Federer: ''I think both me and Novak are naturally attacking players''

#51
You tell him! What does this Federer guy know about tennis anyway?

I really don’t get why pros insist on having opinions that differ from the TTW collective wisdom. Who do they think they are? :laughing::laughing:
Well, that is the difference between people like you, and me: you have to be told, in order to "know" something. I have my own thinking to rely on.

Oh, BTW, I guess that that means that you believe the thousands upon thousands of stupidities that ATGs of the game throw at the audience all the time, because "they know better".

D-oh!

:cool:
 
#52
Last 15 years or so, power baseline era has been for neutral players, well balanced between defense and attacking game.
Actually, you can not be a top player without top defense game these days.
It's just different strategy to balance defense and attacking game.

Federer: greatest front runner i've ever seen. Take 1st blood and raise level to end a match ASAP. But if match get extended and pressured, he becomes defensive.
Nadal: do not take risk unless it is necessary. But if pressured he is the most aggressive. Ultimate clutch player.
Djokovic: He stays balanced consistently from beginning to the end.

Overall, the game has never been more defensive than last 15 years or so, in entire history of tennis.
You have to run well, put the ball back. Long rallies on slow bouncy surfaces( including Wimbledon)
Power baseline era is actually clay court tennis of past eras.
 
Last edited:
#56
Naturally they both are. Especially when they play other each, that’s what makes the match up great.

Djoko tends to mix his game up more. Novak can win playing aggressive, he can also win by staying in the point and relying on his great defence.

Fed can play both ways too but he normally always plays aggressive in all matches. Djoko in matches, mixes his approach depending on how the match is going!
 
#57
If he’s naturally aggressive, isn’t it devolving rather than evolving to resort to a defensive style that goes against his natural instinct?
Nothing's wrong with that. Fedr used to be a S&Ver before turning into an all-court player, according to Beatles Fan's criteria it means he has become a more defensive player. You may call it devolving, but it has brought him 20 Slams.
 
#59
Attacking is, IMO, going for winners as much as possible, regardless of the manner chosen.

Neither Nadal, nor Djokovic fit that description.

:cool:
I think that's called "yolo" these days. :p

Seriously, I think people can have different opinions on what "attacking" means; some people may think of "attacking the net" which you can't really accuse Djokovic of doing :p but you can also play an aggressive baseline game.

In the end, I personally wouldn't necessarily call him attacking, but I wouldn't call him defensive either. His amazing defence allows him to stay in points and then turn defence into attack when he is in a better position in a rally. Certainly he has hit no shortage of spectacular winners over time.

Moreover, we should remember that Fed also reigned in his attacking instincts and played the percentages, when he was at the height of his powers and his baseline game was enough to beat anyone pretty much every day. (Ok, almost everyone, with the exception of one guy with a vicious spinny lefty forehand, and then that was mostly on clay.)

Even then, I would say that Federer had the more aggressive game. But you could see with Djokovic e.g. in _those_ USO semis that he was quite willing to take the risk and go for the winner.
 
#60
Federer thinks Djokovic has an attacking game and even followed it up with saying they have very aggressive points so he is not just talking about when Novak came up, he is talking about him overall. It's not the first time he talks about this. It's funny people call Novak a pusher that's all.

I trust Federers knowledge of the game rather than taking Tennis_Hands words for it, and I also trust my eyes aswell.
2011 Djokovic vs Nadal in Rome. That's as attacking as you can be vs. an in-form Nadal on clay. I mean, Djokovic wasn't stupidly rushing to the net (why would he lol) but he had unbelievably agressive FH and BH in that specific match.

Now, I don't know the stats and don't care for them either. THAT Djokovic in that match was a defender, attacker, grinder and anything you can be in tennis.
 
#63
Djokovic is one of the best, if not the best I have seen someone play turning defense into offense. Those who say he (and Nadal) is just a defensive player, i really question their knowledge of the game. Sure he is not a purely offensive player like Federer, but then again, not many are in the same category as the Swiss Maestro. Ferrer is a classic example of a purely defensive player, certainly not Djoko.
 
#64
Djokovic is an attacking player by nature, but he’s turned into a defensive player because that gives him better results. And there’s nothing wrong with that.
Djokovic’s style changes based on his opponent. His matches with aged are amazingly attacking, against Murray are excruciatingly defensive, and those with Nadal are somewhere in between.

I suspect it’s easier to successfully play defensive as a naturally attacking player than vice versa and so I think it’s very likely Novak is a naturally aggressive player, who has introduced defensiveness to his game against the right opponents to optimize his results.
 
#65
In truth, for Novak attacking or defense is just strategy tailored for a specific opponent. He has different gameplans. He has even different gameplans for serving games and return games - he can play as an aggressive attacker when serving, while he plays rather passive and keep the ball in when receiving serves. When he's in a good form he can both attack and defend at highest level. Anyway because of different strategies employed I can't consider him an attacker or a defensive player - he is both.
 
#68
Who are we to disagree with Fed. That being said, there is no way that Djokovic is a "naturally" aggressive player. See his matches against players such as Wawrinka or any other big hitters and he is just defending and running.
Fed, OTOH, is aggressive no matter who he plays.

A naturally aggressive player, always tries to attack no matter who is on the other side of the net. I don't think Djokovic is that player, as Federer himself is.
It's all about matchups. Someone can make attacking players defend most of the time if he doesn't suit him.
 

K-H

Hall of Fame
#69
When the GOAT himself is saying it, well....

I have always classified both Federer and Djokovic as natural attacking players. Federer is the more attacking player of the two, but Djokovic by nature is one also. Nadal and Murray are more naturally defensive orientated counter punchers.
It’s unfair to put Nadal together with Murray. I think Federer and Djokovic are probably more aggressive looking at it all year round but Nadal fully fit I can be as aggressive as Djokovic if not more at times therefore IMO I don’t think you can put him at the same level as Murray.
I’ll put into context as well,
Nadal vs Djokovic at Wimbledon 2018, Nadal had considerably more baseline winners than Djokovic in that match.
 
#70
I question how much all this really matters, even assuming that tennis does matter to all of us. I do laugh whenever someone refers to Novak as a pusher or Rafa as a moonballer. They're missing some great tennis.

There are different ways to attack, or to be aggressive. With Novak, we mostly see it in his return of serve, and when at his best, the way he can take balls early and redirect down the line with both wings, taking the upper hand in rallies. He doesn't have Fed's inclination to finish as many points at the net nor Rafa's instincts at the net, but obviously he can and has volleyed well throughout his career.
 
#71
In truth, for Novak attacking or defense is just strategy tailored for a specific opponent. He has different gameplans. He has even different gameplans for serving games and return games - he can play as an aggressive attacker when serving, while he plays rather passive and keep the ball in when receiving serves. When he's in a good form he can both attack and defend at highest level. Anyway because of different strategies employed I can't consider him an attacker or a defensive player - he is both.
Sure, I would label Novak defensive, if offense/ defense were absolutes.

Then I will watch him return serves right back to the server's feet, and think "that's incredibly offensive!"

So I think your post is good and sums it up nicely :)
 
#73
You tell him! What does this Federer guy know about tennis anyway?

I really don’t get why pros insist on having opinions that differ from the TTW collective wisdom. Who do they think they are? :laughing::laughing:
While I understand your point, let's not pretend like every pro speaks the truth and nothing but the truth. We shouldn't completely discard everything they say, but let's not delve into the other extreme and take their words as absolute truth without questioning them.

Cases in point: McEnroe and Wilander among others.
 
#74
It’s unfair to put Nadal together with Murray. I think Federer and Djokovic are probably more aggressive looking at it all year round but Nadal fully fit I can be as aggressive as Djokovic if not more at times therefore IMO I don’t think you can put him at the same level as Murray.
I’ll put into context as well,
Nadal vs Djokovic at Wimbledon 2018, Nadal had considerably more baseline winners than Djokovic in that match.
Yeah, Nadal seemed to attack more than Djokovic in their Wimb SF. Djokovic was the more defensive player and it was mostly his serve that kept him in the match.
 
#76
This thread is hilarious. People, mostly Fedfans, know better than Federer himself. Talking about how he is playing mind games or how he must have an angle.


Also please don't try the "fed said he is playing better than ever did you believe him then? " Or "fed has said he was the underdog when he wasn't " games.

Saying whether a player is offensive or defensive doesn't confer a competitive advantage like commenting on your own level (theoretically) could. There is no "angle "

Very instructive to see how people will continue to argue in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary if something offends their worldview. This can apply to things outside of tennis...

FWIW Djoko is clearly an athletic baseliner that dictates points with court positioning. He tends to engage in longer rallies as that suits him the most. But he retains an offensive bent with his taking the ball early and taking charge of the rallies early and dictating play. Also has excellent first strikes which suit well on grass. He is a blend of offense and defense who plays the more athletic based game but it is obvious why he would be seen as more offensive in spirit than Nadal or Murray.

And there is nothing bad about being defensive either! It's just people here think that. So silly
 
#78
Well, that is the difference between people like you, and me: you have to be told, in order to "know" something. I have my own thinking to rely on.

Oh, BTW, I guess that that means that you believe the thousands upon thousands of stupidities that ATGs of the game throw at the audience all the time, because "they know better".

D-oh!

:cool:
I know! I trust you more than this kid Federer. :cool::cool:
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
#80
There's no clear distinction between an attacking/aggressive and defensive/pusher player. They all fall on the grey area.

From a scale 0 to 10 with 0 being an absolute attack/aggressive type and 10 being an absolute defensive/pusher, I would rate Nole at level 7, Federer at 4.

The player who is the closest to level 0 I would say Martina Navratilova, and closest to 10 would be David Ferrer.
 
Top