Nadal is the Greatest Returner of the current era (statistically)

[aman92]

People often complain that Rafa's service return isn't as great as compared to Djokovic and Murray so I decided to do a simple comparison. Basically did a comparison of all the return stats from the ATP website and while they are incredibly close, Rafa is equal or better than Djokoray in every single metric!

Nadal
1st Serve Return Points Won 34%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 55%
Break Points Opportunities 8,898
Break Points Converted 45%
Return Games Played 11,982
Return Games Won 33%
Return Points Won 42%
Total Points Won 54%

Djokovic
1st Serve Return Points Won 34%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 55%
Break Points Opportunities 7,943
Break Points Converted 44%
Return Games Played 10,975
Return Games Won 32%
Return Points Won 42%
Total Points Won 54%

Murray
1st Serve Return Points Won 34%
2nd Serve Return Points Won 55%
Break Points Opportunities 7,308
Break Points Converted 44%
Return Games Played 9,958
Return Games Won 32%
Return Points Won 42%
Total Points Won 53%

 

[Jon Snow]

Federer and Djokovic have never done this too:

 

[TahoeTennis]

 

[aldeayeah]

That would mean he has the best return game, not necessarily the best return stroke.

 

[Jaitock1991]

Once again, it's important to seperate the return stroke itself from the return game as a whole, much like the serve as a stroke and the holdgame as a whole. I don't get why people don't understand this.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

That would mean he has the best return game, not necessarily the best return stroke.

this , also clay stats greatly inflate return stats. Ferrer et al is up there to, no one thinks he has the best return.

Still, Rafa is neck and neck with Novak from baseline, so overall return game is probably close

 

[AngryBirds]

As a return stroke alone. Djokovic is still ahead of Nadal. Nadal's ground game is what allows him to break opponents so often.

 

[clayqueen]

Here's proof:

 

[clayqueen]

As a return stroke alone. Djokovic is still ahead of Nadal. Nadal's ground game is what allows him to break opponents so often.

How do you measure return strokes if you end up not winning the point? Rafa's ROS is strategic in taking control of the point and ultimately winning it.

 

[DreddyTennis45]

Christ almighty do people actually watch tennis on here.

 

[r2473]

Federer and Djokovic have never done this too:

He probably still didn't break

 

[clayqueen]

This is uncanny. The champions won the most points on receiving serve and the runners up served the most aces.

 

[r2473]

This is uncanny. The champions won the most points on receiving serve and the runners up served the most aces.

They also lead the "ugly people" category. That's a great picture of Kevin. Did he just roll out of bed?

 

[clayqueen]

Rafa also leads in 2nd serve return points

 

[clayqueen]

The champions lead in break points won

 

[aman92]

Once again, it's important to seperate the return stroke itself from the return game as a whole, much like the serve as a stroke and the holdgame as a whole. I don't get why people don't understand this.

What is more important? The return stroke or actually winning the return games?

 

[bitcoinoperated]

Wtf happened at Wimbledon then?

 

[haqq777]

He probably still didn't break

This was 2015 Shanghai Masters. Not only did Nadal break here to win the set 7-5, he also went on to win the match.

 

[aman92]

Wtf happened at Wimbledon then?

Same thing which happened to Djokovic at Wimbledon last year

 

[VolleyHelena]

Nope
Djokovic is better

 

[tennis_pro]

 

[aman92]

Broke Anderson 4 times using the same tactic

 

[Jaitock1991]

What is more important? The return stroke or actually winning the return games?

Obviously winning the return games, I'm not arguing that. And in this department Rafa is indeed the best statistically(given that the stats you've provided are actually accurate).

However, your title and what you write in your opening post does not correspond with what the numbers you refer to present. That's all I'm saying

 

[aman92]

Obviously winning the return games, I'm not arguing that. And in this department Rafa is indeed the best statistically(given that the stats you've provided are actually accurate).

However, your title and what you write in your opening post does not correspond with what the numbers you refer to present. That's all I'm saying

If you could provide stats to prove otherwise, I'll acknowledge

 

[clayqueen]

That would mean he has the best return game, not necessarily the best return stroke.

The end justifies the means.

 

[Red Rick]

There's a few confounders here

Clay
Any shot after the return.

 

[Jaitock1991]

If you could provide stats to prove otherwise, I'll acknowledge

Prove what? That return game does not equal return stroke?

 

[aman92]

Prove what? That return game does not equal return stroke?

That Nadal has an inferior return stroke compared to Djokoray

 

[FiReFTW]

Yes he is better at villeys than federer and anyone in history, also best returner ever. He is best at everything, nobody comes close.. specialy his butt picking.

 

[clayqueen]

What is more important? The return stroke or actually winning the return games?

First of all, he can't prove what he is saying and secondly, even if he could prove that Djokovic's return stroke is better than Nadal's, in tennis, winning the point is all that counts. You do not get points for artistic impression or technical ability.

 

[Jaitock1991]

That Nadal has an inferior return stroke compared to Djokoray

Did I ever say he has? Not that I recall. All I said and still stand by is that your numbers do not prove what you say they do. He may very well have the best return stroke(again, never said he doesn't), but the numbers you refer to do not directly prove it, as a player's game behind the return is a huge factor.

 

[esgee48]

Comparison is only good for recent decade. If the courts were as fast as they were in the 90's and early 2000's, you could not stand that far back to return. Even the USO courts are rated slower than the AO courts for 2017. W was rated fastest, but it too was way slower historically. Slow courts make the returns much easier. That's the factoid not factored into your stat. The GS are suspect in my mind due to court slowdowns which favor retrieving over attacking. Introduce fast courts again in the high 30's or mid 40's (Fast factor) and everyone return game will go down. People who stand way back will just be aced with no chance to return.

 

[aman92]

Did I ever say he has? Not that I recall. All I said and still stand by is that your numbers do not prove what you say they do. He may very well have the best return stroke(again, never said he doesn't), but the numbers you refer to do not directly prove it, as a player's game behind the return is a huge factor.

A great returner is judged by how many return games he wins not by how he returns the first shot. The stats prove Nadal has a better return game and thus a better returner. What can't you understand?

 

[TheFifthSet]

This is largely because his best surface is the one where players break the highest % of the time (and also because a higher % of his matches are played on clay compared to Djokovic and Murray).

 

[clayqueen]

This is largely because his best surface is the one where players break the highest % of the time (and also because a higher % of his matches are played on clay compared to Djokovic and Murray).

Sigh!

 

[TheFifthSet]

A great returner is judged by how many return games he wins not by how he returns the first shot. The stats prove Nadal has a better return game and thus a better returner. What can't you understand?

lol @ using semantics to impose your views on others.

Return of serve = the return of service stroke

Return game = the totality of the game wherein the opposing player served

Serve = the service stroke

Service game = inverse of the return game.

As such the return and serve as individual strokes are different from serve and return games.

 

[bitcoinoperated]

Broke Anderson 4 times using the same tactic

He got into Muller's service games after getting pasted for two sets by standing even further back.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Sigh!

Refute a single thing I said.

Nadal objectively returns best on a surface where the return of serve stroke is objectively less of a factor, and also plays a much higher % of his matches on that surface than Djokovic and Murray.

 

[Jaitock1991]

A great returner is judged by how many return games he wins not by how he returns the first shot. The stats prove Nadal has a better return game and thus a better returner. What can't you understand?

It's a matter of interpretations of definitions, I guess. In tennis(as in any other sport) the way I and anyone I've ever practiced with sees it, it's convenient to seperate different types of strokes from each other. Forehand drive, backhand drive, serve, overhead etc..

The service return(backhand return as well as forehand return; chips, blocks etc.) happens to be one of these strokes. The return game, however, is a combination of everything(not just the return stroke, all though that's clearly the most important one). Rafa has the best return game not only because his return stroke is world class, enabling him to consistently get back serves very few others could, but because the rest of his game is also world class and arguably the best ever, depending on the surface.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

The end justifies the means.

we all know there's absolutely no limit whatsoever for the nadal in that regard...

 

[Sport]

Statitics are science. something not debatable. Nadal is indeed the greatest returner of the Open Era along with Djokovic. Federer fans will dislike it, and will come here with subjective arguments. However, no Fed fan will come here with statitics proving Federer is suppousedly better than Nadal resting.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Rafa has the best return game

...but I don't think even that's a given.

The difference between the 3 in raw %'s is tiny, with Nadal playing a much higher % of matches on the surface where the average tour player breaks more. Whenever you have a set of conditions that favour the returner, return game numbers will be high. I reckon that Connors and Borg probably won 40-45% of their return games in multiple years in the 70s/80s, numbers that simply aren't possible today. Why? Obviously because the racquet technology was far more primitive back in the day and serves were less potent. Does this mean that they were far and away better returners than Djokovic and Murray?

A weighed surface comparison between Djokovic, Nadal and Murray would probably yield a more illuminating result.

 

[TheFifthSet]

Statitics are science. something not debatable. Nadal is indeed the greatest returner of the Open Era along with Djokovic. Federer fans will dislike it, and will come here with subjective arguments. However, no Fed fan will come here with statitics proving Federer is suppousedly better than Nadal resting.

Coria is #1 then. 35% of career return games won. Better than Nadal.

And the numbers only go back to '91. Connors and Borg almost certainly won more than 33% of their return games, in fact it was probably in excess of 36-37%.

 

[Sport]

Coria is #1 then. 35% of career return games won. Better than Nadal.

And the numbers only go back to '91. Connors and Borg almost certainly won more than 33% of their return games, in fact it was probably in excess of 36-37%.

And Federer?

 

[TheFifthSet]

And Federer?

Not even close to those guys in overall return numbers.

Didn't realize this thread was about Federer though.

By your own criteria, Nadal is not even close to being the best returner of the Open Era. Science, after all.

 

[Sport]

Not even close to those guys in overall return numbers.

Didn't you tell me the percentage was more relevant than the number overall? First you told me the percentage is more relevant for the Nadal-Coria comparison. Now you tell me the number of return points won is better for the Nadal-Federer comparison. So you change your criteria depending on which one do you want to favour.

 

[Sport]

Coria is #1 then. 35% of career return games won. Better than Nadal.

And the numbers only go back to '91. Connors and Borg almost certainly won more than 33% of their return games, in fact it was probably in excess of 36-37%.

According to you "Coria is #1 then. 35% of career return games won. Better than Nadal." But Coria played less matches than Nadal and Nadal has more return points won overall. So apparently, by your own logic, the most relevant thing is not the overall number of return points won but the percentage of return points won.

The number of return points won is overall greater for Fed, since Federer has been professional 4 years before Nadal, so obviously he has played more matches. But can you please tell me the percentage of return points made by Federer?

 

[Jaitock1991]

...but I don't think even that's a given.

The difference between the 3 in raw %'s is tiny, with Nadal playing a much higher % of matches on the surface where the average tour player breaks more. Whenever you have a set of conditions that favour the returner, return game numbers will be high. I reckon that Connors and Borg probably won 40-45% of their return games in multiple years in the 70s/80s, numbers that simply aren't possible today. Why? Obviously because the racquet technology was far more primitive back in the day and serves were less potent. Does this mean that they were far and away better returners than Djokovic and Murray?

A weighed surface comparison between Djokovic, Nadal and Murray would probably yield a more illuminating result.

True. In Rafa's case, I would expect him to be extremely good on clay, as his style of returning suits him perfectly there. But on hard and especially grass, I don't think he's nearly as effective compared to Djokoray.

 

[Jaitock1991]

Didn't you tell me the percentage was more relevant than the number overall? First you told me the percentage is more relevant for the Nadal-Coria comparison. Now you tell me the number of return points won is better for the Nadal-Federer comparison. So you change your criteria depending on which one do you want to favour.

Haha. Talk about twisting words. But it takes one to know one, I guess

 

[TheFifthSet]

According to you "Coria is #1 then. 35% of career return games won. Better than Nadal." But Coria played less matches than Nadal and Nadal has more return points won overall. So apparently, by your own logic, the most relevant thing is not the overall number of return points won but the percentage of return points won.

The number of return points won is overall greater for Fed, since Federer has been professional 4 years before Nadal, so obviously he has played more matches. But can you please tell me the percentage of return points made by Federer?

Why is Federer relevant to this discussion? I don't think his overall return game is better than Nadal's. Return as a singular stroke? Sure. Return game as a whole? No.

Coria is a better returner by your own criteria because he's better than Nadal in almost every single metric the OP provided, and you embraced the OP's methodology wholesale.