kandamrgam
Hall of Fame
1. as nadal's offence as has improved, his defense has decreased after 2009. Its a major reason why djokovic was able to beat him at his own game of outdefending, outlasting , even on clay in 2011. That would not have happened to 06-09 nadal on clay.
2. the 2008 final stats are wrong. For 2008, the RG site has # of first serves in the winners column. That's why I linked the 2008 RG semi from my own stats.
3. your eye test is not wrong regarding RG 2008 semi and RG 2007 final. He was more aggressive in 2008 compared to 2007.
80 forcing plays (23W+57 FEs)/198 = 40.4%
82 forcing plays(30W+52 FEs)/255 = 32.1%
that's why don't take the winners only.
4. I don't think making forced errors half as important as the winners to determine aggression level is the solution either. It may not be 1:1, but sure as hell isn't 0.5:1.
1. Surely not. Novak wasn't outlasting Rafa, he was matching him in terms of defence and outhitting him. Nadal surely had to improve his offence there.
2. Sure enough, if we account for both W+FE you get the result 2008 semi had better aggression than 2007 final. But by the same token you get Nadal in 2017 vs thiem had higher percentage than vs 2008 Fed. This stat is from tennisabstract for 2008 final.
45 forcing plays(20W+25 FEs)/144 = 31%
It's comparable to his 2007 stat, and worse than 2017 stat. If you think Nadal had better W+FE ratio in 2017 final than 2007 final owing to worse play from Thiem, what do you make of the 2008 result in which Fed played just bad? Maybe Nadal wasn't as aggressive as he could have been in 2008 match, maybe he didn't have to, but if you can agree 2008 results by your own metric is inferior to Thiem 2017 then let's move on. I'm not saying it isn't the case, I'm just being sceptical about these numbers as many different parameters have gone into matches, including strategies, style of play etc. Whole season records are much more indicative..
Sent from my NEM-L22 using Tapatalk