Greatest Serves of All Time

NonP · Jul 29, 2017

abmk said:
@NonP :

Pete's URS is comparable to Roddick in part because he SnVed far more. (Same applies for Goran, Krajicek, but I think to a lesser extent )

that tends to raise the % of unreturned serves. We saw that Federer's highest unreturned serve%s were mainly when he was SnVing (2001,2003)

Otherwise, I think Sampras' would be clearly below Roddick's, if he was staying back and returners could just get the ball back in

That's only part of the whole picture. Will try to follow up later tonight.

Steady Eddy · Jul 29, 2017

NonP said:
You know, you actually have some interesting things to say about tennis when you're not moaning about those sexual degenerates or just chattering away in O&E. Yes, I've heard from a couple other longtime fans about how humongous Denton's serve was, and it shows up in his ace %. The Ivanisevic/Karlovic of his era.

And Stich's 2nd serve was the main reason why none other than Sampras feared him more than anyone else. You're quite right his DF frequency wasn't necessarily a shortcoming on his part. In fact I've argued that most of today's players should be DFing more, not less.

Once upon a time, I kept track of points won on 2nd serve for a Connors vs. Courier match. They were only winning about 1/3 of those points! Many pros get their first serve in about 75% of the time, and win about 75% of the ones that go in. These results point to that it's better to risk some doubles. At their level the opponent jumps all over a non-aggressive serve.

"Sexual degenerates"?

abmk · Jul 29, 2017

NonP said:
K, I'ma put this together before I hit the cinema in literally 5 min. You can save your thanks for later. Just keep in mind that the following lists are far from complete (esp Fed's - I've got close to 80-90 of his matches by now) and I will most likely keep updating this post going forward as I add more names and #s.

Krajicek - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...rves-of-all-time.306579/page-24#post-11355021
Roddick - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...rves-of-all-time.306579/page-23#post-10535921
Isner, Curren, Pim Pim & Noah - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...rves-of-all-time.306579/page-23#post-10544220
Stich - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...rves-of-all-time.306579/page-23#post-10550026
Federer - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...rves-of-all-time.306579/page-23#post-10525077
Muller - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...rves-of-all-time.306579/page-24#post-10623285
Kyrgios - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...rves-of-all-time.306579/page-23#post-10555858
Vines & Doeg - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...rves-of-all-time.306579/page-23#post-10559815

you could put a link to this list in your opening post and specify it clearly. Just a suggestion

and no thanks until there are further updates to the lists

NonP said:
That's only part of the whole picture. Will try to follow up later tonight.

more return winners is one aspect. But that doesn't change what I said.

Another aspect I can think of would be the use of serve to set up the volley instead of going for outright aces or service winners/forcing errors off the return. But that's more Edberg/Cash/Rafter , not Sampras/Becker/Stich/Krajicek

Higher first serves % in with poly compared to pre-poly ? That's valid , but counter-balanced by the speed/conditions of 80s/90s compared to the 2000s.

Chanwan · Jul 30, 2017

NonP said:
You can keep regurgitating your BS and platitudes till the world comes to an end but that doesn't make your crackpot claims any more valid. The bottom line is that your pin-up boy is nowhere near Gorgo or other GSOAT candidates. Oh, and you don't even know what "torque" means in this context.

You know, you actually have some interesting things to say about tennis when you're not moaning about those sexual degenerates or just chattering away in O&E. Yes, I've heard from a couple other longtime fans about how humongous Denton's serve was, and it shows up in his ace %. The Ivanisevic/Karlovic of his era.

And Stich's 2nd serve was the main reason why none other than Sampras feared him more than anyone else. You're quite right his DF frequency wasn't necessarily a shortcoming on his part. In fact I've argued that most of today's players should be DFing more, not less.

Welcome to the club. Before I start you might like to know that we do have a sizable URS database for many of these players, well in my own stack anyway. FYI I've already shared some of these #s (which I should add are mostly the work of Moose, krosero, @slice serve ace and Voo de Mar) in this very thread and will try to post links later tonight.

And yes, aces per service point is definitely a better metric than aces per match (which of course is what you see when you look at this ATP table only). Case in point:

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...erves-of-all-time.306579/page-20#post-9534377

As you can see Goran actually served more aces per service point in his 1st four rounds at '01 Wimbledon than Karlovic on his respective run in '15, but I guarantee you that's not what you heard shortly after Ivo posted those "record" ace totals at '15 Wimby. You can read the rest of my post for other reasons why one shouldn't put too much stock in aces/match.

But we're really going off on a tangent here. The fact of the matter is that even aces per service point can be misleading especially when it comes to servers like Sampras and Roddick, who almost certainly got more free points off their serve than other servers with similar ace counts. Even the likes of Ivo, Goran, Isner, Krajicek and Ranoic don't win over 50% of their service points outright that often, and I can say with a great deal of confidence (more so in Pete's case, since I have a significantly bigger URS collection for him) that Pete's and Andy's rate wasn't all that much worse. In fact I'd put Pete's freebie % up against almost anybody's (largely due in no small part to his unusually heavy topspin), this despite his considerably lower ace frequency than those servebots'. OTOH Isner's URS % is often surprisingly subpar for a server of his caliber, and Raonic's has been found wanting in the biggest matches of his career. These are just some of the many interesting findings that have come out of this thread. No wonder many consider it the single greatest thread in TT history (their words, not mine).

And speaking of clutch factor one thing we should keep in mind about the likes of Ivo and Isner is the fact that they faced top opposition less often than their more accomplished counterparts. Also technology does play a significant role here. More on these and other factors:

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...erves-of-all-time.306579/page-21#post-9632916
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...erves-of-all-time.306579/page-21#post-9632917

Long story short I rank Goran's serve above Ivo's as a pure shot because of my eye test. That is, I reckon Goran's lefty spin and well-nigh unreadable motion would come in handier than even Ivo's height advantage against the top players/returners. When Goran's serve was on there was literally nothing you could do about it except guess. I've never seen an opponent rendered so helpless by anyone, and among his peers in history (well, in the Open era at any rate) the only ones that come close are probably Tanner and Curren, though even here Goran's got his own height advantage.

But if I were to choose the best serveR - that is, the guy I'd want to serve for my life - the predictable but well-justified pick is Sampras. I know I'm tooting my own horn here but I'm not making an idle boast when I say you'll be hard-pressed to find other GSOAT rankings that have incorporated more thought and research. Some of these rankings may be better supported than the others, but they all have some basis in fact and history.

Cheers, will have a longer look later! Not much time today. I was under the impression that high ace rate ≈ high unreturned serves numbers. But you say Pete and Roddick are in Karlovic's league despite falling significantly short on the ace rate count?
And yes, this thread sure seems like the most serious on the matter.

NonP · Jul 30, 2017

Was surprised at some of the missing names up there. Here are a few URS #s for Karlovic (opponent's in brackets as usual, and links to Moose's, krosero's and/or Voo de Mar's posts are included in case you wanna see the 1st/2nd-serve breakdown and other stats):

2005 Wim 1R L Bracciali - at least 66.7% (132+/198), 51 aces, 8 DFs [??% (??/193), 33 aces, 5 DFs]
2007 Stockholm F W T. Johansson - 60.6% (40/66), 27 aces, 1 DF [??% (??/66), 5 aces, 2 DFs]
2015 Newport QF W Brown - 58.7% (37/63), 23 aces, 2 DFs [52.6% (30/57), 5 aces, 3 DFs]
2015 Newport SF W Sock - 55.7% (34/61), 14 aces, 2 DFs [??% (??/72), 4 aces, 6 DFs]
2015 Newport F L Ram - 48.1% (52/108), 19 aces, 4 DFs [47.0% (54/115), 17 aces, 2 DFs]
2003 Wim 1R W Hewitt - 45.7% (59/129), 19 aces, 8 DFs [37.2% (42/113), 10 aces, 8 DFs]
2013 Newport QF L Isner - 45.3% (34/75), 14 aces, 3 DFs [53.2% (41/77), 23 aces, 1 DF]
2005 USO 2R L Agassi - 45.3% (63/139), 30 aces, 7 DFs [??% (??/115), 5 aces, 1 DF]
2005 Queen's F L Roddick - 39.5% (32/81), 16 aces, 3 DFs [55.4% (41/74), 9 aces, 1 DF]
2010 Delray Beach F L Gulbis - 37.7% (26?/69), 14 aces, 5 DFs [37.5% (18?/48), 6 aces, 2 DFs]

(Question marks for the Delfray Beach match due to discrepancies between Voo's own tallies - main page vs. bmp chart.)

Newcombe:

1973 USO F W Kodes (missing Newk's last 2 points; Voo's totals available only for aces/DFs) - 39.2%, 12 aces, 6 DFs [24.2%, 5 aces, 1 DF]
1971 WIM F W Smith - 38.5% (57/148), 9 aces, 5 DFs [29.3% (44/150), 6 aces (2 on 2nd), 7 DFs]
1975 AO F W Connors (Voo's) - 32.6% (44/135), 17 aces, 7 DFs [27.9% (39/140), 4 aces, 1 DF]
1969 WIM F L Laver (Voo's) - 30.3% (40/132), 4 aces, 9 DFs [18.8% (24/128), 9 aces, 7 DFs]
1970 WIM F W Rosewall - 21.5% (34/158), 6 aces (1 on 2nd), 7 DFs [21.0% (30/143), 2 aces, 11 DFs]

Zivojinovic:

1987 WIM 3R W Bates - 50.9% (56/110), 26 aces
1988 DC SF L Becker - 46.2% (43/93) [57.3% (43/75)]
1987 WIM QF L Connors - 42.1% (40/95), 25 aces, 0 DFs
1985 AO QF W McEnroe - 40% (44/110), 13 aces, 6 DFs [37.7% (43?/114), 12 aces, 1 DF]
1985 WIM 1R W Wilander - 38.9% (44/113), 15 aces (3 on 2nd), 12 DFs
1986 WIM SF L Lendl - 36.8% (64/174), 18 aces (1 on 2nd), 7 DFs
1987 USO 3R L McEnroe - 32.1% (54/168), 21 aces, 9 DFs [31.9% (53/166), 10 aces, 12 DFs]

Tanner:

1977 AO F W Vilas - 46.4% (39/84) [25.6% (22/86)]
1983 WIM QF L Lendl - 43.9% (43/98), 12 aces, 7 DFs [37.1% (49/132), 11 aces (3 on 2nd), 2 DFs]
1975 WIM SF L Connors (Voo's got his own #s) - 34.5% (30/87), 12 aces (1 on 2nd), 3 DFs [31.4% (22/70), 4 aces, 1 DF]
1980 WIM QF L Connors (Voo's) - 33.6% (47/140), 16 aces, 6 DFs [26.4% (32/121), 4 aces, 2 DFs]
1979 WIM F L Borg - 31.1% (52/167), 15 aces, 4 DFs [33.6% (51/152), 4 aces, 3 DFs]

Smith:

1971 WIM F L Newcombe - 29.3% (44/150), 6 aces (2 on 2nd), 7 DFs [38.5% (57/148), 9 aces, 5 DFs]
1974 WIM SF L Rosewall - 26.3% (47/179), 3 aces, 8 DFs [23.3% (38/163), 0 aces, 9 DFs]
1972 WIM F W Nastase (Voo's) - 17.9% (32/179), 1 ace, 6 DFs [21.7% (34/157), 4 aces (1 on 2nd), 5 DFs]

And Ashe:

1978 YEC F L McEnroe (Voo's) - 35.5% (33/93), 9 aces, 3 DFs [35.2% (43/122), 7 aces, 7 DFs]
1975 WIM F W Connors - 32.4% (34/105), 4 aces, 2 DFs [21.4% (28/131), 1 ace, 3 DFs]
1969 WIM SF L Laver (Voo's - since @urban's stats don't include URS I'm not sure where I got these #s) - 26.5% (31/117), 6 aces, 5 DFs [32.6% (30/92), 9 aces, 2 DFs]

(Moose or any1 else, let me know if you can fill in the gaps for me: opponent's stats, ace/DF totals, etc.)

Frankly thinking about yanking Smith off the list. I've been keeping him in there because of the glowing contemporary accounts of his serve and also because I'd been expecting to add to our tiny Smith collection, but given his underwhelming %s in three of his biggest matches (yes, even after grading on a curve) I find it hard to justify his ongoing inclusion when other candidates have been downgraded due to their own lack of clutchness and the near-greats with a similar track record (Ashe, Lendl, Forget, Tsonga, Kyrgios, etc.) are no longer in contention. What do you guys think?

Steady Eddy said:
Once upon a time, I kept track of points won on 2nd serve for a Connors vs. Courier match. They were only winning about 1/3 of those points! Many pros get their first serve in about 75% of the time, and win about 75% of the ones that go in. These results point to that it's better to risk some doubles. At their level the opponent jumps all over a non-aggressive serve.

FYI I've been making this argument for a long time now. Like I said I do find your tennis IQ pretty high.

"Sexual degenerates"?

Was referring to what frankly seems to be your obsession with non-cisgender identities, but let's drop it for now.

abmk said:
you could put a link to this list in your opening post and specify it clearly. Just a suggestion

and no thanks until there are further updates to the lists

I'll take those thanks now, thanks.

Was actually thinking about doing just that with my OP. Will do before I hit the sack tonight.

more return winners is one aspect. But that doesn't change what I said.

Another aspect I can think of would be the use of serve to set up the volley instead of going for outright aces or service winners/forcing errors off the return. But that's more Edberg/Cash/Rafter , not Sampras/Becker/Stich/Krajicek

Higher first serves % in with poly compared to pre-poly ? That's valid , but counter-balanced by the speed/conditions of 80s/90s compared to the 2000s.

The strongest counterpoint I can offer is that Pete's stats on non-grass courts don't seem to drop a whole lot. Granted he still S&Ved more than Roddick on these surfaces, but then I can point to similar examples from other players, too. I'll try to elaborate tomorrow.

Chanwan said:
Cheers, will have a longer look later! Not much time today. I was under the impression that high ace rate ≈ high unreturned serves numbers. But you say Pete and Roddick are in Karlovic's league despite falling significantly short on the ace rate count?
And yes, this thread sure seems like the most serious on the matter.

It's indeed generally true that higher ace rate = higher URS %, but there are anomalies like Pete and Andy who win a disproportionate % of their service points for their height. Mind you, I still rate Ivo's serve higher as a stand-alone stroke, but considering the whole package I like Sampras over just about anybody else against a Murray or Djokovic.

Do take your time to peruse the stuff later. I'm too beat now to reply anyway.

Eggshen · Jul 30, 2017

Fedfan34 said:
If this is a top five list, this is easy:
Sampras, Sampras, Sampras, Sampras, and Sampras
If we get into top ten, it goes something like:
Sampras, Sampras, Sampras, Sampras, Sampras, Sampras, Sampras, Sampras, Sampras, and Sampras

Not sure about 9 and 10.

1. Sampras with a racquet
2. Sampras with a fly swatter
3. Sampras with a ball point pen
4. Sampras serving while pretending to hold a racquet
5. Everyone else

abmk · Jul 30, 2017

@NonP :

Ok, now you get a thanks , thank you

Will wait for the factor re : Sampras vs Roddick.

Limpinhitter · Jul 30, 2017

NonP said:
Was surprised at some of the missing names up there. Here are a few URS #s for Karlovic (opponent's in brackets as usual, and links to Moose's, krosero's and/or Voo de Mar's posts are included in case you wanna see the 1st/2nd-serve breakdown and other stats):

2005 Wim 1R L Bracciali - at least 66.7% (132+/198), 51 aces, 8 DFs [??% (??/193), 33 aces, 5 DFs]
2007 Stockholm F W T. Johansson - 60.6% (40/66), 27 aces, 1 DF [??% (??/66), 5 aces, 2 DFs]
2015 Newport QF W Brown - 58.7% (37/63), 23 aces, 2 DFs [52.6% (30/57), 5 aces, 3 DFs]
2015 Newport SF W Sock - 55.7% (34/61), 14 aces, 2 DFs [??% (??/72), 4 aces, 6 DFs]
2015 Newport F L Ram - 48.1% (52/108), 19 aces, 4 DFs [47.0% (54/115), 17 aces, 2 DFs]
2003 Wim 1R W Hewitt - 45.7% (59/129), 19 aces, 8 DFs [37.2% (42/113), 10 aces, 8 DFs]
2013 Newport QF L Isner - 45.3% (34/75), 14 aces, 3 DFs [53.2% (41/77), 23 aces, 1 DF]
2005 USO 2R L Agassi - 45.3% (63/139), 30 aces, 7 DFs [??% (??/115), 5 aces, 1 DF]
2005 Queen's F L Roddick - 39.5% (32/81), 16 aces, 3 DFs [55.4% (41/74), 9 aces, 1 DF]
2010 Delray Beach F L Gulbis - 37.7% (26?/69), 14 aces, 5 DFs [37.5% (18?/48), 6 aces, 2 DFs]

(Question marks for the Delfray Beach match due to discrepancies between Voo's own tallies - main page vs. bmp chart.)

Newcombe:

1973 USO F W Kodes (missing Newk's last 2 points; Voo's totals available only for aces/DFs) - 39.2%, 12 aces, 6 DFs [24.2%, 5 aces, 1 DF]
1971 WIM F W Smith - 38.5% (57/148), 9 aces, 5 DFs [29.3% (44/150), 6 aces (2 on 2nd), 7 DFs]
1975 AO F W Connors (Voo's) - 32.6% (44/135), 17 aces, 7 DFs [27.9% (39/140), 4 aces, 1 DF]
1969 WIM F L Laver (Voo's) - 30.3% (40/132), 4 aces, 9 DFs [18.8% (24/128), 9 aces, 7 DFs]
1970 WIM F W Rosewall - 21.5% (34/158), 6 aces (1 on 2nd), 7 DFs [21.0% (30/143), 2 aces, 11 DFs]

Zivojinovic:

1987 WIM 3R W Bates - 50.9% (56/110), 26 aces
1988 DC SF L Becker - 46.2% (43/93) [57.3% (43/75)]
1987 WIM QF L Connors - 42.1% (40/95), 25 aces, 0 DFs
1985 AO QF W McEnroe - 40% (44/110), 13 aces, 6 DFs [37.7% (43?/114), 12 aces, 1 DF]
1985 WIM 1R W Wilander - 38.9% (44/113), 15 aces (3 on 2nd), 12 DFs
1986 WIM SF L Lendl - 36.8% (64/174), 18 aces (1 on 2nd), 7 DFs
1987 USO 3R L McEnroe - 32.1% (54/168), 21 aces, 9 DFs [31.9% (53/166), 10 aces, 12 DFs]

Tanner:

1977 AO F W Vilas - 46.4% (39/84) [25.6% (22/86)]
1983 WIM QF L Lendl - 43.9% (43/98), 12 aces, 7 DFs [37.1% (49/132), 11 aces (3 on 2nd), 2 DFs]
1975 WIM SF L Connors (Voo's got his own #s) - 34.5% (30/87), 12 aces (1 on 2nd), 3 DFs [31.4% (22/70), 4 aces, 1 DF]
1980 WIM QF L Connors (Voo's) - 33.6% (47/140), 16 aces, 6 DFs [26.4% (32/121), 4 aces, 2 DFs]
1979 WIM F L Borg - 31.1% (52/167), 15 aces, 4 DFs [33.6% (51/152), 4 aces, 3 DFs]

Smith:

1971 WIM F L Newcombe - 29.3% (44/150), 6 aces (2 on 2nd), 7 DFs [38.5% (57/148), 9 aces, 5 DFs]
1974 WIM SF L Rosewall - 26.3% (47/179), 3 aces, 8 DFs [23.3% (38/163), 0 aces, 9 DFs]
1972 WIM F W Nastase (Voo's) - 17.9% (32/179), 1 ace, 6 DFs [21.7% (34/157), 4 aces (1 on 2nd), 5 DFs]

And Ashe:

1978 YEC F L McEnroe (Voo's) - 35.5% (33/93), 9 aces, 3 DFs [35.2% (43/122), 7 aces, 7 DFs]
1975 WIM F W Connors - 32.4% (34/105), 4 aces, 2 DFs [21.4% (28/131), 1 ace, 3 DFs]
1969 WIM SF L Laver (Voo's - since @urban's stats don't include URS I'm not sure where I got these #s) - 26.5% (31/117), 6 aces, 5 DFs [32.6% (30/92), 9 aces, 2 DFs]

(Moose or any1 else, let me know if you can fill in the gaps for me: opponent's stats, ace/DF totals, etc.)

Frankly thinking about yanking Smith off the list. I've been keeping him in there because of the glowing contemporary accounts of his serve and also because I'd been expecting to add to our tiny Smith collection, but given his underwhelming %s in three of his biggest matches (yes, even after grading on a curve) I find it hard to justify his ongoing inclusion when other candidates have been downgraded due to their own lack of clutchness and the near-greats with a similar track record (Ashe, Lendl, Forget, Tsonga, Kyrgios, etc.) are no longer in contention. What do you guys think?

FYI I've been making this argument for a long time now. Like I said I do find your tennis IQ pretty high.

Was referring to what frankly seems to be your obsession with non-cisgender identities, but let's drop it for now.

I'll take those thanks now, thanks.

Was actually thinking about doing just that with my OP. Will do before I hit the sack tonight.

The strongest counterpoint I can offer is that Pete's stats on non-grass courts don't seem to drop a whole lot. Granted he still S&Ved more than Roddick on these surfaces, but then I can point to similar examples from other players, too. I'll try to elaborate tomorrow.

It's indeed generally true that higher ace rate = higher URS %, but there are anomalies like Pete and Andy who win a disproportionate % of their service points for their height. Mind you, I still rate Ivo's serve higher as a stand-alone stroke, but considering the whole package I like Sampras over just about anybody else against a Murray or Djokovic.

Do take your time to peruse the stuff later. I'm too beat now to reply anyway.

URS are not the only measure of serving greatness. In any event, how about Smith's numbers in the 71' U.S. Open final and the 73' WCT final in Dallas, his 2 second most important wins?

Dan Lobb · Jul 30, 2017

NonP said:
You can keep regurgitating your BS and platitudes till the world comes to an end but that doesn't make your crackpot claims any more valid. The bottom line is that your pin-up boy is nowhere near Gorgo or other GSOAT candidates. Oh, and you don't even know what "torque" means in this context.

You know, you actually have some interesting things to say about tennis when you're not moaning about those sexual degenerates or just chattering away in O&E. Yes, I've heard from a couple other longtime fans about how humongous Denton's serve was, and it shows up in his ace %. The Ivanisevic/Karlovic of his era.

And Stich's 2nd serve was the main reason why none other than Sampras feared him more than anyone else. You're quite right his DF frequency wasn't necessarily a shortcoming on his part. In fact I've argued that most of today's players should be DFing more, not less.

Welcome to the club. Before I start you might like to know that we do have a sizable URS database for many of these players, well in my own stack anyway. FYI I've already shared some of these #s (which I should add are mostly the work of Moose, krosero, @slice serve ace and Voo de Mar) in this very thread and will try to post links later tonight.

And yes, aces per service point is definitely a better metric than aces per match (which of course is what you see when you look at this ATP table only). Case in point:

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...erves-of-all-time.306579/page-20#post-9534377

As you can see Goran actually served more aces per service point in his 1st four rounds at '01 Wimbledon than Karlovic on his respective run in '15, but I guarantee you that's not what you heard shortly after Ivo posted those "record" ace totals at '15 Wimby. You can read the rest of my post for other reasons why one shouldn't put too much stock in aces/match.

But we're really going off on a tangent here. The fact of the matter is that even aces per service point can be misleading especially when it comes to servers like Sampras and Roddick, who almost certainly got more free points off their serve than other servers with similar ace counts. Even the likes of Ivo, Goran, Isner, Krajicek and Ranoic don't win over 50% of their service points outright that often, and I can say with a great deal of confidence (more so in Pete's case, since I have a significantly bigger URS collection for him) that Pete's and Andy's rate wasn't all that much worse. In fact I'd put Pete's freebie % up against almost anybody's (largely due in no small part to his unusually heavy topspin), this despite his considerably lower ace frequency than those servebots'. OTOH Isner's URS % is often surprisingly subpar for a server of his caliber, and Raonic's has been found wanting in the biggest matches of his career. These are just some of the many interesting findings that have come out of this thread. No wonder many consider it the single greatest thread in TT history (their words, not mine).

And speaking of clutch factor one thing we should keep in mind about the likes of Ivo and Isner is the fact that they faced top opposition less often than their more accomplished counterparts. Also technology does play a significant role here. More on these and other factors:

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...erves-of-all-time.306579/page-21#post-9632916
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...erves-of-all-time.306579/page-21#post-9632917

Long story short I rank Goran's serve above Ivo's as a pure shot because of my eye test. That is, I reckon Goran's lefty spin and well-nigh unreadable motion would come in handier than even Ivo's height advantage against the top players/returners. When Goran's serve was on there was literally nothing you could do about it except guess. I've never seen an opponent rendered so helpless by anyone, and among his peers in history (well, in the Open era at any rate) the only ones that come close are probably Tanner and Curren, though even here Goran's got his own height advantage.

But if I were to choose the best serveR - that is, the guy I'd want to serve for my life - the predictable but well-justified pick is Sampras. I know I'm tooting my own horn here but I'm not making an idle boast when I say you'll be hard-pressed to find other GSOAT rankings that have incorporated more thought and research. Some of these rankings may be better supported than the others, but they all have some basis in fact and history.

You're saying that Larsen and Rosewall and Gonzales and Cooper and Laver were dummies who did not have a clue what they were talking about?
That goes against the grain of logical thought.

My understanding of "torque" in this context is consistent with the dictionary, I guess you have a better understanding?

"Power" as Larsen used the term is more than just "speed"...two different concepts.

Yes, Hoad used more spin and "torque" than Gonzales.

krosero · Aug 28, 2017

I've mentioned before that I have a ton of pre-OE boxscores, from which I've calculated many service stats. I've rarely posted them -- my data is not ideally organized to do that -- but here's a batch of them, all from one event.

It's the Philadelphia Pro RR of 1952, won by Pancho Gonzalez. The tournament was held March 21-29; it featured 6 nights of play among 4 men, each man playing the other three twice.

Gonzalez won the tournament with a 5-1 record, just edging out Segura.

I got all the stats below from the boxscores published in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

These are mostly service stats but I'll also throw in the stroke counts (winners, errors), since those were in the boxscores too.

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Segura, first of two meetings, 6-2, 6-4

Gonzalez won 54 points overall, Segura 41.

Gonzalez won 34 of 48 service points (70.8%)

Segura won 27 of 47 service points (57.4%).

Gonzalez held in 8 of 9 service games: hold rate 88.9%

Segura held in 5 of 9 service games: hold rate 55.6%

Gonzalez had 7 placements, 2 aces, 1 double-fault and 11 other errors (7 nets, 4 outs).

Segura had 4 placements, 0 aces, 2 double-faults and 14 other errors (7 nets, 7 outs).

___________________________________________________

Kramer d. Kovacs, first of two meetings, 7-5, 6-0

Kramer won 57 points overall, Kovacs 43.

Kramer won 37 of 53 service points (69.8%)

Kovacs won 27 of 47 service points (57.4%).

Kramer held in 9 of 9 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Kovacs held in 5 of 9 service games: hold rate 55.6%

Kramer had 11 placements, 15 aces, 2 double-faults and 32 other errors (16 nets, 16 outs).

Kovacs had 4 placements, 5 aces, 1 double-fault and 30 other errors (15 nets, 15 outs).

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Kovacs, first of two meetings, 6-3, 6-4

Gonzalez won 69 points overall, Kovacs 55.

Gonzalez won 44 of 61 service points (72.1%)

Kovacs won 38 of 63 service points (60.3%).

Gonzalez held in 10 of 10 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Kovacs held in 7 of 9 service games: hold rate 77.8%

Gonzalez had 24 placements, 10 aces, 1 double-fault and 41 other errors (20 nets, 21 outs).

Kovacs had 10 placements, 3 aces, 1 double-fault and 34 other errors (14 nets, 20 outs).

___________________________________________________

Segura d. Kramer, first of two meetings, 6-0, 15-13

Segura won 116 points overall, Kramer 89.

Segura won 71 of 95 service points (74.7%)

Kramer won 65 of 110 service points (59.1%).

Segura held in 16 of 17 service games: hold rate 94.1%

Kramer held in 12 of 17 service games: hold rate 70.6%

Segura had 43 placements, 3 aces, 2 double-faults and 50 other errors (21 nets, 29 outs).

Kramer had 31 placements, 5 aces, 5 double-faults and 65 other errors (25 nets, 40 outs).

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Kramer, first of two meetings, 6-3, 6-4

Gonzalez won 69 points overall, Kramer 50.

Gonzalez won 41 of 52 service points (78.8%)

Kramer won 39 of 67 service points (58.2%).

Gonzalez held in 10 of 10 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Kramer held in 7 of 9 service games: hold rate 77.8%

Gonzalez had 33 placements, 0 aces, 0 double-faults and 35 other errors (21 nets, 14 outs).

Kramer had 12 placements, 3 aces, 1 double-fault and 35 other errors (16 nets, 19 outs).

___________________________________________________

Segura d. Kovacs, first of two meetings, 6-2, 6-2

Segura won 64 points overall, Kovacs 41.

Segura won 34 of 54 service points (63.0%)

Kovacs won 21 of 51 service points (41.2%).

Segura held in 7 of 8 service games: hold rate 87.5%

Kovacs held in 3 of 8 service games: hold rate 37.5%

Segura had 18 placements, 3 aces, 1 double-fault and 30 other errors (11 nets, 19 outs).

Kovacs had 9 placements, 1 ace, 1 double-fault and 42 other errors (22 nets, 20 outs).

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Kramer, second of two meetings, 6-4, 6-4

Gonzalez won 60 points overall, Kramer 50.

Gonzalez won 38 of 60 service points (63.3%)

Kramer won 28 of 50 service points (56.0%).

Gonzalez held in 8 of 10 service games: hold rate 80.0%

Kramer held in 6 of 10 service games: hold rate 60.0%

Gonzalez had 24 placements, 2 aces, 3 double-faults and 34 other errors (17 nets, 17 outs).

Kramer had 11 placements, 2 aces, 2 double-faults and 32 other errors (19 nets, 13 outs).

___________________________________________________

Segura d. Kovacs, second of two meetings, 6-2, 6-3

Segura won 62 points overall, Kovacs 39.

Segura won 34 of 46 service points (73.9%)

Kovacs won 27 of 55 service points (49.1%).

Segura held in 8 of 8 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Kovacs held in 5 of 9 service games: hold rate 55.6% [EDIT TO CORRECT CALCULATION]

Segura had 19 placements, 1 ace, 1 double-fault and 27 other errors (9 nets, 18 outs).

Kovacs had 10 placements, 1 ace, 0 double-faults and 42 other errors (24 nets, 18 outs).

___________________________________________________

Kovacs d. Gonzalez, second of two meetings, 0-6, 6-4, 6-4

Kovacs came back from love-2 in the second.

This was Kovacs’ only win in the event, and Gonzalez’s only loss.

It was also the only match in which the winner won fewer points than the loser.

And it was the only night in which any match went beyond two sets; the other match this night, between Kramer and Segura, also did so.

Kovacs won 67 points overall, Gonzalez 77.

Kovacs won 48 of 79 service points (60.8%)

Gonzalez won 46 of 65 service points (70.8%).

Kovacs held in 9 of 13 service games: hold rate 69.2%

Gonzalez held in 10 of 13 service games: hold rate 76.9%

Kovacs had 15 placements, 4 aces, 3 double-faults and 40 other errors (19 nets, 21 outs).

Gonzalez had 26 placements, 8 aces, 1 double-fault and 47 other errors (22 nets, 25 outs).

___________________________________________________

Kramer d. Segura, second of two meetings, 4-6, 8-6, 6-3

Kramer won 124 points overall, Segura 115.

Kramer won 80 of 124 service points (64.5%)

Segura won 71 of 115 service points (61.7%).

Kramer held in 15 of 17 service games: hold rate 88.2% [EDIT TO CORRECT CALCULATION]

Segura held in 13 of 16 service games: hold rate 81.3%

Kramer had 48 placements, 8 aces, 6 double-faults and 58 other errors (29 nets, 29 outs).

Segura had 48 placements, 3 aces, 3 double-faults and 65 other errors (25 nets, 40 outs).

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Segura, second of two meetings, 6-2, 6-3

Gonzalez won 66 points overall, Segura 47.

Gonzalez won 33 of 42 service points (78.6%)

Segura won 38 of 71 service points (53.5%).

Gonzalez held in 8 of 8 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Segura held in 5 of 9 service games: hold rate 55.6% [EDIT TO CORRECT CALCULATION]

Gonzalez had 27 placements, 7 aces, 1 double-fault and 32 other errors (14 nets, 18 outs).

Segura had 14 placements, 0 aces, 1 double-fault and 31 other errors (13 nets, 18 outs).

___________________________________________________

Kramer d. Kovacs, second of two meetings, 8-6, 6-2

Kramer won 84 points overall, Kovacs 62.

Kramer won 48 of 68 service points (70.6%)

Kovacs won 42 of 78 service points (53.8%).

Kramer held in 10 of 11 service games: hold rate 90.9% [EDIT TO CORRECT CALCULATION]

Kovacs held in 7 of 11 service games: hold rate 63.6%

Kramer had 17 placements, 14 aces, 4 double-faults and 34 other errors (16 nets, 18 outs).

Kovacs had 19 placements, 5 aces, 1 double-fault and 52 other errors (29 nets, 23 outs).

Kramer closed out the match with a 6-deuce hold, the longest game of the match.

Dan Lobb · Aug 28, 2017

krosero said:
I've mentioned before that I have a ton of pre-OE boxscores, from which I've calculated many service stats. I've rarely posted them -- my data is not ideally organized to do that -- but here's a batch of them, all from one event.

It's the Philadelphia Pro RR of 1952, won by Pancho Gonzalez. The tournament was held March 21-29; it featured 6 nights of play among 4 men, each man playing the other three twice.

Gonzalez won the tournament with a 5-1 record, just edging out Segura.

I got all the stats below from the boxscores published in the Philadelphia Inquirer.

These are mostly service stats but I'll also throw in the stroke counts (winners, errors), since those were in the boxscores too.

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Segura, first of two meetings, 6-2, 6-4

Gonzalez won 54 points overall, Segura 41.

Gonzalez won 34 of 48 service points (70.8%)

Segura won 27 of 47 service points (57.4%).

Gonzalez held in 8 of 9 service games: hold rate 88.9%

Segura held in 5 of 9 service games: hold rate 55.6%

Gonzalez had 7 placements, 2 aces, 1 double-fault and 11 other errors (7 nets, 4 outs).

Segura had 4 placements, 0 aces, 2 double-faults and 14 other errors (7 nets, 7 outs).

___________________________________________________

Kramer d. Kovacs, first of two meetings, 7-5, 6-0

Kramer won 57 points overall, Kovacs 43.

Kramer won 37 of 53 service points (69.8%)

Kovacs won 27 of 47 service points (57.4%).

Kramer held in 9 of 9 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Kovacs held in 5 of 9 service games: hold rate 55.6%

Kramer had 11 placements, 15 aces, 2 double-faults and 32 other errors (16 nets, 16 outs).

Kovacs had 4 placements, 5 aces, 1 double-fault and 30 other errors (15 nets, 15 outs).

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Kovacs, first of two meetings, 6-3, 6-4

Gonzalez won 69 points overall, Kovacs 55.

Gonzalez won 44 of 61 service points (72.1%)

Kovacs won 38 of 63 service points (60.3%).

Gonzalez held in 10 of 10 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Kovacs held in 7 of 9 service games: hold rate 77.8%

Gonzalez had 24 placements, 10 aces, 1 double-fault and 41 other errors (20 nets, 21 outs).

Kovacs had 10 placements, 3 aces, 1 double-fault and 34 other errors (14 nets, 20 outs).

___________________________________________________

Segura d. Kramer, first of two meetings, 6-0, 15-13

Segura won 116 points overall, Kramer 89.

Segura won 71 of 95 service points (74.7%)

Kramer won 65 of 110 service points (59.1%).

Segura held in 16 of 17 service games: hold rate 94.1%

Kramer held in 12 of 17 service games: hold rate 70.6%

Segura had 43 placements, 3 aces, 2 double-faults and 50 other errors (21 nets, 29 outs).

Kramer had 31 placements, 5 aces, 5 double-faults and 65 other errors (25 nets, 40 outs).

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Kramer, first of two meetings, 6-3, 6-4

Gonzalez won 69 points overall, Kramer 50.

Gonzalez won 41 of 52 service points (78.8%)

Kramer won 39 of 67 service points (58.2%).

Gonzalez held in 10 of 10 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Kramer held in 7 of 9 service games: hold rate 77.8%

Gonzalez had 33 placements, 0 aces, 0 double-faults and 35 other errors (21 nets, 14 outs).

Kramer had 12 placements, 3 aces, 1 double-fault and 35 other errors (16 nets, 19 outs).

___________________________________________________

Segura d. Kovacs, first of two meetings, 6-2, 6-2

Segura won 64 points overall, Kovacs 41.

Segura won 34 of 54 service points (63.0%)

Kovacs won 21 of 51 service points (41.2%).

Segura held in 7 of 8 service games: hold rate 87.5%

Kovacs held in 3 of 8 service games: hold rate 37.5%

Segura had 18 placements, 3 aces, 1 double-fault and 30 other errors (11 nets, 19 outs).

Kovacs had 9 placements, 1 ace, 1 double-fault and 42 other errors (22 nets, 20 outs).

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Kramer, second of two meetings, 6-4, 6-4

Gonzalez won 60 points overall, Kramer 50.

Gonzalez won 38 of 60 service points (63.3%)

Kramer won 28 of 50 service points (56.0%).

Gonzalez held in 8 of 10 service games: hold rate 80.0%

Kramer held in 6 of 10 service games: hold rate 60.0%

Gonzalez had 24 placements, 2 aces, 3 double-faults and 34 other errors (17 nets, 17 outs).

Kramer had 11 placements, 2 aces, 2 double-faults and 32 other errors (19 nets, 13 outs).

___________________________________________________

Segura d. Kovacs, second of two meetings, 6-2, 6-3

Segura won 62 points overall, Kovacs 39.

Segura won 34 of 46 service points (73.9%)

Kovacs won 27 of 55 service points (49.1%).

Segura held in 8 of 8 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Kovacs held in 5 of 9 service games: hold rate 52.9%

Segura had 19 placements, 1 ace, 1 double-fault and 27 other errors (9 nets, 18 outs).

Kovacs had 10 placements, 1 ace, 0 double-faults and 42 other errors (24 nets, 18 outs).

___________________________________________________

Kovacs d. Gonzalez, second of two meetings, 0-6, 6-4, 6-4

Kovacs came back from love-2 in the second.

This was Kovacs’ only win in the event, and Gonzalez’s only loss.

It was also the only match in which the winner won fewer points than the loser.

And it was the only night in which any match went beyond two sets; the other match this night, between Kramer and Segura, also did so.

Kovacs won 67 points overall, Gonzalez 77.

Kovacs won 48 of 79 service points (60.8%)

Gonzalez won 46 of 65 service points (70.8%).

Kovacs held in 9 of 13 service games: hold rate 69.2%

Gonzalez held in 10 of 13 service games: hold rate 76.9%

Kovacs had 15 placements, 4 aces, 3 double-faults and 40 other errors (19 nets, 21 outs).

Gonzalez had 26 placements, 8 aces, 1 double-fault and 47 other errors (22 nets, 25 outs).

___________________________________________________

Kramer d. Segura, second of two meetings, 4-6, 8-6, 6-3

Kramer won 124 points overall, Segura 115.

Kramer won 80 of 124 service points (64.5%)

Segura won 71 of 115 service points (61.7%).

Kramer held in 15 of 17 service games: hold rate 87.9%

Segura held in 13 of 16 service games: hold rate 81.3%

Kramer had 48 placements, 8 aces, 6 double-faults and 58 other errors (29 nets, 29 outs).

Segura had 48 placements, 3 aces, 3 double-faults and 65 other errors (25 nets, 40 outs).

___________________________________________________

Gonzalez d. Segura, second of two meetings, 6-2, 6-3

Gonzalez won 66 points overall, Segura 47.

Gonzalez won 33 of 42 service points (78.6%)

Segura won 38 of 71 service points (53.5%).

Gonzalez held in 8 of 8 service games: hold rate 100.0%

Segura held in 5 of 9 service games: hold rate 52.9%

Gonzalez had 27 placements, 7 aces, 1 double-fault and 32 other errors (14 nets, 18 outs).

Segura had 14 placements, 0 aces, 1 double-fault and 31 other errors (13 nets, 18 outs).

___________________________________________________

Kramer d. Kovacs, second of two meetings, 8-6, 6-2

Kramer won 84 points overall, Kovacs 62.

Kramer won 48 of 68 service points (70.6%)

Kovacs won 42 of 78 service points (53.8%).

Kramer held in 10 of 11 service games: hold rate 90.0%

Kovacs held in 7 of 11 service games: hold rate 63.6%

Kramer had 17 placements, 14 aces, 4 double-faults and 34 other errors (16 nets, 18 outs).

Kovacs had 19 placements, 5 aces, 1 double-fault and 52 other errors (29 nets, 23 outs).

Kramer closed out the match with a 6-deuce hold, the longest game of the match.

Thanks for these stats, I have always wondered about the breakdown in matches for this tournament.
It looks like Kramer was getting into his best form towards the end of the tournament.

Is there any indication of what the surface was for this event? Philadelphia was significant in the early fifties.

NonP · Aug 28, 2017

Let's start with the long-overdue update:

Ivanisevic
Karlovic
Sampras
Gonzales
Krajicek
Arthurs
Roddick
Newcombe
Isner
Becker
Philippoussis
Zivojinovic
McEnroe
Raonic
Curren
Stich
Tanner
Rusedski
Federer
Muller

And the Honorary Hall of Fame (by order of birth as usual):

McLoughlin, Maurice - perhaps the first distinguished cannonball serve in tennis history
Tilden - yet another storied power serve, which he bolstered with spin and accuracy
Doeg, John - Ivanisevic to Vines' Sampras, a southpaw whose serve was considered one of the two or three greatest ever (along with Vines') in his heyday
Stoefen, Lester - one of the first giants with a feared high-rise rocket launcher
Vines - by many accounts, the best and fastest serve of the pre-WWII era
Kramer - in addition to a formidable first delivery, perhaps the best second serve before Newcombe and Sampras
Denton, Steve - his unusual service motion notwithstanding, an ace dispenser that could bring enormous heat
Edberg - for his iconic kicker (any logo ring a bell?), arguably the best ever for serve-and-volley
Johansson, Joachim - Denton of the aughts

As I hinted last time Smith has been eliminated for failing to live up to his reputation in at least three important matches. I said last year I was going to put less stock in subjective observations and more in cold hard numbers, and this winnowing reflects my new methodology. Doesn't mean the yanked names are gone for good, though. If you come across anything for the current, former and/or future candidates, feel free to share.

Also going forward I'll be updating my OP with links to each player's URS database (here's the primer on unreturned serves again). Will try to keep the numbers up to date as well. (Moose actually PM'ed moi some new #s and corrections earlier today. They will be incorporated shortly.)

The list of prehistoric candidates remains the same (year of birth in parentheses):

Bob Falkenburg (1926)
Mike Sangster (1940)
Colin Dibley (1944)
John Feaver (1952)
Victor Amaya (1954)

On to the replies:

Limpinhitter said:
URS are not the only measure of serving greatness. In any event, how about Smith's numbers in the 71' U.S. Open final and the 73' WCT final in Dallas, his 2 second most important wins?

Don't think I have those. And right, #s ain't everything, but even so you can see that Newk won most of his big matches while Stan lost 2 out of 3. That's surely something, no?

And get this: per Moose's post on the '73 USO final (Moose did you ever fill in the gap with those 2+ missing points?) Newk's eye-popping URS rate of 39.2% was largely due to Kodes returning so well John was forced to go for broke on serve. So Newk was able to counter this Agassian returning performance from his opponent with a level of serving prowess rarely seen in that era, and in one of his career-defining matches to boot. In other words Newk served like a champ, which can't be said of Stan in his own Wimby matches. Advantage Newcombe.

krosero said:
I've mentioned before that I have a ton of pre-OE boxscores, from which I've calculated many service stats. I've rarely posted them -- my data is not ideally organized to do that -- but here's a batch of them, all from one event....

Super. But... no URS stats?

Dan Lobb said:
It looks like Kramer was getting into his best form towards the end of the tournament.

Looks more like Gorgo kicked everyone else's ar$e. Your boy could only dream about such dominance on serve.

pc1 · Aug 28, 2017

NonP said:
Let's start with the long-overdue update:

Ivanisevic

Karlovic

Sampras

Gonzales

Krajicek

Arthurs

Roddick

Newcombe

Isner

Becker

Philippoussis

Zivojinovic

McEnroe

Raonic

Curren

Stich

Tanner

Rusedski

Federer

Muller

And the Honorary Hall of Fame (by order of birth as usual):

McLoughlin, Maurice - perhaps the first distinguished cannonball serve in tennis history

Tilden - yet another storied power serve, which he bolstered with spin and accuracy

Doeg, John - Ivanisevic to Vines' Sampras, a southpaw whose serve was considered one of the two or three greatest ever (along with Vines') in his heyday

Stoefen, Lester - one of the first giants with a feared high-rise rocket launcher

Vines - by many accounts, the best and fastest serve of the pre-WWII era

Kramer - in addition to a formidable first delivery, perhaps the best second serve before Newcombe and Sampras

Denton, Steve - his unusual service motion notwithstanding, an ace dispenser that could bring enormous heat

Edberg - for his iconic kicker (any logo ring a bell?), arguably the best ever for serve-and-volley

Johansson, Joachim - Denton of the aughts

As I hinted last time Smith has been eliminated for failing to live up to his reputation in at least three important matches. I said last year I was going to put less stock in subjective observations and more in cold hard numbers, and this winnowing reflects my new methodology. Doesn't mean the yanked names are gone for good, though. If you come across anything for the current, former and/or future candidates, feel free to share.

Also going forward I'll be updating my OP with links to each player's URS database (here's the primer on unreturned serves again). Will try to keep the numbers up to date as well. (Moose actually PM'ed moi some new #s and corrections earlier today. They will be incorporated shortly.)

The list of prehistoric candidates remains the same (year of birth in parentheses):

Bob Falkenburg (1926)

Mike Sangster (1940)

Colin Dibley (1944)

John Feaver (1952)

Victor Amaya (1954)

On to the replies:

Don't think I have those. And right, #s ain't everything, but even so you can see that Newk won most of his big matches while Stan lost 2 out of 3. That's surely something, no?

And get this: per Moose's post on the '73 USO final (Moose did you ever fill in the gap with those 2+ missing points?) Newk's eye-popping URS rate of 39.2% was largely due to Kodes returning so well John was forced to go for broke on serve. So Newk was able to counter this Agassian returning performance from his opponent with a level of serving prowess rarely seen in that era, and in one of his career-defining matches to boot. In other words Newk served like a champ, which can't be said of Stan in his own Wimby matches. Advantage Newcombe.

Super. But... no URS stats?

Looks more like Gorgo kicked everyone else's ar$e. Your boy could only dream about such dominance on serve.

Don't forget Newcombe didn't lose serve once against Jimmy Connors in the quarters in the 1973 US Open also! Newk, when in shape was the best serve and volleyer I have seen technically.

When I write that I mean he had a great first serve, second serve, excellent volley on both sides and he could really get close to the net on the first volley. People have said he had the best first volley in the game. And of course he had a great overhead.

Let's just say I thought it was tough to break his serve especially on grass.

You could argue some may be as good overall in the serve and volley as Newcombe, Sampras for example.

Kramer was probably every bit as good and perhaps a bit better than Newcombe because of the slightly better serve and the slight better volley.

NonP · Aug 29, 2017

My old post with URS stats for Isner (along with those for Curren, Pim Pim and Noah) was running out of room, and since I expect to add to John's collection in the foreseeable future I'm spinning it off here (again links are included where available - note the '10 Wimby marathon!):

2016 Atlanta SF W Opelka - 63.6% (49/77), 22 aces, 5 DFs [38.5% (37-96), 15 aces, 4 DFs]
2016 DC 1R W Groth - 56.6% (47/83), 20 aces, 2 DFs
2017 Atlanta SF W Muller - 53.7% (29/54), 15 aces, 5 DFs [37.7% (23/61), 8 aces, 4 DFs]
2013 Newport QF W Karlovic - 53.2% (41/77), 23 aces, 1 DF [45.3% (34/75), 14 aces, 3 DFs]
2015 AO 3R L Muller - 52.2% (59/113), 30 aces, 2 DFs [47.4% (46/97), 23 aces, 3 DFs]
2015 Washington F L Nishikori - 51.8% (44/85), 18 aces, 2 DFs [31.2% (24/77), 5 aces, 2 DFs]
2010 WIM 1R W Mahut - 51.7% (254/491), 113 aces, 10 DFs [47.0% (230/489), 103 aces, 21 DFs]
2010 Auckland F W Clement - 41% (41/100), 22 aces, 2 DFs [31.2% (29/93), 8 aces, 0 DFs]
2007 Washington SF W Monfils - 39.8% (49/123), 22 aces, 5 DFs [42.2% (43/102), 25 aces, 4 DFs]
2012 IW SF W Djokovic - 39.3% (45/112), 20 aces, 0 DFs [31.5% (35-111), 8 aces, 2 DFs]
2009 USO 3R W Roddick - 38.7% (63/163), 38 aces, 7 DFs [40.9% (63/154), 20 aces, 2 DFs]
2012 DC 1R W Federer - 38.2% (50/131), 14 aces, 5 DFs [37.4% (43/115), 13 aces, 1 DF] (of the 36 return errors he drew from Fed, 25 were BHs)
2016 Paris F L Murray - 37.2% (32/86), 18 aces, 2 DFs [30.6% (30/98), 9 aces, 4 DFs]
2012 IW F L Federer - 32.4% (23/71), 4 aces, 1 DF [32.1% (18/56), 7 aces, 2 DFs]
2015 Miami SF L Djokovic - 28.0% (23/82), 9 aces, 1 DF [32.8% (19/58), 10 aces, 1 DF]

And as a bonus here are some #s for Querrey:

2016 WIM 4R W Mahut - 50% (43/86), 23 aces, 3 DFs [28.6% (30/105), 9 aces, 4 DFs]
2012 LA F W Berankis - 44.9% (22/49), 8 aces, 2 DFs [10% (4/40), 0 aces, 2 DFs]
2017 WIM SF L Cilic (Voo's #s differ from Moose's, but their URS totals do match) - 33.8% (51/151), 13 aces, 3 DFs [47.5% (57/120), 25 aces, 1 DF]
2014 Winston-Salem SF L Janowicz - 28.8% (30/104), 18 aces, 6 DFs [37.9% (39/103), 7 aces, 6 DFs]
2010 Houston F L Chela - 19.8% (20/101), 11 aces, 3 DFs [11.3% (13/115), 2 aces, 1 DF]

pc1 said:
Don't forget Newcombe didn't lose serve once against Jimmy Connors in the quarters in the 1973 US Open also! Newk, when in shape was the best serve and volleyer I have seen technically.

When I write that I mean he had a great first serve, second serve, excellent volley on both sides and he could really get close to the net on the first volley. People have said he had the best first volley in the game. And of course he had a great overhead.

Let's just say I thought it was tough to break his serve especially on grass.

You could argue some may be as good overall in the serve and volley as Newcombe, Sampras for example.

Kramer was probably every bit as good and perhaps a bit better than Newcombe because of the slightly better serve and the slight better volley.

Yes, all of these three had an ATG 2nd serve that gave them a tremendous leg up against their opposition. I can buy that Jack's volley was slightly better than Newk's (or Pete's for that matter), but as you noted Newk probably made up for it with his nonpareil 1st volley. The same could be said of Pete, too.

pc1 · Aug 29, 2017

NonP said:
Yes, all of these three had an ATG 2nd serve that gave them a tremendous leg up against their opposition. I can buy that Jack's volley was slightly better than Newk's (or Pete's for that matter), but as you noted Newk probably made up for it with his nonpareil 1st volley. The same could be said of Pete, too.

I don't know if Sampras had a better first volley than either Kramer or Gonzalez but he often made up for it by delaying and taking the short ball on the bounce close to the net and hitting a great offensive shot. It's not quite a half volley.

Sampras in my opinion is very similar to Kramer in style. Great first and second serves, excellent volleys, great forehands, super overheads etc.

Both at their peaks moved very well with Sampras getting the edge there.

Kramer did have strokes that very few players had today in his sidespin shots like his sidespin forehand which would pull a player off the court when he hit his down the line approach. Same on the backhand side. I understand that Kramer's sidespin backhand down the line drove Budge crazy.

krosero · Aug 29, 2017

NonP said:
Super. But... no URS stats?

Unfortunately no, those are the rarest of all, pre-OE.

NonP · Sep 6, 2017

Just took URS stats on the Delpo-Fed match. Here they are (the one who served first in the set is placed above the other):

-Set 1-
RF - 36.8% (7/19) on 1st, 18.8% (3/16) on 2nd
DP - 52% (13/25), 14.3% (1/7)

-Set 2-
RF - 36.8% (7/19), 0% (0/10)
DP - 61.5% (8/13), 10% (1/10)

-Set 3-
DP - 42.9% (12/28), 7.7% (1/13)
RF - 42.9% (12/28), 0% (0/17)

-Set 4-
RF - 55.6% (10/18), 10% (1/10)
DP - 78.6% (11/14), 33.3% (3/9)

-Total-
DP - 55% (44/80) on 1st, 15.4% (6/39) on 2nd, 42.0% (50/119) for match
RF - 42.9% (36/84), 7.5% (4/53), 29.2% (40/137)

(Frankly not too sure about the 2nd & 3rd sets, but if my totals are off it shouldn't be by more than 1 or 2.)

Not one of Fed's finest serving performances. I'm guessing one of Delpo's better ones. Still neither guy did much on their 2nd serves, as you can see. Both would've had their hands more than full by a prime Sampras or Becker tonight (especially since this was an indoor match).

A couple more observations:

This was a very winnable match for Roger. Delpo wasn't serving particularly well at first (his 69% on 1st serves is misleading), and as Mac (annoyingly) kept pointing out his FH surprisingly lacked bite as well, though both shots kept getting better as the match progressed. And of course there are those squandered 4 SPs in the 3rd-set TB.
Surprisingly Fed was more successful in 2nd-serve points won: 57% to DP's 51%. And though he had respectable success at the net (34/53 for 64%) Fed did miss some easy volleys. In short Delpo simply outplayed Fed on big points.
The 4th set was Delpo's masterpiece. Not only due to his stellar URS %s but also his 12 winners to only 1 UFE. Having said that Fed's return definitely let him down here.
Pretty sure all aces were on 1st-serves except 1 by Delpo in the 4th.

Official stats here (y'all know these stay up only for a year, so do what you gotta do):

http://www.usopen.org/en_US/scores/stats/1502ms.html

pc1 said:
I don't know if Sampras had a better first volley than either Kramer or Gonzalez but he often made up for it by delaying and taking the short ball on the bounce close to the net and hitting a great offensive shot. It's not quite a half volley.

Sampras in my opinion is very similar to Kramer in style. Great first and second serves, excellent volleys, great forehands, super overheads etc.

Both at their peaks moved very well with Sampras getting the edge there.

Kramer did have strokes that very few players had today in his sidespin shots like his sidespin forehand which would pull a player off the court when he hit his down the line approach. Same on the backhand side. I understand that Kramer's sidespin backhand down the line drove Budge crazy.

Yes, Pete's edge in athleticism is why I give him the nod over Jack on grass even though I tend to think among the ATGs Kramer might be the toughest for him on this surface. Would've loved to see these two duke it out myself.

Dan Lobb · Sep 6, 2017

NonP said:
Let's start with the long-overdue update:

Ivanisevic

Karlovic

Sampras

Gonzales

Krajicek

Arthurs

Roddick

Newcombe

Isner

Becker

Philippoussis

Zivojinovic

McEnroe

Raonic

Curren

Stich

Tanner

Rusedski

Federer

Muller

And the Honorary Hall of Fame (by order of birth as usual):

McLoughlin, Maurice - perhaps the first distinguished cannonball serve in tennis history

Tilden - yet another storied power serve, which he bolstered with spin and accuracy

Doeg, John - Ivanisevic to Vines' Sampras, a southpaw whose serve was considered one of the two or three greatest ever (along with Vines') in his heyday

Stoefen, Lester - one of the first giants with a feared high-rise rocket launcher

Vines - by many accounts, the best and fastest serve of the pre-WWII era

Kramer - in addition to a formidable first delivery, perhaps the best second serve before Newcombe and Sampras

Denton, Steve - his unusual service motion notwithstanding, an ace dispenser that could bring enormous heat

Edberg - for his iconic kicker (any logo ring a bell?), arguably the best ever for serve-and-volley

Johansson, Joachim - Denton of the aughts

As I hinted last time Smith has been eliminated for failing to live up to his reputation in at least three important matches. I said last year I was going to put less stock in subjective observations and more in cold hard numbers, and this winnowing reflects my new methodology. Doesn't mean the yanked names are gone for good, though. If you come across anything for the current, former and/or future candidates, feel free to share.

Also going forward I'll be updating my OP with links to each player's URS database (here's the primer on unreturned serves again). Will try to keep the numbers up to date as well. (Moose actually PM'ed moi some new #s and corrections earlier today. They will be incorporated shortly.)

The list of prehistoric candidates remains the same (year of birth in parentheses):

Bob Falkenburg (1926)

Mike Sangster (1940)

Colin Dibley (1944)

John Feaver (1952)

Victor Amaya (1954)

On to the replies:

Don't think I have those. And right, #s ain't everything, but even so you can see that Newk won most of his big matches while Stan lost 2 out of 3. That's surely something, no?

And get this: per Moose's post on the '73 USO final (Moose did you ever fill in the gap with those 2+ missing points?) Newk's eye-popping URS rate of 39.2% was largely due to Kodes returning so well John was forced to go for broke on serve. So Newk was able to counter this Agassian returning performance from his opponent with a level of serving prowess rarely seen in that era, and in one of his career-defining matches to boot. In other words Newk served like a champ, which can't be said of Stan in his own Wimby matches. Advantage Newcombe.

Super. But... no URS stats?

Looks more like Gorgo kicked everyone else's ar$e. Your boy could only dream about such dominance on serve.

Right, the guy with the greatest and most powerful serve ever, who had a lifetime hth edge over prime Gonzales on grass, was not really a good player....talk about dreams.
You need a pillow?

pc1 · Sep 7, 2017

NonP said:
Just took URS stats on the Delpo-Fed match. Here they are (the one who served first in the set is placed above the other):

-Set 1-
RF - 36.8% (7/19) on 1st, 18.8% (3/16) on 2nd
DP - 52% (13/25), 14.3% (1/7)

-Set 2-
RF - 36.8% (7/19), 0% (0/10)
DP - 61.5% (8/13), 10% (1/10)

-Set 3-
DP - 42.9% (12/28), 7.7% (1/13)
RF - 42.9% (12/28), 0% (0/17)

-Set 4-
RF - 55.6% (10/18), 10% (1/10)
DP - 78.6% (11/14), 33.3% (3/9)

-Total-
DP - 55% (44/80) on 1st, 15.4% (6/39) on 2nd, 42.0% (50/119) for match
RF - 42.9% (36/84), 7.5% (4/53), 29.2% (40/137)

(Frankly not too sure about the 2nd & 3rd sets, but if my totals are off it shouldn't be by more than 1 or 2.)

Not one of Fed's finest serving performances. I'm guessing one of Delpo's better ones. Still neither guy did much on their 2nd serves, as you can see. Both would've had their hands more than full by a prime Sampras or Becker tonight (especially since this was an indoor match).

A couple more observations:

This was a very winnable match for Roger. Delpo wasn't serving particularly well at first (his 69% on 1st serves is misleading), and as Mac (annoyingly) kept pointing out his FH surprisingly lacked bite as well, though both shots kept getting better as the match progressed. And of course there are those squandered 4 SPs in the 3rd-set TB.

Surprisingly Fed was more successful in 2nd-serve points won: 57% to DP's 51%. And though he had respectable success at the net (34/53 for 64%) Fed did miss some easy volleys. In short Delpo simply outplayed Fed on big points.

The 4th set was Delpo's masterpiece. Not only due to his stellar URS %s but also his 12 winners to only 1 UFE. Having said that Fed's return definitely let him down here.

Pretty sure all aces were on 1st-serves except 1 by Delpo in the 4th.

Official stats here (y'all know these stay up only for a year, so do what you gotta do):

http://www.usopen.org/en_US/scores/stats/1502ms.html

Yes, Pete's edge in athleticism is why I give him the nod over Jack on grass even though I tend to think among the ATGs Kramer might be the toughest for him on this surface. Would've loved to see these two duke it out myself.

Nice info on the match.

Not sure if it's a huge edge in athleticism because Braden mentioned to me how athletic Kramer was before the arthritis affected him so badly. Sampras does have an advantage in athleticism over almost every player that he played. He was such an unbelievable talent.

abmk · Jan 22, 2018

@NonP :

This time , AO site has the stats on unreturned serves for the matches. You might want to check them out.

NonP · Jan 22, 2018

I know it's been a while but....

Dan Lobb said:
Right, the guy with the greatest and most powerful serve ever, who had a lifetime hth edge over prime Gonzales on grass, was not really a good player....talk about dreams.
You need a pillow?

Completely clueless as always. It's doubtful your boy even belongs in the top 50. Sometimes I almost wish you'd stick to your gay bashing. You're at least somewhat resourceful in that area.

pc1 said:
Nice info on the match.

Not sure if it's a huge edge in athleticism because Braden mentioned to me how athletic Kramer was before the arthritis affected him so badly. Sampras does have an advantage in athleticism over almost every player that he played. He was such an unbelievable talent.

Didn't mean to imply a huge gap. But as you know these small things matter a lot between ATGs.

abmk said:
@NonP :

This time , AO site has the stats on unreturned serves for the matches. You might want to check them out.

Yeah I noticed that. Makes my job easier.

Will post updated #s for the currently active candidates someday.

But frankly this AO has been a big dud. Chung's upset of Djoko last nite was a good one but I'd still like to see more variety. Hopefully tonight's matchups will be as good as they look on paper.

abmk · Jan 22, 2018

NonP said:
Yeah I noticed that. Makes my job easier. Will post updated #s for the currently active candidates someday.

But frankly this AO has been a big dud. Chung's upset of Djoko last nite was a good one but I'd still like to see more variety. Hopefully tonight's matchups will be as good as they look on paper.

nah, not really. There've been some pretty good matches apart from djoko-chung:

shapovalov-tsonga, tsonga-kyrgios, kyrgios-dimitrov, thiem-sandgren
and in the WTA -- tsieh's amazing variety vs kerber (tsieh is like the female santoro)

some good rallies in nadal-schwartzmann as well

Dan Lobb · Jan 23, 2018

NonP said:
I know it's been a while but....

Completely clueless as always. It's doubtful your boy even belongs in the top 50. Sometimes I almost wish you'd stick to your gay bashing. You're at least somewhat resourceful in that area.

Didn't mean to imply a huge gap. But as you know these small things matter a lot between ATGs.

Yeah I noticed that. Makes my job easier. Will post updated #s for the currently active candidates someday.

But frankly this AO has been a big dud. Chung's upset of Djoko last nite was a good one but I'd still like to see more variety. Hopefully tonight's matchups will be as good as they look on paper.

That must be a nice comfy cloud you are dreaming away on....

abmk · Jan 28, 2018

AO 18 final :

Something is not adding up.

It says :

returns in play :
Cilic - 70
Federer - 85

DFs from Federer : 4
from Cilic : 5

# of serves :
Federer : 139
Cilic : 141

So unreturned serves :
Federer : 139-70-4 = 65
Cilic : 141 - 85 - 5 = 51

https://ausopen.com/match/Marin-Cilic-vs-Roger-Federer-MS701#landing-tab=view-3

-------------------

Craig O'Shannessy has
Federer with 48 and Cilic with 41

"Overall, Federer had 48 serves unreturned for the match, while Cilic only had 41. "

Federer had 24 aces, Cilic 16, so he hasn't removed aces from that either.

https://ausopen.com/articles/features/ao-analyst-how-short-was-sweet-fed

----

the first set of figures seems more probable to me, given how the match went.

abmk · Jan 29, 2018

^^

I counted myself and got 65 serves unreturned for Federer out of 139.

AO 2018 final.

Unreturned serve%:

Federer : 65/139 (46.76%)
Cilic : 49/141 (34.75%)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...australian-open-2018-final-statistics.609400/

abmk · Jan 30, 2018

Was curious about the Murray match in 2015. One of Fed's best serving matches (arguably the best he's served)

Got it from here :

http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/20150710-M-Wimbledon-SF-Roger_Federer-Andy_Murray.html

(counted using the point by point description)

1st set : 15/34
2nd set : 12/31
3rd set : 11/26

so total : 38/91 (41.76%)

1st serve unret. = 32/70 (45.71%) (By set : 14/30, 10/19,8/21)
2nd serve unret. = 6/21 (28.57%) (By set : 1/4,2/12,3/5)

P.S. Note that there is a slight discrepancy in the above charting and official stats. The above charting has 30/34 first serves in for Federer in the 1st set, official stats have 29/34

https://web.archive.org/web/2015090...edon.com/en_GB/scores/stats/day19/1602ms.html

Edit :

for Murray :

1st serve : 31/79
2nd serve : 4/28

Total : 35/107 (32.71%)

abmk · Feb 1, 2018

Some more stats on unreturned serves :

1. Safin Hewitt AO 2005 final :

Safin : 39/110 = 35.45%
Hewitt : 32/123 = 26.02%

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...witt-australian-open-2005-final-stats.596195/

2. Mcenroe Lendl USO 84 final :

Mcenroe : 34/73 (46.57%)
Lendl : 15/83 (18.07%)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...uso-final-mcenroe-lendl.210028/#post-11539567

3. Federer Hewitt YEC 2004 final :

Federer : 17/47 = 36.17%
Hewitt : 11/55 = 20%

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/federer-hewitt-tmc-2004-final-stats.599957/

4. Goran Rafter Wimbledon 2001 final :

Goran : 71/164 = 43.29%
Rafter : 57/139 = 41%

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...vic-rafter-wimbledon-2001-final-stats.602109/

5. Laver Ashe Wimbledon 1969 semi :

Laver : 31/92 (33.69%)
Ashe : 31/115 (26.96%)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...-ashe-wimbledon-1969-sf.165933/#post-11726709

6. Federer Nalbandian Madrid 2006 semi :

Federer - 18/41 (43.9%)
Nalbandian - 10/ 54 (18.51%)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/federer-nalbandian-madrid-2006-semi-stats.603190/

7. Federer Lopez USO 2007 4R :

Federer - 38/85 (44.7%)
Lopez - 43/114 (37.71%)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/federer-lopez-uso-2007-4r-stats.603339/

8. Federer Roddick Wimbledon 2005 final :

Federer : 29/79 (36.71%)
Roddick : 32/96 (33.33%)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ddick-wimbledon-2005-final-statistics.607371/

9. Federer Karlovic Wimbledon 2009 QF :

Federer: 42/85 (49.41%)
Karlovic : 49/80 (61.25%) (2 serves are missing)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/federer-karlovic-wimbledon-2009-qf.609144/

10. Federer Roddick Wimbledon 2003 SF :

Federer : 34 out of 84 service points (40.48%)
Roddick : 25 out of 99 service points (25.25%)

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/federer-roddick-wimbledon-2003-semi-stats.597325/

abmk · Feb 1, 2018

@NonP :

When are you going to post the other unreturned serve stats that you have ?
Been a long time !

abmk · Feb 9, 2018

@NonP :

Here you go, a match for Fed with with > 50% unreturned serves .

presenting the Wimbledon 2017 final vs Cilic !

Federer served at 75.71% first serves in (53/70)

He had 36/70 serves unreturned. (51.43%)

By set : 9/24, 13/18, 14/28

On 1st serve by set : 8/17, 11/14,12/22 ...........Total = 31/53
On 2nd serve by set : 1/7,2/4,2/6 ...........Total = 5/17

Checked on this : http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/20170716-M-Wimbledon-F-Marin_Cilic-Roger_Federer.html

(counted using the point by point description)

I knew it was high, but hadn't counted earlier. I had gone by this.
http://voodemar.com/wb17federer_cilic/

it has 32/70 !

Then today I came across this :

start at @12:50

at 5-4, 30-15 , it shows 34/65 serves unreturned. After this fed had 3 serves in, 2 unreturned and 1 returned (he lost that point).
Making it 36/68. He had 2 DFs in the match. I guess those were not counted in the total serves. So that makes it 36/70.

tom williams · Feb 9, 2018

NonP said:
Limpin beat me to it. But I understand your being meh about Isner. There've been a few Isner matches I did enjoy (his upset of Roddick at the '09 USO, for one), but he definitely wouldn't be among my top choices to watch.

First off, rubbish. There are a few areas where Roddick has been bested but power ain't one of 'em. Check out his serve speeds at 2004 Wimbledon for a few examples.

Second, let's match noise for noise and consider Vines' more measured take from his fine book Tennis: in his glowing (if rambling) chapter on Hoad he approvingly quotes Larsen's claim that Hoad's delivery was swifter than Gonzales', but he then adds that Lew's 2nd serve was "not quite up to Pancho's kicker." Roddick's own OTOH belongs to the upper echelon of distinguished 2nd serves in history.

Third, power is highly overrated at the pro level, especially among the very greatest servers who have been nominated here. The fact that you cited power alone as your case for Hoad does not speak well of your understanding of the game.

And last but not least, if you truly cared to learn about the game rather than stick up for your pin-up boy you would've noticed in that very post of mine you quoted why I've decided against ranking most of the old-timers in favor of giving them honorary mentions. If you want to be taken seriously try to offer an actual argument of your own.

Hello there at long last i have got around to replying to your post, firstly i have to say i am no tennis expert although i have seen all the great players from the 1950 s to the 1918 Australia open,i was only quoting what Mr Larsen had to say i did not say that Lew Hoads service was more power full than Pancho Conzales, Yes by the way we all have our favorites Lew s one of mine along with a few others and i do have the privilege of knowing his Granddaughter, when it comes to pinup boys come into my office you will see a line up of Australian sporting heroes,. I have always thought this was a fun foram however now i am beginning to wonder. You have a great day!!

tom williams · Feb 9, 2018

tom williams said:
Hello there at long last i have got around to replying to your post, firstly i have to say i am no tennis expert although i have seen all the great players from the 1950 s to the 1918 Australia open,i was only quoting what Mr Larsen had to say i did not say that Lew Hoads service was more power full than Pancho Conzales, Yes by the way we all have our favorites Lew s one of mine along with a few others and i do have the privilege of knowing his Granddaughter, when it comes to pinup boys come into my office you will see a line up of Australian sporting heroes,. I have always thought this was a fun foram however now i am beginning to wonder. You have a great day!!

Correction 2018 Australian Open

NonP · Feb 11, 2018

Dan Lobb said:
That must be a nice comfy cloud you are dreaming away on....

Let me take a wild guess: despite your desperate attempts to come up with a decent retort you failed miserably and proceeded to fall back on this trite "dreaming" insult.

Here's a much better one, issued by Virginia's first openly transgender elected official after defeating one of your fellow homophobes (remember that race?):

https://twitter.com/nitrevino/status/928126868817174533

A classy insult if there ever was one. Eat that. LOL!

abmk said:
@NonP :

When are you going to post the other unreturned serve stats that you have ?
Been a long time !

Just too much going on in life.

And I did see your stats here, thanks. For the record I actually had Voo's #s for the '17 Wimby final (I check his site for new stats every now and then). Like I said before, a very nice guy, with lots of valuable contributions, but he does have this unfortunate tendency to slip in a slight error here and there so I always double-check his work where possible. And even so I couldn't have caught this slip-up cuz the total # of points matched, so double thanks for the correction.

Maybe I could post some new ones after the Olympics. Stay tuned.

tom williams said:
Hello there at long last i have got around to replying to your post, firstly i have to say i am no tennis expert although i have seen all the great players from the 1950 s to the 1918 Australia open,i was only quoting what Mr Larsen had to say i did not say that Lew Hoads service was more power full than Pancho Conzales, Yes by the way we all have our favorites Lew s one of mine along with a few others and i do have the privilege of knowing his Granddaughter, when it comes to pinup boys come into my office you will see a line up of Australian sporting heroes,. I have always thought this was a fun foram however now i am beginning to wonder. You have a great day!!

I did act like a bit of a jerk so I apologize for that. In my defense you're not the only diehard Hoad admirer here, though in that other guy's case even that description isn't quite adequate which is probably why I lashed out.

It's always good to hear from people who got to see the old-timers firsthand.

Just hope you'll expand your reminiscences beyond Hoad's circle. Keep on posting!

Dan Lobb · Feb 11, 2018

NonP said:
Let me take a wild guess: despite your desperate attempts to come up with a decent retort you failed miserably and proceeded to fall back on this trite "dreaming" insult.

Here's a much better one, issued by Virginia's first openly transgender elected official after defeating one of your fellow homophobes (remember that race?):

https://twitter.com/nitrevino/status/928126868817174533

A classy insult if there ever was one. Eat that. LOL!

Just too much going on in life. And I did see your stats here, thanks. For the record I actually had Voo's #s for the '17 Wimby final (I check his site for new stats every now and then). Like I said before, a very nice guy, with lots of valuable contributions, but he does have this unfortunate tendency to slip in a slight error here and there so I always double-check his work where possible. And even so I couldn't have caught this slip-up cuz the total # of points matched, so double thanks for the correction.

Maybe I could post some new ones after the Olympics. Stay tuned.

I did act like a bit of a jerk so I apologize for that. In my defense you're not the only diehard Hoad admirer here, though in that other guy's case even that description isn't quite adequate which is probably why I lashed out.

It's always good to hear from people who got to see the old-timers firsthand. Just hope you'll expand your reminiscences beyond Hoad's circle. Keep on posting!

NonP, I have no interest in debating the fine points of gender politics here...perhaps in church, but not here.
Suffice it to say that we may have some discordance in views on those issues.

As you know, my estimation of all-time greats relies upon peak performance levels, nothing to do with long and honourable dedication.
I do not start with "iron-man" stats, clock-punching records.

I guess I agree with Laver, Rosewall, and Gonzales in choosing Hoad as the greatest player on level of play....that is not a rare choice, obviously.

pc1 · Feb 12, 2018

Jack Kramer serving

I think Kramer hits the first serve in the video.
https://www.gettyimages.com/license/534170962

Kramer against Budge
https://www.gettyimages.com/license/504387527

Kramer against Gonzalez

I think it's Kramer vs Schroeder. The taller one is Kramer.

Batzmo · Feb 12, 2018

Modern players past 20 years
The dr.
In terms of actually has a game to back up the serve and isnt 7 foot serve bot - so overall serve game i guess - sampras and federer maybe

abmk · Feb 12, 2018

NonP said:
Just too much going on in life. And I did see your stats here, thanks. For the record I actually had Voo's #s for the '17 Wimby final (I check his site for new stats every now and then). Like I said before, a very nice guy, with lots of valuable contributions, but he does have this unfortunate tendency to slip in a slight error here and there so I always double-check his work where possible. And even so I couldn't have caught this slip-up cuz the total # of points matched, so double thanks for the correction.

Maybe I could post some new ones after the Olympics. Stay tuned.

If you'd post those, I'd know which all you have and avoid counting from TennisAbstract point by point description for those matches and get a few other matches from there.

abmk · Feb 12, 2018

Another match for Karlovic where he crossed the 60% unreturned serves barrier.
Was curious to check his 45 aces match vs Berdych in Halle 15 - highest in a 3-set match.

Checked from here :

http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/20150619-M-Halle-QF-Tomas_Berdych-Ivo_Karlovic.html
Point by point description

Set by set ..

1st serve : 17/21, 25/32,17/22 ...Total = 59/75
2nd serve : 3/7, 3/15,0/6 ...Total = 6/28

Total by set :
20/28, 28/47,17/28 ....Total = 65/103 (63.11%)

Edit :
Berdych :

30/62 on 1st serves
1/24 on 2nd serves !

total = 31/86 (36.05%)

NonP · Feb 13, 2018

Dan Lobb said:
NonP, I have no interest in debating the fine points of gender politics here...perhaps in church, but not here.
Suffice it to say that we may have some discordance in views on those issues.

Oh c'mon even you must admit that response was just about perfect! And "discordance" is a very mild way of putting it, but sure, wrong forum.

As you know, my estimation of all-time greats relies upon peak performance levels, nothing to do with long and honourable dedication.
I do not start with "iron-man" stats, clock-punching records.

I guess I agree with Laver, Rosewall, and Gonzales in choosing Hoad as the greatest player on level of play....that is not a rare choice, obviously.

Except that we're not talking about GOAT players here, but rather GOAT serves/servers and I guarantee you most Gonzales/Hoad contemporaries would rank Pancho's serve over your boy's. There's a reason why nearly all names advanced so far in this thread have been 6-footers. Height matters.

abmk said:
If you'd post those, I'd know which all you have and avoid counting from TennisAbstract point by point description for those matches and get a few other matches from there.

The problem is I don't have many of 'em in a presentable format... and am too lazy to dig in and start organizing.

Also if you're looking thru TA's database you needn't worry about any duplication cuz I almost never visit TA. (Didn't have those Ivo-Tomas stats, thanks.) Besides I always like to double-check so even if we end up with duplicate stats that shouldn't be such a bad thing.

Too busy with work and the Olympics now (the last two days sure didn't help!) but I'll try to post some major updates after the Os.

abmk said:
Another match for Karlovic where he crossed the 60% unreturned serves barrier.
Was curious to check his 45 aces match vs Berdych in Halle 15 - highest in a 3-set match.

Checked from here :

http://www.tennisabstract.com/charting/20150619-M-Halle-QF-Tomas_Berdych-Ivo_Karlovic.html
Point by point description

Set by set ..

1st serve : 17/21, 25/32,17/22 ...Total = 59/75
2nd serve : 3/7, 3/15,0/6 ...Total = 6/28

Total by set :
20/28, 28/47,17/28 ....Total = 65/103 (63.11%)

As you know I like to post the opponent's stats alongside for comparison. Obviously I can easily get Berdych's here but if you don't mind do both players next time, por favor.

Dan Lobb · Feb 13, 2018

NonP said:
Oh c'mon even you must admit that response was just about perfect! And "discordance" is a very mild way of putting it, but sure, wrong forum.

Except that we're not talking about GOAT players here, but rather GOAT serves/servers and I guarantee you most Gonzales/Hoad contemporaries would rank Pancho's serve over your boy's. There's a reason why nearly all names advanced so far in this thread have been 6-footers. Height matters.

The problem is I don't have many of 'em in a presentable format... and am too lazy to dig in and start organizing. Also if you're looking thru TA's database you needn't worry about any duplication cuz I almost never visit TA. (Didn't have those Ivo-Tomas stats, thanks.) Besides I always like to double-check so even if we end up with duplicate stats that shouldn't be such a bad thing.

Too busy with work and the Olympics now (the last two days sure didn't help!) but I'll try to post some major updates after the Os.

As you know I like to post the opponent's stats alongside for comparison. Obviously I can easily get Berdych's here but if you don't mind do both players next time, por favor.

Perfect? No, easily refuted, but the place to have this debate is in church, not on this forum.

Gonzales had more trouble with Hoad's serve than vice-versa.

abmk · Feb 25, 2018

NonP said:
The problem is I don't have many of 'em in a presentable format... and am too lazy to dig in and start organizing. Also if you're looking thru TA's database you needn't worry about any duplication cuz I almost never visit TA. (Didn't have those Ivo-Tomas stats, thanks.) Besides I always like to double-check so even if we end up with duplicate stats that shouldn't be such a bad thing.

Too busy with work and the Olympics now (the last two days sure didn't help!) but I'll try to post some major updates after the Os.

As you know I like to post the opponent's stats alongside for comparison. Obviously I can easily get Berdych's here but if you don't mind do both players next time, por favor.

was a bit lazy to do Berdych's point by point as it wasn't that interesting.
But found a shorter way. Could get all the aces+service winners+forced errors from the serve breakdown.
Just need to look at the unforced errors off the opponent's return in the point by point description.

30/62 on 1st serves
1/24 on 2nd serves !

total = 31/86 (36.05%)

Edited original post to include this.

abmk · Feb 25, 2018

Got it.

Check the return breakdown.
Get the in play field (service returns in play)
Check the no of DFs

Unreturned serves = Total number of serves - in play - DFs

abmk · Feb 25, 2018

Now added for Murray in the Wim 2015 SF .

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...rves-of-all-time.306579/page-25#post-11994102

abmk · Feb 25, 2018

Here's the 2nd match with 50+ % unreturned serves for Fed, @NonP :

Thanks to @TheFifthSet 's post about Fed's dominance vs Dolgo on serve (search function not working. I knew fed was dominant vs dolgo, but didn't realise how much until I saw FifthSet's post) and TennisAbstract :

2016 AO 2R :

Fed :

1st serve : 34/48 (70.83%) !
2nd serve : 7/22 (31.81%)

Total = 41/70 (58.57%)

Dolgo :

1st serve : 16/53
2nd serve : 11/40

Total = 27/93 (29.03%)

http://www.tennisabstract.com/chart...en-R64-Roger_Federer-Alexandr_Dolgopolov.html

abmk · Feb 28, 2018

Borg-Connors USO 81 SF:

Borg : 37/100 (37%)
Connors : 10/98 (10.2%)

37% is a high # in the wood era, in it !?
This is with only 46% 1st serves in . 30/46 (65.22%) were not returned !
(well 47% according to New York times and 46% as per krosero)
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/stats-for-borg-connors-1981-uso-sf.196955/

Moose Malloy · Feb 28, 2018

abmk said:
Borg-Connors USO 81 SF:

Borg : 37/100 (37%)
Connors : 10/98 (10.2%)

37% is a high # in the wood era, in it !?
This is with only 46% 1st serves in . 30/46 (65.22%) were not returned !
(well 47% according to New York times and 46% as per krosero)
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/stats-for-borg-connors-1981-uso-sf.196955/

Yeah 37% is high. The highest I've come across from that era was Tanner in 77 AO final. He had 46% unreturned, but only served at 44%. 81% of his first serves were unreturned(30 of 37)

Atennisone · Apr 1, 2018

Well of Open Era and rating serve and not service game

1. Karlovic
2. Ivanesevic
3. Isner
4. Roddick
5. Sampras
6. Raonic
7. Kyrgios
8. Federer
9. Anderson
10. Becker
11. Anderson
12. Muller
13. Lopez
14. Tsonga
15. Stich

Limpinhitter · Apr 1, 2018

Atennisone said:
Well of Open Era and rating serve and not service game

1. Karlovic
2. Ivanesevic
3. Isner
4. Roddick
5. Sampras
6. Raonic
7. Kyrgios
8. Federer
9. Anderson
10. Becker
11. Anderson
12. Muller
13. Lopez
14. Tsonga
15. Stich

John Newcombe? Rosco Tanner? John McEnroe? Ivan Lendl? Kevin Curren? Richard Krajicek? BTW, you have Anderson twice.

KG1965 · Apr 2, 2018

Atennisone said:
Well of Open Era and rating serve and not service game

1. Karlovic
2. Ivanesevic
3. Isner
4. Roddick
5. Sampras
6. Raonic
7. Kyrgios
8. Federer
9. Anderson
10. Becker
11. Anderson
12. Muller
13. Lopez
14. Tsonga
15. Stich

Good list if are added Tanner, Newcombe, McEnroe, Lendl, Curren, Krajicek, as suggested Limp.

Moose Malloy · Jul 11, 2018

@NonP
Per Brad Gilbert, Anderson had 68% of his serves unreturned vs Kohlschreiber in the 3rd round. For his first 4 matches total he had 53% unreturned serves

Also I came across an article saying Isner had 61% vs Struff at 2014 USO

NonP · Jul 11, 2018

Moose Malloy said:
@NonP
Per Brad Gilbert, Anderson had 68% of his serves unreturned vs Kohlschreiber in the 3rd round. For his first 4 matches total he had 53% unreturned serves

Damn 68% for the whole match? Pretty surprised to see such a number from Anderson who I think has a top-notch serve but not an overpowering one. I'll pay closer attention to him from now on.

Didn't catch a single second of yesterday's shocker live but it seems like typical stuff from Kev: no panic despite being down, kept playing solid and in this case got the W. He should be able to get by Isner (though if John returns like he did yesterday it'll be pretty close) but again come up short in the final.

BTW my old desktop/hard drive went kaput literally 2-3 days after my recent move and my local PC guy (who happens to be one of my clients) couldn't save it, so I'll need to pay a specialty data recovery center a small fortune to get my tennis spreadsheets back.

Should have most of the stuff backed up already if the worst comes to pass... but obviously I'll be crossing my fingers.

Greatest Serves of All Time

Legend

Legend

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

Legend

New User

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Legend

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Legend

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Rookie

Rookie

Legend

G.O.A.T.

G.O.A.T.

New User

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

Bionic Poster

G.O.A.T.

Hall of Fame

G.O.A.T.

Legend

G.O.A.T.

Legend

Similar threads