Novak Djokovic is the Ultimate Tennis Machine

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
For me it's a nightmare. It's like watching the Terminator play tennis. I've never like his game, and I always root against him unless he's playing someone I dislike personally.

I don't like watching Novak play tennis. I've never enjoyed it, and the ball bouncing makes me insane.

BUT: IF you like his style of play, it's utterly amazing, and if you don't, you have to give him 100% credit for being a magnificent athlete. When I say these things I get hate replies from Fed fans, especially when I go further and suggest that if he had treated his gluten problem from the time he was a teen, he'd probably be at least tied right now in the slam race.

Let me go one step further. We both know that no one has been near Nadal's peak on clay. He's still standing on an average of about 63.5% of games on clay for his career, and he'd have to go on an epic decline for years to pull that down much. The only guy who won the same way on clay was Borg.

So beside Nadal, it's between Fed and Novak on clay. And here is something everyone misses.

These are points on clay, career, up to the last time I updated. I guarantee it is hardly changed:

Career points on clay:

Djokovic 54.04%
Fed: 53.58%

There is not much difference there, right?

Here is what you can reasonably expect. Take points over 50, double, add to 50. It's a bit higher on clay, but this is ball park.

Expect 58% of games for Joker, 57% for Fed. And I think it is fair to handicap Fed as a much older player. Game% always comes down in later years.

Instead, we see this:
59.07% Joker
56.72% Fed

This is patience, and it is choice of shots. There is a simple formula you can use to show efficiency of points, and there you see it. Anything over 2 is good, and close to 2.2 on clay is where the best are. This ratio does not work for players who started before 1991 because the ATP stats are all screwed up, but for later players it's very consistent.

These guys are between 2.1 and 2.2:

Djokovic
Ferrer
Thiem
Nalbandian
Coria
Kuerten
Ferrero
Murray
Nadal
Medvedev
Moya

The most important stat is about games, and Djokovic is 2nd only to Nadal in this era on clay. But the points story shows why Fed is 3rd instead of clearly tied for 2nd. He doesn't have the same surgical tactical ability on clay, and never has had it.

Federer: 1.88
Great stat. Do you have a chart to show Thiem's evolution here? My hunch is that he's gotten smarter and learned to go for larger targets in the court. He seems more patient in point construction.
 

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
I had to think of Andre in yesterday's final. It was so eerily similar to how Andre played, though Andre took the ball earlier and had the greater FH. But Djoker's ROS is as good and his ability to redirect the ball is just jaw dropping. I've always said the greatest ball striker in tennis history is Andre, but Novak may be his equal, if not superior at this point.

Djoko's return of serve is superior. He gets everything back and is rarely aced compared to Agassi. Agassi liked staying at the baseline and tried to hit returns for winners whereas Djoko just wants to get it back.
 

Luka888

Professional
Djokovic is not boring at all. I love his movement and his tennis IQ. He is also a funny guy. Could someone help me out here? #1? Won last three majors? Just won Madrid. How come? :unsure:
 

BHud

Hall of Fame
Just no...net game and overheads are gawd awful, serve is average. It just goes to show how good his service return and ground game is.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
Great stat. Do you have a chart to show Thiem's evolution here? My hunch is that he's gotten smarter and learned to go for larger targets in the court. He seems more patient in point construction.
I don't have a chart because making them takes so long. But I do believe it goes like this:

Big events (majors)
All events
All matches
All games

Like that. I'm not a big believer in watching points because they are so often mis-reported. Again, the ATP was ridiculously off in 2003 in points, and in 2016 they even screwed up games. That's really hard to do.

But we can always double check games. Scores are everywhere. Way back it was harder - there are matches even now that have a W/L but are missing scores. Not for majors though, so for majors we can go back as far as we wish and compare.

The point ratio becomes intereesting in that it MAY indicate a surface weakness. We know that Fed's weakest surface is clay. That's easy to forget since if we forget his accomplishments on other surfaces, he has still been pretty impressive and would, of course, most likely have more RGs in not playing at the same time as Nadal.

Here is another thing people will probably not be interested in. This ratio is lower on grass, just as game% is always lower on grass. In other words, if you take % of games for many players on each surface, it is highest on clay and lowest on grass. Same thing with point to game ratio: highest on clay, lowest on grass. But you only see that by looking at the best of the best for careers.

For instance, around 2.2 is good for clay, but 1.9 is good for grass. They way you spot weakness is when the same player, a guy like Fed, has a lower ratio on clay than on grass. That is true of both Fed and Sampras, I believe (trying to remember.)

The problem with computing a guy like Thiem is that even if his ratio is good, he doesn't win enough games. He's right in the range of players who won RG once, or came close, but nowhere near the guys who won it twice or more. I have my own ideas about why, but for right now that is irrelevant. The point is that stats don't support him getting to the top and staying there, even on clay. For that to be likely he'd have to make a further evolution in his game - which I would personally be very happy to see.
 

Nadalgaenger

G.O.A.T.
Just spent a few mins watching this again. Man, this has to be one of the highest levels of tennis ever achieved on HC:

 
N

Nole14_15NoPressure

Guest
def djokovic():
if AO_final == true:
ultron_mode=1



Thiem beats Zverev to reach his first AO final.
Goran:"djokovic()"
 

big ted

Legend
from another post i was watching a video of Chris Evert from the early 80s and her game & style actually reminded me of Djokovics, from the deep return of serves, amazingly solid consistency, all the way up to the mental toughness!
 

Booger

Hall of Fame
Machines are bad for the overall health of the sport. Professional sports is entertainment first and foremost. Djokovic is ambien during a time when tennis is desperately trying to hold on to relevance.

Kyrgios sucks but at least he goes for big shots and doesn't desperately beg the crowd for applause. Would 100% rather watch that than another indistinguishable Djokovic groundstroke practice session.
 

Shaj

Semi-Pro
Machines are bad for the overall health of the sport. Professional sports is entertainment first and foremost. Djokovic is ambien during a time when tennis is desperately trying to hold on to relevance.

Kyrgios sucks but at least he goes for big shots and doesn't desperately beg the crowd for applause. Would 100% rather watch that than another indistinguishable Djokovic groundstroke practice session.
Help yourself then..don't bother watching him...
 

skaj

Legend
His game is well suited for modern tennis, he's sort of a male (fit) version of Serena Williams, minus the greatest serve ever. He lacks fine touch, good net game, great tactical abilities, but is dangerous off both wings, has great offence as well as great defense, and also a very good serve-return combo.

Still, I think that prime Federer had the game to beat him.
 

maratha_warrior

Hall of Fame
I’ve never seen anyone better at getting results and playing solid tennis.
Fedal are more spectacular but this guy is the most effective player of all time.

Congrats to Nole on another title today. I was rooting for Thiem yesterday but had to tip my hat to this guy.

Tsitsipas had no chance and Nadal 2019 version wouldn’t have been any better.

He’s going to be very hard to stop at RG. Co-favorite with Nadal (or maybe slightly ahead).

He really wants the Double Nole Slam and knows what it would mean for his legacy.

You posted this before Covid.

Your prediction became correct even after Healthy Djokovic lost 4 chances to play at slams ( WB 2020 USO 2020 AO 2022 USO 2022 ) , and he was clear favourite at all 4 slams .
 
Gonna be a boring year at the slams if Djoker decides to peak for all of them and just not bother with non slam events. If you found 2021 boring and predictable, you aint seen nothing yet LOL, This year he doesn't have to worry about going for that elusive Olympics so he won't overplay
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
Novak Djokovic is the Ultimate Tennis Machine

No truer word's been said. Who wants to watch a machine playing tennis? It's like watching Nintendo or X-Box
.
 
Top