Does djokovic play boring tennis?

[Deleted member 716271]

My older brother was a big fan of Agassi. I remember a lot of people loved watching Agassi but Pete wasn't as popular in comparison. It's a bit surprising for me when I see more Pete fans on here than that of Andre.

You are going to find that in general, on message boards, you will have a higher percentage of fans who like the "classy" or "boring" player, because I would posit that forum dwellers are by nature less likely to resonate with intense, rebellious figures. Much more admiration for classic tennis and less for personality. That's not necessarily a bad thing, just the way it is.

 

[Deleted member 733170]

If you we're designing a machine that played tennis it would probably look a bit like Djokovic. That should be taken as a compliment. After all, who doesn't like to drive a precision made and reliable German car!?

The Federer Djokovic match up reminds me to some extent of the Deep Blue against Garry Kasparov chess series. In 1997 Deep Blue won for the first time and the apparent reason was that Deep Blue made a mistake which threw Kasparov off his game plan... The parallel I am trying to make is one consistency versus flair.

To label Djokovic's tennis as 'boring' reveals a lack of understanding in the game.

 

[donquijote]

He is the most entertaining player on the tour and I am not talking about his jokes or crowd-pleasing acts.

 

[SpinToWin]

If you we're designing a machine that played tennis it would probably look a bit like Djokovic. That should be taken as a compliment. After all, who doesn't like to drive a precision made and reliable German car!?

The Federer Djokovic match up reminds me to some extent of the Deep Blue against Garry Kasparov chess series. In 1997 Deep Blue won for the first time and the apparent reason was that Deep Blue made a mistake which threw Kasparov off his game plan... The parallel I am trying to make is one consistency versus flair.

To label Djokovic's tennis as 'boring' reveals a lack of understanding in the game.

To take up your metaphor regarding the German car.

You buy the German car to get you from A to B efficiently and safely.

You buy the Italian sports car because it excites you.

Edit: let me add that that may differ for somebody truly invested in automobiles too, just like it may differ for people invested in tennis.

If we apply that to Djokovic, then Djokovic is the guy you put your money on when you bet, but not the guy you're emotionally invested in/who you truly root for.

 

[m2nk2]

He has all of it, just not as good. A player couldn't get more complete than Djokovic.

Ehrm yes? He's got a good BH/movement and a decent FH/serve. But the rest isn't very good. His volley/smash are well below par.

Luckily for him, in this era you don't need to ever play volley really.

 

[RF20Lennon]

I quite enjoy his game. But I mostly watch because I like him more for his personality than his game.

 

[TMF]

Malisse think Nole is boring to watch.

Malisse: "Roger Federer is Fun to Watch, Novak Djokovic is Boring"

http://www.**************.org/Editor/Img/Xavier-Malisse-on-Roger-Federer-and-Novak-Djokovic-img26595_668.jpg

 

[RF-18]

The thing is, Djokovic game is of equal high quality wich makes people think he doesn't have anything that stands out.

He has the best BH in the game, one of the best FH, and a really great serve. Return game is outstanding, and he has barely any weaknesses, probably the least out of anybody. He is a all round player, Ferrer is that too, but not of Djokovic's quality, that is the difference. Ferrer is good, but Djokovic is World Class.

I enjoy watching his game. I love balanced and consistent players.

 

[Djokovic2011]

To take up your metaphor regarding the German car.

You buy the German car to get you from A to B efficiently and safely.

You buy the Italian sports car because it excites you.

Edit: let me add that that may differ for somebody truly invested in automobiles too, just like it may differ for people invested in tennis.

If we apply that to Djokovic, then Djokovic is the guy you put your money on when you bet, but not the guy you're emotionally invested in/who you truly root for.

Tell that to his millions of fans around the world.

 

[SpinToWin]

Tell that to his millions of fans around the world.

It was more of a criticism of the metaphor

 

[tennis4me]

The thing is, Djokovic game is of equal high quality wich makes people think he doesn't have anything that stands out.

He has the best BH in the game, one of the best FH, and a really great serve. Return game is outstanding, and he has barely any weaknesses, probably the least out of anybody. He is a all round player, Ferrer is that too, but not of Djokovic's quality, that is the difference. Ferrer is good, but Djokovic is World Class.

I enjoy watching his game. I love balanced and consistent players.

Completely agree. I can't see any obvious weakness in his game. I used to be not a Djoker fan, because of his well-known excuses. But, he's a completely different player now. His fitness level, his consistency, his weapons, his defense-to-offence shots are just unparalleled.

Ferrer is definitely good, otherwise he wouldn't be ranked as high and as long as he is now. Ferrer is the type of player that probably many players hate to play against. One really have to beat Ferrer, he doesn't make too many unforced errors; he's like a retriever. Very intense player.

Having said that, sorry Ferrer's fans, IMO Ferrer's is boring to watch, Djokovic is not.

Not sure why Malisse calls Djokovic's game boring, Malisse's game is not that exciting himself. He's entitled to his opinions, I guess.

 

[newpball]

How do you rate djokovics game entertainment wise??

Extremely high!

It is always a delight to see such a top professional at work!

:grin:

 

[Dan Z]

He's like some mechanised chameleon... would be a bit harsh to call him boring but like when watching Murray I do find it hard to get excited by his play but the difference is he's so predictably good.

Just think if he'd hit this level at a younger age..

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Extremely high!

It is always a delight to see such a top professional at work!

:grin:

No it isn't. Federer is a top professional and you can't stand watching him at work (unless he's losing).

Federer and Djokovic are the two super professionals of the ATP imo. Huge props to Djokovic.

 

[newpball]

Federer is a top professional and you can't stand watching him at work (unless he's losing).

It seems you simply parsed my sentence incorrectly, I did not say 'it is always a delight to see all top professionals at work'. Unfortunately, in my opinion, F is not such a top professional as Djokovic. F is undoubtedly a top professional but he and Djokovic have their differences. Enough differences for me to be a fan of one but not of the other.

I have to admit I am guilty as charged of not being a fan of F.
Tarring and feathering for me for this heinous crime I suppose!

:grin:

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

It seems you simply parsed my sentence incorrectly, I did not say 'it is always a delight to see all top professionals at work'. Unfortunately, in my opinion, F is not such a top professional as Djokovic. F is undoubtedly a top professional but he and Djokovic have their differences. Enough differences for me to be a fan of one but not of the other.

I have to admit I am guilty a charged of not being a fan of F.
Tarring and feathering for me for this heinous crime I suppose!

:grin:

Well I knew this response was coming (focus on "such").

No punishments for you and your so called heinous crime. All I'd ask is some respect but you have your gimmicks that need perpetuating (addiction to "F").

 

[tennis4me]

I have to admit I am guilty a charged of not being a fan of F.
Tarring and feathering for me for this heinous crime I suppose!
:grin:

I am a converted F-to-D fan. But, I still enjoy watching F play - winning or losing since the entertainment factor is high.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

I am a converted F-to-D fan. But, I still enjoy watching F play - winning or losing since the entertainment factor is high.

You'll enjoy chatting with RF-18.

 

[newpball]

But, I still enjoy watching F play...

At times I do too!

:grin:

 

[newpball]

All I'd ask is some respect but you have your gimmicks that need perpetuating (addiction to "F").

Alright here is a nice picture of F:

:grin:

 

[Gazelle]

Djokovic is the most spectacular player ever. He does things only he (and Fish) can do on a tennis court.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

It seems you simply parsed my sentence incorrectly, I did not say 'it is always a delight to see all top professionals at work'. Unfortunately, in my opinion, F is not such a top professional as Djokovic. F is undoubtedly a top professional but he and Djokovic have their differences. Enough differences for me to be a fan of one but not of the other.

I have to admit I am guilty as charged of not being a fan of F.
Tarring and feathering for me for this heinous crime I suppose!

:grin:

You don't like Federer because we know you're a fan of Sampras, and Federer kinda ruined his whole "GOAT" deal.

 

[jg153040]

How do you rate djokovics game entertainment wise?? Does his error-free high percentage tennis come off as boring to you? Lets face it the guy is like a brick wall and i have heard some people outside of talk tennis say he plays boring tennis and that federer for example is much more entertaining. So i just wanted to get the talk tennis communities opinion on djokovics game entertainment wise. Discuss!!

He is for me. Ugly strokes and boring game. He is too stable.

I like even Ferrer and Murray more.

So, what is more important to you? Have more fun in your life or have more success? I choose fun any time.

Because rich people are making suicides, because they got rich by not having fun and doing it only for the money. Then you see poor people who are very happy.

I pick Santoro over Djokovic any time. Santoro leads h2h vs Safin who leads h2h vs Djokovic.

 

[chjtennis]

I enjoy watching Djokovic's matches. What an amazing player. He will be missed when he's gone. Just like Ivan Lendl.

 

[jg153040]

I enjoy watching Djokovic's matches. What an amazing player. He will be missed when he's gone. Just like Ivan Lendl.

His matches are exciting because his tennis is high level, but it's still boring tennis.

How many people watched Djokovic when he wasn't winning or playing big matches?

But a lot of people still watched Nalbandian.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

He is for me. Ugly strokes and boring game. He is too stable.

I like even Ferrer and Murray more.

So, what is more important to you? Have more fun in your life or have more success? I choose fun any time.

Because rich people are making suicides, because they got rich by not having fun and doing it only for the money. Then you see poor people who are very happy.

I pick Santoro over Djokovic any time. Santoro leads h2h vs Safin who leads h2h vs Djokovic.

If I were an ATP tennis pro I would take success. But I don't see it as a case of either or, in fact I would bet it's very fun to be the best in the world at what you do.

 

[chjtennis]

His matches are exciting because his tennis is high level, but it's still boring tennis.

How many people watched Djokovic when he wasn't winning or playing big matches?

But a lot of people still watched Nalbandian.

Pre-2011 Djokovic was nowhere as exciting as Djokovic of 2011 and after. He just simply became better and more exciting since 2011.

 

[jg153040]

Pre-2011 Djokovic was nowhere as exciting as Djokovic of 2011 and after. He just simply became better and more exciting since 2011.

Yeah, that was my point. You only find him exciting because he is better and winning, where were you in 2006-2009?

 

[chjtennis]

Yeah, that was my point. You only find him exciting because he is better and winning, where were you in 2006-2009?

I was watching tennis, I guess.

I didn't think Djokovic was boring back then either. He was simply not good enough to be such a threat to Federer or Nadal, so that's why he didn't excite quite as much. He was always a solid player, though. Big 4 prestige made him a star back then already and you pay to watch stars play, so I don't think he was 'boring' back then either. He just became much more exciting in 2011. That's all.

 

[jg153040]

If I were an ATP tennis pro I would take success. But I don't see it as a case of either or, in fact I would bet it's very fun to be the best in the world at what you do.

Well, I hope you wouldn't if you are smart. If your life sucks, no success will help you.

I think any reasonable person would prefer health, longevity, happiness over success.

 

[jg153040]

I was watching tennis, I guess.

I didn't think Djokovic was boring back then either. He was simply not good enough to be such a threat to Federer or Nadal, so that's why he didn't excite quite as much. He was always a solid player, though. Big 4 prestige made him a star back then already and you pay to watch stars play, so I don't think he was 'boring' back then either. He just became much more exciting in 2011. That's all.

Yeah, he became more exciting because he was winning . His game become more boring actually.

Winning doesn't equal exciting game.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Yeah, that was my point. You only find him exciting because he is better and winning, where were you in 2006-2009?

? Djokovic was fascinating to watch during that period. He was considered to be one of the brightest prospects for the future in 2006-7 alongside Murray and Gasquet.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Well, I hope you wouldn't if you are smart. If your life sucks, no success will help you.

I think any reasonable person would prefer health, longevity, happiness over success.

I consider those things to be success.

Well, those and Federer.
Federer is success.

 

[jg153040]

I consider those things to be success.

Well, those and Federer.
Federer is success.

Cool, but the argument was that success is winning + money. This is what people mean usually.

But, yeah you have some rare people like Fed who have it all.

 

[jg153040]

? Djokovic was fascinating to watch during that period. He was considered to be one of the brightest prospects for the future in 2006-7 alongside Murray and Gasquet.

I agree, I loved pre peak Nole. I found his game much more exciting and explosive. He is now playing wall tennis.

Also, a lot of people here are bandwagoners and that was my point. They just find a player exciting all of the sudden, just because that player becomes successful.

 

[The Green Mile]

Nah, I like watching Djokovic play. I can understand why some might dislike watching him though (It's already been explained). There is actually very few tennis players I find boring. Serve bots, grinders, S & V, etc.... I don't mind. I like the bit of variety we have on tour.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I agree, I loved pre peak Nole. I found his game much more exciting and explosive. He is now playing wall tennis.

Also, a lot of people here are bandwagoners and that was my point. They just find a player exciting all of the sudden, just because that player becomes successful.

Djokovic was successful from 2006-2007, he just was not anywhere near as successful as he was post 2011.

You have to talk about degrees of success to reiterate your point.

 

[jg153040]

Djokovic was successful from 2006-2007, he just was not anywhere near as successful as he was post 2011.

You have to talk about degrees of success to reiterate your point.

I don't think I need to bother that much to prove an established fact, that most people are bandwagoners and not only in tennis.

 

[chjtennis]

Yeah, he became more exciting because he was winning . His game become more boring actually.

Winning doesn't equal exciting game.

You can play 'boring' style but you can still be exciting. That's the irony of sports. I personally enjoy watching Djokovic v Murray 'snooze-fest', but even if I found it really boring, the match up between no. 1 and no. 3 would've been exciting to me anyway for its sheer meaning in men's tennis. Maybe I'm too much of a fan of tennis. 8)

 

[chjtennis]

Nah, I like watching Djokovic play. I can understand why some might dislike watching him though (It's already been explained). There is actually very few tennis players I find boring. Serve bots, grinders, S & V, etc.... I don't mind. I like the bit of variety we have on tour.

I'm a bit like you. I like any style as long as they do it at the top level.

 

[jg153040]

You can play 'boring' style but you can still be exciting. That's the irony of sports. I personally enjoy watching Djokovic v Murray 'snooze-fest', but even if I found it really boring, the match up between no. 1 and no. 3 would've been exciting to me anyway for its sheer meaning in men's tennis. Maybe I'm too much of a fan of tennis. 8)

Yeah, I agree, but I thought the OP was asking just about style.

In the end this is only my opinion. Some people find snooze fests exciting.

Takes all kinds.

 

[newpball]

You don't like Federer because we know you're a fan of Sampras, and Federer kinda ruined his whole "GOAT" deal.

A Sampras fan?

No, not really, I am not very attracted to his playing style.

:grin:

 

[Djokovic2011]

I have to say the way Djokovic played the other day against Dolgopolov could certainly be described as boring, I hate it when he plays really passive tennis like that.

Why can't he always play like he did in the first set of his Dubai SF against Berdych?

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

I have to say the way Djokovic played the other day against Dolgopolov could certainly be described as boring, I hate it when he plays really passive tennis like that.

Why can't he always play like he did in the first set of his Dubai SF against Berdych?

Djokovic sucks. You know it, I know it. He's a dull, boring, terr... awww who am I kiddin'.

Novak rocks.

 

[RF-18]

I have to say the way Djokovic played the other day against Dolgopolov could certainly be described as boring, I hate it when he plays really passive tennis like that.

Why can't he always play like he did in the first set of his Dubai SF against Berdych?

Sometimes you have a bad day, if you think you can always play your best tennis that easy then he would probably have been unbeaten through his career.

The difference is that when Djokovic is playing bad and his aggressive game falls apart, just misses everything, he can go back and rely on his amazing defence, and his consistency with not giving away any free points. This drives the opponents crazy.

Djoko can adapt to wichever playstyle you want.

Yes, it is boring and I agree it didn't look so pretty the other day, but he won. What defines champions is being able to pull through although playing terrible.

 

[RF-18]

Those two sets Dolgo played was probably his best and people in the pro section where going nuts about how good he played, while Novak looked like he was out of gas and not really there on the court in his mind. But still it was two extremely tight sets where novak won one. Then won the third but yes dolgo was hurting or tired it seemed.

This is champ style. Rafa and Federer does this too.

 

[wangs78]

Djokovic can be boring but isn't always. He is a retriever who's mobility allows him the time and preparation to hit winners. Versus a pure retriever who just keeps getting the ball back and looks for errors from his opponent. Fed on the other hand plays every point with the intention to hit the last shot (i.e., a winner) and he is able to do it with such variety and flair that the best matches to watch are when Fed is on one side of the net.

 

[abmk]

I find Djokovic very entertaining when he plays aggressively. When he goes into retriever mode I dislike it e.g. large parts of the AO 15 SF.

When he's on and using those awesome ground strokes to dictate play he's great to watch IMO.

pretty much this ...^^

 

[joshalfie]

Hate to revive an old thread but I had to chime in.

I feel that the fact that we are debating this is evidence enough that Djokovic does not usually play a very entertaining game.

However, I think that this is more a statement of defensive/passive tennis in general. That style of play, to play to not lose rather than win, doesn't sit well with many spectators. And I don't feel that labelling those people as "not understanding tennis" doesn't help.

Walling up may be an effective, winning strategy in some match-ups but it really is a boring one to many people.

For a personal statement I will say this - Djokovic does not have the most powerful forehand, backhand or serve. He has reliable shots but lacks power. And powerful shots are exciting.

Therefore, even when he plays "aggressive" I'm left feeling a little disappointed. He rarely rips an awe inspiring winner like a Stan or Federer or Nadal. And for that reason I don't watch his matches unless he plays someone else that I like.

 

[zagor]

Mechanical yes but not boring (for me), depends on what sort of tennis do you like (and whether you enjoy various tennis styles or just a certain type). He's one of the cleanest ballstrikers on tour, is a terrific athlete (those full stretch BH winners) and is like a modern Agassi on the ROS when he's in the zone. As I said, I agree he's mechanical but so are/were guys like Davydenko or even Delpo and I like their games as well.

Of course, on his bad day he's overly defensive and passive, hits with one speed and gets big hitters into groove against him (the most recent being FO final and his match against Anderson) but it is what it is. He's one of the few modern players that is trying to incorporate netplay into his game and I give him credit for that, he's thinking ahead.