Medvedev has posted the highest dominance ratio in a USO title run in the ATP era

How long will this mythical record stand?

  • 5 years

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 15 years

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 25 years

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 30 years

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 35 years

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 40 years

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 45 years

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    14

NatF

Bionic Poster
His draw wasn't too good but it takes a great player to post up such numbers.
He did what he should have done with such a draw that is correct. Considering how Djokovic played it's one of the weakest slam draws I've seen though.
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
He did what he should have done with such a draw that is correct. Considering how Djokovic played it's one of the weakest slam draws I've seen though.
That’s more of a reflection of the current weak era than the particular draw in this tournament.
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
To an extent but even for this era his draw fell apart.
Ok… so if we accept your assertion that his draw fell apart, which titans of hardcourt tennis would you have liked him to face? Tsitsipas? Rublev? Zverev? He straight-settled both Tsits and Rublev in the AO, and has a combined 9-2 H2H over them. And he hasn’t lost to Zverev since 2019.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Ok… so if we accept your assertion that his draw fell apart, which titans of hardcourt tennis would you have liked him to face? Tsitsipas? Rublev? Zverev? He straight-settled both Tsits and Rublev in the AO, and has a combined 9-2 H2H over them. And he hasn’t lost to Zverev since 2019.
Titans is relative. Compared to past draws that still wouldn't have been great but it's a lot better than what he ended up facing. The guys he played didn't really show up either so it's not like in the past when a lower ranked player catches fire and burns through a draw...
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
He did what he should have done with such a draw that is correct. Considering how Djokovic played it's one of the weakest slam draws I've seen though.
But why should he have done it? Cause he is a great player in the first place. That's why you are kinda expecting it, but even then 1.71 DR is off the charts and apparently open era record in USO.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
But why should he have done it? Cause he is a great player in the first place. That's why you are kinda expecting it, but even then 1.71 DR is off the charts and apparently open era record in USO.
Depends how you define great, he's certainly a good player. Efficiency =/= Peak anyway, the great players raise their games when they need to but don't necessarily approach early rounds with full intensity.
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
Titans is relative. Compared to past draws that still wouldn't have been great but it's a lot better than what he ended up facing. The guys he played didn't really show up either so it's not like in the past when a lower ranked player catches fire and burns through a draw...
You can’t say the guys he played didn’t show up. They looked bad because they were completely overmatched.

Over the past 2 years, Med has been playing at a higher dominance ratio in hardcourt slams than Djokovic. It’s not like he suddenly caught fire… he just kept doing what he’s been doing, which is gradually morphing into a dominant #1.
 
Last edited:

NatF

Bionic Poster
You can’t say the guys he played didn’t show up. They looked bad because they were completely overmatched.

Over the past 2 years, Med has been playing at a higher dominance ratio in hardcourt slams than Djokovic. It’s not like he suddenly caught fire… he just kept doing what he’s been doing, which is gradually morphing into a dominant #1.
Sounds like a chicken or egg question. I just don't rate Medvedev that highly, even after Sunday. He was very clutch and his serve in set 1 was on fire but after that the match was more about him being steady and taking his chances versus Djokovic imploding.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
And Joker at the USO :p
Joker has the most finals in USO history now. He has the most finals in AO (also record AO titles). It doesn't matter much that he lost that 7th game in relation to his HC abilities and especially comparing it to Nadal. With that said, and the point I'm making, if Djokovic had won 1 or 2 of those finals, the general consensus of his HC prowess would still stay the same as if he is on 3 titles. The only problem this conversion rate has, is that Djokovic isn't now at about 25 slams.
 
Joker has the most finals in USO history now. He has the most finals in AO (also record AO titles). It doesn't matter much that he lost that 7th game in relation to his HC abilities and especially comparing it to Nadal. With that said, and the point I'm making, if Djokovic had won 1 or 2 of those finals, the general consensus of his HC prowess would still stay the same as if he is on 3 titles.
4>3, 2>1 stay salty
bud :cool:
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
Sounds like a chicken or egg question. I just don't rate Medvedev that highly, even after Sunday. He was very clutch and his serve in set 1 was on fire but after that the match was more about him being steady and taking his chances versus Djokovic imploding.
Others didn’t rate him as highly as they should either, which is why I pointed out in my other threads on Friday before the semi’s that betting on Medvedev to win the tournament was an easy money lock.
 
Did not expect to see Nadal having 3 runs up there, atta goat
Daniil did have a soft draw, but he took care of business in strong fashion so well played to the lad.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Dominance ratio values serving and returning equally.
It doesn't. It's not a huge gap but it certainly favours serving - which perhaps mirrors the serve being the most important shot?

Check out this post by @Sysyphus

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/dominance-ratio-vs-of-points-won.610309/

Say player A wins 70% of his serve points of his service points and 35% of his return points. Assuming an equal number of points played on serve and return, this should suggest that he wins 52.5% of points overall. His DR would be 35/30 ≈ 1.17

Player B wins 65% of service points and 40% of return points, which (assuming equal amount of serve and return points played) suggests the same % of total points won. However, played B would end up with a lower DR of 40/35 ≈ 1.14.
 

tudwell

Legend
How do these numbers compare to non-US Open slam runs? I'm assuming Nadal put up some ridiculous numbers at the French.
 

NatF

Bionic Poster
Your assumption of equal number of points is not a valid assumption.
I'm talking about the system itself being biased towards serving, a point won on your serve counts for more than a point won on return. The example was just an illustration.
 

travlerajm

G.O.A.T.
I'm talking about the system itself being biased towards serving, a point won on your serve counts for more than a point won on return. The example was just an illustration.
Actually the scoring system in tennis just is the opposite. A point won on return is worth more than a point won on serve, because the former is worth more compared to the expected value of a return point than the latter is worth relative to the expected value of a serve point.

As for the dominance ratio, it does not weight serving more. In the example given, player B has lower dominance ratio than player A because the ratio of 40/35 (1.14) is less than the ratio of 35/30 (1.17). In other words, played A’s serving edge exceeds player B’s returning edge, so played A deserves a higher dominance ratio. Serving and returning are weighted equally.
 
Last edited:

RelentlessAttack

Hall of Fame
@Third Serve @AnOctorokForDinner

Just had a look at Rafter’s 1998 draw, seriously wtf how did he pull that off?

It wasn’t like he had clay specialists and qualifiers like Medvedev/Nadal’s draw, Rafter had to play Goran, Pete, and then Philipoussis, aka 3 of the top 10/15 most efficient servers of all time.

That’s absurd.
I was apparently wrong all this time about SafinBOAT. It was RafterBOAT all along.

In all seriousness one of the biggest reasons I hate the homogenization era is that Llodra-Murray 2008 was pitifully the closest we’ve gotten to seeing someone serve and volley like Rafter in 18-19 years. The contrast of styles in the 90s/early 00s was so much more entertaining than what we have now
 

RelentlessAttack

Hall of Fame
Medvedev perfected the Kyrgios 2017 strategy that has been the obvious strategy to use against Djokovic for years but few can execute. Servebot - Junkball. Simon showed us that junkballing throws off even Peakovic and servebots have long given him fits too. Power baselining just plays into his strengths. Servebot as much as possible and dump it down the middle with no pace and spin as often as possible in rallies. Federer actually pointed out the importance of going down the middle against Djokovic like 10+ years ago but either never embraced the glory of junkballing, or didn’t feel he had the stamina to do so.

Going big on your second serve is also the future of tennis. Medvedev, Zverev, and Djokovic all do this when playing well
 

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
Nadal :oops::oops: that’s a lot more impressive than I was expecting from him. All I can picture is a platter of high cholestorol food and the phrases “epic” and “GOATy AF”

Rafter and Sampras are even more surprising, I suppose they must have had incredible service games that tournament. Neither are renowned as great returners and Sampras actively tanked return games when up a break.
You better slayyy :D

 
Top