ESPN: "Novak Djokovic is the greatest tennis player in history"

TheFifthSet

Legend
I think Nole's game far more boring than Nadal's.

For one Djokovic only excels on surfaces that suit his game-style. He lacks rhythm and timing when he plays on anything fast paced (not counting medium paced courts like the USO).

It's laughable to say Djoker is a more offensive player than Nadal at his best. His "offense" to me is counterpunching, whereas Nadal's "offense" comes off as raw, brute strength. Aggression from the baseline. Just because Nadal doesn't go for winners every single ball doesn't mean he is less offensive than one of the most defensive top-players of all time. His brutal strokes push players back and allow Nadal to dictate from the back of the court, Djokovic in comparison just counters until he can find an opening.

And finally, his tennis is not "jaw dropping" because he's just an extremely consistent, well rounded counterpuncher.

Only excels on surfaces that suit his game style?

Dude, have you been following Nadals career on indoor courts? He's won one title his entire career!

Nadal's I/O fh opens up the court better than almost any shot ever, that I will admit, but what's laughable is how you think these guys are on some sort of different plane in terms of style of game. Look at Nadals court positioning! And his position on the return on average. Posters here go nuts when he stands close to the baseline because of how uncommon it is.

Moreover, he most definitely comes to the net less, *does* hit less winners and is usually the less offensive player in their H2H. Djokovic is seen as primarily defensive because his defense is so good. Let's call a spade a spade here.

And finally, we're dabbling in semantics on some of these points but the fact of the matter is: a good return of serve is paramount in today's game. So is good retrieving ability. So is athleticism. So is a great bh. I bring all of these things up because Djokovic has ALL of those things, and is one of the best of all time in each category.

If a player is in the running for "best of all time" in several different strokes/attributes, id say he's clearly a little more than just "extremely consistent"
 

Fedalforever

Semi-Pro
Really, winners count shouldn't be the point you use if you want to compare Nadal favourably to him. Nadal hits less winners than his opponents a higher % of the time than Djokovic does, and I would bet anything that Djokovic has hit more winners than Nadal in at least 75% of their matches.
I didn't mention Nadal, did I? But now you mention him, Nadal used his Fh to end points....probably the best ground stroke in the game when it is on.Djokovic was forced to attack vs Nadal pre 2014 because he could not hang with hi on the baseline consistently. When Andy Murray hits more winners than you on indoor HC despite winning
Iike half the total number of games.......only Chico could say with a straight face that Djokovic is an offensive player. He stopped being offensive in 2008-09
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
The way Djoker controls the point looks defensive a lot of the time, his attacking tendencies only come out when he knows he can hit a clean winner. At least from what I've seen.

I was probably exaggerating a bit, but I still do believe Nadal is the more offensive of the two IMO.

Djokovic is more consistent in edging out (or outright slaughtering) his opponents in terms of winners, but as has been said winners is not the be all and end all - however, it's still worth noting and it showcases how unusual and atypical Nadal's form of offence is.

At his best, Nadal's offence is simply more explosive than Djokovic's and it's more domineering. He's more likely to punish out of nowhere whereas Djokovic is more likely to extract points incrementally through positional pressure. Nadal is the more explosive athlete and shot-maker.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Djokovic is more consistent in edging out (or outright slaughtering) his opponents in terms of winners, but as has been said winners is not the be all and end all - however, it's still worth noting and it showcases how unusual and atypical Nadal's form of offence is.

At his best, Nadal's offence is simply more explosive than Djokovic's and it's more domineering. He's more likely to punish out of nowhere whereas Djokovic is more likely to extract points incrementally through positional pressure. Nadal is the more explosive athlete and shot-maker.
I agree with that. Djoker goes more for angles whereas Nadal just tries to bludgeon you off the court, be it with a lot of winners or not.

One thing people don't realize is that all of those huge shots from Nadal take a toll, especially when he's moving you around and tiring you out instead of going for outright winners. Players say they hate playing Nadal and prefer to play Federer because he ends the points much quicker, giving the players a break.
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
I like that Nadal has been working on his own angles though and he's rolling over a lot of shots off both wings early right at the baseline to use the width of the court more often. He was doing this a lot against Djokovic actually in their last match but he couldn't sustain and was in worse form than he's in now. It's going to be a battle of positioning between Nadal and Djokovic at WTF should they play. Nadal has some new ploys compared to previous years in using the width of the court.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
I didn't mention Nadal, did I? But now you mention him, Nadal used his Fh to end points....probably the best ground stroke in the game when it is on.Djokovic was forced to attack vs Nadal pre 2014 because he could not hang with hi on the baseline consistently. When Andy Murray hits more winners than you on indoor HC despite winning
Iike half the total number of games.......only Chico could say with a straight face that Djokovic is an offensive player. He stopped being offensive in 2008-09

I mentioned Nadal because

a) your username is 'FedalForever'. Thought that was relevant. If you had a beef w/Djokovics game, you should with Nadals as well as their games are not diametrically opposed. Nadal in full flight can be an offensive player (2013 summer), but other times (2009 fall season, 2015 QF where he hit 3 fh winners to Novaks 23) he's a staunch counterpuncher.
b) I was talking about Nadal in my discussion with Sabratha, and you quoted the post.

Most importantly, I never called Djokovic an offensive player, I merely asserted that he is MORE offensive in nature than Nadal and many other top players.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Only excels on surfaces that suit his game style?

Dude, have you been following Nadals career on indoor courts? He's won one title his entire career!

Nadal's I/O fh opens up the court better than almost any shot ever, that I will admit, but what's laughable is how you think these guys are on some sort of different plane in terms of style of game. Look at Nadals court positioning! And his position on the return on average. Posters here go nuts when he stands close to the baseline because of how uncommon it is.

Moreover, he most definitely comes to the net less, *does* hit less winners and is usually the less offensive player in their H2H. Djokovic is seen as primarily defensive because his defense is so good. Let's call a spade a spade here.

And finally, we're dabbling in semantics on some of these points but the fact of the matter is: a good return of serve is paramount in today's game. So is good retrieving ability. So is athleticism. So is a great bh. I bring all of these things up because Djokovic has ALL of those things, and is one of the best of all time in each category.

If a player is in the running for "best of all time" in several different strokes/attributes, id say he's clearly a little more than just "extremely consistent"
How many Cincinnati titles does Djoker have? Less than Nadal.. yet he's called the grinder.

Djoker does return close to the baseline and yes, he does have an aggressive return, but what does he do after that? Go for a clean winner most the time? No. He stands back and grinds the point out until he can find an opening, like what I said.

Offense isn't just winners, guy. That's why Nadal can't be judged on that metric alone. Djoker also comes to the net more often as a last resort, and we've seen that horrible overhead of his when he played guess who at the French Open.

Yes, Djoker has all of those things but just because he has certain fundamentals aggressive players have doesn't mean he's aggressive himself. Much like Murray has a huge backhand but many people would laugh at the idea of him being called "aggressive".

Nole probably only has the best return of all time (still arguable as Agassi had a more explosive return than Nole) and undoubtedly the best backhand. For the most part he is consistent over most categories, but not being the "best" in many (if any) of them.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
I like that Nadal has been working on his own angles though and he's rolling over a lot of shots off both wings early right at the baseline to use the width of the court more often. He was doing this a lot against Djokovic actually in their last match but he couldn't sustain and was in worse form than he's in now. It's going to be a battle of positioning between Nadal and Djokovic at WTF should they play. Nadal has some new ploys compared to previous years in using the width of the court.
I've been mightily impressed with Nadal's latest form to be honest.
 

Fedalforever

Semi-Pro
I mentioned Nadal because

a) your username is 'FedalForever'. Thought that was relevant. If you had a beef w/Djokovics game, you should with Nadals as well as their games are not diametrically opposed. Nadal in full flight can be an offensive player (2013 summer), but other times (2009 fall season, 2015 QF where he hit 3 fh winners to Novaks 23) he's a staunch counterpuncher.
b) I was talking about Nadal in my discussion with Sabratha, and you quoted the post.

Most importantly, I never called Djokovic an offensive player, I merely asserted that he is MORE offensive in nature than Nadal and many other top players.
LOL did you seriously use RG 2015 QF to bolster your argument? Seriously? Let's not be intellectually dishonest here. If you want to be fair and use RG, use set number 5 of RG 2013. Rafa sensing that his yard was in danger blAsted winners from all over the place and Djokovic typically crapped his pants.

Also, Nadal has a much more aesthetically pleasing game although that is obviously subjective. Djokovic is a brilliant retriever and runs better than anyone in history from side to side thanks to ridiculous flexibility, but his game overall is bland and boring for the most part unless he is playing Federer on fast HC where he has to be offensive. I don't blame Novak for being defensive btw. It works. In Paris for example, you knew Murray would end up beating himself...so I don't blame Novak for doing what he had to do. But to suggest Novak is more offensive than most other top players is way over the top when he typically has fewer winners and plays far more percentage shots than the rest.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
LOL did you seriously use RG 2015 QF to bolster your argument? Seriously? Let's not be intellectually dishonest here. If you want to be fair and use RG, use set number 5 of RG 2013. Rafa sensing that his yard was in danger blAsted winners from all over the place and Djokovic typically crapped his pants.

Also, Nadal has a much more aesthetically pleasing game although that is obviously subjective. Djokovic is a brilliant retriever and runs better than anyone in history from side to side thanks to ridiculous flexibility, but his game overall is bland and boring for the most part unless he is playing Federer on fast HC where he has to be offensive. I don't blame Novak for being defensive btw. It works. In Paris for example, you knew Murray would end up beating himself...so I don't blame Novak for doing what he had to do. But to suggest Novak is more offensive than most other top players is way over the top when he typically has fewer winners and plays far more percentage shots than the rest.


Yeah again, you're totally misquoting me. I said many. Not most. Many.

I don't see what's "unfair" about using the 2015 match. He wasn't in top form, yes, but he had very little on his ground strokes and wasn't being offensive AT ALL, in his biggest match of the year. Nadal might have equal or better offensive CAPABILITIES, but in terms of mindset and results he IMO isn't as offensive as Djokovic, who stands closer to the baseline in rallies and particular on the return and takes the ball earlier.

Once again I must say that if we wish to have an idea of how many times their opponents hit more winners than them, a bit of digging should be done. I'd venture to say that Nadals opponents hit more winners than him a greater % of the time than Djokovics do, since we're going that route.
 
D

Deleted member 688153

Guest
Djokovic is more consistent in edging out (or outright slaughtering) his opponents in terms of winners, but as has been said winners is not the be all and end all - however, it's still worth noting and it showcases how unusual and atypical Nadal's form of offence is.

At his best, Nadal's offence is simply more explosive than Djokovic's and it's more domineering. He's more likely to punish out of nowhere whereas Djokovic is more likely to extract points incrementally through positional pressure. Nadal is the more explosive athlete and shot-maker.
Have you considered trying to write about or commentate on tennis in a more official capacity?
Your opinion seems more informed and thought-out than that of many paid commentators. :)
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
If he somehow beats Djokovic I think he will win the whole thing. Dont see it happening though.
If he does beat Djoker he probably loses to Fed (just my opinion). But as you said that's unlikely to happen..
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
Have you considered trying to write about or commentate on tennis in a more official capacity?
Your opinion seems more informed and thought-out than that of many paid commentators. :)

Can't say I have considered it, but you must remember that many here know as much or more than I do. The difference is that I'm more vocal and think out loud. I am aware of my strengths and my limitations.
 
D

Deleted member 688153

Guest
Can't say I have considered it, but you must remember that many here know as much or more than I do. The difference is that I'm more vocal and think out loud. I am aware of my strengths and my limitations.
That's just it though, it's all in the communication with things like commentary.
Federer knows loads about tennis, but I don't know how he'd do as a commentator, for instance.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
How many Cincinnati titles does Djoker have? Less than Nadal.. yet he's called the grinder.

Djoker does return close to the baseline and yes, he does have an aggressive return, but what does he do after that? Go for a clean winner most the time? No. He stands back and grinds the point out until he can find an opening, like what I said.

Offense isn't just winners, guy. That's why Nadal can't be judged on that metric alone. Djoker also comes to the net more often as a last resort, and we've seen that horrible overhead of his when he played guess who at the French Open.

Yes, Djoker has all of those things but just because he has certain fundamentals aggressive players have doesn't mean he's aggressive himself. Much like Murray has a huge backhand but many people would laugh at the idea of him being called "aggressive".

Nole probably only has the best return of all time (still arguable as Agassi had a more explosive return than Nole) and undoubtedly the best backhand. For the most part he is consistent over most categories, but not being the "best" in many (if any) of them.

This is getting a tad bizarre, because so many of these things apply to Nadal just as much.


1. How often does Nadal "go for clean winners most of the time" ? (I didnt claim Djokovic does that).

2. How is it fair to say Djokovic has a game suited to a specific set of conditions when Djokovic on a fast hard court (his worst surface) is STILL better than Nadal indoors (his worst surface) ? So that's a complete double standard. Surely Nadal isn't more all-surface tha Djokovic.

3. Why do you guys keep thinking that I said Djokovic is an aggressive player? I didn't. He's found a great balance between defense and offensive and I would consider him an aggressive counterpuncher. I merely believe he's aggressive in comparison to Nadal, and indeed, in their h2h he is more often the aggressor.

4. I didn't say Djokovic is the absolute best in any of those categories. Just that he's AMONG the best ever in so many categories that to simply call him "consistent" is seriously underestimating him. One can't seriously be historically great at so many things yet still only be considered "consistent" or "well-rounded".
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
That's just it though, it's all in the communication with things like commentary.
Federer knows loads about tennis, but I don't know how he'd do as a commentator, for instance.

I considered starting a video series where I do analysis of key stages in matches and have unfinished video projects of that nature. That's about as far as I've gone thinking about contributing further, probably via a youtube channel.
 

Fedalforever

Semi-Pro
Yeah again, you're totally misquoting me. I said many. Not most. Many.

I don't see what's "unfair" about using the 2015 match. He wasn't in top form, yes, but he had very little on his ground strokes and wasn't being offensive AT ALL, in his biggest match of the year. Nadal might have equal or better offensive CAPABILITIES, but in terms of mindset and results he IMO isn't as offensive as Djokovic, who stands closer to the baseline in rallies and particular on the return and takes the ball earlier.

Once again I must say that if we wish to have an idea of how many times their opponents hit more winners than them, a bit of digging should be done. I'd venture to say that Nadals opponents hit more winners than him a greater % of the time than Djokovics do, since we're going that route.
Using that 2015 QF is like using Novak's 2005 match at the Ao vs Safin to suggest Safin would have dominated Djokovic at the AO.

I've not categorically stated that Nadal is a much more offensive player than Djokovic. His game is more appealing certainly....at least to me. Like I said having the greatest ground stroke (his Fh...probably on par with peak Fed's) does help in that regard. See matches like AO 2009 F to see how offensive Nadal could be when he wanted to. From memory, Djokovic vs Murray at Paris had 20 winners for Murray vs 10 for Djokovic.....in a match where Murray was comprehensively beaten....by comparison, Nadal had 12 to 15 vs the same opponent on a similar court....2015dal...
 

Fedalforever

Semi-Pro
This is getting a tad bizarre, because so many of these things apply to Nadal just as much.


1. How often does Nadal "go for clean winners most of the time" ? (I didnt claim Djokovic does that).

2. How is it fair to say Djokovic has a game suited to a specific set of conditions when Djokovic on a fast hard court (his worst surface) is STILL better than Nadal indoors (his worst surface) ? So that's a complete double standard. Surely Nadal isn't more all-surface tha Djokovic.

3. Why do you guys keep thinking that I said Djokovic is an aggressive player? I didn't. He's found a great balance between defense and offensive and I would consider him an aggressive counterpuncher. I merely believe he's aggressive in comparison to Nadal, and indeed, in their h2h he is more often the aggressor.

4. I didn't say Djokovic is the absolute best in any of those categories. Just that he's AMONG the best ever in so many categories that to simply call him "consistent" is seriously underestimating him. One can't seriously be historically great at so many things yet still only be considered "consistent" or "well-rounded".

Of course Djokovic is not as all surface as Nadal. Nadal has won slams on every surface. Djokovic is more consistent maybe across surfaces, but Nadal's peak on HC(2013 NA swing is better than anything Djokovic has shown despite being an overall greater HC player) and grass 2008(queens and Wimbledon vs prime Fed) is at the very least comparable. Let's not even talk about clay.
 
D

Deleted member 688153

Guest
I considered starting a video series where I do analysis of key stages in matches and have unfinished video projects of that nature. That's about as far as I've gone thinking about contributing further, probably via a youtube channel.
Ah, YouTube. Is there anything you can't get on there?
What we do need is that tennis analysis forum you were talking about.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
This is getting a tad bizarre, because so many of these things apply to Nadal just as much.


1. How often does Nadal "go for clean winners most of the time" ? (I didnt claim Djokovic does that).

He doesn't, like I already said he bludgeons his opponents off the court.

2. How is it fair to say Djokovic has a game suited to a specific set of conditions when Djokovic on a fast hard court (his worst surface) is STILL better than Nadal indoors (his worst surface) ? So that's a complete double standard. Surely Nadal isn't more all-surface tha Djokovic.

I don't think Djoker is a better fast-hard player than Nadal is an indoor-player. If Djoker can't even win a single Cincinnati title I can't say he's more versatile in this comparison.

3. Why do you guys keep thinking that I said Djokovic is an aggressive player? I didn't. He's found a great balance between defense and offensive and I would consider him an aggressive counterpuncher. I merely believe he's aggressive in comparison to Nadal, and indeed, in their h2h he is more often the aggressor.

I don't believe Djoker is more aggressive than Nadal, and I've already previously stated why.

4. I didn't say Djokovic is the absolute best in any of those categories. Just that he's AMONG the best ever in so many categories that to simply call him "consistent" is seriously underestimating him. One can't seriously be historically great at so many things yet still only be considered "consistent" or "well-rounded".

Except it isn't given being "among the best" in a certain category doesn't mean all-around he is the best due to everything adding up. It means he's consistently good across all fields, but not the best in any of them. A best way to describe this (in laymen's terms) is "Jack Of All Trades".
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
Ah, YouTube. Is there anything you can't get on there?
What we do need is that tennis analysis forum you were talking about.

I had an account but it was terminated for copyright infringement- was called FederersL1ama. I have others but have been largely inactive.

There was a big crackdown on tennis accounts showcasing Wimbledon content around the summer of .. I think it was 2013.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
Sabratha, you can't be serious with that first point.

For one thing, even if I conceded that Nadal is better on indoor courts than Djokovic is on fast hc, can you not see how ridiculous it is to say that Djokovics game is only suited to certain set of conditions?

Nadal has 1 indoor title in his entire career, 2 WTF finals and is 15-11 at the WTF.

Djokovic has 5 Cincy finals and 4 Dubai titles. Clearly he's better on fast outdoor HC than Nadal is indoors.

How does your claim ring true for Djokovic but not for Nadal?
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
Sabratha, you can't be serious with that first point.

For one thing, even if I conceded that Nadal is better on indoor courts than Djokovic is on fast hc, can you not see how ridiculous it is to say that Djokovics game is only suited to certain set of conditions?

Nadal has 1 indoor title in his entire career, 2 WTF finals and is 15-11 at the WTF.

Djokovic has 5 Cincy finals and 4 Dubai titles. Clearly he's better on fast outdoor HC than Nadal is indoors.

How does your claim ring true for Djokovic but not for Nadal?
No, because it is.

Nadal's struggles indoors has nothing to do with his game, more to do with his own physical limitations visa vis his knees. At least that's my own honest opinion.
 

TheFifthSet

Legend
No, because it is.

Nadal's struggles indoors has nothing to do with his game, more to do with his own physical limitations visa vis his knees. At least that's my own honest opinion.
Fair enough.

I personally don't think that that alone can explain away a 10 year title drought, but to each their own :)
 

jga111

Hall of Fame
Article: http://espn.go.com/tennis/story/_/id/14119101/why-novak-djokovic-greatest-tennis-player-history
So according to this writer: Simon Barnes, "Djokovic is the greatest tennis player in history".

IMO, it's way too premature to declare so.
Besides, he used anedotical personal opinions such as Djokovic will double bagle say Nastase, Smith, etc. Therefore he's the greatest, there's lack of any substantated meaningful statistics to support his point. Comments?

I'm sorry, but for as long as your half-dozen+ GS short from the all time leader, the assertion that 'Djkokovic is the greatest tennis player in history' is simply embarrassing to those that share that opinion.
 
D

Deleted member 688153

Guest
No, because it is.

Nadal's struggles indoors has nothing to do with his game, more to do with his own physical limitations visa vis his knees. At least that's my own honest opinion.
My opinion is that Novak is okay on fast HC but has had to face FedGOAT on the surface heaps.
Roger has denied him many fast HC titles.

Right now, Novak does have more fast HC credentials than Nadal does indoor credentials to be fair, although I guess level of play is rather subjective.
But from the objective evidence, I'd have to say that Novak is better on fast HC than Nadal is indoors I'm afraid.

Also, Nadal's indoor struggles are due largely to low bounce IMO, I thought that was pretty widely agreed.
Facing Fed and Novak there heaps hasn't helped either.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
My opinion is that Novak is okay on fast HC but has had to face FedGOAT on the surface heaps.
Roger has denied him many fast HC titles.

Right now, Novak does have more fast HC credentials than Nadal does indoor credentials to be fair, although I guess level of play is rather subjective.
But from the objective evidence, I'd have to say that Novak is better on fast HC than Nadal is indoors I'm afraid.

Also, Nadal's indoor struggles are due largely to low bounce IMO, I thought that was pretty widely agreed.
Facing Fed and Novak there heaps hasn't helped either.
I can agree with that, I just don't think Nole is vastly more versatile than Nadal.
 
D

Deleted member 688153

Guest
I can agree with that, I just don't think Nole is vastly more versatile than Nadal.
He's more consistent on his worst surfaces than Nadal is IMO, and his game is probably more complete too, but I think I'd agree that both lose out to, say, Federer, who can show up and basically win on anything the organizers can think of (only ever really losing to Nadalovic anywhere).

I have never seen Federer flounder on a particular surface.
God I want carpet back, Novak's style would be absolutely punished, leaving Fed to hold the trophy.

Blue clay too, Fed just shows up, doesn't care, wins anyway.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
He's more consistent on his worst surfaces than Nadal is IMO, and his game is probably more complete too, but I think I'd agree that both lose out to, say, Federer, who can show up and basically win on anything the organizers can think of (only ever really losing to Nadalovic anywhere).

I have never seen Federer flounder on a particular surface.
God I want carpet back, Novak's style would be absolutely punished, leaving Fed to hold the trophy.

Blue clay too, Fed just shows up, doesn't care, wins anyway.
He's more consistent and well-rounded, I agree. I just don't really think he's more aggressive than Nadal. When it comes to Federer? No question he's more aggressive than Nadal. He ends the points extremely quickly with insane winners, I don't see either Novak or Rafa doing that.

Federer is probably the most consistent player of all time to be honest. His QF streak is hugely underrated and barely if ever mentioned anymore.
 
D

Deleted member 688153

Guest
He's more consistent and well-rounded, I agree. I just don't really think he's more aggressive than Nadal.
He can be, I think he has more natural capacity for it than Nadal, but he almost never actually is, so I'd say you're right.

When it comes to Federer? No question he's more aggressive than Nadal. He ends the points extremely quickly with insane winners, I don't see either Novak or Rafa doing that.

Federer is probably the most consistent player of all time to be honest. His QF streak is hugely underrated and barely if ever mentioned anymore.
Agree. :)
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
He can be, I think he has more natural capacity for it than Nadal, but he almost never actually is, so I'd say you're right.
Probably. Though I'd say Murray's offense is a bit underrated in comparison to these two, he is almost as good as Nole at smacking that huge backhand of his down the line. Both (to me) seem like they can play aggressive, but defense is what they prefer/their forte.
 

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
He's more consistent and well-rounded, I agree. I just don't really think he's more aggressive than Nadal. When it comes to Federer? No question he's more aggressive than Nadal. He ends the points extremely quickly with insane winners, I don't see either Novak or Rafa doing that.

Federer is probably the most consistent player of all time to be honest. His QF streak is hugely underrated and barely if ever mentioned anymore.
@Nathaniel_Near @Firstservingman
Just my 2 cents.
FS is right that Novak, on average, hits more winners than Rafa compared to his opponent. Over the course of their careers, Rafa has, on average, relied more on defense and opponents unforced errors (due to their frustration when they can't hit a clean winner) than Novak has.

However, NN is also right that Rafa's offense is more explosive. He can hit winners from 3-4 meters behind the baseline that Novak and every other player wouldn't even be contemplating.
And there is a kind of subtle offense in his high-bouncing forehand that keeps the opponent on the back foot, unable to attack. But there's a similar subtle offense in Novak's ability to always get the ball deep and change directions as often as he please.
Neither player go for the quick finish and are happy to rally and wait for their opponent to err/overhit or give them the short ball they are looking for. Both of them are more than willing to pound, when they get the short ball. And Rafa's forhand is obviously more devastating in that respect.

Court-positioning wise, Novak's (much) more offensive - as well as mindset wise, I believe.
 

Poisoned Slice

Bionic Poster
hqdefault.jpg


He wasn't talking about Novak, but he had this to say about ESPN this morning.

''ESPN is a frickin joke when it comes to Journalism. Full of easy puff stuff with no substance whatsoever''.

Go Dave. :p
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
The way Djoker controls the point looks defensive a lot of the time, his attacking tendencies only come out when he knows he can hit a clean winner. At least from what I've seen.

I was probably exaggerating a bit, but I still do believe Nadal is the more offensive of the two IMO.

Roger certainly doesn't

Nadal = defensive minded and positioning, with great firepower

Djoko=relatively offensive minded and positioning, with great defense
 
Top