleted) I think the hard part is separating when a player is simply not playing well (which can include injuries) from a player that loses focus. That's why I like something like % of deciding sets won. Presumably at that point they are playing roughly equal.
Click to expand...

Could be that the better player allowed himself to be pushed to five due to loss of focus or such, in that case it's not clutch. For example, 2015 RG SF, Djokovic beating Murray 6-3 6-3 5-7 5-7 6-1. That's unclutch if anything, shouldn't have allowed a decider (in fact, Djokovic didn't even face BP right until getting broken at 5-5 3rd set all of a sudden).
 
NoleFam said:
I don't really see the point in going down this road since we probably wouldn't agree on a few things. Federer has lost 5 times from match point up in Slams. This had already happened twice before those Djokovic losses happened. I'm not sure about Sampras but this never happened to Nadal and Djokovic, and Federer's quality was not crap in 2010 and 2011 like Nadal's was mostly in 2015/2016.
Click to expand...
Like I said, Federer's quality was not bad. But his mental game was not up to par.

And why exactly are matches lost from MPs up the only indicative of poor mental strength? I don't see why Djokovic should get a free pass when some of his slam losses were pure collapses.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Could be that the better player allowed himself to be pushed to five due to loss of focus or such, in that case it's not clutch. For example, 2015 RG SF, Djokovic beating Murray 6-3 6-3 5-7 5-7 6-1. That's unclutch if anything, shouldn't have allowed a decider (in fact, Djokovic didn't even face BP right until getting broken at 5-5 3rd set all of a sudden).
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing. But how do we distinguish each case? Also looking at overall numbers should include both the situations when a players loses focus yet goes on to win as well when a player benefits from the other guy losing focus.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Could be that the better player allowed himself to be pushed to five due to loss of focus or such, in that case it's not clutch. For example, 2015 RG SF, Djokovic beating Murray 6-3 6-3 5-7 5-7 6-1. That's unclutch if anything, shouldn't have allowed a decider (in fact, Djokovic didn't even face BP right until getting broken at 5-5 3rd set all of a sudden).
Click to expand...

Agree - another example is the AO SF of 2013, when Murray beat Federer in 5 sets. The most one-sided 5-setter I've ever seen, Murray should have put away Federer in straights, yet bizarrely slipped in 2 tie-breaks, and had to go to 5.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Could be that the better player allowed himself to be pushed to five due to loss of focus or such, in that case it's not clutch. For example, 2015 RG SF, Djokovic beating Murray 6-3 6-3 5-7 5-7 6-1. That's unclutch if anything, shouldn't have allowed a decider (in fact, Djokovic didn't even face BP right until getting broken at 5-5 3rd set all of a sudden).
Click to expand...

Isn't fighting through and extending matches where you're underdog/being outplayed instead of losing more matches in straight sets a sign of mental strength as well?

(Number of straight set losses/Total Number of losses)
Connors 142/280
Borg 73/130
Becker 106/214
Sampras 107/222
Nadal 98/191

Others(joke option)
Djokovic 90/178
Federer 115/262

Obviously tough to analyze each loss/some of them could be genuine mugging up winnable matches
 
Last edited:
To me mental strength is clutchness in closing out sets if there are no inhibiting factor like an injury. Nobody would say John Isner was mentally weak for his performance in the Miami final.
 
MajesticTennisManiac said:
Isn't losing more matches in straight sets instead of fighting through and extending matches where you're underdog/being outplayed a sign of mental strength as well?

(Number of straight set losses/Total Number of losses)
Connors 142/280
Borg 73/130
Becker 106/214
Sampras 107/222
Nadal 98/191

Others(joke option)
Djokovic 98/191
Federer 115/262

Obviously tough to analyze each loss/some of them could be genuine mugging up winnable matches
Click to expand...

So basically Federer is the best ever at fighting back to force matches to the 3rd or 5th set. To me that is mental strength, pushing a match to the limit despite not having the best form.
 
Hitman said:
Nadal, challenged by Sampras.

To me, these two are the best big match players I personally have ever seen.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised. I would think the largest proportion of being "Earth's Mightiest Warrior" is the mental strength. To be that, to be Mel Gibson in Braveheart, is to have the mental strength and will to overcome an opponent who has even greater physical skills.
 
I think I’m going to trust the ATP’s measure of “Under Pressure” leaders on this one. And the winners are:

Djokovic
Sampras
Nadal
Federer

:cool::cool::cool:
 
It would have to be Nadal. He is definitely the most consistent in the mental strength department.

As for the options on your list, where is Novak Djokovic? He has an amazing 5 set record and has made some epic comeback in matches. The stats under pressure definitely back him up. When he turns his peak mental strength on, he becomes like Superman. I would even argue that Novak has a much better peak mental strength than Rafa, but Rafa is just overall more consistent.

Federer should also be on the poll for his AO 2017 win against Rafa alone. He was down a break in the 5th set, if you don't remember. His domination of his rivals in the 2000s was also a testament to his strong will. Rafa is just a matchup nightmare for him and many people intertwine that with "weak" mental strength.
 
GabeT said:
I think I’m going to trust the ATP’s measure of “Under Pressure” leaders on this one. And the winners are:

Djokovic
Sampras
Nadal
Federer

:cool::cool::cool:
Click to expand...

I like that list, too. The "career" option goes pretty deep into the open era. Sampras was pretty close to the top of my list, and it is unsurprising that the Big 3 are there. Surprising is that Nishikori is #5, but I guess he is pretty clutch ...and then out injured the next day. Murray at #6 suggests that he is closer to the Big 3 than many have said around here lately. I was surprised by Boris at #18, because I always thought of him, though I liked his game, as someone who was mentally fragile. Perhaps it was just at times in his career, and those thinking he was mentally tough are just looking at the times when he was...
 
mike danny said:
Why are you lumping 2003 with 2004-2006 to begin with?

And second of all, where are those 6 losses that you speak of? Safin AO 2005, Nalbandian WTF 2005, Nadal Rome 2006 and that was it.
Click to expand...

Nalbandian 03 AO, Hewitt Davis Cup 03, and Novak Gstaad 03 were all 5-setters than he lost (and as the favorite) in that time-frame. Why wouldn't you count 03? Fed was already an established top 10 player by then. I started comparing Djokovic from late-06 when he got into the top 20 as part of his 14-2 vs Fed's 3-6.

Your premise was that 08-10 was somehow an isolated situation in regards to Fed losing tight matches when this has been a preponderance throughout his career.
 
Winners or Errors said:
I like that list, too. The "career" option goes pretty deep into the open era. Sampras was pretty close to the top of my list, and it is unsurprising that the Big 3 are there. Surprising is that Nishikori is #5, but I guess he is pretty clutch ...and then out injured the next day. Murray at #6 suggests that he is closer to the Big 3 than many have said around here lately. I was surprised by Boris at #18, because I always thought of him, though I liked his game, as someone who was mentally fragile. Perhaps it was just at times in his career, and those thinking he was mentally tough are just looking at the times when he was...
Click to expand...
Looking at the responses in this thread it’s clear that there is no consensus on what is mental strength and there is an over reliance on anecdotes instead of career data. The ATP numbers are not perfect but at least they provide a consistent framework. I like them.
 
Last edited:
smoledman said:
What do you call Federer's 2009 RG run, having to win those 5 setters against Haas & Del Potro? Both times had to come from behind in the match with the entire tennis world screaming he HAD to win RG!
Click to expand...
Haas was a mental midget. Once he mishit that easy volley he completely collapsed. Let him make this volley and I want to see how Federer is coming back. Not to take awary anything from Federer he did show some mental strength in this FO run, but guys like Haas cannot be the benchmark here.
 
It is a bit too early for a definitive answer.

Djokovic was lacking 8 slams against Nadal and 15 slams against Federer when he started his chase to surpass them ~8 years ago, by wining his slams and preventing Nadal and Federer both from wining more. In the meantime he won 14 and they both won 8+4=12 combined. And it's not over just yet. Therefore, if he equals or surpasses Federer's slam record - at the moment of Djokovic ending his career, in the next several years, the OP question will be answered without any hint of a doubt.

In the meantime, we can surely discuss particular points, matches and seasons until cows do come home and publicly display personal likey-no likey, which humans are able to express even before they can say a single meaningful word.
 
Tough one. Would first have to define mental strength but you probably can’t get a consensus on that. Atp has an under pressure rating but it’s largely numbers without context.

For example:
-Nole can’t be a mental giant with his poor finals record and 17 (?) mid-match retirements, along with the almost 2 year disappearance
-Rafa has lost so many matches to scrubs and is yet to defend a single title of clay; he was also completely lost for almost 2 years
-Fed is the best front runner and severely underestimated for mental strength (even some straight set matches are literally decided on a few points), but he is most likely not top of the list here

I’d almost have to go for Pete since he pretty much won all the big matches. His RG failures had little to do with mental strength and much more with his inability to play on clay. Which back then was the norm due to actual differences in playing surfaces.
 
The amount of definitions that are basically just being good at tennis instead of mental strength me rethink my time here
 
mike danny said:
Like I said, Federer's quality was not bad. But his mental game was not up to par.

And why exactly are matches lost from MPs up the only indicative of poor mental strength? I don't see why Djokovic should get a free pass when some of his slam losses were pure collapses.
Click to expand...

I never said those losses were because of poor mental strength. I just told you that those Djokovic losses wasn't the 1st time it had happened. If you recall, you are the one who replied to a comment unrelated to that and brought those matches up. Every champ has had bad losses but who said Djokovic gets a free pass?
 
EasyGoing said:
Tough one. Would first have to define mental strength but you probably can’t get a consensus on that. Atp has an under pressure rating but it’s largely numbers without context.

For example:
-Nole can’t be a mental giant with his poor finals record and 17 (?) mid-match retirements, along with the almost 2 year disappearance
-Rafa has lost so many matches to scrubs and is yet to defend a single title of clay; he was also completely lost for almost 2 years
-Fed is the best front runner and severely underestimated for mental strength (even some straight set matches are literally decided on a few points), but he is most likely not top of the list here

I’d almost have to go for Pete since he pretty much won all the big matches. His RG failures had little to do with mental strength and much more with his inability to play on clay. Which back then was the norm due to actual differences in playing surfaces.
Click to expand...
That would imply that losing early is better as a measure of mental strength because you can’t lose in a final if you don’t reach it.
 
Nadalgaenger said:
Ferrer. Guy got farther on less talent than anyone on list.
Click to expand...

It's actually quite right, in the sense that Ferrer won pretty much every match he was supposed to win, and lost every time he was supposed to. But a nice clutch win here and there, when you are not supposed to win, would have been much better to make a case for him.
 
I wouldn't blame Sampras for not wanting to spill his guts at RG after 1996, when he gave his absolute best effort and look what happened - draining five-setters and eventually complete loss of energy in the semifinal. He just wasn't good enough there.
 
chut said:
It's actually quite right, in the sense that Ferrer won pretty much every match he was supposed to win, and lost every time he was supposed to. But a nice clutch win here and there, when you are not supposed to win, would have been much better to make a case for him.
Click to expand...

Ferrer lost belief too easily, of course Nadal is something else but one can still fight to the end. 4-6 7-6(6) 6-0 and 4-6 6-4 6-0 6-1 doesn't look anything like clutch. Throw in 2013 RG final, Ferrer hadn't lost a set and had the game to make sets close at least, instead he assumed the submissive role from the first game
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Ferrer lost belief too easily, of course Nadal is something else but one can still fight to the end. 4-6 7-6(6) 6-0 and 4-6 6-4 6-0 6-1 doesn't look anything like clutch. Throw in 2013 RG final, Ferrer hadn't lost a set and had the game to make sets close at least, instead he assumed the submissive role from the first game
Click to expand...

How much of having supreme mental strength is having a reliable pattern of play or a relatively simple gameplan?
 
EasyGoing said:
No, that implies that Pete could be a mental fortress made of the stuff they put into Wolverine and his clay game still wouldn’t get him into finals.
Click to expand...
Why mention clay? Nole has the same number of slams outside of clay as Sampras. We need a clear definition of mental strength if we are going to debate it, and some way to measure it. The ATP Under Pressure stays are at least a starting point.
 
NatF said:
How much of having supreme mental strength is having a reliable pattern of play or a relatively simple gameplan?
Click to expand...

Well you still need to execute, and it's not like Federer plays 3D chess compared to Nadal or anyone, there's some creativity but the bread and butter for every player is a set od trusted patterns, at least on serve.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Well you still need to execute, and it's not like Federer plays 3D chess compared to Nadal or anyone, there's some creativity but the bread and butter for every player is a set od trusted patterns, at least on serve.
Click to expand...

Who mentioned Fred or Nadl?

Execution is still part of it, but it helps to have an easy pattern of play to fall back on big points.
 
NatF said:
Who mentioned Fred or Nadl?

Execution is still part of it, but it helps to have an easy pattern of play to fall back on big points.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't everyone have a trusted pattern? If you keep oscillating between options without great confidence in any particular one, that's a bit of a weakness. It's great to have a lot of options, and it's also great to know when to use them all, not trying to improvise on the fly.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Ferrer lost belief too easily, of course Nadal is something else but one can still fight to the end. 4-6 7-6(6) 6-0 and 4-6 6-4 6-0 6-1 doesn't look anything like clutch. Throw in 2013 RG final, Ferrer hadn't lost a set and had the game to make sets close at least, instead he assumed the submissive role from the first game
Click to expand...

I understand your point, but Ferrer won some matches against Nadal, in GS. Picking a RG final against Nadal as an example, you'll find many players to be unclutch :p
But you're right, he sometimes missed the right attitude. That's basically what i meant by pointing out he missed some clutch wins.

In a sense, he was a gatekeeper in terms of level of play, but also in terms of mental strentgh, since he wouldn't lose to someone he would perceive as an inferior player but would accept too easily to lose to the big 4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Megafanoftennis100
  • Poll Poll
Imagine a player with a better serve than Sampras, better FH than Federer, better mental strength than Nadal. Could he win Wimbledon this year?
Replies
5
Views
137
Megafanoftennis100
Megafanoftennis100
N
Nadal's mental strength is overrated?
2
Replies
81
Views
9K
DSH
DSH
T
Players that has reached full potential?
Replies
23
Views
4K
fps
F
4UTRMoutet
  • Poll Poll
What is the better mental approach, Novak or Rafa?
2
Replies
93
Views
1K
MichaelNadal
MichaelNadal
BGod
How long will legacy last for current players? (aside from Fed/Rafa)
Replies
33
Views
3K
Chanwan
Chanwan
Back
Top