Is Novak Djokovic the most agile + flexible player ever in men's tennis?

[TearTheRoofOff]

Good shout on the honourable mention to Deuce Grigolo.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

It's about the combination of agility and flexibility (hence I wrote agile + flexible).

Also, Federer was definitely agile during his peak. Nadal, not so much. He's always seemed like a stiff / tensed player lacking range of motion. Nadal had fast running speed linearly, but wasn't that quick at changing directions. Hence: his poor / atrocious return of serve.

I think Nadal is pretty good at changing direction. Also, his return isn't that poor? I very much agree that Nadal does come across as a little stiff and not particularly flexible or fluid with his motions. Not horrendous though. Anyway, thanks for the topic. I find flexibility + agility a difficult combination to amalgamate into a single hierarchy, really.

 

[-NN-]

Dimitrov is often quick and flexible, when in a flow he has iron curtain movement but he can by slip-slidey as well as unbalanced in comparison to the Big Three, which is something he has gradually improved over the years (especially core strength and consistency of first step).

 

[-NN-]

Nadal was amazing at changing direction this is pure trollery.

Federer used to be able to utterly explode laterally and change direction after a very short (less than a foot) sort of double hop and he basically never does that anymore because he'd probably break his legs.

Murray sometimes would just grind his legs into the dust and not even stop his momentum with a short hop and immediately be on his way in lateral transition leaving craters in the ground.

Djokovic and Dimitrov are largely momentum based movers but Djokovic has better anticipation.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

Nadal was amazing at changing direction this is pure trollery.

Federer used to be able to utterly explode laterally and change direction after a very short (less than a foot) sort of double hop and he basically never does that anymore because he'd probably break his legs.

Murray sometimes would just grind his legs into the dust and not even stop his momentum with a short hop and immediately be on his way in lateral transition leaving craters in the ground.

Djokovic and Dimitrov are largely momentum based movers but Djokovic has better anticipation.

LOL

 

[MatsPhilander]

 

[Ganstaz003]

I think Nadal is pretty good at changing direction. Also, his return isn't that poor? I very much agree that Nadal does come across as a little stiff and not particularly flexible or fluid with his motions. Not horrendous though. Anyway, thanks for the topic. I find flexibility + agility a difficult combination to amalgamate into a single hierarchy, really.

No problem!

Nadal has the worst return of serve out of the 'big four'. He is the only one that has to stand the furthest back behind the baseline but still has worse return than either of the big. The return of serve is where agility (change of direction and speed whilst maintaining balance) is tested the most.

Nadal was amazing at changing direction this is pure trollery.

Federer used to be able to utterly explode laterally and change direction after a very short (less than a foot) sort of double hop and he basically never does that anymore because he'd probably break his legs.

Murray sometimes would just grind his legs into the dust and not even stop his momentum with a short hop and immediately be on his way in lateral transition leaving craters in the ground.

Djokovic and Dimitrov are largely momentum based movers but Djokovic has better anticipation.

Nadal's change of direction is poor compared to the other 'big 4' members, The guy seems too stiff to even return serve against any above average server on fast surfaces. His poor return of serve on fast surfaces is attributed to him not being very agile.

 

[Ganstaz003]

That's one of the greatest diving volleys I've ever seen.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

No problem!

Nadal has the worst return of serve out of the 'big four'. He is the only one that has to stand the furthest back behind the baseline but still has worse return than either of the big. The return of serve is where agility (change of direction and speed whilst maintaining balance) is tested the most.

Nadal's change of direction is poor compared to the other 'big 4' members, The guy seems too stiff to even return serve against any above average server on fast surfaces. His poor return of serve on fast surfaces is attributed to him not being very agile.

I'd suggest that Nadal's poor return stats compared to the other 3 is more related to positioning, reactions, anticipation and stroke mechanics than flat out agility. Nadal was too good at physically reacting to redirected balls to have poor agility. You can't run everything down from the most surprising shotmakers on speed alone or else you'll be wrong-footed left right and centre.

 

[Ganstaz003]

I'd suggest that Nadal's poor return stats compared to the other 3 is more related to positioning, reactions, anticipation and stroke mechanics than flat out agility. Nadal was too good at physically reacting to redirected balls to have poor agility. You can't run everything down from the most surprising shotmakers on speed alone or else you'll be wrong-footed left right and centre.

I guess we may have to agree to disagree here. Reaction to stimuli is also part of agility (in addition to also being able to change directions at speed whilst maintaining balance). So having poor reactions contributes to having poorer agility.

Nadal is able to run down many balls because he stands furthest back from the baseline compared to nearly every other top player. It gives him more time to build momentum / speed and to react. This is why some are mistaking Nadal's linear foots speed for agility (two different things). When it comes to quick / immediate changes of directions and speed for the first 10 meters, Nadal doesn't appear to be the quickest to me. Djokovic, Federer and even perhaps Murray have Nadal beat in this department.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

I guess we may have to agree to disagree here. Reaction to stimuli is also part of agility (in addition to also being able to change directions at speed whilst maintaining balance). So having poor reactions contributes to having poorer agility.

Nadal is able to run down many balls because he stands furthest back from the baseline compared to nearly every other top player. It gives him more time to build momentum / speed and to react. This is why some are mistaking Nadal's linear foots speed for agility (two different things). When it comes to quick / immediate changes of directions and speed for the first 10 meters, Nadal doesn't appear to be the quickest to me. Djokovic, Federer and even perhaps Murray have Nadal beat in this department.

Hmmm, regarding reactions as a part of physical agility seems tenuous. I understand that footspeed and agility are not synonymous, but to me there's no denying his ability to change direction. Sure, he stands far back which gives him time to defend but I don't think that's evidence enough that his basic ability to change direction is questionable. There are many instances where Nadal has accelerated extremely hard within 10 metres. To me it's an inescapable reality, so as you say, we may have to disagree.

Putting the other 3 above him for this is still viable, though.

 

[Waspsting]

... definition of agility and that is the ability to change directions at speed whilst maintaining balance...

ok

My thread was about who has the best combination of flexibility and agility (hence flexibility + agility). So this thread should take into account all the players who had the best combination of both. Other attributes such as 50+ meter running speed isn't relevant....

Of course its relevant!

If your defining agility in terms of speed (presumably running), then running speed has to be a factor in agility. Anyone can change directions well when they're gently ambling along

Maybe you can post a few videos demonstrating what you're thinking of exactly when you refer to Djokovic's superior agility? I'm just not seeing it... however you define "agility"

When I think of "changing directions at speed", I think of being wrong footed (which is a rare enough thing that I don't think its worthy of discussion)... so I assume you mean they've run to hit the ball and then the motion they go through to recover as they prepare for the next prospective shot ... is that right?

Return of serve is as much about hand eye coordination as it is about agility. The ability to stretch and reach balls few others could during returns (which Novak Djokovic does) is a testament to agility / flexibility. However, the ability to strike the ball perfectly with the racket on the correct spot and returning the ball effectively to the opponent is about hand eye coordination. Novak Djokovic is one of the best in the former (agility & flexibility) whilst Andre Agassi and Roger Federer are two of the best in the latter (denoting hand eye coordination). Thus, the best returners need to have a combination of both of those attributes.

I COMPLETELY disagree with this - I would go as far as to say it's out and out wrong. Djokovic's return is primarily based on hand-eye coordination, not agility-flexibility

Djokovic is in the Agassi mold - clean striking being the key to his returning prowess (i.e. good hand-eye coordination)... There is no way Roger Federer hits more return of service winners (or to be more precise - returns balls with more authority, even on the forehand side) than Djokovic does... I'm not even going to look up the numbers for this - its like saying Djokovic serves more aces than Federer - its so obvious


As far as reaching difficult serves go - he's good but not the best

ace% against:

Monfils: 4.0%
Murray: 5.6%
Federer: 5.7%
Djokovic: 6.2%
Nadal 7.1%
Agassi: 9.7%

(figures credit @TheFifthSet)

As for the "maintaining balance" part of your definition of agility, I can only repeat what I said earlier -

I've never seen a player fall down as often as Djokovic. In one of the Wimbledon finals (2014 or 2015)... he did it so often I remember it occurring to me that he might be doing it on purpose to throw his opponent off

Post videos of what exactly it is you mean by "agility"... I'm just not seeing what your trying to say about Djokovic's supposedly superior agility

 

[Ganstaz003]

Hmmm, regarding reactions as a part of physical agility seems tenuous. I understand that footspeed and agility are not synonymous, but to me there's no denying his ability to change direction. Sure, he stands far back which gives him time to defend but I don't think that's evidence enough that his basic ability to change direction is questionable. There are many instances where Nadal has accelerated extremely hard within 10 metres. To me it's an inescapable reality, so as you say, we may have to disagree.

Putting the other 3 above him for this is still viable, though.

Changing directions without there being an external stimuli to respond to isn't agility.That's merely 'changing directions'. Agility requires an external stimuli to respond to in addition to changing directions.

Well at least we agree on the fact that he is inferior to the other top 3 players. So that's all that needs to be stated.

 

[Vish13]

Wow. After tennis Novak can become a super porn star..

 

[Ganstaz003]

ok



Of course its relevant!

If your defining agility in terms of speed (presumably running), then running speed has to be a factor in agility. Anyone can change directions well when they're gently ambling along

Maybe you can post a few videos demonstrating what you're thinking of exactly when you refer to Djokovic's superior agility? I'm just not seeing it... however you define "agility"

When I think of "changing directions at speed", I think of being wrong footed (which is a rare enough thing that I don't think its worthy of discussion)... so I assume you mean they've run to hit the ball and then the motion they go through to recover as they prepare for the next prospective shot ... is that right?






I COMPLETELY disagree with this - I would go as far as to say it's out and out wrong. Djokovic's return is primarily based on hand-eye coordination, not agility-flexibility

Djokovic is in the Agassi mold - clean striking being the key to his returning prowess (i.e. good hand-eye coordination)... There is no way Roger Federer hits more return of service winners (or to be more precise - returns balls with more authority, even on the forehand side) than Djokovic does... I'm not even going to look up the numbers for this - its like saying Djokovic serves more aces than Federer - its so obvious


As far as reaching difficult serves go - he's good but not the best

[QUOTE} ace% against:

Monfils: 4.0%
Murray: 5.6%
Federer: 5.7%
Djokovic: 6.2%
Nadal 7.1%
Agassi: 9.7%
[QUOTE/]

(figures credit @TheFifthSet)

As for the "maintaining balance" part of your definition of agility, I can only repeat what I said earlier -

I've never seen a player fall down as often as Djokovic. In one of the Wimbledon finals (2014 or 2015)... he did it so often I remember it occurring to me that he might be doing it on purpose to throw his opponent off

Post videos of what exactly it is you mean by "agility"... I'm just not seeing what your trying to say about Djokovic's supposedly superior agility

1) What I meant to write was linear running speed (in straight lines) for a longer distance than usually needed in a tennis court (50 or more meters) is irrelevant to this topic.

2) Of course, changing directions quickly whilst running fast is as much to do with agility as changing directions quickly from a stationary position. I'm not disputing that!

3) This is one of many videos which demonstrates what I'm referring to:

My definition of agility is simply the ability to change directions fast whilst maintaining balance and the speed for the first few meters (10 meters or less - which is more to do with acceleration but I'd still include this).

4) Novak Djokovic REACHES balls that few other players could (Agassi being one of them). That has a lot more to do with agility / flexibility than hand eye coordination. It's what he does after REACHING the ball which is to do with hand eye coordination. Novak Djokovic's hand eye coordination is good, but I doubt it's as good as Agassi's, Federer's or Davydenko's. Roger Federer has superior volleys to Novak Djokovic (indicating greater hand eye coordination). Roger Federer also has some of the cleanest and greatest half volleys ever in men's tennis, which is also better than Novak Djokovic's (again indicating greater hand eye coordination). What Djokovic does better is reach balls that Federer is unable to.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

Changing directions without there being an external stimuli to respond to isn't agility.That's merely 'changing directions'. Agility requires an external stimuli to respond to in addition to changing directions.

Well at least we agree on the fact that he is inferior to the other top 3 players. So that's all that needs to be stated.

But that IS agility, to my mind. Sure there requires an external stimuli to change direction, but the actual speed at which you physically change direction is what I view as agility, independent of the nervous response time to fire up the muscles. It's the actual speed with which the muscles produce their output after the fact that I'm interested in. What you're talking about is good reactions, which to me you can have without good agility and vice versa, so the concepts aren't necessarily intertwined. You can do a forwards and backwards run involving changing directions with nothing really to react to and almost anyone would use that as some sort of reference to your agility. Anyway, it seems we're going into semantics here, which is often a muddy mess. I've seen agility defined as an 'ability to move quickly and easily', so there's one idea. Point is, I think Nadal was excellent at quickly changing direction in his prime.

Also I said it was viable, not that it was necessarily true. In fact, I'm not convinced it is.

 

[BlueClayGOAT]

Returning Roger Federer's serve isn't that impressive (Federer has never been a powerful server). .

No he hasn't been a power server (although he still does serve at 125+ mph). His serve is one of the best-disguised and most accurate of all time. Often, it's not about sheer speed as much as it is about being able to read serves well in order to return effectively. There's a reason Federer is so difficult to break especially on the faster surfaces.

In other words, getting an effective return in consistently on a Federer serve is one of the more difficult feats in tennis.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

No he hasn't been a power server (although he still does serve at 125+ mph). His serve is one of the best-disguised and most accurate of all time. Often, it's not about sheer speed as much as it is about being able to read serves well in order to return effectively. There's a reason Federer is so difficult to break especially on the faster surfaces.

In other words, getting an effective return in consistently on a Federer serve is one of the more difficult feats in tennis.

Indeed, on a very good day one might suggest Fed's serve is every bit as devastating as Pete's. Their disguise and placement is probably equal for best ever, with Pete's extra wicked super heat on the ball as well as bold second serves giving him the better serve overall.

 

[Ganstaz003]

But that IS agility, to my mind. Sure there requires an external stimuli to change direction, but the actual speed at which you physically change direction is what I view as agility, independent of the nervous response time to fire up the muscles. It's the actual speed with which the muscles produce their output after the fact that I'm interested in. What you're talking about is good reactions, which to me you can have without good agility and vice versa, so the concepts aren't necessarily intertwined. You can do a forwards and backwards run involving changing directions with nothing really to react to and almost anyone would use that as some sort of reference to your agility. Anyway, it seems we're going into semantics here, which is often a muddy mess. I've seen agility defined as an 'ability to move quickly and easily', so there's one idea. Point is, I think Nadal was excellent at quickly changing direction in his prime.

Also I said it was viable, not that it was necessarily true. In fact, I'm not convinced it is.

I'm using the word / term 'agility' for lack of a better word. That's the best word I found to be most useful in this context and in this context, I'm defining agility as the ability to change directions in response to an external stimuli. Without there being an external stimuli, the movement is simply a change of direction and not an 'agility' based move.

All the evidence seems to suggest that Rafael Nadal has the worst agility compared to Andy Murray, Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer. His appalling return of serve on fast surfaces relative to those aforementioned players is one of many evidence as to why his agility is inferior.

 

[Ganstaz003]

No he hasn't been a power server (although he still does serve at 125+ mph). His serve is one of the best-disguised and most accurate of all time. Often, it's not about sheer speed as much as it is about being able to read serves well in order to return effectively. There's a reason Federer is so difficult to break especially on the faster surfaces.

In other words, getting an effective return in consistently on a Federer serve is one of the more difficult feats in tennis.

I'm not disagreeing with you. My point was simply that Roger Federer has never been a 'POWERFUL' server like Ivo Karlovic, John Isner, Milos Raonic etc. Whilst Rafael Nadal struggles against 'POWERFUL' servers on fast surfaces like grass. So Nadal being able to return effectively against Federer isn't that relevant considering I didn't even initially argue that Nadal struggles against Federer like servers but struggles against powerful servers.

Also, a powerful serve that is well placed is far more difficult to return than a weak serve that is well placed. This is why the likes of Milos Raonic and Ivo Karlovic are going to be more dangerous, purely with their serve than Roger Federer if they are at peak level.

 

[HailDjokovic]

Djokovic is definitely the most flexible male player of all time, he can reach balls that other pros who have been playing all their life wish they could emulate.

Combined with his footspeed which is only rivaled by nadal or monfils, he is an absolutely ridiculous ballchaser.

And as many others have said being agile and being flexible are two different things.

Nonetheless I think Novak is exceptionally agile and efficient on hard court. It's quite hard NOT to slip or stumble when you're trying to push off your legs and slide the way he does often.
I do think that Novak's footwork could be better on clay or grass, but his game suits all surfaces so there isn't any need.

 

[Bender]

There is a HUGE disparity between Roger Federer's return of serve abilities compared to Rafael Nadal. So no, they aren't equal. There is a reason why Roger Federer is able to LITERALLY touch the baseline whilst returning serve (even against some of the most powerful servers). There's also a reason why Rafael Nadal has to stand a million miles behind the baseline when returning serve (even against some of the least powerful servers). What does that indicate? It indicates how atrocious, horrific and poor Rafael Nadal's hand eye coordination, reflexes and reaction times are. The guy has one of the worst hand eye coordination and reflexes I've ever seen from a double digit grand slam winner in men's tennis. Even whilst standing that far behind the baseline, he lacks the reflexes and hand eye coordination to return the serve of the likes of Gilles Muller? Yet, you're comparing his return of serve to Roger Federer's? Explain how Rafael Nadal even qualifies to be compared to Roger Federer in this department.

Returning Roger Federer's serve isn't that impressive (Federer has never been a powerful server). On grass and other fast surfaces, Nadal's atrocious hand eye coordination and reflexes get exposed to be below mediocre. It's almost as if the guy is as slow as a turtle somehow in the reflex department.

Also, I don't believe in Rafael Nadal's 'weak serve' myth. Nadal has one of the best serve + forehand combination on the men's tour. In other words, that combination allows him to win more free points than many other players. Even Novak Djokovic doesn't have such weapons where he is able to win as many free points because of that. He purposefully serves the way he does so that he can follow up with the forehand on the next shot, which is practically as good as an unreturned serve.

Rafa stands back to put as much action he can on the ball as possible on the return. The extra distance he puts between the baseline and himself isn't to give himself more time to react to the incoming ball, but to give himself more time to take a full swing at the ball--there's a marked difference between what you're saying and what he's doing.

FWIW, against the biggest servers like Karlovic, he actually stands right on top of the baseline rather than hang back. You can accuse him of being too stubborn to return like a normal tennis player on faster surfaces, or question his shot selection on the return, but his ROS or ability to return the serve is not as bad as you say. Off the top of my head, look at his matches against Raonic at the AO this year, or against Karlovic in Shanghai in 2015, or against Djokovic in Montreal in 2013, or Berdych at the AO in 2012. I'd even go so far as to say that Rafa's ROS is excellent, just not as good as Djokovic's when returning slow serves, and not as good as Federer's (on average) when returning big serves, but pretty close behind both. He has shown that he can return like a monster on the baseline, but stubbornly moves back when he's perfectly capable of returning right on the baseline.

Also, IIRC, Muller was leading the boards in serve statistics going into Wimbledon, so there's no need to insult Muller's capabilities. He may well have beat any of the other Big Four that day, with Federer having the best chance at beating him.

 

[metsman]

That's one of the greatest diving volleys I've ever seen.

great example of poor anticipation as well.

 

[Ganstaz003]

great example of poor anticipation as well.

What do you mean? By who?

 

[MS_07]

I've personally never seen anybody move with the agility and display the flexibility that Novak Djokovic has shown during tennis matches in all my time that I've been watching tennis. I'll dare to even go as far as to say that he makes the likes of Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer look like stiff metals. As if they have cement / lead stuck on their feet, inhibiting their movement and range of motion. Novak Djokovic's success against Rafael Nadal even partly stems from the fact that he has superior flexibility and agility, enabling him to stretch for balls and change directions to get balls that Nadal can't. So considering he is even superior in this department to arguably the best athlete in tennis for the last 2 decades, then it's fair to say that Djokovic has been at the very least, number 1 for the last 2 and a half decades.

Has there been any other player from the earlier past era that rivals Djokovic in this department, if not surpass him?

Some of the closest players that rival Djokovic in my opinion are the likes of Lleyton Hewitt and Michael Chang.

Flexible. Yes.
Agile - Definitely NOT, period

 

[iChen]

Are you saying Novak has a career in ballerina after tennis?

 

[MS_07]

Are you saying Novak has a career in ballerina after tennis?

Exactly, from now onwards !!

 

[Ganstaz003]

Rafa stands back to put as much action he can on the ball as possible on the return. The extra distance he puts between the baseline and himself isn't to give himself more time to react to the incoming ball, but to give himself more time to take a full swing at the ball--there's a marked difference between what you're saying and what he's doing.

FWIW, against the biggest servers like Karlovic, he actually stands right on top of the baseline rather than hang back. You can accuse him of being too stubborn to return like a normal tennis player on faster surfaces, or question his shot selection on the return, but his ROS or ability to return the serve is not as bad as you say. Off the top of my head, look at his matches against Raonic at the AO this year, or against Karlovic in Shanghai in 2015, or against Djokovic in Montreal in 2013, or Berdych at the AO in 2012. I'd even go so far as to say that Rafa's ROS is excellent, just not as good as Djokovic's when returning slow serves, and not as good as Federer's (on average) when returning big serves, but pretty close behind both. He has shown that he can return like a monster on the baseline, but stubbornly moves back when he's perfectly capable of returning right on the baseline.

Also, IIRC, Muller was leading the boards in serve statistics going into Wimbledon, so there's no need to insult Muller's capabilities. He may well have beat any of the other Big Four that day, with Federer having the best chance at beating him.

1) How often does anybody ever get a full swing on a return against a big server who is serving above 120 miles per hour (especially on fast surfaces)? So even the reason you propose for why he stands so far back, he is RARELY ever successful at fulfilling that particular reason / purpose. Furthermore, if Rafael Nadal was so 'agile', then he should be able to make quick swings with his arms from a shorter distance. The fact that he needs that much time to generate power is a testament to how poor his agility is. That actually further reinforces my point.

2) When I say Nadal's ROS is 'bad', it's relative to the other top 4 members and other top returners. Of course, he is a better returner than someone like Ivo Karlovic.

3) I was referring to Nadal's ROS being bad on fast surfaces like grass. So bringing forward his performances on slow surfaces is irrelevant to this discussion. The best reflexes, agility and hand eye coordination are required on fast surfaces like grass. It's not a surprise why Nadal has been ABSOLUTELY ATROCIOUS at Wimbledon since 2012. He lacks heavily in those departments. It's as if he has the reflexes of a turtle relative to the likes of Murray or Djokovic.

4) The problem with Rafael Nadal isn't just losing to Muller. It's his CONSISTENT defeats and failures to opponents that are incompetent at reaching a quarter final of a grand slam more than once. Federer or Djokovic don't lose to players like that on a consistent basis. If they do, it's the odd match that they lose. On the other hand, Nadal has a knack of consistently losing to those players on grass. Thus, there's a big enough sample to conclude that Nadal lacks the main requirements to be a top grass court player, which are agile movements, fast reflexes / reactions, high level hand eye coordination and sufficiently good touch.

 

[maruzo]

I've personally never seen anybody move with the agility and display the flexibility that Novak Djokovic has shown during tennis matches in all my time that I've been watching tennis. I'll dare to even go as far as to say that he makes the likes of Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer look like stiff metals. As if they have cement / lead stuck on their feet, inhibiting their movement and range of motion. Novak Djokovic's success against Rafael Nadal even partly stems from the fact that he has superior flexibility and agility, enabling him to stretch for balls and change directions to get balls that Nadal can't. So considering he is even superior in this department to arguably the best athlete in tennis for the last 2 decades, then it's fair to say that Djokovic has been at the very least, number 1 for the last 2 and a half decades.

Has there been any other player from the earlier past era that rivals Djokovic in this department, if not surpass him?

Some of the closest players that rival Djokovic in my opinion are the likes of Lleyton Hewitt and Michael Chang.

The most flexible, yes. One of the most agile. Not necesarily the most agile. There's so many players who moves just as good as he does.

 

[MS_07]

The most flexible, yes. One of the most agile. Not necesarily the most agile. There's so many players who moves just as good as he does.

There are players who move far better than him, period
Joker can't handle volleys and smash. it is known.

 

[Defcon]

People think because Djoker twists himself into these shapes that he's more agile or a better mover, none of which is true. He has average footwork and because of this often hits shots in awkward positions. Doing splits on a court isn't needed unless you can't get to the ball, Nonak uses it on routine shots to make up for lack of footwork and preparation.

Which is why no one (viewer or commentator) has ever said his game is effortless (same with Murray and Nadal) the way they for Fed and some other players who were obviously more talented.

 

[MS_07]

People think because Djoker twists himself into these shapes that he's more agile or a better mover, none of which is true. He has average footwork and because of this often hits shots in awkward positions. Doing splits on a court isn't needed unless you can't get to the ball, Nonak uses it on routine shots to make up for lack of footwork and preparation.

Which is why no one (viewer or commentator) has ever said his game is effortless (same with Murray and Nadal) the way they for Fed and some other players who were obviously more talented.

Can't put more perfectly.
Bcz he has 1 win over Nad on clay and 2-3 wins over Fed (both not on their prime), blind ppl started believing him as god and his every move as perfect.

Muz has much more better footwork and skills, his whining attitude is the only problem.

 

[70後]

Usually 1hbh vs 2hbh is a tradeoff. But with that extreme elasticity, Djokovic gains part of the bonuses of a single handed backhand while also having all the bonuses of a two handed backhand. Hence 2015 and '16.

 

[Ganstaz003]

Flexible. Yes.
Agile - Definitely NOT, period

One can't be agile unless they had sufficiently flexible enough hips / core to begin with. Although they are technically different things, they are very closely related.

 

[Ganstaz003]

The most flexible, yes. One of the most agile. Not necesarily the most agile. There's so many players who moves just as good as he does.

Very few players in history have agility at the level or surpassing the level of Djokovic's. I'd state that only the likes of a peak Lleyton Hewitt, peak Roger Federer, David Ferrer and some of the other short speedy players can match / surpass Djokovic for agility. Djokovic's agility is partly the reason why he is one of, if not the greatest returner of serve in history. His ability to change directions and reach balls which others can't is at a unique level. Only few players can even reach, never mind return balls back in play from defensive positions and from return of serve as well as Djokovic.

 

[MS_07]

One can't be agile unless they had sufficiently flexible enough hips / core to begin with. Although they are technically different things, they are very closely related.

Look at heavy weight fighters, they are not flexible but i bet you they can easily dodge away 1000 punches thrown by joker on their face.
Also, F1 drivers who need probably the most agility in any game are not particularly flexible.
Baseball batsmen also need the most agility but many of them are very fat and don't have flexibility.

flexibility definitely helps but agility is more a combination of anticipation quicker judgement clear thoughts and some weird connections in brain which helps a person to do all above things faster than a normal person.
Some guys have those connections by birth and some develop them over many years of practice.

Look at some reflex valleys by monfils or dustin brown. you will get it.

 

[Ganstaz003]

Look at heavy weight fighters, they are not flexible but i bet you they can easily dodge away 1000 punches thrown by joker on their face.
Also, F1 drivers who need probably the most agility in any game are not particularly flexible.
Baseball batsmen also need the most agility but many of them are very fat and don't have flexibility.

flexibility definitely helps but agility is more a combination of anticipation quicker judgement clear thoughts and some weird connections in brain which helps a person to do all above things faster than a normal person.
Some guys have those connections by birth and some develop them over many years of practice.

Look at some reflex valleys by monfils or dustin brown. you will get it.

I'm not sure how you define 'agility', but my definition of agility is how quickly someone changes directions (goes from left to right) or changes body position (turning the body 180 degrees) whilst maintaining balance. Attributes such as clear thoughts, anticipation and quick judgement alone have nothing to do with how I define agility.

Also, speaking as a boxer myself, the example you gave of boxing is a poor one because all the boxers that are the most agile (heavyweight boxers or not), have some of the most flexible hips and core.

Here is an example of one of the most agile boxers ever in Pernell Whitaker:

Another very agile boxer named Guillermo Rigondeaux:

Even a prime Mike Tyson was supremely agile:

Do you want to know the one thing they ALL had in common? FLEXIBLE HIPS AND CORE. Trust me! Try changing directions fast with stiff / tensed hip and core muscles and then tell me if you can be very agile. I guarantee you that you can't!

 

[MS_07]

I'm not sure how you define 'agility', but my definition of agility is how quickly someone changes directions (goes from left to right) or changes body position (turning the body 180 degrees) whilst maintaining balance. Attributes such as clear thoughts, anticipation and quick judgement alone have nothing to do with how I define agility.

Also, speaking as a boxer myself, the example you gave of boxing is a poor one because all the boxers that are the most agile (heavyweight boxers or not), have some of the most flexible hips and core.

Here is an example of one of the most agile boxers ever in Pernell Whitaker:

Another very agile boxer named Guillermo Rigondeaux:

Even a prime Mike Tyson was supremely agile:

Do you want to know the one thing they ALL had in common? FLEXIBLE HIPS AND CORE. Trust me! Try changing directions fast with stiff / tensed hip and core muscles and then tell me if you can be very agile. I guarantee you that you can't!

So I gave example of 3 sports, you posted videos of 1, still waiting for you to post videos of F1 drivers and baseball fat batsman doing some ballerina dance, turning 180' while driving a car or hitting a ball.

There's one more sport of cricket (many similarities to baseball), check videos of inzamam ul haq or Chris Gayle , they have hard time in running (where you have to take 180' turn after each run) , still they go as one of the greatest batsman in sport Bcz they have agility to pick the line length of the ball well and hit it with enough timing and power. Inzamam is so fat that ppl used to call him potato.

 

[I Am Finnish]

lol

 

[I Am Finnish]

 

[Ganstaz003]

So I gave example of 3 sports, you posted videos of 1, still waiting for you to post videos of F1 drivers and baseball fat batsman doing some ballerina dance, turning 180' while driving a car or hitting a ball.

There's one more sport of cricket (many similarities to baseball), check videos of inzamam ul haq or Chris Gayle , they have hard time in running (where you have to take 180' turn after each run) , still they go as one of the greatest batsman in sport Bcz they have agility to pick the line length of the ball well and hit it with enough timing and power. Inzamam is so fat that ppl used to call him potato.

• Quantity = irrelevant. What's relevant is if my definition and message I posted is understood by the viewers. So if one video does it, so be it! No need for more!
• As I've already stated, the way I define agility is the ability to change directions as fast as possible. So although cricket players, baseball players and the other examples of athletes you've provided have more agility than an average human being who isn't very athletic, they certainly aren't the most agile compared to athletes from other sports. None of those attributes you've mentioned have anything to do with the way I DEFINE 'agility'. Thus, I deem them irrelevant.

 

[MIRO_1975]

I think you have to consider players from the 70s to the 90s, too. I am pretty sure that there were also some amazing agile and flexible athletes on the court - certainly under consideration of former tennis, technics and materials (e.g. I am thinking of Borg, Lendl, Edberg, Pete)...


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

 

[MS_07]

• Quantity = irrelevant. What's relevant is if my definition and message I posted is understood by the viewers. So if one video does it, so be it! No need for more!
• As I've already stated, the way I define agility is the ability to change directions as fast as possible. So although cricket players, baseball players and the other examples of athletes you've provided have more agility than an average human being who isn't very athletic, they certainly aren't the most agile compared to athletes from other sports. None of those attributes you've mentioned have anything to do with the way I DEFINE 'agility'. Thus, I deem them irrelevant.

Please change the title to
"
Is Novak Djokovic the most 180' moving + flexible player ever in men's tennis?
"

And I would happily agree with you

 

[skaj]

No, it's Monfils. He's as flexible and even faster.

 

[smoledman]

Djokovic is the best athlete ever in tennis. Federer has the best mind ever. Rafa has the best pain tolerance ever.

 

[Djokodalerer31]

Djokovic is the best athlete ever in tennis. Federer has the best mind ever. Rafa has the best pain tolerance ever.

the way i see it is Novak has atheltism, Federer mind, while Rafa has a little bit of both, though to a lesser extent than both...

 

[Boom-Boom]

No, Federer is.

GOAT

 

[Red Rick]

There's a huge difference between flexible and being agile. They're two totally different things. Novak is almost surely the most "flexible," but countless players are as agile or more agile than he is: Chang, Noah, Monfils, Mecir, Borg, etc.

Agile denotes that a player can not only move quickly, but move effortlessly. Djoker's movement is incredible, but he never, ever looks effortless in anything he does on a tennis court. He often looks awkward or labored when hitting his shots or moving. His footwork has never been as great as Fed or even someone like Ferrer, both of him beat him hands down in agility.

For this sort of stuff, Djoker wins:

Djoko's movement is probably the most efficient in the game.

 

[Sport]

No, Federer is.

What the? One thing is to support Federer, and the other thing is to make Federism a religion. Federer more flexible than Djokovic? Yeah sure. What will be next? Federer a better returner than Djokovic? Federer faster than Nadal? Federer with a better clay game than Nadal? Just ridiculous.

 

[Sport]

I'm not sure how you define 'agility', but my definition of agility is how quickly someone changes directions (goes from left to right) or changes body position (turning the body 180 degrees) whilst maintaining balance.

Nadal is obviously much more agile than Federer. Agility is more a physical quality than a technical one. Nadal is much mroe physical than Federer. He is faster, stronger and simply much more agile. The comparison is even ridiculous.

Nadal can run from left to right much faster than Federer could ever dream:

Min. 8:12

Nadal also rotates his body 360 degree much faster than Federer, which is specially noticieable in his return of the ball: