GOAT Returner (Djokovic vs Agassi)

[TheRed]

Agassi was aced more because he played more matches and he faced big servers on truly fast surfaces. The fastest surface used today would be considered medium fast at most in the 90's. Also, the main difference between Agassi's and Djokovic's return is that Agassi was FORCED to do more because he knew that if he just put it back in play the server would finish the point with a volley winner afterwards.

When Djokovic's reflexes and movement decline his "great" return of serve will suddenly dissapear because he won't have the goods anymore to back it up. Agassi remained a top quality returner until he retired, basically. Look at some of the returns he pulled off against Roddick in Cincinnati 2004 or against Fed in the US finals in 2005.

I generally agree with you. Yes, Agassi got aced a lot but the truth was, even in his era, he was known to get aced a lot but that didn't make him less than the greatest returner in his era. I still think Agassi is better by virtue of what you said, Djokovic has a history of struggling with guys like Karlovic and Isner, the type of players which Agassi would beat pretty handily. I remember one US Open, one player(can't remember which one) had a really impressive serving record of not having been broken in XX amount of service games. He played Agassi and got broken in like the 1st game and a total of over 10 times in the match. It was amazing.

 

[TheRed]

well it's cause of the backhand and he always chips it. Give him one of those to his forehands and he will murder it, or used to.

Well, that still makes him an average returner, especially compared to Agassi or Djokovic.

 

[Noelan]

Both are one of the best returners of all time. There is a difference on how these two players approached return of serve.
First Serve:
Andre did not have an adept lateral movement owing to his less flexible torso, hence his return of serve was based on to wait for the ball to get to his hitting zone, and once it was there he could hit an aggressive return. He used to make educated guesses where the server will serve, one of the funny examples was his encounters with Boris, he knew where Boris was going to serve by observing his tongue motion , but those guesses where after all guesses and for this reason he was aced a lot and he did not care about this as he knew once he got on top of the ball he could put the opponent in an uncomfortable situation.
Novak's return of serve is based on principle of getting the back right at the opponent's feet or close to the baseline, or in other words neutralizing the first serve, in this way it gives his baseline game more chances of winning the point.

Second Serve:
Players usually hit second serves probably less than 100 mph, hence Andre had more time to get into a position where he could hit an aggressive return. His idea was same in either of the serves, only difference was on 1st serves he got less chances to impose his ROS whereas on 2nd serves he had more opportunities.

Novak has a different way of handling the second serve, he does not go for the baseline, but rather redirects the ball just like he does during baseline rallies but with a little bit more aggression and uses the pace of the ball for redirection, and since the opponent is still yet to get back to his rally position he gets caught off guard, and loses the point.

As far as the surfaces and racquets are concerned it could be said that both of them had certain advantages over the other. On one hand if we say Andre played on faster conditions hence he had a better hand eye coordination, then it is also to be noted that the racquets and strings were of different make then, and on the other hand if it is said Novak is playing on slower conditions then it is to be noted, since then the racquets and strings have improved and allows players to hit the ball harder, hence it negates the advantages each has over the other.

In my opinion Novak has slightly better ROS than Andre.

Great post and excellent observations of both players .
Thank you!

 

[TheFifthSet]

I considered this, as you will read on my post. That's why I said that Novak is a better defender.

And yet this isn't taken into consideration when judging who the better returner is. Why exactly is that? It's basically put into a separate category.

Silly me, I somehow thought that getting the ball back was crucial to the return. Again, if I want to say things that'll suit my argument, I can say that Agassi teeing off on second serves hit near his strike zone are more of a judge of how great his groundstrokes are than his "return." I think that's semantical, but it's just as valid as saying Djokovic getting a higher % of returns doesn't do him any favours in this comparison. Of course him being a better defender aids him, why wouldn't the two overlap? Just like you need great groundstrokes and timing to have a good return, it also helps to have good flexibility and be able to get balls back.

Fwiw, I was a bit bemused by your first statement ("so you think Krajicek is a better returner than Agassi eh") because it was an utter strawman. If you read my post you'd see that I think Agassi is a phenomenal returner -- otherwise I wouldn't think the comparison to be so close. What I stated was that a big part of the return is getting the ball back in play to begin with, and it was an area where Agassi struggled at times. He made up for it by killing second serves no doubt -- that's why he's on the short list of great returners. I just don't think he's far and away the best like some claim. He was never in the top 5 in first serve return points won in his career, and this is with a world-class baseline game that rivals anyones. In fact, here is where he placed every year in the 90s starting from '91 in first serve return points won:

39
42
23
28
20
22
N/A
6
6




As for his height being used to explain away his average defensive return, well, I don't see how that's relevant. It isn't as if there is some inch-for-inch return category. If his height/lack of range impedes his returning ability, it's a mark against him. It's akin to saying that Rochus has a serve that is similar in quality to Federer's when you take into account the 8 inch height difference.

 

[TheFifthSet]

As good as Djokovic's returns are, he doesn't actually have that great a record against big servers, and this is on slower surfaces than the ones that Andre used to play on.

Going to give the edge to Andre, but Djokovic does punish second serves on a consistent basis far better than Andre did (as I recall).

It has to be the other way around. Agassi never finished in the top 5 in first serve return points won, and even in some of his slam winning years he finished outside the top 20-30. Agassi could rope a second serve better than anybody, and probably slightly better than Djokovic, but he conceded too much returning first serves.

 

[TheFifthSet]

It was a lot damn harder to win points on the returns back then.

The problem is that the data doesn't bear this out.

The tour-wide % of return points won is lower than its ever been, players are holding a higher % of the time and more aces are being hit. The conditions are slower, sure, but the equipment of today definitely seems to favour servers as much as it does returners.

 

[tennis_pro]

Remaining silent is a lot better than just saying no, no, no to facts. But since you really like to spread a lot of negativity around here anyway, I guess I should have avoided this. Too high expectations from this place.

I wasnt interested in this discussion anymore.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

I think Connors could obviously hit a lot of winners off the serve as Agassi did but I also believe that Connors got more serves into play than Agassi. I also believe that defensively Connors was quicker and faster so he could win points that Agassi would not.

The thing is that Agassi is far more recent than Borg and Connors and his great returning is still in their minds.

Well I grew up watching Agassi and he do was a great returner but not a god like people are making him, I can understand if somebody make thread for Connors as better returner which may be true but Novak is so consistent with his returns in compare to Agassi.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Those who think that Djokovic has better returns than Agassi have absolutely no clue.It's Agassi and it ain't even close. I wonder what Djokovic would do against the Sampras serve on fast surfaces with Pete hanging on the net within a second. Djokovic is great in putting the return back in play and because he's a way better mover than Agassi he can slowly turn the point around in his favor. If he did the same against someone like Sampras Pete would be putting the volleys away time after time.

And Sampras was just one of many in that era, take any other serve-and-volleyer with a big serve like Krajicek or Becker.

Djokovic also struggles against the best servers on tour. BIG TIME. Both Isner and Karlovic give him fits. Owlderer can push him to the limit on his SERVE ALONE (2014 Wimbledon). Anderson almost beat him at Wimbledon with more than half of his work done from his serve. Roddick led him 5-3 in the h2h despite losing his monster game in 2004 and becoming a pusher with a big serve. Look what happened in Dubai 2008.

A big reason for this is that, in a vacuum, Karlovic and Isner have better service games than just about anybody in the 90s. They are both able to get their massive serves in close to 70% of the time. Nobody from the 90s combined pace and accuracy like they did. Height plays a role in that, as does the equipment. The best servers of the 90s could only brandish their big first serves about 55-60% of the time. Landing them in at 70% was practically unheard of, unless a player made a concerted effort to trade pace for more consistency. This shielded Agassi, to an extent, because as noted his first serve return wasn't all that special.

In any event Djokovic's record against the best servers is still pretty great

Fed 23-22
Berdych 22-2
Isner 8-2
Anderson 5-1
Tsonga 14-7
Cilic 14-0
Raonic 5-0 (just as good as serve as Roddick if not better fwiw)
Soderling 6-1
Lopez 6-1
Gulbis 6-1
Guccione 3-0
Karlovic 1-2
Muller 2-0
Roddick 4-5
Del Potro 11-2
Fish 7-0
Querrey 8-1
Ljubicic 7-2
Safin 0-2

Agassi;

Sampras 14-20
Becker 10-5
Martin 13-5
Krajicek 4-3
Ivanisevic 4-3
Rusedski 9-2
Edberg 6-3
McEnroe 2-2
Enqvist 5-5
Stich 6-0
Ljubicic 2-2
Roddick 5-1
Rafter 10-5
Safin 2-3
Federer 3-8
Rosset 4-2
Dent 5-0
Wayne Arthurs 2-0
Henman 2-2
Lopez 2-1
Johansson 6-1
Scud 6-2
Muller 1-1

Clearly both could dispatch the biggest servers at a high clip.

 

[RudyHuxtable]

 

[PeterHo]

Different qualities required for both eras. I agree it's harder to hit clean return winners today but with great movement and groundstrokes it's a gazillion times easier to put the ball in play and slowly work your way into a point. Because we're talking about the ROS alone and not what's coming afterwards - Agassi wins this by a country mile.

I would agree if agassi didnt get aced as much as he did. Theres really no excuse for getting aced so many times by serves that are actually slower than today. A lot of the times he was not even going for it. You rarely see that happen with novak.

 

[tennis_pro]

I would agree if agassi didnt get aced as much as he did. Theres really no excuse for getting aced so many times by serves that are actually slower than today. A lot of the times he was not even going for it. You rarely see that happen with novak.

Completely different times, I remember someone said (was it Becker?) that the way points were played on grass courts in particular that if the server won the first 2 points to get to 30-0 the returner could've tanked the next 2 points because there was literally no chance he was gonna break. That also implied on several other courts like fast HC (which were truly fast) or carpet which ain't use anymore. Right now, you rarely see top guys tank points even if they are 40-0 down in the return games.

 

[Blocker]

Seriously, tennis fans today are clueless. Agasssi got aced alot because there were alot of tournaments on fast courts. Djokovic would be aced alot too in Agassi's era. I'm tipping these plastic tennis fans also think that humans roamed the earth during the triassic period sending eachother snapchats.

 

[every7]

Come on. Is that all you say to defend your opinion? What the f is self-evident? Who the hell are "all tennis fans"? Your argument is so girly - very careless and irresponsible.

Nadal is not an exception. He just brings things to a new level.

Like you. You bring the term "silly" to a new level, though there're countless idiots out there.

This has escalated unnecessarily. I will have to agree to disagree because things have become personalized in an unfortunate way. Disappointing.......

 

[PeterHo]

Completely different times, I remember someone said (was it Becker?) that the way points were played on grass courts in particular that if the server won the first 2 points to get to 30-0 the returner could've tanked the next 2 points because there was literally no chance he was gonna break. That also implied on several other courts like fast HC (which were truly fast) or carpet which ain't use anymore. Right now, you rarely see top guys tank points even if they are 40-0 down in the return games.

That's the mental part of the game.

Given that agassis return game win % is similar to novaks, theres no reason to "tank" 0_30 down. You keep saying agassi played on faster courts but the fact is he had a very high return game win % regardless which means at 0_30 down he still has good chances of breaking, on those "faster" crts.

If as you say he tanked those points then his return points won early in the game must be even higher. In that case you can argue he has a better ROS but he's mentally weaker which pegged back his return win %.

 

[tennis_pro]

That's the mental part of the game.

Given that agassis return game win % is similar to novaks, theres no reason to "tank" 0_30 down. You keep saying agassi played on faster courts but the fact is he had a very high return game win % regardless which means at 0_30 down he still has good chances of breaking, on those "faster" crts.

If as you say he tanked those points then his return points won early in the game must be even higher. In that case you can argue he has a better ROS but he's mentally weaker which pegged back his return win %.

No, Agassi wasn't immune to avoiding 30-0 situations. He had his portion like everyone else. However he won one of the first 2 points more probably often than anyone else.

 

[cockneyDjoker]

Djokovic easily. He's the best returner of all time.

 

[6august]

Some of you are unbelievably clueless and ignorance. Answer my questions above, or admit that you're just butthurt:

Now I'll tell you why Agassi is not greater (actually I just repeat what is said a thousand times before)

1. Racquet:

Agassi's stick is 2 times bigger than Nole's. You don't have to play tennis and still know that it's much easier to return with a bigger stick.

2. String:

Agassi used gut but his opponents used gut, too.

Nole uses poly (actually half poly, half gut) and guess what do his opponents use? Poly! Surprise?!

It's ridiculous to say it's easier for Nole than Agassi, unless Nole's opponents all still use gut.

3. If you don't believe 2., just look at the charts below:

http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/PUBLICATIONS/46. GrandSlamStats.pdf

You'll see the average serve speed of all 4 Slams keeps increasing and currently it's significantly higher than 20 years ago.

So the myth of Fast courts >>> faster serves is now proven to be BS.

 

[6august]

1 Sam Groth 263.4 km/h (163.7 mph) 2012 Busan Open Challenger Tennis[5][6]
2 Albano Olivetti 257.5 km/h (160 mph) 2012 Internazionali Trofeo Lame Perrel–Faip[7]
3 John Isner 253 km/h (157.2 mph) 2016 Davis Cup
4 Ivo Karlović 251 km/h (156 mph) 2011 Davis Cup[8]
Jerzy Janowicz[note 1] 2012 Pekao Szczecin Open[9]
6 Milos Raonic 250 km/h (155.3 mph) 2012 Rogers Cup[10]
7 Andy Roddick 249 km/h (155 mph) 2004 Davis Cup[11][12]
8 Roscoe Tanner[note 2] 246 km/h (153 mph) 1978 American Airlines Tennis Games
9 Joachim Johansson 245 km/h (152 mph) 2004 Davis Cup[13]
Feliciano López 2014 Aegon Championships
11 Hubert Hurkacz 243 km/h (151 mph) 2016 Davis Cup
12 Marius Copil 242.0 km/h (150.4 mph) 2015 Australian Open
13 Taylor Dent 241.1 km/h (149.8 mph) 2006 ABN AMRO World Tennis Tournament[12]
14 Ernests Gulbis 240.3 km/h (149.3 mph) 2007 St. Petersburg Open
15 Greg Rusedski 240 km/h (149 mph) 1998 Newsweek Champions Cup[14]
Andy Murray 240 km/h (149 mph) 2016 Davis Cup

 

[6august]

17 Dmitry Tursunov 237 km/h (147 mph) 2006 Davis Cup
Jo-Wilfried Tsonga 2014 Rogers Cup
19 Gaël Monfils 235 km/h (146 mph) 2007 Legg Mason Tennis Classic [12]
Dušan Vemić 2008 Countrywide Classic[12]
Marin Cilic 2016 Davis Cup
22 Ričardas Berankis 234.0 km/h (145.4 mph) 2011 Open d'Orléans[15]
Stanislas Wawrinka 2014 Davis Cup
24 Ivan Ljubičić 233 km/h (145 mph) 2007 Pacific Life Open
Grigor Dimitrov 2013 Aegon Championships
26 Mardy Fish 232 km/h (144 mph) 2007 Pacific Life Open[12]
Fernando Verdasco 2009 French Open[12]
Marcin Matkowski 2009 ATP World Tour Finals
Viktor Troicki 2013 Davis Cup[16]
30 Roger Federer 230 km/h (143 mph) 2010 Gerry Weber Open
Martin Verkerk 2003 Breil Milano Indoor
Daniel Brands Intersport Heilbronn Open
Robin Söderling 2010 ATP World Tour Finals
Jiří Veselý 2014 Wimbledon

 

[6august]

35 Mark Phillipoussis 229 km/h (142 mph) 1997 Franklin Templeton Classic[17]
Mikhail Youzhny 2005 Davis Cup
Ilija Bozoljac 2011 Intersport Heilbronn Open
Jérémy Chardy 2013 Australian Open
Alexander Zverev 2016 Davis Cup
40 Sam Querrey 227 km/h (141 mph) 2009 Wimbledon
Jack Sock 2012 BB&T Atlanta Open
Gilles Simon 2015 Australian Open
Ryan Harrison 2015 BNP Paribas Open
Alejandro Gómez 2015 Claro Open Colombia
Reilly Opelka 2015 US Open
46 Fernando González 226.0 km/h (140.4 mph) 2009 French Open
Tomáš Berdych 2009 French Open
Benjamin Becker 2008 Australian Open
Dominic Thiem 2015 Italian Open
Marcel Granollers 2015 Australian Open[18]

 

[6august]

51 Julián Alonso 225.3 km/h (140 mph) 1997 Waldbaum's Hamlet Cup
Gilles Elseneer 2003 Davidoff Swiss Indoors
Nicolás Almagro 2009 French Open
Juan Martín del Potro 2009 Rogers Cup
Marcos Baghdatis 2010 BMW Open
Thiemo de Bakker 2010 Gerry Weber Open
James Duckworth 2013 Australian Open
Victor Estrella Burgos 2015 Claro Open Colombia
Frank Dancevic 2016 Davis Cup

 

[mightyrick]

1) Connors
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2) Agassi
3) Djokovic

 

[timnz]

Nole is just a taller version of agassi, so he returns better.

Theres no way a 180cm guy can reach as many balls as nole does. Thats why agassi got aced a lot more, even though serves nowadays are FASTER.

I can't agree. Height (as long as it is beyond some minimum) doesn't seem to be relevant. If anthing the really tall guys movement may hamper their ability to move into the direction of the ball. The other great returner was Connors at 5ft 10". You got players like 6ft 4" Ivanisevic copying Connors in the hope of emulating his return.

Is there any evidence that serves today are faster? I know the clock says faster - but it is common knowledge that it simply returns faster times for the same speed ball. Case in point - the fastest Ivanisevic served in his prime was around 136-138. In his 40's he has been clocked at around 145. Now is it likely that he is a faster server in his 40's? I doubt it....it is clear that the speed camera is just returning faster speeds for the same speed ball.

 

[xFedal]

I can't agree. Height (as long as it is beyond some minimum) doesn't seem to be relevant. If anthing the really tall guys movement may hamper their ability to move into the direction of the ball. The other great returner was Connors at 5ft 10". You got players like 6ft 4" Ivanisevic copying Connors in the hope of emulating his return.

Is there any evidence that serves today are faster? I know the clock says faster - but it is common knowledge that it simply returns faster times for the same speed ball. Case in point - the fastest Ivanisevic served in his prime was around 136-138. In his 40's he has been clocked at around 145. Now is it likely that he is a faster server in his 40's? I doubt it....it is clear that the speed camera is just returning faster speeds for the same speed ball.

Timnz Your thrice my age, of all people you should know that Nole is better returner than Aggasi, if you could chose to have Noles return or Aggasi I would expect you to make the smart choice and chose Nole.

 

[nmanimaran15]

Who are those big servers that connors faced in his career? How is he much ahead of agassi?Let me know it.Really, I don't know about 70's or 80's.

 

[Meles]

Coria has the best first serve return points won all surfaces by a wide, wide margin. Coria also has the highest break points converted on all surfaces by 1 percent. Coria converted 48% of break points to Djkovic 44% on clay. This advantage probably stems from having a better first serve return on clay than Djoko. In 2003 Coria won 40% of all first serve return points and coverted 49% of break points. Strong, strong case for Coria having the best return.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/guillermo-coria-best-returner.429337/

 

[PeterHo]

No, Agassi wasn't immune to avoiding 30-0 situations. He had his portion like everyone else. However he won one of the first 2 points more probably often than anyone else.

I'm happy with agassi winning more return points early but tanking more at 0_30.

I can't agree. Height (as long as it is beyond some minimum) doesn't seem to be relevant. If anthing the really tall guys movement may hamper their ability to move into the direction of the ball. The other great returner was Connors at 5ft 10". You got players like 6ft 4" Ivanisevic copying Connors in the hope of emulating his return.

Is there any evidence that serves today are faster? I know the clock says faster - but it is common knowledge that it simply returns faster times for the same speed ball. Case in point - the fastest Ivanisevic served in his prime was around 136-138. In his 40's he has been clocked at around 145. Now is it likely that he is a faster server in his 40's? I doubt it....it is clear that the speed camera is just returning faster speeds for the same speed ball.

Check the height of goalies. Returning relies on reaction and reach. Shorter players have good reaction but poor reach. Theres actually an optimal height and i dont think its 180, not in this era anyway.

Do u know what u r talking about? Speed cameras giving different results for the same speed ball?????? Speed cameras is science, and if u dont believe in science there's nothing that can convince you.

There can be multiple reasons why older goran serves faster. Racket tech. Or maybe as he got older he's grown a more muscular arm, or even got fatter, so his serve became more powerful. A heavier person can serve bigger than a lighter guy and that has nothing to do with age.

Yes theres tons of evidence that shows serve speeds increased, eg. University research. Its common knowledge. Read @6augusts
comments in this thread.

 

[Meles]

?? yet he chose Agassi.
To me, Murray def. belongs on any shortlist. His numbers careerwise are as good as Djoko's and he's worse than Djoko once the rally is going. I.e. his returns can't be much worse, if at all. Hewitt's up there too, but just shy of Connors, Agassi, Djoko and Murray to me.
Too young for anything prior to the 90's, so there might be good returners, I'm simply not giving credit. I mention Connors as he's famed for his return.

The only one who mentions Murray and he's clearly up there with a very nice first serve return on hard courts. On grass Hewitt stands out for return games won. I think I'd admit that perhaps clay and grass court numbers can be thrown out for deciding the best returner. Clay is so slow that the numbers would be greatly affected by the players prowess on the surface. Grass is such a small part of the tour that just usinng the hard court stats is probably most telling:
CAREER RETURN GAMES WON ON HARD FROM ALL COUNTRIES
PLAYER PERCENTAGE GAMES WON TOTAL GAMES MATCHES
1 Andre Agassi 32 2,325 7,257 615
2 Novak Djokovic 32 2,029 6,252 536
3 Michael Chang 32 1,960 6,161 526
4 Andy Murray 32 1,865 5,750 479
5 Stefan Edberg 31 916 2,989 241
6 Lleyton Hewitt 30 1,978 6,562 525
7 David Ferrer 30 1,727 5,791 477
8 Guillermo Coria 30 403 1,347 112

The above have to be the modern contenders (and ancient Connors is not to shabby from 1991 onwards.)

CAREER BREAK POINTS CONVERTED ON HARD FROM ALL COUNTRIES (filtered out players with less matches and brought Coria up)
PLAYER PERCENTAGE POINTS WON TOTAL POINTS MATCHES
2 Novak Djokovic 45 2,029 4,482 536
6 Michael Chang 44 1,960 4,457 526
7 Nikolay Davydenko 44 1,482 3,347 435
8 Rainer Schuettler 44 1,141 2,595 364
9 Marcelo Rios 44 785 1,802 255
10 Stefan Edberg 44 916 2,095 241
11 Brad Gilbert 44 496 1,115 153
20 Andre Agassi 43 2,325 5,347 615
21 Lleyton Hewitt 43 1,978 4,555 525
22 Andy Murray 43 1,865 4,312 479
23 David Ferrer 43 1,727 4,021 477
40 Guillermo Coria 43 403 948 112

Above you have to wonder what a lower break point conversion rate means for a player like Agassi, etc. It took Agassi more break opportunities to break as much as Djokovic. Below we'll see that Agassi is also trailing the leaders in winning first serve points. First serve return points won seems to be a key ingredient to break point conversion.

CAREER 1ST SERVE RETURN POINTS WON ON HARD FROM ALL COUNTRIES (heavily filtered)
PLAYER % POINTS WON TOTAL POINTS MATCHES
1 Andy Murray 34 7,697 22,851 479
3 Novak Djokovic 33 8,144 24,536 536
4 Stefan Edberg 33 3,955 11,956 241
8 Guillermo Coria 33 1,701 5,190 112
12 Roger Federer 32 12,092 37,341 785
13 Michael Chang 32 7,465 23,276 526
14 Lleyton Hewitt 32 7,772 24,640 525
15 David Ferrer 32 7,273 22,574 477
16 Rafael Nadal 32 7,014 22,229 472
17 Nikolay Davydenko 32 6,354 19,985 435
27 Andre Agassi 31 8,794 27,993 615

With 2nd serve return points we Agassi making up the difference. Despite leading this stat by 1 percent, we we see that not doing as well on first serve points hurt Agassi a lot on break point conversion.

CAREER 2ND SERVE RETURN POINTS WON ON HARD FROM ALL COUNTRIES (heavily filtered)
PLAYER % POINTS WON TOTAL POINTS MATCHES
1 Andre Agassi 56 11,669 20,851 615
2 Novak Djokovic 55 9,251 16,701 536
3 Michael Chang 55 10,052 18,236 526
4 Andy Murray 55 8,516 15,375 479
7 Lleyton Hewitt 54 9,869 18,328 525
8 David Ferrer 54 8,583 15,831 477
9 Rafael Nadal 54 7,863 14,633 472
10 Thomas Enqvist 54 8,189 15,295 459
11 Nikolay Davydenko 54 7,224 13,486 435
12 David Nalbandian 54 5,480 10,079 285
13 Stefan Edberg 54 4,383 8,191 241
14 Thomas Muster 54 3,404 6,355 177
33 Guillermo Coria 53 2,009 3,770 112

From looking at this, Chang is clearly in the conversation and also Edberg which is a surprise. These stats appear to start in the 1991 season so Chang and Agassi will have an advantage that the early years of their career are filtered out which would help their numbers. Hard courts were not Coria's favorite surface, so his overall numbers are pretty favorable considering his game was not suited for hard courts. Ferrrer's case might be stronger than Coria's.

I come back to Edberg. First serve return points won is very high and this helps Edberg break. Its an amazing stat given that Edberg is more of a serve and volley player. Edberg has the GOAT RETURN?

 

[Chanwan]

Coria has the best first serve return points won all surfaces by a wide, wide margin. Coria also has the highest break points converted on all surfaces by 1 percent. Coria converted 48% of break points to Djkovic 44% on clay. This advantage probably stems from having a better first serve return on clay than Djoko. In 2003 Coria won 40% of all first serve return points and coverted 49% of break points. Strong, strong case for Coria having the best return.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/guillermo-coria-best-returner.429337/

Coria played 59 % of his matches on clay, which inflates his resume. Hence, good thing you do it on hard.
The fact that he's so relatively close to Rafa as he is, speaks to his advantage though: http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/stats/return-games-won/all/clay/all/

Also, while the stats can help us, they are not the end of the argument.
For example, I think there's a strong case for saying Novak is doing better than Murray if the rally is in neutral career wise. Him and Novak are doing extremely similar on first serve points won (34 vs. 33 % in Andy's favor) and in 2nd service points won (55 % for both), while Novak is sprinting ahead in break points converted (45 to 43 %).
They have the same % of return games won, 32, but Novak is better with 0,2 or how much it happens to be.

Given his superior ground game, one would expext Andy's return to the superior of the two then.
Just like I consider Roddick's serve (and everyone else above Fed on this list) quite a bit better than Fed's, despite Roddick just edging - not flat out beating him - in this department, because Fed is better at backing his serve up.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/stats/service-games-won/all/hard/all/

Now obviously the ground game difference between Fed and Roddick, Raonic, Isner, Karlovic is bigger than it is between Novak and Andy. But the same principle applies nevertheless.

As for Edberg, are you implying his ground game post the return is worse off than the rest because of his S & V preference?
Also, as to him having an advantage with the data starting in 1991, I think not. He lost almost five years of him being in the top-3 (4 years) and top-5 (most of the 5th year).
Plus, look how quickly he rose in the rankings -
from 523 (not playing ATP-matches, mind you) to 17 in little over a year. 1,5 years later, fall 1985, he was a steady top-10'er and climbing. His fall in the rankings was more prolonged:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/stefan-edberg/e004/rankings-history

 

[NonP]

He was never in the top 5 in first serve return points won in his career, and this is with a world class baseline game that rivals anyone's. In fact, here is where he placed every year in the 90s starting from '91 in first serve return points won:

39
42
23
28
20
22
N/A
6
6

For the umpteenth time, you really shouldn't take the ATP's '90s match stats at face value. Again the ATP counted aces at most of the '90s GS tournaments twice (and also at a few non-GS ones like the '92 YEC), so if you really think Agassi got aced that more often than guys like Djoko you need to factor in the double-counting of aces which would've brought down Dre's return %s. Plus you shouldn't even need to go through the trouble to see something was fishy. I mean if you really thought Agassi in '95, one of the best return seasons by anyone, would be ranked only 20th in % of 1st-serve points won you definitely didn't think about this hard enough.

And BTW the usual knock against Agassi getting aced more often doesn't really pass muster once you dig deeper. Short version: when you study the %s of unreturned serves in various matches you'll see that, except when the server is absolutely on fire (say with over 50% of his serves as freebies), one would probably see about 30-40% of his serves fail to come back on a medium/fast court (hard/grass), with average servers towards the lower end and elite ones near the 40% mark or higher. Then let's say both players play about 200 points in total and divided evenly between the two (most best-of-5 matches don't actually last that long, let alone best-of 3 which is the dominant format today, but let's assume the current scenario for simpler math), which means 100 points played by each on return.

And realistically speaking, given the same tools, getting more serves back in would mean 5% at best in decreased % of unreturned serves. So if Agassi were to become Novak all of a sudden and have the hackneyed talking point about the two played out against a server of Feli's or Kyrgios' caliber on their (both Dre's and his opponent's) good day, he'd lose about 40% of his return points outright rather than 45%, which in this case means 5 more points to win potentially. That's 5 out of 100, while putting clearly less pressure on his opponent during the remaining 60 of his return points. And note that I'm not even considering whether he in fact would've lost 45% of his receiving points precisely due to his aggressive return.

So is that extra 5% really worth the diminished control you'd have on your remaining return points? I doubt it, and I bet Sampras for one would agree given that he has admitted on record Agassi was just about the only one he had to turn up an extra gear or two against because Dre would drive the balls back at your shoelaces from the get-go.

Of course Novak could and can do the same, but given his struggles against Roddick, Karlovic and Isner I say not as well as Agassi. Put another way, if Pete, Edberg, Becker, Rafter and Mac were to play against a player with the same set of tools except his return they'd probably prefer to play against Novak's return than against Agassi's.

 

[mxmx]

Seriously, tennis fans today are clueless. Agasssi got aced alot because there were alot of tournaments on fast courts. Djokovic would be aced alot too in Agassi's era. I'm tipping these plastic tennis fans also think that humans roamed the earth during the triassic period sending eachother snapchats.

Agassi may have also risked more by trying to cover angles on returns, which would inevatably result in aces, but in persentages work out for him...he risked more, got aced more, but it paid off.

 

[PeterHo]

For the umpteenth time, you really shouldn't take the ATP's '90s match stats at face value. Again the ATP counted aces at most of the '90s GS tournaments twice (and also at a few non-GS ones like the '92 YEC), so if you really think Agassi got aced that more often than guys like Djoko you need to factor in the double-counting of aces which would've brought down Dre's return %s. Plus you shouldn't even need to go through the trouble to see something was fishy. I mean if you really thought Agassi in '95, one of the best return seasons by anyone, would be ranked only 20th in % of 1st-serve points won you definitely didn't think about this hard enough.

And BTW the usual knock against Agassi getting aced more often doesn't really pass muster once you dig deeper. Short version: when you study the %s of unreturned serves in various matches you'll see that, except when the server is absolutely on fire (say with over 50% of his serves as freebies), one would probably see about 30-40% of his serves fail to come back on a medium/fast court (hard/grass), with average servers towards the lower end and elite ones near the 40% mark or higher. Then let's say both players play about 200 points in total and divided evenly between the two (most best-of-5 matches don't actually last that long, let alone best-of 3 which is the dominant format today, but let's assume the current scenario for simpler math), which means 100 points played by each on return.

And realistically speaking, given the same tools, getting more serves back in would mean 5% at best in decreased % of unreturned serves. So if Agassi were to become Novak all of a sudden and have the hackneyed talking point about the two played out against a server of Feli's or Kyrgios' caliber on their (both Dre's and his opponent's) good day, he'd lose about 40% of his return points outright rather than 45%, which in this case means 5 more points to win potentially. That's 5 out of 100, while putting clearly less pressure on his opponent during the remaining 60 of his return points. And note that I'm not even considering whether he in fact would've lost 45% of his receiving points precisely due to his aggressive return.

So is that extra 5% really worth the diminished control you'd have on your remaining return points? I doubt it, and I bet Sampras for one would agree given that he has admitted on record Agassi was just about the only one he had to turn up an extra gear or two against because Dre would drive the balls back at your shoelaces from the get-go.

Of course Novak could and can do the same, but given his struggles against Roddick, Karlovic and Isner I say not as well as Agassi. Put another way, if Pete, Edberg, Becker, Rafter and Mac were to play against a player with the same set of tools except his return they'd probably prefer to play against Novak's return than against Agassi's.

Firstly, i think novak get way more balls back than 5%, given how flatfooted agassi looked at times. Nole has often reduced servers like federer and raonic to get less than half the aces he usually gets, thats easily 10 points in a 5 setter. Its probably closer to 10% difference.

Secondly, i disagree that novaks return gives less pressure to the opponent. The way agassi returns the server knows he couldnt do anything about it. While against nole the server already need to think how to hit the ball that comes back deep.

The fact is agassi, on average, dealt with serves some 20km slower than what novak faced, regardless of court speed. That's a difference of about 10%, to agassi's advantage. Novak facing 20km slower serves could also hit return winners like that.

As to noles struggles against roddick karlovic or isner, Agassi had more struggles against sampras alone than nole had against all these guys and federer put together. Also None of the guys u mentioned beat nole post 2011 in a slam. Agassi lost multiple times to big servers in his prime, in slams.

Agassi was only a 5 slammer when sampras won 14, nearly 3 times less. He's barely a second tier great, and is the biggest benefactor of sampras' decline.

 

[Navdeep Srivastava]

I can't agree. Height (as long as it is beyond some minimum) doesn't seem to be relevant. If anthing the really tall guys movement may hamper their ability to move into the direction of the ball. The other great returner was Connors at 5ft 10". You got players like 6ft 4" Ivanisevic copying Connors in the hope of emulating his return.

Is there any evidence that serves today are faster? I know the clock says faster - but it is common knowledge that it simply returns faster times for the same speed ball. Case in point - the fastest Ivanisevic served in his prime was around 136-138. In his 40's he has been clocked at around 145. Now is it likely that he is a faster server in his 40's? I doubt it....it is clear that the speed camera is just returning faster speeds for the same speed ball.

Better racquets friend.

 

[PMChambers]

Djokovic.
Agassi was OK under Gilbert and excelled under Cahill but pre Gilbert he was all over the joint. He never learnt to play a ball on it merits until Gilbert/Cahill, refused to back away, struggled to build pressure and lost a lot against average players. Djokovic is playing tougher competition through most of his career and has been sitting in 1-3 through most of it because of the pressure he builds. I think Agassi was pretty even in the late 90's early 00, but by then he was aging and had lost some of his speed. Djokovic has been returning great since his early 20's. I'd put Nadal above Agassi, he got nearly everything back in his prime and built enormous pressure as a result of consistently deep and kicking returns against all players including Federer, Agassi never managed that, hence the Major count difference, Nadal did it with stacked field unlike Agassi. Connors is again better than Agassi.

Connors - Djokovic (I think they are both very close)
Borg
Nadal
Agassi

 

[abmk]

For the umpteenth time, you really shouldn't take the ATP's '90s match stats at face value. Again the ATP counted aces at most of the '90s GS tournaments twice (and also at a few non-GS ones like the '92 YEC), so if you really think Agassi got aced that more often than guys like Djoko you need to factor in the double-counting of aces which would've brought down Dre's return %s. Plus you shouldn't even need to go through the trouble to see something was fishy. I mean if you really thought Agassi in '95, one of the best return seasons by anyone, would be ranked only 20th in % of 1st-serve points won you definitely didn't think about this hard enough.

And BTW the usual knock against Agassi getting aced more often doesn't really pass muster once you dig deeper. Short version: when you study the %s of unreturned serves in various matches you'll see that, except when the server is absolutely on fire (say with over 50% of his serves as freebies), one would probably see about 30-40% of his serves fail to come back on a medium/fast court (hard/grass), with average servers towards the lower end and elite ones near the 40% mark or higher. Then let's say both players play about 200 points in total and divided evenly between the two (most best-of-5 matches don't actually last that long, let alone best-of 3 which is the dominant format today, but let's assume the current scenario for simpler math), which means 100 points played by each on return.

And realistically speaking, given the same tools, getting more serves back in would mean 5% at best in decreased % of unreturned serves. So if Agassi were to become Novak all of a sudden and have the hackneyed talking point about the two played out against a server of Feli's or Kyrgios' caliber on their (both Dre's and his opponent's) good day, he'd lose about 40% of his return points outright rather than 45%, which in this case means 5 more points to win potentially. That's 5 out of 100, while putting clearly less pressure on his opponent during the remaining 60 of his return points. And note that I'm not even considering whether he in fact would've lost 45% of his receiving points precisely due to his aggressive return.

So is that extra 5% really worth the diminished control you'd have on your remaining return points? I doubt it, and I bet Sampras for one would agree given that he has admitted on record Agassi was just about the only one he had to turn up an extra gear or two against because Dre would drive the balls back at your shoelaces from the get-go.

Of course Novak could and can do the same, but given his struggles against Roddick, Karlovic and Isner I say not as well as Agassi. Put another way, if Pete, Edberg, Becker, Rafter and Mac were to play against a player with the same set of tools except his return they'd probably prefer to play against Novak's return than against Agassi's.

Can you post some of these unreturned stats somewhere ?

 

[TheFifthSet]

For the umpteenth time, you really shouldn't take the ATP's '90s match stats at face value. Again the ATP counted aces at most of the '90s GS tournaments twice (and also at a few non-GS ones like the '92 YEC), so if you really think Agassi got aced that more often than guys like Djoko you need to factor in the double-counting of aces which would've brought down Dre's return %s. Plus you shouldn't even need to go through the trouble to see something was fishy. I mean if you really thought Agassi in '95, one of the best return seasons by anyone, would be ranked only 20th in % of 1st-serve points won you definitely didn't think about this hard enough.

No, I've acknowledged before that there's a problem with the 90's data, but that's a tour-wide problem that applies to all players, and Agassi was outside the top 20 for a half-decade, even while he was winning slams. Never in his entire CAREER did he finish in the top 5, and 6-7 times he finished outside the top 20. Unless the stars REALLY aligned to make Agassi look poor on the first serve return (and he was consistently among the top in second serve returns, which seems to corroborate what we would suspect of him) , it shouldn't be disregarded. Here was where he placed from 2000-2004, when the stats were considerably more reliable:


38
7
8
19
38

And BTW the usual knock against Agassi getting aced more often doesn't really pass muster once you dig deeper. Short version: when you study the %s of unreturned serves in various matches you'll see that, except when the server is absolutely on fire (say with over 50% of his serves as freebies), one would probably see about 30-40% of his serves fail to come back on a medium/fast court (hard/grass), with average servers towards the lower end and elite ones near the 40% mark or higher. Then let's say both players play about 200 points in total and divided evenly between the two (most best-of-5 matches don't actually last that long, let alone best-of 3 which is the dominant format today, but let's assume the current scenario for simpler math), which means 100 points played by each on return.

And realistically speaking, given the same tools, getting more serves back in would mean 5% at best in decreased % of unreturned serves. So if Agassi were to become Novak all of a sudden and have the hackneyed talking point about the two played out against a server of Feli's or Kyrgios' caliber on their (both Dre's and his opponent's) good day, he'd lose about 40% of his return points outright rather than 45%, which in this case means 5 more points to win potentially. That's 5 out of 100, while putting clearly less pressure on his opponent during the remaining 60 of his return points. And note that I'm not even considering whether he in fact would've lost 45% of his receiving points precisely due to his aggressive return.

So is that extra 5% really worth the diminished control you'd have on your remaining return points? I doubt it, and I bet Sampras for one would agree given that he has admitted on record Agassi was just about the only one he had to turn up an extra gear or two against because Dre would drive the balls back at your shoelaces from the get-go.

Of course Novak could and can do the same, but given his struggles against Roddick, Karlovic and Isner I say not as well as Agassi. Put another way, if Pete, Edberg, Becker, Rafter and Mac were to play against a player with the same set of tools except his return they'd probably prefer to play against Novak's return than against Agassi's.

Yes, good points. There were differences in their approach to returning serve, that much is clear. What I do believe is that Agassi could be a more flashy, arguably more devastating, returner on his very best day but Djokovic was better day-in, day-out. Reminder: I don't believe the gap between them on the return is very large at all, and certainly not large enough for some posters to scoff at the comparison. I was merely responding to people that were under the impression that it was a wholly laughable comparison. everybody else I wouldn't even bother countering, because they both possess world-class returns and as such it wouldn't make sense to squabble over such fine margins.

Also, Djokovic's "struggles" against Isner are pretty much nonexistent. He's won 38.3% of his return points against him for crying out loud (!!!!)

Hes broken him 28 times in 10 matches, breaking him even in the two matches he's lost, limiting his ace% to under 10 the vast majority of the time, and never went a match without breaking his serve at least once. Not much struggling to be found here. Karlovic he's faced once in the past 8 years, and only once in what can reasonably be called the peak of his career. Your case is reasonable, but you could go without overstating things like this.

 

[NatF]

?? yet he chose Agassi.
To me, Murray def. belongs on any shortlist. His numbers careerwise are as good as Djoko's and he's worse than Djoko once the rally is going. I.e. his returns can't be much worse, if at all. Hewitt's up there too, but just shy of Connors, Agassi, Djoko and Murray to me.
Too young for anything prior to the 90's, so there might be good returners, I'm simply not giving credit. I mention Connors as he's famed for his return.

Murray is a very consistent returner. But I don't really recall him having the same 6th gear on the return as guys like Connors, Djokovic and indeed Agassi. I don't recall him painting the lines with his returns in a slam final like Djokovic has done.

 

[Chanwan]

Murray is a very consistent returner. But I don't really recall him having the same 6th gear on the return as guys like Connors, Djokovic and indeed Agassi. I don't recall him painting the lines with his returns in a slam final like Djokovic has done.

See post 130 above and let me know if that changes anything for you with respect to Murray. His return is the reason he gets to slam finals in the first place - he's got the worst hold game by a margin by any of the top 4.

 

[Meles]

Coria played 59 % of his matches on clay, which inflates his resume. Hence, good thing you do it on hard.
The fact that he's so relatively close to Rafa as he is, speaks to his advantage though: http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/stats/return-games-won/all/clay/all/

Also, while the stats can help us, they are not the end of the argument.
For example, I think there's a strong case for saying Novak is doing better than Murray if the rally is in neutral career wise. Him and Novak are doing extremely similar on first serve points won (34 vs. 33 % in Andy's favor) and in 2nd service points won (55 % for both), while Novak is sprinting ahead in break points converted (45 to 43 %).
They have the same % of return games won, 32, but Novak is better with 0,2 or how much it happens to be.

Given his superior ground game, one would expext Andy's return to the superior of the two then.
Just like I consider Roddick's serve (and everyone else above Fed on this list) quite a bit better than Fed's, despite Roddick just edging - not flat out beating him - in this department, because Fed is better at backing his serve up.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/stats/service-games-won/all/hard/all/

Now obviously the ground game difference between Fed and Roddick, Raonic, Isner, Karlovic is bigger than it is between Novak and Andy. But the same principle applies nevertheless.

As for Edberg, are you implying his ground game post the return is worse off than the rest because of his S & V preference?
Also, as to him having an advantage with the data starting in 1991, I think not. He lost almost five years of him being in the top-3 (4 years) and top-5 (most of the 5th year).
Plus, look how quickly he rose in the rankings -
from 523 (not playing ATP-matches, mind you) to 17 in little over a year. 1,5 years later, fall 1985, he was a steady top-10'er and climbing. His fall in the rankings was more prolonged:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/players/stefan-edberg/e004/rankings-history

The stats are a partial window. They indicate he had a very effective return game and an example of the issue that return must work with players game. So, its possible that if available, his career numbers might be level with the best. I had no idea Edberg was so effective on return.

Others have dismissed Fed's first serve return. It is clearly excellent in that opponent cannot take over the point so easily. Stat anomolies. John Mac best first serve return and not his prime years. Pat Mac very high in 2nd serves on hard court. Perhaps we are looking for the wrong style of return and Edberg is the GOAT.

 

[NatF]

See post 130 above and let me know if that changes anything for you with respect to Murray. His return is the reason he gets to slam finals in the first place - he's got the worst hold game by a margin by any of the top 4.

I understand the point. The stats as they stand would show Murray has at least as good a return as Djokovic. However I would add that Djokovic has played significantly more matches against top 10 players - around 80 or so more. Against top 10 players Djokovic wins slightly more return points (39.7 vs 38.4). I don't have more detailed stats unfortunately. Now again as Djokovic is the better baseliner it does show Murray in a very good light.

Murray is clearly an extremely good returner but being able to produce the goods in the biggest moments is surely an important component. Djokovic has him beat there. Certain players raise their games for the big finals and the big matches. Djokovic does this more than Murray, the fact Murray returns just as well during the main slog of the tour doesn't matter so much to me. If Murray has a better B game return than Djokovic but Djokovic has the significantly better A game return, which is better? I'd take Djokovic's. Also as Murray has the weaker hold game his return is even more integral to his game. How many times in the last year has Djokovic looked like he's coasting in early rounds only to turn it up in the final?

Djokovic is clearly the better returner IMO.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

I would say Agassi when you consider the conditions he played on. The only baseliner to snatch a wimbledon in the 90s

The thing is if you transplant Nole in the 90s he NEVER would have accomplished what Andre did. Yet if you stick Andre in this era he would probably be even better than he was in his era

Agreed, I could definitively see Andre take a lot more dope than he did in the 90's.

 

[Meles]

See post 130 above and let me know if that changes anything for you with respect to Murray. His return is the reason he gets to slam finals in the first place - he's got the worst hold game by a margin by any of the top 4.

I believe the 90s stats are garbage and @NonP would know.

I'd put Murray above Djokovic with this logic too. Connors gets the crown for the early players.

Coria gets a star and stats show he was better than Rafa on hard despite being the inferior player on hard. Coria gets a star for best clay court return. Clearly better than Djoko on clay.

 

[Meles]

I understand the point. The stats as they stand would show Murray has at least as good a return as Djokovic. However I would add that Djokovic has played significantly more matches against top 10 players - around 80 or so more. Against top 10 players Djokovic wins slightly more return points (39.7 vs 38.4). I don't have more detailed stats unfortunately. Now again as Djokovic is the better baseliner it does show Murray in a very good light.

Murray is clearly an extremely good returner but being able to produce the goods in the biggest moments is surely an important component. Djokovic has him beat there. Certain players raise their games for the big finals and the big matches. Djokovic does this more than Murray, the fact Murray returns just as well during the main slog of the tour doesn't matter so much to me. If Murray has a better B game return than Djokovic but Djokovic was the significantly better A game return which is better? I'd take Djokovic's. Also as Murray has the weaker hold game his return is even more integral to his game. How many times in the last year has Djokovic looked like he's coasting in early rounds only to turn it up in the final?

Djokovic is clearly the better returner IMO.

Very sound. What of Coria's superiority on clay? Djoko would be considered better clay court player, no? Coria might be seen as choker, but his retirement from service yips clouds that judgement.

 

[NatF]

Very sound. What of Coria's superiority on clay? Djoko would be considered better clay court player, no? Coria might be seen as choker, but his retirement from service yips clouds that judgement.

Coria was really excellent on the return. An underrated contributor to 03-05 on clay and also on hards where he was quite good.

Djokovic has achieved a lot more on clay so he would be considered better. Peak for peak, Djokovic wins still but I think it would be an awesome match. Coria is clearly better than anyone on clay in today's era not named Nadal-Djokovic + Staminal (Fedr too old now).

 

[Chanwan]

I understand the point. The stats as they stand would show Murray has at least as good a return as Djokovic. However I would add that Djokovic has played significantly more matches against top 10 players - around 80 or so more. Against top 10 players Djokovic wins slightly more return points (39.7 vs 38.4). I don't have more detailed stats unfortunately. Now again as Djokovic is the better baseliner it does show Murray in a very good light.

Murray is clearly an extremely good returner but being able to produce the goods in the biggest moments is surely an important component. Djokovic has him beat there. Certain players raise their games for the big finals and the big matches. Djokovic does this more than Murray, the fact Murray returns just as well during the main slog of the tour doesn't matter so much to me. If Murray has a better B game return than Djokovic but Djokovic has the significantly better A game return, which is better? I'd take Djokovic's. Also as Murray has the weaker hold game his return is even more integral to his game. How many times in the last year has Djokovic looked like he's coasting in early rounds only to turn it up in the final?

Djokovic is clearly the better returner IMO.

Had to chuckle, that's the understatement of the century @Mainad - sorry.

All good points. I wouldn't say Djoko's clearly better, but you present a good case of why it probably should be considered the better one. Sometimes vs. Fed, Novak just zones in on the return and returns it at Fed's feet no matter what. I've only seen Murray do that once or twice to Fed.

 

[NatF]

Had to chuckle, that's the understatement of the century @Mainad - sorry.

All good points. I wouldn't say Djoko's clearly better, but you present a good case of why it probably should be considered the better one. Sometimes vs. Fed, Novak just zones in on the return and returns it at Fed's feet no matter what. I've only seen Murray do that once or twice to Fed.

hopefully Mainad appreciates me not saying that Murray gets EXPOSED on the biggest stages

Clearly might be too far, what I meant was the difference is noticeable.

 

[Mainad]

Had to chuckle, that's the understatement of the century @Mainad - sorry.

What is?

 

[Chanwan]

What is?

the bold in the comment I replied to:
Certain players raise their games for the big finals and the big matches. Djokovic does this more than Murray, the fact Murray returns just as well during the main slog of the tour doesn't matter so much to me.

edit: please note that I've been carrying Murray's torch in this thread

 

[Mainad]

the bold in the comment I replied to:
Certain players raise their games for the big finals and the big matches. Djokovic does this more than Murray, the fact Murray returns just as well during the main slog of the tour doesn't matter so much to me.

edit: please note that I've been carrying Murray's torch in this thread

Sounds reasonable enough to me.