Nadal has better first serve than Federer/Sampras! And Karlovic...

[torpantennis]

Facts don't lie. Here are career service game stats for some interesting names. The numbers behind each name are:

1st serve %/1st serves won %/2nd serves won %, % of all points won by the server on his 1st serve

The last number is simply the product of the first two. That number says that how many of ALL points are ended by the server winning it on his 1st serve. Most any pro could serve bomb aces if they would go for way too much on first serves. That would lift the 1st serves won % higher, but less 1st serves would go in. The real efficiency of the first serve is actually measured by that last number. So here are the stats:

Karlovic: 66%/83%/53%, 54.8%
Isner: 68%/78%/56%, 53.0%
Roddick: 65%/79%/56%, 51.3%
Raonic: 62%/81%/54%, 50.2%
Nadal: 69%/72%/57%, 49.7%
Sampras: 59&/81%/53%, 47.8%
Federer: 62%/77%/57%, 47.7%
Djokovic: 65%/73%/55%, 47.5%
Murray: 58%/74%/52%, 42.9%

Ain't that amazing! It's not any big surprise that Karlovic and Isner have the most devastating 1st serves of all time, with more than 50% of the service points ending with them winning it on their 1st serve. But what the! Nadal, the clay court baseliner, wins MORE points with his 1st serve than Federer or Sampras! Who could've believed it. If you ask me, this must be the biggest reason why Nadal has achieved so much more than a typical Spanish clay courter. Murray's 1st serve is lame, he wins less than 43% of all points with it!

But read it again: Nadal is better than Sampras or Federer in winning points with his 1st serve. Raonic is barely better than Nadal.

Another interesting fact: Karlovic wins 54.8% of the points where he goes for his serve as much as he does on his 1st delivery. That number is actually more than his 2nd serves won %. That would mean that Karlovic would've been a more successive player if he had used two 1st serves, instead of going for less like he has done on his 2nd serve!

Then how could Nadal be better than Federer/Sampras on his 1st serve? Give me your opinions, I have my own already and will explain it later.

 

[torpantennis]

Reserved for my own opinion

 

[Deleted member 740774]

Reserved for my own opinion

unreal...the whole post is opinion

 

[Nachiket Nolefam]

Lol, his first serve is okay, good because he is left hander and can add a lot of slice to feed on right handers backhand. Second serve, just rolls it in.
Its useless if he hit 65% first serve or 85% first serve as he will never use S&V. Back to baseline tennis.

His great clay game helps with the stat enormously. When he has won more than 300 matches on clay and on clay its almost impossible to break him from baseline, its obvious.

Stats don't lie but you have to look at why they are like that. See how Dustin Brown would crush his serves on grass where there is no time to rally.

 

[torpantennis]

Lol, his first serve is okay, good because he is left hander and can add a lot of slice to feed on right handers backhand. Second serve, just rolls it in.
Its useless if he hit 65% first serve or 85% first serve as he will never use S&V. Back to baseline tennis.

His great clay game helps with the stat enormously. When he has won more than 300 matches on clay and on clay its almost impossible to break him from baseline, its obvious.

Stats don't lie but you have to look at why they are like that. See how Dustin Brown would crush his serves on grass where there is no time to rally.

But Nadal wins way more of the points on first serve than on his 2nd delivery. So that means he can take advantage of the serve. Sure, some players who go for too much on their 1st serve win much more of those risky 1st serve points (like Sampras, see that mediocre 1st serves in %). But it doesn't matter, all that matters is how good are you all in all in taking advantage of your first serve. A pro could go for aces on all first serve and win like 90% of 1st serves, but only 10-20% of those serves would go in and that would not be an effective first serve.

 

[Nachiket Nolefam]

But Nadal wins way more of the points on first serve than on his 2nd delivery. So that means he can take advantage of the serve. Sure, some players who go for too much on their 1st serve win much more of those risky 1st serve points (like Sampras, see that mediocre 1st serves in %). But it doesn't matter, all that matters is how good are you all in all in taking advantage of your first serve. A pro could go for aces on all first serve and win like 90% of 1st serves, but only 10-20% of those serves would go in and that would not be an effective first serve.

His first serve is good, gives him few free points like everyone, no way near Federer or Djokovic. Everyone wins way more points on first serve than 2nd.

 

[torpantennis]

His first serve is good, gives him few free points like everyone, no way near Federer or Djokovic. Everyone wins way more points on first serve than 2nd.

But Nadal goes for less risk on first serve than Djokovic/Federer. Hence he gets way more of them in, and all in all takes more advantage in winning points with the aid of his first serve (like the last numbers show). As in tennis, the goal is to win points, that means Nadal has better 1st serve than Federer/Djokovic.

 

[Nachiket Nolefam]

But Nadal goes for less risk on first serve than Djokovic/Federer. Hence he gets way more of them in, and all in all takes mopre advantage in winning points with the aid of his first serve. As in tennis, the goal is to win points, that means Nadal has better 1st serve than Federer/Djokovic.

Serve is a shot, that allows you to take control of the rally or finish it. Nadal wins many points on his first serve but don't finish it, its more of his rallying strength. Just see what happens when his rallying is not top notch like 2015. Or grass where he can't rally much.

 

[torpantennis]

Serve is a shot, that allows you to take control of the rally or finish it. Nadal wins many points on his first serve but don't finish it, its more of his rallying strength. Just see what happens when his rallying is not top notch like 2015. Or grass where he can't rally much.

But if Nadal's game was ONLY about rallying, he would not win any more points on his 1st serve than on his 2nd serve. That however isn't the case, so indeed he takes advantage of that first serve, by gaining control of the rallies. Not gaining as great control as Federer, BUT he gets more 1st serves in and as a result the total number shows that he totally wins more points with the aid of his first serve.

Sampras clearly and by far went for too much on his first serve. Karlovic OTOH goes for too little on his 2nd serve.

 

[Gary Duane]

Break these stats down by surface or they will be useless.

One year Nadal won 91% of all his service games, on clay, and he lead the whole tour in this stat. But overall Nadal's stats on clay are hugely dominant over every other clay player we have stats for since around 1991.

On clay Nadal in his career has had the greatest defensive skills of any player we have seen. One year he won, I think, 51% of all his return games on clay. Anyone with those ridiculous skills will have monstrous skills to back up an otherwise better than average but not an amazing serve.

 

[Kalin]

Quote:
'Nadal has better first serve than Federer/Sampras! And Karlovic...'

No, he doesn't. And it's not even an opinion; it's a fact.

 

[torpantennis]

Quote:
'Nadal has better first serve than Federer/Sampras! And Karlovic...'

No, he doesn't. And it's not even an opinion; it's a fact.

Sampras and Federer go for too much on first serve, decreasing its effectiveness. And it's not even an opinion; it's a fact.

 

[Kalin]

Sampras and Federer go for too much on first serve, decreasing its effectiveness. And it's not even an opinion; it's a fact.

No argument there, although Pete in particular had such a great second serve he could afford to go for a lot on the first.

If you had titled the post 'Nadal has the most effective first serve due' or something along these lines it would probably sound better. 'Better' just implies higher quality which his serve definitely isn't.

 

[torpantennis]

No argument there, although Pete in particular had such a great second serve he could afford to go for a lot on the first.

If you had titled the post 'Nadal has the most effective first serve due' or something along these lines it would probably sound better. 'Better' just implies higher quality which his serve definitely isn't.

Sampras "great 2nd serve" is yet again a legend without any connection to truth. Just see those 2nd serve points won % for proof. Murray wins almost as much points on his 2nd serve than Sampras did on his! And Federer/Nadal are far superior to Sampras on 2nd serve, those two are the all time top two on 2nd serve.

 

[torpantennis]

Break these stats down by surface or they will be useless.

One year Nadal won 91% of all his service games, on clay, and he lead the whole tour in this stat. But overall Nadal's stats on clay are hugely dominant over every other clay player we have stats for since around 1991.

On clay Nadal in his career has had the greatest defensive skills of any player we have seen. One year he won, I think, 51% of all his return games on clay. Anyone with those ridiculous skills will have monstrous skills to back up an otherwise better than average but not an amazing serve.

I did break the stats down on HCs and grass. Here they are.

Grass:
Sampras: 63%/85%/53%, 53.6%
Federer: 66%/79%/59%, 52.1%
Nadal: 69%/75%/58%, 51.8%
Djokovic: 67%/76%/56%, 50.9%

HC:
Sampras: 59%/82%/53%, 48.4%
Nadal: 67%/72%/57%, 48.2%
Djokovic: 64%/74%/56%, 47.4%
Federer: 61%/77%/57%, 47.0%

Clay:
Nadal: 71%/70%/56%, 49.7%
Djokovic: 65%/71%/54%, 46.2%
Federer: 61%/75%/55%, 45.8%

So yes, on faster courts Sampras does indeed lead the way of the greats. Sampras data wasn't available for clay. But ain't it amazing! Nadal can take MORE advantage of his first serve on clay than on faster HCs LOL.

 

[Nachiket Nolefam]

I did break the stats down on HCs and grass. Here they are.

Grass:
Sampras: 63%/85%/53%, 53.6%
Federer: 66%/79%/59%, 52.1%
Nadal: 69%/75%/58%, 51.8%
Djokovic: 67%/76%/56%, 50.9%

HC:
Sampras: 59%/82%/53%, 48.4%
Nadal: 67%/72%/57%, 48.2%
Djokovic: 64%/74%/56%, 47.4%
Federer: 61%/77%/57%, 47.0%

Clay:
Nadal: 71%/70%/56%, 49.7%
Djokovic: 65%/71%/54%, 46.2%
Federer: 61%/75%/55%, 45.8%

So yes, on faster courts Sampras does indeed lead the way of the greats. Sampras data wasn't available for clay. But ain't it amazing! Nadal can take MORE advantage of his first serve on clay than on faster HCs LOL.

Lol are you stupid? Still saying he took ADVANTAGE on first serve. What advantage? He rallied since that point onward.

 

[torpantennis]

Lol are you stupid? Still saying he took ADVANTAGE on first serve. What advantage? He rallied since that point onward.

Somebody is always on upper hand in rallies. Nadal even on clay still wins way more points on 1st serve than on his 2nd. That means that he can indeed take ADVANTAGE of the first serve for the rally, staying on upper hand. That's the key for his success on first serve. He can start dominating each and every rally after his first serve with his FH. Sampras never had such a high percentage pattern to back up his serve, hence the relatively bad numbers and hence him going for too much on his serve. Sampras, like figures prove, was a servebot. Even Raonic is better on 2nd serve than Sampras LOL.

 

[Livedeath]

Quote:
'Nadal has better first serve than Federer/Sampras! And Karlovic...'

No, he doesn't. And it's not even an opinion; it's a fact.

And facts dont lie.

 

[torpantennis]

And facts dont lie.

Serve ain't meaning a thing if you don't take advantage of it. Facts don't lie who is a serve bot and who is not.

 

[NonP]

Facts don't lie.

First of all, some of your "facts" are wrong. Read this:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/inde...pts-won-for-1992-1999-corrected-stats.469808/

Second, you're just regurgitating many of the same old debunked talking points with respect to serve and service game. See my responses to Romismak for an in-depth explanation:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/inde...erves-of-all-time.306579/page-21#post-9622692
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/inde...erves-of-all-time.306579/page-21#post-9632916
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/inde...erves-of-all-time.306579/page-21#post-9632917

And those are just starting points. You can follow the additional links in my posts if you're really interested to learn. Comparing serves especially from different eras isn't anywhere near as simple as you'd like it to be.

 

[BeatlesFan]

"Nadal has a better first serve than Sampras!"

There literally is nothing more to say.

I guess the OP doesn't realize that Nadal doesn't go for much on his first serve, excluding the USO one year (and ONLY one year). The same rationale applies to Wilander, who served 91% first serves in his FO final against Leconte. He was spinning the serve in at 70 MPH, so he missed 2/73 first serves in the entire match. There is no one on the planet (except the OP), who could ever form the words to claim Nadal has a better serve than Sampras.

If anyone said to Rafa, "hey, you have a better serve than Pete," this is how he'd react, prior to throwing up at the idiocy of the remark.

 

[sarmpas]

The 'reasoning' here just shows how some posters don't have the thinking to evaluate a shot in isolation as far as it can be.

 

[Gary20]

Nadal does not have a better first serve than sampras. It isnt lack of power, it is the fact his serve is so predictable. Goes same spots 80% of the time

 

[Alexrb]

Nadal does not have a better first serve than sampras. It isnt lack of power, it is the fact his serve is so predictable. Goes same spots 80% of the time

Isn't it pretty much a slice out wide most of the time? Nadal is the only lefty in that group, I think that has more to do with it. Plus he backs up his serve pretty damn well.