Match Stats/Report - Djokovic vs Federer, US Open final 2015

[Waspsting]

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

 

[Towny]

This match was disappointing for me because unlike their Wimbledon match, I actually felt Federer had a decent chance here. He was very aggressive and unorthodox and I felt had was the better player in both the second and third sets.

The breakpoint situation was where he lost it IMO. Djokovic played clutch, steady tennis so credit to him. But, if I recall correctly, Federer was 1/11 on second serve break points or something like that. He really should've capitalised and taken the third. If he had, he may have gone on to win the whole thing.

Credit to Djokovic for the win. He is a monster from the baseline. Unfortunately, 2015 Fed no longer had the tools to hang with Novak from the baseline so had to try a different approach. Unfortunately for him, it wasn't enough.

 

[NatF]

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

Federer made errors on like 10/23 BP's - including missing sitters in the forecourt.

Come on man you penalised Djokovic in 2007 for making errors when in leading positions but you don't see any fault with Federer for missing so many bp's?

 

[BGod]

4 of 23 BPs is terrible. Now 1 of those came near end of match when he needed 2 just to get even and almost did. Fed in his later years with BPs has been a disaster and one of my biggest peeves about him as a fan. Which is why Novak can absolutely become GOAT without getting the same Slams. More clutch when it matters.

 

[KINGROGER]

Great analysis. Fed’s weak baseline game definitely cost him those slam finals in those years.

 

[Dilexson]

Federer chocked there but it was entertaining as hell for a 4 set slam final. If not for the similar progress at the previous slam i would have definitely expected a 5th set.

 

[Dilexson]

I wouldn't call Fedr the better player that day btw (inb4....) it's always the winner.

 

[Waspsting]

I wouldn't call Fedr the better player that day btw (inb4....) it's always the winner.

Your probably right... obviously, 90+ percent of the time the winner is the "better player"

There are a few when I think players are equal, and then who ends up winning and losing comes down a flip of the coin (Wimbledon finals 2007 and 2008 or the Fed-Djok US semis '10 and '11 examples). That's extremely rare - and I tend not to draw conclusions about the result "proving" who was the better player in such matches

Clearest better-player-lost match I've seen was Stich-Edberg, '91 Wimbledon... have you seen that one? Very little between the two guys, but it was Edberg who clearly was more of a threat on return, but lost 3 tiebreaks and lost without having his set broken

So I guess "better player lost" is saying "better player, sans critical points (aka generally as "clutch", but far more often than is generally acknowledged, just a chance/fortune deal)

In this match, Djokovic clearly better in 1st and the remaining 3 are close (I'd say Fed in 2nd and 3rd, Djoko in 4th) - so overall, yes Djokovic the better player... gotto be careful to avoid the natural perceptual bias of seeing the more aggresive player as the better one

Federer made errors on like 10/23 BP's - including missing sitters in the forecourt.

Come on man you penalised Djokovic in 2007 for making errors when in leading positions but you don't see any fault with Federer for missing so many bp's?

Let me get back to you in detail when I have my score sheets on me, but I don't think there's a contradiction here

Djoko was serving... Fed was returning
Djoko is/was a solid player - focus on not making errors, so for him to make 4 routine UEs in a row is highly out of character... Fed is/was an attacking player - which goes hand-in-hand with making UEs
Djoko was playing normally, probably the slightly better baseliner in his match.... Fed was playing wild, attacking, completely outside his norm - and far outmatched from the baseline
Djoko's run of UEs to not seal the first set was at odds with his play in the rest of the match.... Fed was making errors throughout (and the way he was playing, virtually guaranteed)

I think Fed choked in Wimbledon 2008 final because the errors he was making were uncharacteristically meek on break points. In this match though, they'd be in line with the way he was playing in the match (wild aggression)

 

[Dilexson]

Your probably right... obviously, 90+ percent of the time the winner is the "better player"

There are a few when I think players are equal, and then who ends up winning and losing comes down a flip of the coin (Wimbledon finals 2007 and 2008 or the Fed-Djok US semis '10 and '11 examples). That's extremely rare - and I tend not to draw conclusions about the result "proving" who was the better player in such matches

Clearest better-player-lost match I've seen was Stich-Edberg, '91 Wimbledon... have you seen that one? Very little between the two guys, but it was Edberg who clearly was more of a threat on return, but lost 3 tiebreaks and lost without having his set broken

So I guess "better player lost" is saying "better player, sans critical points (aka generally as "clutch", but far more often than is generally acknowledged, just a chance/fortune deal)

In this match, Djokovic clearly better in 1st and the remaining 3 are close (I'd say Fed in 2nd and 3rd, Djoko in 4th) - so overall, yes Djokovic the better player... gotto be careful to avoid the natural perceptual bias of seeing the more aggresive player as the better one



Let me get back to you in detail when I have my score sheets on me, but I don't think there's a contradiction here

Djoko was serving... Fed was returning
Djoko is/was a solid player - focus on not making errors, so for him to make 4 routine UEs in a row is highly out of character... Fed is/was an attacking player - which goes hand-in-hand with making UEs
Djoko was playing normally, probably the slightly better baseliner in his match.... Fed was playing wild, attacking, completely outside his norm - and far outmatched from the baseline
Djoko's run of UEs to not seal the first set was at odds with his play in the rest of the match.... Fed was making errors throughout (and the way he was playing, virtually guaranteed)

I think Fed choked in Wimbledon 2008 final because the errors he was making were uncharacteristically meek on break points. In this match though, they'd be in line with the way he was playing in the match (wild aggression)

Thank you for the detailed reply. I'm afraid i was an infant back when that Wimbledon match happened and i haven't watched it later either. So i'll concede the argument and accept there might be exceptions.
I merely wanted state my opinion on the term 'better player lost' . It has been thrown around a lot when a player loses a close match, almost always in favour of the aggressor (as you have pointed out), not necessarily Fedr either. There might have been a few instances with Delpo/Stan. Can't remember the matches.

In regards to the Final i think Fedr lost it because of his mentality(I think he even kinda admitted that later in an interview). I guess my view is that you can't pick a guy who couldn't get past the mental hurdle/couldn't tough it out the most testing moments as the the better player, even though they might have been neck and neck in the court. (Say if the match had ended in a tie i still would have picked Novak. )

 

[mike danny]

4 of 23 BPs is terrible. Now 1 of those came near end of match when he needed 2 just to get even and almost did. Fed in his later years with BPs has been a disaster and one of my biggest peeves about him as a fan. Which is why Novak can absolutely become GOAT without getting the same Slams. More clutch when it matters.

Fed never went 1 out 9 in slsms in his prime. And Novak lost too many slsms to people he shouldn't have lost as many slams to.

 

[NatF]

Let me get back to you in detail when I have my score sheets on me, but I don't think there's a contradiction here

Djoko was serving... Fed was returning
Djoko is/was a solid player - focus on not making errors, so for him to make 4 routine UEs in a row is highly out of character... Fed is/was an attacking player - which goes hand-in-hand with making UEs
Djoko was playing normally, probably the slightly better baseliner in his match.... Fed was playing wild, attacking, completely outside his norm - and far outmatched from the baseline
Djoko's run of UEs to not seal the first set was at odds with his play in the rest of the match.... Fed was making errors throughout (and the way he was playing, virtually guaranteed)

I think Fed choked in Wimbledon 2008 final because the errors he was making were uncharacteristically meek on break points. In this match though, they'd be in line with the way he was playing in the match (wild aggression)

Thanks I'd appreciate the detailed response.

Djokovic was serving but he gave Federer a lot of second serves that Federer couldn't capitalise on. I can't remember the exact number but it seems like Federer was less successful on second serve points when at BP then throughout the rest of the match.

I'd say that Djokovic in 2007 was a bit more aggressive than in 2015, he had the tendency to ball bash in those earlier years. Missing with 4 UE's in a row would be uncharacteristic for any player at that level regardless of play style. Federer is an attacking player that's true but looking at the flow of the match time and again he would play a great couple of points to get into a good position and then make errors. I'll have to use the TA chart as I don't have yours but they have Fed at 67 UE's for the match - 62 without the double faults e.g. UE's when the point was in play. That's about 21/22% for all the points played in the match (292), now in pressure moments you'd expect more errors but double the amount? Definitely some choking.

 

[abmk]

Thanks I'd appreciate the detailed response.

Djokovic was serving but he gave Federer a lot of second serves that Federer couldn't capitalise on. I can't remember the exact number but it seems like Federer was less successful on second serve points when at BP then throughout the rest of the match.

I'd say that Djokovic in 2007 was a bit more aggressive than in 2015, he had the tendency to ball bash in those earlier years. Missing with 4 UE's in a row would be uncharacteristic for any player at that level regardless of play style. Federer is an attacking player that's true but looking at the flow of the match time and again he would play a great couple of points to get into a good position and then make errors. I'll have to use the TA chart as I don't have yours but they have Fed at 67 UE's for the match - 62 without the double faults e.g. UE's when the point was in play. That's about 21/22% for all the points played in the match (292), now in pressure moments you'd expect more errors but double the amount? Definitely some choking.

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...-stats-a-horror-show-of-bp-profligacy.544058/

 

[NatF]

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...-stats-a-horror-show-of-bp-profligacy.544058/

Ouch lol.

 

[RF-18]

It was a great match, spectators and viewers at home were robbed of a 5 set thriller. Ive said it and say it again, Djokovic had no business winning this in 4. Out of the 4 sets, both had two sets of their own each. But who knows what would have happened if Fed won that 3rd set wich he IMO was better in but yet lost it. He'd thrive on that momentum and I have a hard time seeing Djokovic going double break up like he did when he stole the 3rd set going into the 4th.

It was unfortunate for Fed cause both in the build up for the match and in the final itself he had what was necessary to win this tournament and capture record breaking 6th USO title. Somehow Djokovic weathered the storm, but credit goes to him aswell for standing up to Federers onslaught. Very few versions of Djokovic, if any at all would be able to capture the win. Perhaps 2011 USO Djoko. But I feel Fed USO 2015 would have punished that serve more.

 

[Pheasant]

Djoker out-clutched Fed. Fed squandered way too many break point opportunities. Djokovic converted 6 of 13 break point opportunities whereas Fed converted 4 of 23. This really sums up the difference in the match.

This match was the only time after 2012 that I picked Fed to beat Djoker in a slam match. Fed was on fire heading into that final. He hadn't dropped a set, including a complete demolition of Stan, who had only dropped one set until he met Fed. But Djoker was too clutch. Djoker out-clutched Fed three times at the USO.

Prior to 2017, Fed in 5-setters at slams(semis and finals only) was 3-9.
2017-2018, Fed was 3-0 in 5-setters at slams(semis and finals only).

 

[Waspsting]

... Fed’s weak baseline game definitely cost him those slam finals in those years.

I agree - and think its mostly the slower movement that's at the heart of it.

In this match, Djokovic gets to everything and hits it back off both wings - flat, powerful, deep. That's his standard groundstroke. Its not necessarily enough to draw what we call a 'forced' error, but the thing is.... if Federer gets the ball back the next one is going to come back the same way. and the one after that. and after that. and after that.

Sooner or later, Fed will be the one to concede the error

The younger Fed had much better court coverage and I imagine would have been able to handle these balls in a balanced way (as he did against Roddick), rather than be caught off balance by Djoko's power and depth as he was in this match

Even then, I don't know if he could find a way to actually open the court against such a barrage (which no one was capable of giving him at his peak), but it would mean Djoko couldn't count on winning points just by hitting his standard ball and wait for Fed to cave (somewhat like Nadal hitting FH cc ad nauseam 'til Fed caved)…. peak Fed v peak Djok…. would have been a hell of a match

Thanks I'd appreciate the detailed response.

K, lets have fun!

Do we agree that Djokovic choked in 2007 final first set?

In 5 service games going into the game he failed to serve out the set, I have him making 2 unforced errors. He won 20 points, lost 6.... which he extended to 23-6 as he reached 40-0, 3 set points. And then begins the chokefest.

I have him making 4 UEs in play (plus a double fault) in the next 9 points. And I believe these were short rallies... not the sort where the point has to end when somebody makes the error

Onto 2017 -

I think you know me well enough to know I won't cherry pick data to prove my point.... but I am going to pick out what I think are relevant points and exclude others

First set - Fed loses two break points over two games. One, he goes on to break.... so not relevant. Second he loses with UE BH (4) {meaning a neutral shot}. I'm excluding both of these because I think its clear Djokovic was the better player in the first set and Federer choking or not doesn't come into the equation

Second set - Fed loses 7 break points over three games, where he breaks in 2.... I'm excluding these since Fed won the set anyway, and it doesn't play a part in the final result of Djok beats Federer.

Third set - in games that he didn't end up breaking in, I have Fed missing 4 break points.

- 3/4 ends with what look like Djoko 'clutch' plays - 1 Djokovic FH inside-in winner, 1 a Djokovic service winner, 1 a Federer BH forced error
- 1/4 ends with Federer FH UE (5) {meaning an aggressive shot}

Fourth set - Federer has break points in 3 games, and breaks in one. Excluding the game he breaks in, he misses 4 break points

- 2/4 look like Djoko 'clutch' plays - a Return FE BH and a BH FE (both first serve points)
- 2/4 are down to Fed - 1 FH UE (6) {meaning winner attempt} and 1 Return UE FH (runaround FH attempt)…. (I have him making UEs on 14 winner attempts in the match, his Unforced Error Forcefulness Index of 50 is extremely high and indicative of how riskily he was playing - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...cker-masters-final-1986.622294/#post-12548861

So I'd say that's 3 points total that could have changed the outcome of the match that you can 'blame' Federer for missing

----

Couple of other points. I don't track rally length, but my impression is that most of these break points were in longer rallies (unlike the 2007 Djok chokefest). The dynamics of the match are such that the longer the rally went, the more likely Djokovic would win it.... he's not just better, but at least a category above Fed from the baseline in the match (hence Fed seeking the net so enthusiastically). It seemed to me Djok made a particular effort to keep Fed away from net break point down - and succeeded with his rifle shot groundies

Regarding Djokovic making first or second serves.... Fed went to town on the second serves with SABRs, runaround FHs, return-approaches, hugely aggressive strikes etc..... from the second set onward. Naturally, he made errors on return doing stuff like this, it goes with the territory. But he had to - if he didn't, he'd have got slaughtered from the baseline. And after that, Djok took to putting more on his second serve (to keep Fed from attacking it) and thus, risked serving doubles.... they weren't routine, easy to return (let alone attack) second serves

I actually remember one second serve break point Return UE Fed made (its likely the one in the fourth set outlined as one of the points Fed can be blamed for). It was a powerful second serve and Fed got into a tangle trying to go around it to hit a big FH (if he just put it in play safely, things weren't going well for him)

----

Basically, I think Federer played above himself, in a crazily aggressive way to keep the match even.... and I can't applaud him enough for that. Like say, Roddick in Wimbledon 2004, only better.

I don't blame him for losing break points, I credit him for getting them

A very likely outcome of the mad way he played would have been something akin to 5th set 2009 Aus final (I don't call that choking, I call it playing badly)

And if he hadn't played in that madly aggressive way, well, he'd have just got his clock cleaned from the baseline (I criticize him in his Wimbledon 08 lost.... Here, I think he followed the best course to give himself a shot at the win), the way he did in Australia at the next Slam

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

TL;DR: 4/23.

 

[abmk]

Even then, I don't know if he could find a way to actually open the court against such a barrage (which no one was capable of giving him at his peak), but it would mean Djoko couldn't count on winning points just by hitting his standard ball and wait for Fed to cave (somewhat like Nadal hitting FH cc ad nauseam 'til Fed caved)…. peak Fed v peak Djok…. would have been a hell of a match

agassi USO 04, USO 05, Roddick USO 07, Djokovic himself in USO 07, 08, 09 and 11 (1st 3 sets and final set until the choking)
watch in particular the 1st 2 sets of USO 11 semi, which was vs absolute peak Djokovic.

First set - Fed loses two break points over two games. One, he goes on to break.... so not relevant. Second he loses with UE BH (4) {meaning a neutral shot}. I'm excluding both of these because I think its clear Djokovic was the better player in the first set and Federer choking or not doesn't come into the equation

Second set - Fed loses 7 break points over three games, where he breaks in 2.... I'm excluding these since Fed won the set anyway, and it doesn't play a part in the final result of Djok beats Federer.

Third set - in games that he didn't end up breaking in, I have Fed missing 4 break points.

- 3/4 ends with what look like Djoko 'clutch' plays - 1 Djokovic FH inside-in winner, 1 a Djokovic service winner, 1 a Federer BH forced error
- 1/4 ends with Federer FH UE (5) {meaning an aggressive shot}

Fourth set - Federer has break points in 3 games, and breaks in one. Excluding the game he breaks in, he misses 4 break points

- 2/4 look like Djoko 'clutch' plays - a Return FE BH and a BH FE (both first serve points)
- 2/4 are down to Fed - 1 FH UE (6) {meaning winner attempt} and 1 Return UE FH (runaround FH attempt)…. (I have him making UEs on 14 winner attempts in the match, his Unforced Error Forcefulness Index of 50 is extremely high and indicative of how riskily he was playing - https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...cker-masters-final-1986.622294/#post-12548861

So I'd say that's 3 points total that could have changed the outcome of the match that you can 'blame' Federer for missing

1st set, Djoko's level fell after the fall at 2-1,0-15. If Federer was playing well enough, he'd not have got broken again to lose the set.
4th set, Fed should never have gone down a double break. But anyways Djokovic was the better player, so losing the 4th set is ok.
3rd set was the most expensive one.
Got broken with UFEs in both games in the 3rd set (3 UEs in the first one and then back to back UEs at deuce at 4 all) and then failed to capitalise on his BP chances.

Basically, I think Federer played above himself, in a crazily aggressive way to keep the match even.... and I can't applaud him enough for that. Like say, Roddick in Wimbledon 2004, only better.

no, he didn't. Not for his 2014-2015 style of play. That's how he was playing at that USO even before the match vs Djokovic.
He had beaten Djokovic comprehensively playing the same style at Cincy (of course Cincy is clearly faster) - actually was more aggressive there.
Djokovic did adapt at the USO, USO was slower and Fed's level was lesser, so it was close here. If Fed had kept his head/level on big points, he could have pulled it off.

 

[RS]

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

Djokovic beatable here and worse than 2011 at the event? Most people think he was average here.

 

[Waspsting]

Djokovic beatable here and worse than 2011 at the event? Most people think he was average here.

Not sure about event as a whole. Taking just this match -

27 winners, 19 unforced errors, while forcing 42 errors out of Federer... does that sound average?

Furthermore, as aggressively as Federer plays - I don't think he plays 3 neutral shots in a row after the first set - Djoko must be doing well defensively to keep his own FEs down to 34

Generally, I think he was more clinical/controlled and less abusive in 2015 than 2011. (Read: Higher percentage, and capable of upping it a notch if necessary... I'd call that playing smarter)

'clinical and controlled' is not eye-catching. 'abusive' is... and what's eye catching tends to impress 'most people'

 

[ForehandCross]

clinical and controlled' is not eye-catching. 'abusive' is... and what's eye catching tends to impress 'most people'

Personally I will always maintain 2011 played much better. I think he took matters head on and was too much of a force to be outdone by efficienct play on 2015's behalf. He was more about being uncontrollable than being in control. This might have led him into difficult situations against Federer, but so did 2015 Djokovic's style.

Stat wise, 2011 SF actually ended up being much decisive in favour of Djokovic.

But it is all subjective. It seems you value consistency and efficiency. Tennis quality in the end is a very subjective notion, for me this match really didn't live up, Federer played a stupid strategy and Djokovic wasn't his usual slam final self.

 

[The Guru]

Not sure about event as a whole. Taking just this match -

27 winners, 19 unforced errors, while forcing 42 errors out of Federer... does that sound average?

Furthermore, as aggressively as Federer plays - I don't think he plays 3 neutral shots in a row after the first set - Djoko must be doing well defensively to keep his own FEs down to 34

Generally, I think he was more clinical/controlled and less abusive in 2015 than 2011. (Read: Higher percentage, and capable of upping it a notch if necessary... I'd call that playing smarter)

'clinical and controlled' is not eye-catching. 'abusive' is... and what's eye catching tends to impress 'most people'

Preach my friend. I've said for years that 2015 is Djokovic's best USO but people think it's worse because he doesn't hit with as much power off the ground.

 

[The Guru]

Personally I will always maintain 2011 played much better. I think he took matters head on and was too much of a force to be outdone by efficienct play on 2015's behalf. He was more about being uncontrollable than being in control. This might have led him into difficult situations against Federer, but so did 2015 Djokovic's style.

Stat wise, 2011 SF actually ended up being much decisive in favour of Djokovic.

But it is all subjective. It seems you value consistency and efficiency. Tennis quality in the end is a very subjective notion, for me this match really didn't live up, Federer played a stupid strategy and Djokovic wasn't his usual slam final self.

Wow I have a completely different view. Federer played incredibly aggressively and actually pulled it off and Djokovic played incredibly to weather that storm.

 

[ForehandCross]

Wow I have a completely different view. Federer played incredibly aggressively and actually pulled it off and Djokovic played incredibly to weather that storm.

That's why I said it is a very subjective issue. I for one tried to watch Agassi-Sampras 2001 USO QF, called one of the best matches and I couldn't even get past the first set. I found myself unable to really see it as some extra ordinary match.


But with USO 2015, I can see it as a good match, but I personally fail to see it as one of the better ones I have watched.

I was on MTF at the time, and I distinctly remember the consensus in the live thread was much more along the lines of lower quality , and that was from many Djokovic fans as well ,I was supporting Djokovic too then. And that consensus had remained same for a long time.


It's really nowadays that people have started to call it a great match. I admit I never re watched it, but that's because watching it live it didn't feel that special to ensure revisits.

 

[RS]

Not sure about event as a whole. Taking just this match -

27 winners, 19 unforced errors, while forcing 42 errors out of Federer... does that sound average?

Furthermore, as aggressively as Federer plays - I don't think he plays 3 neutral shots in a row after the first set - Djoko must be doing well defensively to keep his own FEs down to 34

Generally, I think he was more clinical/controlled and less abusive in 2015 than 2011. (Read: Higher percentage, and capable of upping it a notch if necessary... I'd call that playing smarter)

'clinical and controlled' is not eye-catching. 'abusive' is... and what's eye catching tends to impress 'most people'

All great esp the last part if oppenent does not play attacking or hit many winners it is considering passive or pushing or boring to watch.

 

[RS]

Preach my friend. I've said for years that 2015 is Djokovic's best USO but people think it's worse because he doesn't hit with as much power off the ground.

It might be 2nd best form also but it was still a good form. He fell down early in the 3rd game which effected his shoulder which might by why he didnt serve as well as he could have or hit with too much power.

 

[The Guru]

It might be 2nd best form also but it was still a good form. He fell down early in the 3rd game which effected his shoulder which might by why he didnt serve as well as he could have or hit with too much power.

I mean in 2011 he had an actual shoulder injury.

 

[RS]

I mean in 2011 he had an actual shoulder injury.

Back as well. I was more thinking about the SF though were Djokovic served brillantly but the final had some poor serving. Djok could barely serve in the last set due to injury.

 

[mike danny]

I mean in 2011 he had an actual shoulder injury.

Only in the final and only in the 4th set of that final too.

 

[The Guru]

Only in the final and only in the 4th set of that final too.

No he carried it into the tournament...

 

[tudwell]

Watched this match over the weekend and I'm surprised the OP paints such a rosy picture of the match. There were some excellent exchanges, sure, but overall it was rather sloppy from both players, in my opinion. I love Waspsting's analyses – they add a lot to the bare numbers, which don't always tell you as much as you'd like – and normally I agree with his takes, but I gotta disagree here. Djokovic was obviously the more solid player of the two, but even he made a lot of lame errors in this match. He was slipping and off-balance a lot more than you'd usually see (outside of Wimbledon ) and I don't think his groundstrokes had quite the same assertiveness they usually do against Fed – which makes Federer's hyper-aggression that much less necessary, as there were a lot of points where Novak really wasn't pressuring him all that much (though plenty where Novak was, of course). I notice Tennis Abstract's unforced error count is much higher for both players. Novak has 45 there, just 19 here. Obviously there's some subjectivity there and Fed was playing quite aggressively, so I can see the reasoning for a lower unforced error count for Djokovic, but that's a huge difference. Another number I see online is 37 – the US Open's official count? I can't tell – which isn't as steep as TA but still a lot more than 19. The higher numbers definitely more accurately reflect my impression while actually watching the match. I certainly would not call it a "splendid" match. An entertaining one, sure, with a great highlight reel, but far, far from the cleanest match either of these guys has played (and a huge step down from the Wimbledon final they contested just a couple months before).

Gotta credit Novak on his mental strength, though. I kept an eye on the break points and off the top of my head I can't think of any where Fed was in a clear winning position and botched it. He got into rallies he could have won, of course, but Novak buckled down and refused to give an inch – a lot like the tiebreaks in the Wimbledon 2019 final. I mean, 4 of 23 is still woeful, but Novak upping his level at crunch time did a lot to influence that number.

 

[ibbi]

How about Asderaki though? Now that right there was an actual GOAT performance. The thin line of sanity protecting the worlds number 1 tennis player from the unwashed masses and Federer’s uncles and aunts calling the lines.

 

[ForehandCross]

I notice Tennis Abstract's unforced error count is much higher for both players. Novak has 45 there, just 19 here. Obviously there's some subjectivity there and Fed was playing quite aggressively, so I can see the reasoning for a lower unforced error count for Djokovic, but that's a huge difference. Another number I see online is 37 – the US Open's official count? I can't tell – which isn't as steep as TA but still a lot more than 19

That's way too much of a difference isnt it ?

But as for the match I didn't like but either way waspsting always like dynamic matches, where play has a little bit of everything.

As for Novak, he was messed up for some Reason but he had a beast mode Locked up for whenever a b.p arrived on his serve.

 

[tudwell]

How about Asderaki though? Now that right there was an actual GOAT performance. The thin line of sanity protecting the worlds number 1 tennis player from the unwashed masses and Federer’s uncles and aunts calling the lines.

And some bold, timely line calls.

It was definitely a bad crowd. Though I was watching the 05 and 06 finals as well this weekend and I was surprised how often people called out during the service motions of the players – especially in the 06 final, where I think it happened even more than in the 15 final. Which is especially odd as both players were getting lots of support; the crowd really wasn't cheering against anyone, they were just rowdy.

 

[tudwell]

That's way too much of a difference isnt it ?

But as for the match I didn't like but either way waspsting always like dynamic matches, where play has a little bit of everything.

As for Novak, he was messed up for some Reason but he had a beast mode Locked up for whenever a b.p arrived on his serve.

It sure seems like a massive difference to me. I mean, I'm not an expert on match charting, and in a match with one player playing this aggressively, I can see why there would be pretty big differences in unforced error count – but 45 vs. 19 is crazy!

 

[ForehandCross]

protecting worlds number 1 tennis player from the unwashed masses and Federer’s uncles and aunts calling the lines.

GOAT level comment.

 

[Shaj]

One of the proof that Novak was way better than Federer in this match was, just imagine had the match gone onto the 5th set , who would have won it?

Also it was unsustainable aggression from Federer.Its what I used to do when I felt I had no chance against opponent across the net,I just try to hit out coz deep down inside I knew the opponent was better and I couldn't beat him with my normal game..I throw the all hail Mary kitchen sink at him..

Novak always used to do in thos times..Dominate Federer year along but loses a match here and there just to give roger enough confidence for their next match and in their next match Novak again dominated Federer.

 

[RF6777]

Can't believe
That Fed won 145 points in the match, only 2 less than Djoker