Novak is a genius from the middle of the court. He is a great athlete and ball striker and all but people forgets his tennis IQ. His shots are from a tactical perspective from the highest order. He knows the strings to pull to be as effective as possible, this involves tiring the legs of his opponents by letting them chase the ball from side to side wich gives him an advantage in the long run. His game is well planned from top to bottom.
Watching Novak is like watching art. He is a master tactician.
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
