Novak is the Ultimate Percentage Player but has the Least Flair Amongst Big 4.

Djokovic is a lot more than a percentage player. Out of all the Big 3, Djokovic is by far the most entertaining and thrilling to watch when he is down in a match and his back is against the wall. That's when he usually goes into "fully engaged" mode and produces his best. As for who you find more entertaining, it's your preference I guess. Fedal does not entertain anywhere me at the level that Djokovic does but that's why everyone has their own tastes and preferences.
Apparently he is just super consistent, without ze creativity or attacking game. That's all you need to do to be one of the best ever. So much intelligence.

The saltiness of this kind is an excellent indicator that he is doing damn well again.
 

Purplemonster

Hall of Fame
Flair, creativity, attacking all court tennis .. all that matters today is consistency from the baseline.

Federer is not number 3 because of his flair, it's because he's the third most consistent baseliner on tour.

Djokovic is the most consistent baseliner on tour, but please don't try to tell us he has any creativity or flair.
He definitely doesn’t possess the creativity or flair of Federer, that’s very true.
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
He can be a boring robot at times. Just hitting the ball deep side to side until opponent makes an error. But other times I enjoy him like when he used to play vs 2007-2012 Fed or 2013 Nadal for example (or their Wimbledon SF)

Most boring is 2014 - 2016 period when we had countless murrovic finals and he had no one on his level.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Apparently he is just super consistent, without ze creativity or attacking game. That's all you need to do to be one of the best ever. So much intelligence.

The saltiness of this kind is an excellent indicator that he is doing damn well again.
Yea bro. He's only like the 3rd most successful player. The narrative that he's just some consistent player without any creativity or attacking game is so far off from the truth that it's pretty much a joke at this point. Everytime, he's doing well we have to hear this.
 

King No1e

Legend
LOL.. Have you even seen Djokoray marches?
Yes. Murrovic matches can be boring, but some are fun when Murray is being aggressive. Djokovic plays a much more pushy game against Murray than he does against Federer.
Nadal-Murray matches are even worse, though. At least Djokovic executes crazy angles and line painters during the rallies. Nadal just keeps moonballing to the BH.
 

BVSlam

Professional
Nah. Fed and Rafa have easily the most flair with their shotmaking, but Djoko has more flair than Murray, definitely. Yeah Murray has some good touch in his game, but most of the time he doesn't use it and just plays less interesting baseline tennis than Djokovic.

But, while flair is fun, it's not always important. Also, he can play with a lot flair (younger years, vs. Ferrer AO 2013), but probably found being steady without being too passive is the most effective. Also, he's generally pretty aggressive against Rafa, so it depends on whom he plays. He's definitely a smart player.
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
Nole's the Lendl of this gen. Nothing too flashy about his game but damn is he a darn good player. I was gonna say he's the Tim Duncan of tennis but then I remembered Sampras, who fits this comparison spot on
Sampras is Jordan, Federer is Kobe. Nadal is Lebron. Kyrgios is early Carmelo Anthony without the numbers. Del Potro is Duncan without the achievements but the same meat and potatoes approach that trumps everything when it's on. Djokovic is Bird, with the absurd mental toughness and self belief in clutch moments.
 

tonylg

Semi-Pro
All played glued to the baseline, even the first two when weak returns rolled out the red carpet. Most were unforced errors from Fed, the ones when Novak hit a winner it was 3 or 4 shots after an attacking player would have finished the point.

One dimensional boring baseline bot.
 

Wurm

Rookie
I'm genuinely baffled that anyone thinks Novak plays with anything approaching flair. He can be astonishingly good but even when he's producing shots that require magical touch and/or a wizardly control over his body to make the racquet do what it needs to he manages to make it look rehearsed. His movement is ultra-efficient, his anticipation is off the charts, his defense is ridiculously good and he's the master at hitting the shot you can see coming that's incredibly difficult to pull off yet he'll make it look simple.

I can enjoy watching Novak play but usually only when he's up against someone really going at him who's playing well enough to rattle him (e.g. Stan when he's on form).

Murray's flair typically only appears as a result of the opponent's play, usually when he's forced into scrambling or some last-ditch counter punch effort, so if he's playing Novak, or a-another player grinding from the baseline, you can pretty much forget about seeing much of it.

Federer's flair is obvious and the very nature of Rafa's play brings with it a certain bestial flourish.
 

smalahove

Hall of Fame
I'm genuinely baffled that anyone thinks Novak plays with anything approaching flair. He can be astonishingly good but even when he's producing shots that require magical touch and/or a wizardly control over his body to make the racquet do what it needs to he manages to make it look rehearsed. His movement is ultra-efficient, his anticipation is off the charts, his defense is ridiculously good and he's the master at hitting the shot you can see coming that's incredibly difficult to pull off yet he'll make it look simple.

I can enjoy watching Novak play but usually only when he's up against someone really going at him who's playing well enough to rattle him (e.g. Stan when he's on form).

Murray's flair typically only appears as a result of the opponent's play, usually when he's forced into scrambling or some last-ditch counter punch effort, so if he's playing Novak, or a-another player grinding from the baseline, you can pretty much forget about seeing much of it.

Federer's flair is obvious and the very nature of Rafa's play brings with it a certain bestial flourish.
Best post on this thread so far.
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
Risk taker you say ? :-D Just watched his AO final against Nadal, last few games. It is ridiculously funny how stiff and scared he was. If he was risk taker he wouldn't ****ing his pants in so many finals against all time greats.
It's really too bad your boy only beats them when they're 45 or something. Love how Djokovic fans brag and talk down about Roger when in reality Novak is the biggest weak era ATG ever.
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
These are not regular patterns of play. But credit to him, when he nothing to lose he’s takes big risks (occasionally).
The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
 

junior74

G.O.A.T.
I'm genuinely baffled that anyone thinks Novak plays with anything approaching flair. He can be astonishingly good but even when he's producing shots that require magical touch and/or a wizardly control over his body to make the racquet do what it needs to he manages to make it look rehearsed. His movement is ultra-efficient, his anticipation is off the charts, his defense is ridiculously good and he's the master at hitting the shot you can see coming that's incredibly difficult to pull off yet he'll make it look simple.

I can enjoy watching Novak play but usually only when he's up against someone really going at him who's playing well enough to rattle him (e.g. Stan when he's on form).

Murray's flair typically only appears as a result of the opponent's play, usually when he's forced into scrambling or some last-ditch counter punch effort, so if he's playing Novak, or a-another player grinding from the baseline, you can pretty much forget about seeing much of it.

Federer's flair is obvious and the very nature of Rafa's play brings with it a certain bestial flourish.
What @Wurm said.
 
These are not regular patterns of play. But credit to him, when he nothing to lose he’s takes big risks (occasionally).
Well, his RPW numbers are consistently higher than Fedal so I say he DOES consistently take risks on the return. Maybe it stops looking risky when he is able to execute at a high level all the time but you could say the same thing about Fed going big on the serve. It's less obvious what Djokovic does on the return game but realise that it's hard for players to return big serves deep right at the server's toes the way he does. It's less glamorous. But it's highly effective and a bold strategy as well. He doesn't bash the ball senseless like a Nick K would, but he backs himself time and again to make tough returns. Why are other players afraid of doing what he does if they are more comfortable with taking risks? The answer, obviously, is different players are more or less comfortable with risk taking in different aspects of the game. This "you in one aspect = you in all aspects" thing I heard from an ex TTW-er doesn't work in tennis...or life as such.
 
Well, his RPW numbers are consistently higher than Fedal so I say he DOES consistently take risks on the return. Maybe it stops looking risky when he is able to execute at a high level all the time but you could say the same thing about Fed going big on the serve. It's less obvious what Djokovic does on the return game but realise that it's hard for players to return big serves deep right at the server's toes the way he does. It's less glamorous. But it's highly effective and a bold strategy as well. He doesn't bash the ball senseless like a Nick K would, but he backs himself time and again to make tough returns. Why are other players afraid of doing what he does if they are more comfortable with taking risks? The answer, obviously, is different players are more or less comfortable with risk taking in different aspects of the game. This "you in one aspect = you in all aspects" thing I heard from an ex TTW-er doesn't work in tennis...or life as such.
Fair point.
 

beard

Professional
Hehe, I am not Nostradamus, but can see treads about beauty of tennis, aesthetic, flare, grace... dominating this forum very soon... There is even gonna exist Ballet tennis subforum...

Novak, you made many people miserable, please stop... Or let me think, don't stop....
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
Hehe, I am not Nostradamus, but can see treads about beauty of tennis, aesthetic, flare, grace... dominating this forum very soon... There is even gonna exist Ballet tennis subforum...

Novak, you made many people miserable, please stop... Or let me think, don't stop....
I don't think your boy is going to go on winning forever.
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
Not forever, but long enough to ruin many lifes here
I'm more worried about the sudden emergence of all the Sampras fans, like from out of nowhere he's got some relevance beyond being a meme in today's game. :-D Still love the Sampras on clay discussion I saw over the past few days; really funny stuff.
 

ReeceSachs

Professional
I'm more worried about the sudden emergence of all the Sampras fans, like from out of nowhere he's got some relevance beyond being a meme in today's game. :-D Still love the Sampras on clay discussion I saw over the past few days; really funny stuff.
What’s your opinion on 1997 and 1998 :laughing::laughing::laughing:
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
What’s your opinion on 1997 and 1998 :laughing::laughing::laughing:
The highlights for the 1997 tennis season were when Pete Sampras won 2 slams and ended the year at No. 1, but the biggest one was when Jonas Bjorkman realized his full potential and cracked the world's top 4.

1998 is a bit difficult. The biggest world beater I can think of during that year was Karol Kucera who beat Sampras at the Australian Open. ;)
 

OhYes

Legend
It's really too bad your boy only beats them when they're 45 or something. Love how Djokovic fans brag and talk down about Roger when in reality Novak is the biggest weak era ATG ever.
Which reality is that ? :laughing: You have multiple realities which you pick by demand.
Btw I've heard that athletes usually retire at 45, 88 or whatever years you give them. Not Novak's fault 99 year old has that habit to wait big guys are all beaten up so he could collect the prizes.
 

zep

Hall of Fame
I don't know what flair really means in tennis terms but Djokovic rarely hits stunning shots but he's the most precise of the big 3. If you followed doublefault28 on twitter, you'd see the least amount of gif worthy shots from Djokovic. Nadal and Federer on the other hand always feature in the top 5, but so does Kyrgios btw with his trick shots. IMO Nadal hits the most epic shots, you take any match of his and you'll find at least 2-3 jaw dropping shots, Federer is close (and some would rank him over Nadal and that's okay). Djokovic goes through entire tournaments without hitting highlight worthy shots. That's not necessarily a bad thing, that often means that he can play well within himself and still win tournaments.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Djokovic's game is exciting. The fact that sometimes he plays patiently speaks for his flexible tactical approach. He'd have to be a complete fool to go for flash on every point, or in every match. He hits the ball ultra-clean, and his winners are often spectacular.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
This right here takes it as the dumbest post ever. Lol
Saying this for someone that has won 16 GS titles. 16 16
Might be 17 in a month. 18 in February. 19 in July.

I don't wanna scare Fedfans, but he's done this sort of thing twice already, and not a decade ago even.
 

powerplayer

New User
I don't know what flair really means in tennis terms but Djokovic rarely hits stunning shots but he's the most precise of the big 3. If you followed doublefault28 on twitter, you'd see the least amount of gif worthy shots from Djokovic. Nadal and Federer on the other hand always feature in the top 5, but so does Kyrgios btw with his trick shots. IMO Nadal hits the most epic shots, you take any match of his and you'll find at least 2-3 jaw dropping shots, Federer is close (and some would rank him over Nadal and that's okay). Djokovic goes through entire tournaments without hitting highlight worthy shots. That's not necessarily a bad thing, that often means that he can play well within himself and still win tournaments.
Good post.
There's a psychological bias in favour of the exceptional.
Imagine a football match in which 87 mins nothing happens, but in the last 3 minutes 3 goals are scored by one team. Everybody (on the winning team) talking about what a fantastic match it was, but in reality most of it was quite boring.

It might be a big part of why people don't like Djokovic, and why Kyrgios was so hyped up as the next big thing - he occasionally hits amazing shots.
The availability heuristic might even be part of why Trump was voted president - like him or loath him, you can't forget him.
 

snr

Semi-Pro
I know there's lots of posts on the front page about "omg no way more flair than Murray?!"

I'd say yes.. they are similar in that sense of percentage and boring, but Murray has better off pace and better hands, which leads to occasionally some awesome all court tennis and or cat and mouse.

Djoker has some amazing movement but the problem is, so do the other 4 (not in the flexible way but they do it in their own style).
 

mbm0912

Hall of Fame
Djokovic's game is exciting. The fact that sometimes he plays patiently speaks for his flexible tactical approach. He'd have to be a complete fool to go for flash on every point, or in every match. He hits the ball ultra-clean, and his winners are often spectacular.
(y)
 
Top