Novak Djokovic beat Roger Federer 6-4, 5-7, 6-4, 6-4 in the US Open final 2015 on hard court
The win gave Djokovic 3 Slam titles in the year for the second time and was his second USO title. Federer was playing in his first final at the event in six years and aiming for an Open Era breaking sixth title. The pair had played their first final at the venue 8 years ago (https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ederer-vs-djokovic-us-open-final-2007.633118/), and four semi-finals in between (split 2 each)
Djokovic won 147 points, Federer 145
Serve Stats
Djokovic....
- 1st serve percentage (96/155) 62%
- 1st serve points won (63/96) 66%
- 2nd serve points won (32/59) 54%
- Aces 3, Service Winners 4
- Double Faults 5
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (31/155) 20%
Federer...
- 1st serve percentage (88/137) 64%
- 1st serve points won (62/88) 70%
- 2nd serve points won (23/49) 47%
- Aces 11, Service Winners 3
- Double Faults 5
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (44/137) 32%
Serve Pattern
Djokovic served...
- to FH 39%
- to BH 57%
- to Body 4%
Federer served...
- to FH 40%
- to BH 57%
- to Body 3%
Return Stats
Djokovic made...
- 87 (32 FH, 55 BH)
- 2 Winners (2 FH)
- 31 Errors, comprising...
- 5 Unforced (1 FH, 4 BH)
- 26 Forced (12 FH, 14 BH)
- Return Rate (87/132) 66%
Federer made...
- 119 (48 FH, 71 BH), including 4 runaround FHs, 1 runaround BH, 11 return-approaches and 6 'SABRs'
- 3 Winners (1 FH, 2 BH), including 1 BH 'SABR'
- 24 Errors, comprising...
- 7 Unforced (5 FH, 2 BH), including 2 runaround FH attempts
- 17 Forced (8 FH, 9 BH)
- Return Rate (119/150) 79%
(Note: Federer's returning in this match is highly unorthodox and thus, difficult to categorize cleanly. runaround FHs, runaround BHs, SABRs and return-approaches all overlap to some extent. For example, the sole runaround BH was 'runaround' in that the serve was directed to the FH but returned of the BH, but it was a SABR return so not what one would think of when hearing "runaround BH")
Break Points
Djokovic 6/13 (8 games)
Federer 4/23 (11 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
Djokovic 27 (15 FH, 10 BH, 1 FHV, 1 OH)
Federer 42 (17 FH, 11 BH, 3 FHV, 4 BHV, 7 OH)
Djokovic's regular FHs - 4 cc, 2 dtl, 6 inside-out (including 1 return, also a pass), 2 inside-in (including 1 return)
- regular BHs - 1 cc, 2 dtl and 1 at net
- BH passes - 2 cc, 3 dtl (1 at net), 2 lobs
Federer's FHs - 5 cc (1 return), 4 dtl, 6 inside-out, 2 inside in
- regular BHs - 2 cc, 4 dtl (1 slightly inside-out), an inside-in SABR and 1 other return dtl (taken early)
- BH passes - 1 cc, 1 dtl, 1 inside-out at net
- 6 from serve-volley points - 2 FHVs (both first volleys, both swinging shots), 3 OHs (all second volleys, 1 a 'sky-hook') and 1 BHV (a third volley)
- 1 BHV was a stop volley
Errors (excluding returns and serves)
Djokovic 53
- 19 Unforced (7 FH, 12 BH)
- 34 Forced (16 FH, 17 BH, 1 FHV)
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 47.9
Federer 85
- 43 Unforced (26 FH, 13 BH, 1 FHV, 3 BHV)
- 42 Forced (18 FH, 17 BH, 2 FHV, 4 BHV, 1 OH)
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 50
(Note 1: all half-volleys refer to such shots played at net. Half -volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke counts)
(Note 2: The 'Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is a measure of how aggressive of intent the average UE made was. 60 is maximum, 20 is minimum. This match has been scored using a four point scale - 2 defensive, 4 neutral, 5 attacking, 6 winner attempt)
Net Points & Serve-Volley
Djokovic was 12/21 (57%) at net, with no serve-volleys.
He was 0/1 when forced back from net
Federer was 39/48 (67%) at net, including 18/23 (78%) serve-volleying - off first serves 14/18 (78%) off first serve, off second 4/5 (80%) - and 4/11 (36%) return-approaching.
He was 0/1 when forced back
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Match Report
This is a splendid match, a wonderful contest of high level steadiness/pressuring vs high level extreme aggression. Djokovic is a rock, while Federer plays well beyond his comfort zone for being aggressive. Both the points tally (+ 2 Djokovic) and the break point numbers (6/13 Djokovic in 8 games, 4/23 in 11 for Federer) tells you the match could have gone either way, but I think the outcome was the most appropriate result. Playing the way he did, Federer would have needed a lot of luck to win and Djokovic did hold steady through an outrageous, all-out assault from the Swiss
The first set is representative of the what the playing dynamics between the two players was around this period. Federer had built his career as an attacking baseliner but was no longer able to match Djokovic from the back of the court. Thus, he relied more and more on his serve to hold off the Serb's rampaging returns, but could hardly count on doing so 6 times in a row. Djokovic's groundgame was a wall - his strokes consistently powerful and deep off both wings and his movements (both speed and elasticity) incredible. Federer's movements are slow in comparison and while still the more fluent in attacking baseline tennis, his proneness to error was the biggest factor in why he couldn't beat Djokovic from the baseline.
In the first set in particular, but throughout the match in general, Djokovic was hitting balls I would have marked forced error had he missed (and I'm fairly harsh in that judgement) with enough power and depth to draw forced errors from Federer
The first set is played along the above description, and Djokovic comes up on top, predictably.
From the second set onward, Federer plays an uncharacteristic brand of exaggeratedly aggressive tennis. Given his natural game couldn't cut the mustard, this was the best course of action. Usually, when a player goes beyond their comfort zone, they fall flat. Federer did not - he pulled of this uber-aggressive game with great success - and the rest of the match was highly competitive. Indeed, I think Federer was overall the better player.
Federer goes for more on his second serves than usual (note the relatively high 5 double faults for him) - used to as he was of Djokovic going to town on second serves. And it works, drawing forced errors. He takes to attacking the net, with serve-volleys off both serves and by rallying his way to net. Or by return-approaching. He brings out his 'SABR' (dubbed 'Sneak Attack by Roger' by his coach - a charging return where the serve is taken on the half-volley). He takes returns early and looks to hit them hard and deep. From the baseline, unable to follow his old trusted formula of -
a) open the court
b) hit the winner into it
- because Djokovic is too solid in keeping the court closed, he turns to going straight for hitting winners. And largely, succeeds - a remarkable feat against the wall of Djokovic. Djokovic for his part, weathers the storm and remains solid in the face of such aggression (and of course, Federer makes a fair few errors playing the way he did too)
I can't praise the play of both players in the second set too highly. Its one of the best and most dynamic sets of tennis you'll see. Federer takes it to even out the match. While Federer's flashy playmaking naturally takes the eye, all credit to Djokovic for hanging tough through the onslaught - most players would have had their game and probably spirits broken in the face of it
(a non-court issue that's ever present is the crowds complete support for Federer, to the point of hostility towards Djokovic.... which adds to the impression of the match being on Federer's racquet)
The remaining 2 sets are both competitive. Federer continuing to be aggressive, Djokovic a rock. The difference in the latter's game from years gone by is his improved footwork and ability to hit attacking, runaround inside-out FHs, which he wasn't doing at in years gone by.
In set 3, Federer eases up on approaching the net but maintains aggression from the baseline. I thought this was a mistake, but he is the better player in the set, despite losing it. And when he does return to approaching more in the 4th set, Djokovic gets the better of him. So Federer the slightly better player in the 3rd, Djokovic in the 4th - and Djokovic wins both by playing better on key points.
I can't fault Federer for his poor conversion rate of break points. For one, Djokovic usually raises his game on them and plays great tennis - offensive and defensive. Two, when Federer does make errors on these points... they are very aggressive errors, the kind of play that got him on an equal footing in the first place. Credit Djokovic for clutch play, not discredit Federer for choking
Summary - outstanding from both players. Going into the match, its obvious who the better player is. Federer makes it an even match through daring, boldness and calculated smart strategy. For him to win, he would have needed a huge dose of luck (given making errors naturally comes with the territory of the way he was playing) and in all, he played better than I would have expected with the chosen strategy. Or he would have needed Djokovic to mentally cave - and that the Serb didn't is credit to him
Final result could have gone either way, but I think Djokovic emerging victor is the most appropriate outcome
The win gave Djokovic 3 Slam titles in the year for the second time and was his second USO title. Federer was playing in his first final at the event in six years and aiming for an Open Era breaking sixth title. The pair had played their first final at the venue 8 years ago (https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ederer-vs-djokovic-us-open-final-2007.633118/), and four semi-finals in between (split 2 each)
Djokovic won 147 points, Federer 145
Serve Stats
Djokovic....
- 1st serve percentage (96/155) 62%
- 1st serve points won (63/96) 66%
- 2nd serve points won (32/59) 54%
- Aces 3, Service Winners 4
- Double Faults 5
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (31/155) 20%
Federer...
- 1st serve percentage (88/137) 64%
- 1st serve points won (62/88) 70%
- 2nd serve points won (23/49) 47%
- Aces 11, Service Winners 3
- Double Faults 5
- Unreturned Serve Percentage (44/137) 32%
Serve Pattern
Djokovic served...
- to FH 39%
- to BH 57%
- to Body 4%
Federer served...
- to FH 40%
- to BH 57%
- to Body 3%
Return Stats
Djokovic made...
- 87 (32 FH, 55 BH)
- 2 Winners (2 FH)
- 31 Errors, comprising...
- 5 Unforced (1 FH, 4 BH)
- 26 Forced (12 FH, 14 BH)
- Return Rate (87/132) 66%
Federer made...
- 119 (48 FH, 71 BH), including 4 runaround FHs, 1 runaround BH, 11 return-approaches and 6 'SABRs'
- 3 Winners (1 FH, 2 BH), including 1 BH 'SABR'
- 24 Errors, comprising...
- 7 Unforced (5 FH, 2 BH), including 2 runaround FH attempts
- 17 Forced (8 FH, 9 BH)
- Return Rate (119/150) 79%
(Note: Federer's returning in this match is highly unorthodox and thus, difficult to categorize cleanly. runaround FHs, runaround BHs, SABRs and return-approaches all overlap to some extent. For example, the sole runaround BH was 'runaround' in that the serve was directed to the FH but returned of the BH, but it was a SABR return so not what one would think of when hearing "runaround BH")
Break Points
Djokovic 6/13 (8 games)
Federer 4/23 (11 games)
Winners (including returns, excluding aces)
Djokovic 27 (15 FH, 10 BH, 1 FHV, 1 OH)
Federer 42 (17 FH, 11 BH, 3 FHV, 4 BHV, 7 OH)
Djokovic's regular FHs - 4 cc, 2 dtl, 6 inside-out (including 1 return, also a pass), 2 inside-in (including 1 return)
- regular BHs - 1 cc, 2 dtl and 1 at net
- BH passes - 2 cc, 3 dtl (1 at net), 2 lobs
Federer's FHs - 5 cc (1 return), 4 dtl, 6 inside-out, 2 inside in
- regular BHs - 2 cc, 4 dtl (1 slightly inside-out), an inside-in SABR and 1 other return dtl (taken early)
- BH passes - 1 cc, 1 dtl, 1 inside-out at net
- 6 from serve-volley points - 2 FHVs (both first volleys, both swinging shots), 3 OHs (all second volleys, 1 a 'sky-hook') and 1 BHV (a third volley)
- 1 BHV was a stop volley
Errors (excluding returns and serves)
Djokovic 53
- 19 Unforced (7 FH, 12 BH)
- 34 Forced (16 FH, 17 BH, 1 FHV)
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 47.9
Federer 85
- 43 Unforced (26 FH, 13 BH, 1 FHV, 3 BHV)
- 42 Forced (18 FH, 17 BH, 2 FHV, 4 BHV, 1 OH)
Unforced Error Forcefulness Index 50
(Note 1: all half-volleys refer to such shots played at net. Half -volleys played from other parts of the court are included within relevant groundstroke counts)
(Note 2: The 'Unforced Error Forcefulness Index is a measure of how aggressive of intent the average UE made was. 60 is maximum, 20 is minimum. This match has been scored using a four point scale - 2 defensive, 4 neutral, 5 attacking, 6 winner attempt)
Net Points & Serve-Volley
Djokovic was 12/21 (57%) at net, with no serve-volleys.
He was 0/1 when forced back from net
Federer was 39/48 (67%) at net, including 18/23 (78%) serve-volleying - off first serves 14/18 (78%) off first serve, off second 4/5 (80%) - and 4/11 (36%) return-approaching.
He was 0/1 when forced back
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Match Report
This is a splendid match, a wonderful contest of high level steadiness/pressuring vs high level extreme aggression. Djokovic is a rock, while Federer plays well beyond his comfort zone for being aggressive. Both the points tally (+ 2 Djokovic) and the break point numbers (6/13 Djokovic in 8 games, 4/23 in 11 for Federer) tells you the match could have gone either way, but I think the outcome was the most appropriate result. Playing the way he did, Federer would have needed a lot of luck to win and Djokovic did hold steady through an outrageous, all-out assault from the Swiss
The first set is representative of the what the playing dynamics between the two players was around this period. Federer had built his career as an attacking baseliner but was no longer able to match Djokovic from the back of the court. Thus, he relied more and more on his serve to hold off the Serb's rampaging returns, but could hardly count on doing so 6 times in a row. Djokovic's groundgame was a wall - his strokes consistently powerful and deep off both wings and his movements (both speed and elasticity) incredible. Federer's movements are slow in comparison and while still the more fluent in attacking baseline tennis, his proneness to error was the biggest factor in why he couldn't beat Djokovic from the baseline.
In the first set in particular, but throughout the match in general, Djokovic was hitting balls I would have marked forced error had he missed (and I'm fairly harsh in that judgement) with enough power and depth to draw forced errors from Federer
The first set is played along the above description, and Djokovic comes up on top, predictably.
From the second set onward, Federer plays an uncharacteristic brand of exaggeratedly aggressive tennis. Given his natural game couldn't cut the mustard, this was the best course of action. Usually, when a player goes beyond their comfort zone, they fall flat. Federer did not - he pulled of this uber-aggressive game with great success - and the rest of the match was highly competitive. Indeed, I think Federer was overall the better player.
Federer goes for more on his second serves than usual (note the relatively high 5 double faults for him) - used to as he was of Djokovic going to town on second serves. And it works, drawing forced errors. He takes to attacking the net, with serve-volleys off both serves and by rallying his way to net. Or by return-approaching. He brings out his 'SABR' (dubbed 'Sneak Attack by Roger' by his coach - a charging return where the serve is taken on the half-volley). He takes returns early and looks to hit them hard and deep. From the baseline, unable to follow his old trusted formula of -
a) open the court
b) hit the winner into it
- because Djokovic is too solid in keeping the court closed, he turns to going straight for hitting winners. And largely, succeeds - a remarkable feat against the wall of Djokovic. Djokovic for his part, weathers the storm and remains solid in the face of such aggression (and of course, Federer makes a fair few errors playing the way he did too)
I can't praise the play of both players in the second set too highly. Its one of the best and most dynamic sets of tennis you'll see. Federer takes it to even out the match. While Federer's flashy playmaking naturally takes the eye, all credit to Djokovic for hanging tough through the onslaught - most players would have had their game and probably spirits broken in the face of it
(a non-court issue that's ever present is the crowds complete support for Federer, to the point of hostility towards Djokovic.... which adds to the impression of the match being on Federer's racquet)
The remaining 2 sets are both competitive. Federer continuing to be aggressive, Djokovic a rock. The difference in the latter's game from years gone by is his improved footwork and ability to hit attacking, runaround inside-out FHs, which he wasn't doing at in years gone by.
In set 3, Federer eases up on approaching the net but maintains aggression from the baseline. I thought this was a mistake, but he is the better player in the set, despite losing it. And when he does return to approaching more in the 4th set, Djokovic gets the better of him. So Federer the slightly better player in the 3rd, Djokovic in the 4th - and Djokovic wins both by playing better on key points.
I can't fault Federer for his poor conversion rate of break points. For one, Djokovic usually raises his game on them and plays great tennis - offensive and defensive. Two, when Federer does make errors on these points... they are very aggressive errors, the kind of play that got him on an equal footing in the first place. Credit Djokovic for clutch play, not discredit Federer for choking
Summary - outstanding from both players. Going into the match, its obvious who the better player is. Federer makes it an even match through daring, boldness and calculated smart strategy. For him to win, he would have needed a huge dose of luck (given making errors naturally comes with the territory of the way he was playing) and in all, he played better than I would have expected with the chosen strategy. Or he would have needed Djokovic to mentally cave - and that the Serb didn't is credit to him
Final result could have gone either way, but I think Djokovic emerging victor is the most appropriate outcome