Otherside
Semi-Pro
I vote this post as one of the most amusing descriptions of any player I have read. I like it.![]()
just epic

I vote this post as one of the most amusing descriptions of any player I have read. I like it.![]()
1. Sampras
2. Ivanisevic
3. P. Gonzales
4. Roddick
5. Krajicek
6. Stich
7. Tanner
8. Newcombe
9. Tilden
10. Curren
11. Edberg
12. Federer
13. McEnroe
14. Becker
15. Dibley
16. Karlovic
17. Rusedski
18. Kramer
19. Fraser
20. Dent
21. Noah
22. Borg
I have trouble giving Bobo the serve over BoomBoom....don't get me wrong, Bobo had better diguise, a quicker motion, and MAYBE a higher top end (or at least got the higher speeds more often), but I don't think he was the clutch server Becker was...I don't think his 2nd serve...while heavy...was as dangerous as Becker's.
And no...not as consistent....it always seemed to me that the margin for error on his biggest flat blasts was low....he seemed in particular to hit a lot into the net, from what I remember. Not sure if that was due to his toss, posture, head, etc....just don't remember well enough to comment.
He sort of reminded of Taylor Dent. A big plodding man....with a heavy serve that was a big weapon...but just seemed to miss a few too many of the big bomb serves when it really counted.
Ahh, Froehling! Yes, I had the opportunity to see him play a few team tennis matches. He was tall, skinny, and really whipped his serve in there. It's been many years, but, to my recollection, his serve motion was a bit of a semi-straight arm motion, similar to Ashe's. For me, as I explained in my high rating of Federer's serve, the measure of any great shot has to include consideration of how it was used to win championships. To my knowledge, Froehling had a good, but short, record in majors. I think he was a U.S. Open finalist one year. But, that's not enough of a championship record to put him in to the top 20, IMO.
As for Smith, IMO, his serve was one of the best, if not the best, of the early 70's. But, there was very little observable intensity in his game. He seemed very casual, almost indifferent in match play. He didn't get down well to low volleys or groundies. Overall, Newcombe was a better player IMO. Newk had a big serve and a big forehand, but, his real forte was his touch/dink and net game. Unlike Laver who took tremendous pride in how hard he could pound the ball and blast his opponent off of the court, and would never resort to dinks and touch as an approach to a match, Newk was just the opposite. He would be content, even delighted, to drop, lob and dink his opponent all day, the way he did to Connors in the 74' AO. So, overall, Newk was the better player, especially on grass. But, Smith's serve was slightly better IMO.
As for Alexander, I remember him playing great overpowering Smith in a hard court match in a straight sets, only to lose easily to Dick Stockton in the next round missing many first serves and just looking off of his game. Yes, as I recall, Alexander's serve was as big as Tanner's serve (I can't say it was bigger, but, they both had the biggest serves in the game along with Colin Dibley), but, he didn't have as successful a career, especially in majors. So, it's hard for me to put Alexander in the top 20 as well.
As for Ashe, IMO he had a top 20 backhand, top 20 athleticism and was top 20 in versatility and tactics. He was very able, and willing, to change his game to suit the situation in order to win. But, I don't think his serve was top 20. It was a great serve, but, not that great.
Also, John McEnroe said Ivan Ljubicic's serve was top 10 all time, and I respect his opinion on that.
"Yesterday, in dispatching Great Britain's Jeremy Bates in three sets - 7-6, 7-5, 7-6 - Zivojinovic served on 110 points. Of that number, 26 serves were aces. Another 30 points were service winners. What that means is that Bates returned only 54 out of 110 serves - 49 percent. That is how well Zivojinovic is serving." (Philadelphia Daily News)
That comes to a rate of 51% of all serves unreturned (presuming that Bobo's double-faults are accounted for in the above excerpt, or that he didn't serve any).
Anyway 51% is right up there with the top rates mentioned upthread. I think we had Becker just barely over 50% in a few matches, and Sampras just slightly higher than that in a few.
stats I took on '85 Wimbledon 1st Round, Zivojinovic d. Wilander 62 57 75 60
Bobo was 52 of 113 on 1st serve(46%)
Had 15 aces(3 on 2nd serve), 12 df's
Had 29 other unreturned serves.
so 39% of serves were unreturned
stats I took on '86 Wimbledon SF, Lendl d Zivojinovic 62 67 63 67 64
96-174(55%)
18 aces(1 on 2nd serve), 7 df's
had 46 other unreturned serves
37% of serves unreturned
eh, I can recall only two instances, AO 2009 final, USO 2009 final ( neither of them in his peak years ) , that's about it. Not sure how that makes it a liability to a low 1st serve % in big matches ?
Curren had an unreturned rate of 57.6% when he swept Connors at '85 Wimby, per Moose's count.
I don't recall any other rate upthread that was higher. The next highest I know of is Sampras at 52.3%, 2000 Wimbledon final vs. Rafter.
The only previous rate we had for Curren was 40% in his loss to Becker.
karlović vs thomas johansson, stockholm 07
40 of 66 serves unreturned (27 aces) = 60.6 %
i have 2 other for karlović
vs agassi, uso 05, 63 of 139 (30 aces) = 45.3 %
vs roddick, queens 05, 32 of 81 (16 aces) = 39.5 %
few more for krajicek
vs sampras, wimb 96, 62 of 117 (29 aces) = 53 %
vs sampras, stuttgart 98, 52 of 101 (16 aces) = 51.5 %
few for joachim johansson
vs agassi, ao 05, 76 of 149 (51 aces) = 51 %
vs ljubičić, marseille 05, 25 of 58 (20 aces) = 43.1 %
few for goran i did recently
vs edberg, stuttgart 92, 58 of 143 (32 aces) = 40.6 %
vs martin, grand slam cup 95, 55 of 97 (28 aces) = 56.7 %
vs becker, frankfurt 92, 50 of 101 (23 aces) = 49.5 %
few for roddick that i have
vs federer, wimb 09, 98 of 239 (27 aces) = 41 %
vs el aynaoui, ao 03, 79 of 231 (27 aces) = 34.2 %
vs karlović, queens 05, 41 of 74 (9 aces) = 55.4 %
vs sampras, uso 02, 25 of 69 (8 aces) = 36.2 %
vs safin, houston wtf 03, 40 of 92 (13 aces) = 43.5 %
and few for sampras i did most recently
vs stich, wimb 92, 46 of 82 (9 aces) = 56.1 %
vs agassi, paris 94, 40 of 100 (19 aces) = 40 %
vs agassi, hannover 96, 21 of 38 (9 aces) = 55.3 %
vs agassi, monte carlo 98, 27 of 63 (6 aces) = 42.9 %
vs kucera, vienna 98, 35 of 101 (13 aces) = 34.7 %
vs henman, vienna 98, 22 of 40 (10 aces) = 55 % (thanks laurie for uploading - one of the best performances i ever saw)
now, people don't have experience with these unreturned serves stats; it is not part of the standard stats they show at the matches and it is rarely or never showed (i only saw few times at wimbledon it's reverse stat - returns in)
so, i will make a small ladder, based on my experience, which will help to understand this stat better
20 % or less - for the worst servers, or if playing in the mud
20 - 29 % - bad stat for the server
30 - 34 % - returner will be more happy with this, but the server is making some impact
35 % - i would call this middle ground
36 - 40 % - server is making some real impact but is not dominating
41 - 45 % - server is dominating, returner has serious troubles; however, there are still probabbly "pockets" where returner gets opportunities and returns well
46 - 50 % - big domination of server; opportunities for the returner are few and far between
over 50 % - total domination of server; breaks highly unlikely
and lastly, on topic - 4 best servers i saw are ivanišević, krajicek, karlović and sampras - but i don't know in which order to put them
The New York Times has an short but interesting review of how the serve has evolved in tennis history among both the men and the women: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/s...igins-of-tennis-and-the-serve.html?ref=tennis
The same author, in the Times tennis blog, lists his 5 best servers of all time:
1. Sampras
2. Pancho Gonzalez
3. Vines
4. Ivanisevic
5. Federer
1. S. Williams
2. Court
3. Marble
4. King
5. Barbara Potter
Those lists are quite reasonable. With Sampras, Vines and Gonzalez you are on a safe plank. What is lacking a bit, is the lefthanded aspect (except Goran). Neale Fraser and for the women Martina Nav, who imo had the best womens serve (better than King or Court imo), could be added.
Fraser was said to have perhaps the best serve by players like Rod Laver in his book and I believe John Alexander in an instructional tennis book that discussed some of the best serves in the game.Even that 40% rate is pretty good, if not as spectacular as the 57.6% whopper against Connors.
But if other stats of his are along the same lines, they do suggest that he was very up and down even as a server. Some people might ask why, then, someone like Curren or Tanner is on the list while a Dibley, Alexander or Dent is not. There are two main reasons. One, and I've covered this earlier on this thread, because Curren and Tanner actually had fairly long stints among the top 10-20, so their careers and, in turn, their serves were in fact consistent over the long term. And two, because Curren and Tanner's serves, when on, were probably just as devastating as anybody's, and most likely better than all but the very best serves on this list.
ssa, first of all, again thanks a million for these stats. I don't know how you guys find the time to do all this, but trust me, your effort is very much appreciated.
A surprising finding (or two) has been Karlovic's and Isner's %'s, which are not as high as one might expect. Granted this is still a small sample, but at the very least, these numbers do make you rethink the conventional wisdom re: the two monster servers.
Perhaps an even bigger surprise is how well Roddick seems to return their bombs. :twisted:
Goran and Krajicek's %'s are just about what you expect. Roddick's also, if you think, as I (and a few others) do, he's a slight notch below these two.
I'll quote this last part of your post for the less experienced fans:
I have already explained in detail my current ranking of the top 4-5, but not all in one post. Maybe I'll do that, once I have enough time to waste.
I'm really not a fan of ranking old-timers based almost entirely on anecdotes, which is bound to be unreliable. I mean, how can you judge a stroke you have barely seen? We hardly even have enough stats we could use, too.
Not to toot my own horn, but I think my approach is fair: honorable mentions to the historically acknowledged great serves, but no specific rankings compared to their more recent counterparts.
Also, I don't even remember now why I decided not to give Fraser an honorary mention (probably due to lack of data/firsthand accounts). If anyone's got something relevant to share, feel free.
Ditto if you feel like creating a separate list for the women.
* * *
Well, Limpin, again you're trying to determine who was the best servER, which, as I explained in my previous post, isn't exactly what I'm trying to do here. Since hoodjem has been compiling his own rankings seemingly based on your criteria, maybe he can describe them explicitly as such, so there won't be any more confusion over this matter?
Anyway, so how would you rate Froehling's serve as a pure, stand-alone shot? Do note that Frank wasn't a nobody--was ranked No. 6 one year, according to Wiki--and made the US Davis Cup team three different years, so it's not like he was just another one-hit wonder. And after all we don't say Karlovic doesn't belong here just because he never reached the top 10.
Was Smith's 2nd serve as good as Newk's? I don't think I've ever seen Smith ranked as high as the Aussie, so maybe it's because his 2nd serve wasn't as big a weapon? Would be nice to hear others' input on this.
We (well, me and pc1) had ruled Dibley out because his serve was too inconsistent, as we've done with many other worthy candidates that have been named so far. Do you think Alexander had the same problem, or was it a matter of his overall tennis credentials? (FYI Alexander did make 2 AO SFs.)
Here I agree. While I'm really not one to judge any old-timers based on just a couple short videos, from what I've seen Ashe does seem closer to Fed/Lendl in the GSOAT ladder than to, say, Becker/Mac.
* * *
"'Big Bill' Tilden delivered the fastest serve ever officially measured. It was timed at 163.6 mph in 1931. Britain's Mike Sangster had a serve timed at 154 mph in 1963. Ellsworth Vines was clocked at 128 mph and his 1930s contemporary Lester Rollo Stoeten sent down a serve timed at 131 mph. The fastest serve scientifically timed was the 137 mph cannonball from American Scott Carnahan at Los Angeles in 1976. Then in 1981 a West German lawn tennis coach and statistician, Horst Goepper, claimed a serving speed of 199.53 mph during a test in Weinheim."
IMO, Stan Smith's serve was better than about half of the serves on this, maybe more! I think that Smith modeled his serve after Gonzales, the motions are very similar, and he was even bigger than Gonzeles. The only serves clearly better than Smiths on this list would be Sampras, Gonzales, Ivanisovic, Roddick, Becker and Tanner. IMO, Smith's serve was at least as good as Newk's, and better than Mac's and Edberg's.
PS: Not that representative of Smith's serve in singles, but, here's the best I could find on short notice. At least you can get a view of the beautiful technique and power that Smith had: http://www.ina.fr/sport/tennis/vide...oland-garros-victoire-ashe-et-riessen.fr.html
PPS: Come to think of it, I'd put Nastase's and maybe even Ashe's serves ahead of some on this list.
Fraser was said to have perhaps the best serve by players like Rod Laver in his book and I believe John Alexander in an instructional tennis book that discussed some of the best serves in the game.
I agree your method is fair but it's also hard on the players that played before statistics were kept.
I've read about a player named John Doeg, who was apparently a great left handed server who won the US Championship they said mainly on his serve. Apparently he had a wicked lefty serve on his serve. Don Budge in his book said you never broke Doeg's serve, you outlasted it.
That account stuck with me and I've read a number of stories about this guy's incredible serve but he's little known despite winning a major. Aside from the serve the rest of his game had a lot to be desired.
http://www.tennisfame.com/hall-of-famers/john-doeg
Not at all. As I have explained many times in all of Hood's "greatest" [pick your shot] threads, the greatness of a shot has to be measured in light of that players ability to use it to win major championships.
I'm somewhat familiar with Froehling's game having seen him play a few team tennis doubles matches. His serve and Western forehand were huge. He was a very competitive championship level player. But, to my knowledge he played all of his majors as an amature, and he didn't play on the pro tour. Perhaps he didn't want the lifestyle. It didn't pay that well in his day compared to today.
IMO, both of Smith's serves were as good or better than Newks. Certainly more powerful. Newk had the better forehand, better speed and athleticism, and better touch. And, I would say that Newk was overall just plain more competitive than Smith.
Alexander was a better player than Dibley. He was a serious championship prospect. But, like many such prospects, his competitiveness didn't match the level of his physical gifts and his shotmaking ability. Alexander's serve may have been slightly bigger than Froehlings. But, I would put Froehling above Alexander as a player overall for his competitiveness.
I have no idea what you mean by that. Ashe was a great champion, but, IMO, all 4 of them are higher on the GOAT latter than Ashe. IMO, Ashe was a one dimentional power player with no plan "B" in his Amature days of winning the USO in 68' and getting to the Wimbledon SF in 69'. His dismantling of Connors in the 75' W final by dinking and lobbing was a big surprise to many. Clearly, he learned from Newcombe's win over Connors in the 74' AO. He employed a similar approach in beating Borg in the WTC Final in Dallas also in 75". Perhaps his shoulder injury gave him no choice but to try a different approach.
* * *
I find this logic flawed, I must say. By that standard Karlovic's or Arthurs' serve wouldn't even be in the conversation, which I think most people would disagree with.
If that's true, then it's probably impossible to rank him.
Quite a bold claim there.You may well be right. Let's see if there are any consenting/dissenting voices.
How about whether they belong on the list at all? Do you agree with pc1 that Dibley was too inconsistent to be considered an all-time great server? And Alexander?
Limpin, I said GSOAT, as in greatest SERVERS of all time.Cheers.
This contradicts your prior comment accusing me of ranking shots in isolation, which was a false premsie ab initio. IMO, a primary factor in measuring the greatness of a shot is its usefulness in winning championships? How is that logic flawed?
Why is that? Wouldn't his match record and the players he beat make it possible to rank him?
Not really! I saw them both play. Smith's serve was definitely bigger and, IMO, the more effective serve overall.
Not really. I only saw Dibley play doubles. I can't say it was inconsistent. His serve was huge. But, what did he do with it? The rest of his game wasn't up to the level of his serve. The same thing applies to Alexander. Monster serve, better player than Dibley or Karlovic. But, if he belongs on the list at all, it would be near the bottom, IMO, because he didn't do that much with it compared to other great servers.
Ashe had an excellent serve. Before his shoulder problems, it was a great serve. But, over his career, I wouldn't put it in the top 20 of all time. It wasn't as good as Nastase's serve, IMO.
Hey, NonP,
I found a link with some cool pics of Frank Froehling including a pic of his serve at the peak of the toss. Notice the last pic of him hitting a reverse fh and the caption describing an upset win over Roy Emerson in 4 sets at the U.S. Nationals at Forest Hills.
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=fran...rt=49&ndsp=17&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:49&tx=43&ty=51
Huh? I never accused you of such a thing. I just said that your approach is different from my "ranking shots in isolation" (as you put it).
I find the logic flawed because a Karlovic or an Arthurs would never win a major no matter how good their serve was. Similarly, a club-level player would have no chance at a championship even if he had Sampras' or Roddick's serve. No doubt results matter, but they aren't everything.
Well, as you know, amateurs and pros, then and now, are on different levels. In fact Emerson is the only amateur I can think of who probably could hold his own against Laver, Rosewall and other top pros at the time. Kinda hard to rank Froehling's serve if he never got to play those guys.
I'm not doubting you. Just want to get more opinions before I assign him a proper ranking.
Again there's the rub. You're right, Dibley's overall game wasn't on the same level as his serve. But does that mean his serve itself wasn't up to par with Newk's or Tanner's? No, not necessarily. Their respective records just mean that the latter two were better players overall.
So do you think Nastase is among the best servers ever? Though these guys are a little before my time, from what I've seen I personally don't feel Nastase's serve was better than Ashe's at all, or Borg's for that matter, and neither guy is on my list (though hoodjem is free to add him to his own).
Cool find, thanks. The guy was a stick!
I also remember watching this short clip where Lacoste hits a reverse FH once. But then maybe my eyes were deceiving me. As we all know, Sampras invented the running reverse FH.![]()
- Winning a major, getting to a final, even a few semifinals, or winning a big pro event, would be a big help in ranking the greatness of a shot.
Talk about coincidences, just this week I was reading about Doeg and getting a few stats for the match where he defeated Tilden.I've read about a player named John Doeg, who was apparently a great left handed server who won the US Championship they said mainly on his serve. Apparently he had a wicked lefty serve on his serve. Don Budge in his book said you never broke Doeg's serve, you outlasted it.
That account stuck with me and I've read a number of stories about this guy's incredible serve but he's little known despite winning a major. Aside from the serve the rest of his game had a lot to be desired.
http://www.tennisfame.com/hall-of-famers/john-doeg
Have you ever seen any rate higher than this?karlović vs thomas johansson, stockholm 07
40 of 66 serves unreturned (27 aces) = 60.6 %
Here's one I have.few for roddick that i have
vs federer, wimb 09, 98 of 239 (27 aces) = 41 %
vs el aynaoui, ao 03, 79 of 231 (27 aces) = 34.2 %
vs karlović, queens 05, 41 of 74 (9 aces) = 55.4 %
vs sampras, uso 02, 25 of 69 (8 aces) = 36.2 %
vs safin, houston wtf 03, 40 of 92 (13 aces) = 43.5 %
That's confusing issues between overall excellence and excellence of one shot. The serve, in particular, lends itself to more of a sabermetric approach as you can isolate it in a way that you can't with ground strokes, returns, footwork , defense, and the like. Aces, service winners, and service % are pretty democratic stats that can be used to segregate the good from the great. By the "results in majors" rule, we'd be excluding Karlovic, Arthurs, and Isner who are inarguably 3 of the top tier servers of all time (Ivo's the top in my book).
Talk about coincidences, just this week I was reading about Doeg and getting a few stats for the match where he defeated Tilden.
He served 13 love games, and won possibly as many as 23 straight points on serve. I've looked over dozens of boxscores from the time period, and this is the first time I've seen numbers like that -- including in many great matches involving big servers like Tilden, Vines, Hoad.
Doeg had 28 aces in 29 service games and was broken only twice. The NY Times said he had "one of the most feared services in the game." According to the Hartford Courant "Doeg’s mighty service was an overpowering weapon, outdoing the famous cannon balls of Tilden himself."
He's not known because he wasn't the player that some great servers like Gonzalez and Kramer were. Kramer doesn't mention him in his list of great server from his book but I've read a number of accounts of how great this guy was as a server.
NonP,
I agree with you. This is a list of the greatest servers ever and you can be a great server without winning a major.
I'm fairly certain John Doeg was a better server than most of the all time greats but he won just one major I believe.
I didn't argue to that winning a championship was a requirement. But, if you're not a champion, in some respect, be it majors or high level pro events, how great can your serve really be? How do you assign greatness to a shot that hasn't been employed to win a championship of some kind, or at least attain great results against other champions?
You're putting words in my mouth. The "results in majors rule" is your creation, not mine. I just said that a player's ability to use his greatest weapons to win championships should be a primary factor in the measure of that weapon...... If they can't bring it when it really counts, how great of a shot can it be? Based on the same criteria, Karlovic, Arthurs and Isner very much should have a difficult time finding their way on the list of greatest serves of all time.
On the first point you make I agree 100%. No one would dispute that Federer's non-service game is better than Roddick's, and if Roddick is nevertheless holding serve more often it must be due to his serve.Interesting how they have Federer there but not Roddick even though Roddick has held serve more often over the years and has led the ATP in percentage of holding serve numerous times. You add that Federer has more overall weapons outside his serve to hold serve so I cannot figure why Federer is ranked higher than Roddick. Actually I know why, Federer's the better player and experts tend to rate better players as better in everything which may or may not be true. In this case I would think not when it comes to serve.
To the part I bolded above: if I understand this correctly, Federer's numbers are less impressive when facing lesser opponents. You are taking into account the concept of "clutch", and the pressure of the greatest stages, against the greatest opponents.That was a poor phrasing on my part. I wasn't talking about 1st-serve % per se, but rather the serve's reliability in general, particularly in the clutch. If you recall, Fed in fact didn't make an especially high % of 1st serves in his two wins over Nadal on clay (52% at '07 Hamburg, which is subpar by his standards, and 61% at '09 Madrid, which was about average), which reminds us once again why we shouldn't look at the numbers only.
Also, while it might seem unfair at first glance, there's actually a reason why we focus on those and other matches against the likes of Nadal or in-form Delpo. That's because it's one thing to serve well against a Roddick or a Ferrer, who has little to hurt you with, and quite another to do the same, especially in big matches, against a Nadal or a Delpo, who boasts more big weapons. Case in point: the '07 WTF, where Fed served over 70% on average, sometimes even above 80% (twice, in fact, against Roddick and Nadal, who has always struggled indoors).
Much of that has to do with the player's (Fed's in this case) mentality, which is yet another reason why we shouldn't look at the stats alone. You naturally build up more confidence as you beat your opponents like a drum, which then allows you to get more into rhythm on your serve, and since you can afford it, you might also decide to take a few more mph off your 1st serves, which gives you higher %'s. Sampras also had a similar serving streak in '97, where he regularly served over 60%, sometimes over 70%, until it was halted by Korda at the USO. And here Pete's opposition was also somewhat lacking compared to in his previous years, which no doubt helped.
To the part I bolded above: if I understand this correctly, Federer's numbers are less impressive when facing lesser opponents. You are taking into account the concept of "clutch", and the pressure of the greatest stages, against the greatest opponents.
But if so, doesn't the same follow for the numbers produced by many of these lesser champions with great serves, like Karlovic or Arthurs? After all they never produced their numbers under the pressure of Slam finals. Wouldn't it follow that their numbers, too, should be seen as less impressive?
My question to you would be, isn't it more impressive to serve at 70% in the USO final than to serve at 70% in the second round of Cincinnatti when relatively few people are watching and relatively little is at stake? (Presuming the returner is the same in each match, and all other things being equal.)
I would think so. I mean, sure, a large part of the reason that Federer is getting to so many Slam finals is his overall game. He has a ton of game apart from the serve. But once he's in the final, the fact is that he will then be serving under a pressure that is not known in the second or third round, or in a lesser event.Isn't a primary factor in the greatness of a shot the ability to use it to win important matches and championships against other great players?
Isn't a primary factor in the greatness of a shot the ability to use it to win important matches and championships against other great players?
did you count sampras' numbers vs roddick in this match?
do you ever count unreturned serves on 2nd serves in any of your stats?
Have you ever seen any rate higher than this?
I didn't argue to that winning a championship was a requirement. But, if you're not a champion, in some respect, be it majors or high level pro events, how great can your serve really be? How do you assign greatness to a shot that hasn't been employed to win a championship of some kind, or at least attain great results against other champions?
very poor argument. we are talking about just the serve on this thread. it has nothing to do with how well/poor the rest of a player's game is.
IMO, karlovic and isner are #1 and #2 all time (followed by sampras and ivanisevic). their serves are unbelievable but the rest of their game is mediocre. that's why you can't look at their overall results when determining who has the best serve.
it's for this reason that you can't look at # of service games won b/c there is a lot more to holding serve than just the serve.
the way i look at it is would player A hold serve more often with player B's serve than with his own. for example, some clown on here was making the "argument" that federer (who shouldn't be in the top 25) has a better serve than karlovic. that's beyond foolish. nobody in their right mind would argue the fact that federer would hold serve easier with karlovic's serve than with his own.
So, according to your view, the best serve of all time could potentially be someone out of the top 200 or even 300 in the World!
yes b/c we're only talking about the serve. i'm not sure why that is hard to understand.
hypothetically, there could be a player who hit aces on every other serve. but if you were able to get the serve back then the rest of the player's game was that of a beginner. this guy would never win a match but it doesn't change the fact that he would still have the best serve of all time.
vs sampras, uso 02, 25 of 69 (8 aces) = 36.2 %
vs roddick 25 of 75, 33 %, 13 aces
yes b/c we're only talking about the serve. i'm not sure why that is hard to understand.
hypothetically, there could be a player who hit aces on every other serve. but if you were able to get the serve back then the rest of the player's game was that of a beginner. this guy would never win a match but it doesn't change the fact that he would still have the best serve of all time.
Since we discussing whether you have to be an all time great to have a great serve (which I don't believe incidentally) let's have some fun and see which all time greats had the best serves. I don't include Goran, Karlovic and Isner as all time greats for example.
Some possible choices
Pancho Gonzalez
Pete Sampras
Jack Kramer
Bill Tilden
John Newcombe
Arthur Ashe
John McEnroe
Edberg
Boris Becker
Lew Hoad
Roger Federer
Ivan Lendl
Bjorn Borg
Incidentally it occurs to me while I was thinking of top players that Lendl's serve hasn't been mentioned here. It may not be as explosive as Boris Becker's serve but top players like Brad Gilbert thought he had a great serve, not just because of his power but also because of his variety on serve.
It's easy to understand! It demonstrates a poor understanding of the game! Like all sport, greatness is measure by winning. If you don't win, how great can your shots be. I'm not sure why that is hard to understand.
b/c we are only talking about a single stroke on this thread. and you can't win matches consistently with only one stroke.
That was a poor phrasing on my part. I wasn't talking about 1st-serve % per se, but rather the serve's reliability in general, particularly in the clutch. If you recall, Fed in fact didn't make an especially high % of 1st serves in his two wins over Nadal on clay (52% at '07 Hamburg, which is subpar by his standards, and 61% at '09 Madrid, which was about average), which reminds us once again why we shouldn't look at the numbers only.
Also, while it might seem unfair at first glance, there's actually a reason why we focus on those and other matches against the likes of Nadal or in-form Delpo. That's because it's one thing to serve well against a Roddick or a Ferrer, who has little to hurt you with, and quite another to do the same, especially in big matches, against a Nadal or a Delpo, who boasts more big weapons. Case in point: the '07 WTF, where Fed served over 70% on average, sometimes even above 80% (twice, in fact, against Roddick and Nadal, who has always struggled indoors).
Much of that has to do with the player's (Fed's in this case) mentality, which is yet another reason why we shouldn't look at the stats alone. You naturally build up more confidence as you beat your opponents like a drum, which then allows you to get more into rhythm on your serve, and since you can afford it, you might also decide to take a few more mph off your 1st serves, which gives you higher %'s. Sampras also had a similar serving streak in '97, where he regularly served over 60%, sometimes over 70%, until it was halted by Korda at the USO. And here Pete's opposition was also somewhat lacking compared to in his previous years, which no doubt helped.
But I take your point. Heck, I remember even Sampras struggling to buy himself a 1st serve in his loss to Rafter at the '98 USO (and that was before he injured himself later in the match). I was just trying to say, compared to the likes of Pete and Becker, Fed probably falls just short in the clutch department. I can think of a few instances where his serve bailed him out--'07 Wimby final, ditto '08 (well, almost), and most recently in his big upset of Djoko in this year's FO SF--but I don't think, for the most part, he's been very clutch against Nadal, even on his serves.
Since we discussing whether you have to be an all time great to have a great serve (which I don't believe incidentally) let's have some fun and see which all time greats had the best serves.
b/c we are only talking about a single stroke on this thread. and you can't win matches consistently with only one stroke.
So, according to your view, the best serve of all time could potentially be someone out of the top 200 or even 300 in the World!
That begs the question that you haven't yet answered.
I'm not discussing that! I'm just saying that you have to have demonstrated some ability to use your weapon to win with when it counts. If you haven't done that, then how great of a weapon can it be. I think Goran belongs because he's a champion. Isner and Karlovic don't belong because they're not.
PS: On that list, I would put Stan Smith's serve above Kramer, Newcombe, Ashe, McEnroe, Edberg, Lendl and Borg.
Smith's serve was pretty awesome in his day but Newcombe's was generally considered a bit better than Smith's at that time. I think John Alexander and Arthur Ashe mentioned that. But of course it's debatable when you look at serves of this great level. I could see Smith's serve in his day being ranked above the others with the exception of Kramer. Kramer's serve is considered by many to be as great a serve as you could have when you include his second serve.