Rivalries with contrasting styles to look forward to in the near future:

[Djokovic2011]

That doesn't guarantee you the win

Please, watch the match again, take your time in doing so, and while you are at it, do take note of the quality of Djokovic's "shotmaking." ROFLMAO

In the men's game it should do.

 

[CHIP72]

How come no future rivalries between two up and coming players (say among Thiem, Kyrgios, Coric, Zverev, and Kozlov) are listed? We're probably going to see the top future players play one another a lot more than they'll play Nadal or Djokovic.

 

[Chanwan]

Already answered indirectly. Can't do individually, too many posts.
Anyway, to repeat myself since insisted. Novak's bread and butter is clearly his offensive attacking baseline game. He can play excellent defense and as said adjust his style to what he thinks gives him best chance of winning, but defense is not his natural go to default style. Not even close.

What's the use if you simply repeat yourself? I gave you an in depth response on to what extent he's defensive and offensive in post 46 - including an answer to why winners off the serve in the Wimbledon-final doesn't proof that Djoko was the more offensive player in that match:

Anyway, truth needs to be told. All I said is Djokovic played more offensive and aggressive in W 2014 final. And I have good old facts and numbers to back it up:

I.e. Djoko hit a fair amount of passing shots winners, because Fed went to the net so often, but that's not him attacking, but him counterattacking/counterpunching, don't you think?
Moreover, I don't have stats on forced errors, but because of Djoko's superior defense it's not hard to imagine that he got a racquet on a fair amount of Fed's "winners" - i.e. that Fed forced more errors, whereas Djoko could get winners from a 'similar' shot.

 

[Chanwan]

To drive my point further home, I would implore you to watch this year's Indian Wells Federer–Djokovic match, which Djokovic won (btw, Djoko owes the win to Federer, who played a sloppy tie-break in the third set) playing "wait-for-the-error," boring baseline-retreiving, chop-chop tennis, hardly doing anything noteworthy. This match is but one out of many such matches between them, in which Djokovic plays the same boring pattern of play.

Hitting (more) winners does not necessarily mean being aggressive and attacking, or being a shotmaker, which Djokovic isn't.

Djokovic was serving for the match at 5-4. If anything it was Federer who was lucky to even get to the tie-break in the first place.

I did watch the match at the time, but I'm not one of those people, who can remember a match extremely well that I watched half a year back given how many I've watched in between.
But yeah, Djoko is right that Fed got lucky to be in the TB in the first place, but you're right that Fed went completely awol in the TB.

Overall, we're not that far from agreeing (I think Djoko's bread and butter is his defense and defending on the stretch in particular), but I also think he's capable of more than that and I think he shows it vs. Federer at times, which is part of the reason, why I love their match-up more than any other match-up. Fed is the aggressor, but you never know when the match is gonna turn.

 

[Attacking_Tennis]

I did watch the match at the time, but I'm not one of those people, who can remember a match extremely well that I watched half a year back given how many I've watched in between.
But yeah, Djoko is right that Fed got lucky to be in the TB in the first place, but you're right that Fed went completely awol in the TB.

Overall, we're not that far from agreeing (I think Djoko's bread and butter is his defense and defending on the stretch in particular), but I also think he's capable of more than that and I think he shows it vs. Federer at times, which is part of the reason, why I love their match-up more than any other match-up. Fed is the aggressor, but you never know when the match is gonna turn.

 

[Attacking_Tennis]

In the men's game it should do.

Not against Federer, least of all against a prime Federer. Federer, in his prime, was one of the best returners in the world.

Djokovic knows very well he can't go toe-to-toe with Federer when it comes to shotmaking, so he resorts to grinding from behind the baseline—and that's the only way he can beat Federer. If Djokovic tries shotmaking with Fed, he would end up having a lopsided h2h against Federer.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Not against Federer, least of all against a prime Federer. Federer, in his prime, was one of the best returners in the world.

Djokovic knows very well he can't go toe-to-toe with Federer when it comes to shotmaking, so he resorts to grinding from behind the baseline—and that's the only way he can beat Federer. If Djokovic tries shotmaking with Fed, he would end up having a lopsided h2h against Federer.

And what's wrong with that? :???: It's a style of play that clearly works for him so if it ain't broke, why would he bother fixing it? No one ever said tennis had to pretty all the time.

 

[Possum]

Contrasting style? Don't get me wrong, I love tennis and watching it. But I can't tell the difference in any style in the men's or women's games. It's all baseline rallying. Federer is starting to come in more, but that's one guy. That's what made tennis in the 70s, 80s, and 90s so good. You had ALL styles at one time and none was more dominant than the other.

 

[ultradr]

Not against Federer, least of all against a prime Federer. Federer, in his prime, was one of the best returners in the world.

Djokovic knows very well he can't go toe-to-toe with Federer when it comes to shotmaking, so he resorts to grinding from behind the baseline—and that's the only way he can beat Federer. If Djokovic tries shotmaking with Fed, he would end up having a lopsided h2h against Federer.

Federer's return was somewhat on the defensive side. Partly because everybody tried to serve to his backhand.

Nadal was and is same way. Defensive serve returns.

Djokovic-Murray brand tennis is different. They are making aggressive serve returns.

I agree Djokovic is not spectacular shot-maker but constantly pressure with reasonably good shots. I think Becker influenced him to take more risk.

 

[smoledman]

Looking forward to Fed/Kygrios and Fed/Coric for the first time.

 

[ultradr]

It's hard to find contrasting playing style in baseline era.

Even the contrast between Federer and Nadal is not a playing style issue.
It's a contrast in strategies, IMHO.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

It's hard to find contrasting playing style in baseline era.

Even the contrast between Federer and Nadal is not a playing style issue.
It's a contrast in strategies, IMHO.

OK, Sampras fan.

 

[Attacking_Tennis]

And what's wrong with that? :???: It's a style of play that clearly works for him so if it ain't broke, why would he bother fixing it? No one ever said tennis had to pretty all the time.

Nothing wrong with that, just putting it out there—my 2 cents. :smile:

But of course, it hurts to see Federer—the greatest shotmaker of all time—lose to baseline retrievers (Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, and the like). :-[

 

[Djokovic2011]

Nothing wrong with that, just putting it out there—my 2 cents. :smile:

But of course, it hurts to see Federer—the greatest shotmaker of all time—lose to baseline retrievers (Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, and the like). :-[

Just like it hurts me to see Federer servebotting, charging to the net at every opportunity and hitting deadly low slices to Djokovic's backhand. Only difference is you'll never see me making a thread whining about it and stating how much it displeases me given that I understand perfectly well that it's a style of play that pays rich dividends for Roger, just like Novak's game does for him.

 

[cc0509]

Looking forward to Fed/Kygrios and Fed/Coric for the first time.

Federer will kill them both. Let's get real.

 

[Attacking_Tennis]

Just like it hurts me to see Federer servebotting, charging to the net at every opportunity and hitting deadly low slices to Djokovic's backhand. Only difference is you'll never see me making a thread whining about it and stating how much it displeases me given that I understand perfectly well that it's a style of play that pays rich dividends for Roger, just like Novak's game does for him.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Well twisting what is posted and taking partial sentences out of context is typical trollish behavior. Just confirming who you are and what are your intentions - i.e. hate and undermine Djokovic to the extreme. So please stop with this kind of behavior. Thanks.

:lol: :lol:

Chico = guaranteed replies

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Just like it hurts me to see Federer servebotting, charging to the net at every opportunity and hitting deadly low slices to Djokovic's backhand. Only difference is you'll never see me making a thread whining about it and stating how much it displeases me given that I understand perfectly well that it's a style of play that pays rich dividends for Roger, just like Novak's game does for him.

Good poast.

 

[Federer20042006]

Dimitrov vs. Del Potro.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Agassi, Nalbandian and Davydenko were shotmakers. Djokovic is not a shotmaker but has exceptional offense, why isn't that enough for you? Unlike what you think he's nothing like Federer and more like Murray, Nadal and Hewitt in that regard..

Davydenko made a lot of his success by being a tireless wall. A very quick player who retrieved a lot of balls deep. It's more at the end of his career that he became really more aggressive. It coincided with him beginning to beat the very top players more often.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Djokovic at least as shotmaker as those Agassi, Nalbandian and Davydenko. Claiming any of those three is more shotmaker than Djokovic is outrageous.

Why are haters so persistent to put Djokovic down and undermine his shotmaking offensive skills? :shock:

Really no. Agassi and Nalbandian were never going to win a match with their defense, they had to play aggressive in order to win. For Djokovic it isn't the case. He can win a lot of matches primarily thanks to his defense, and obviously as talented as he is, he can make incredible shots or play a very aggressive match. But mostly he play really aggressive against lower ranked players.

Now I asked you yesterday to rank some players from most aggressive to most defensive. I think something like this would be quite right:
Raonic, Anderson, Lopez, Berdych, Cilic, Del Potro, Gulbis, Wawrinka, Federer, Dimitrov, Djokovic, Nadal, Murray, Ferrer, Robredo, Simon (I didn't rank Agut because I don't think I ever saw him play).

Now this ranking doesn't reflect who is better at playing aggressive, all-court, shotmaking, etc. This ranking reflect who has the biggest need to dedicate himself to aggressive/defensive tennis in order to win a match. For this reason, although Nadal and Djokovic are clearly the best defenders of the list, they are not ranked after Simon because they have enough weapon to win a match without fully dedicating themselves to retrieving.

Raonic, Anderson and Lopez really live by their offensive game, they can't out-rally anyone, because their movement and groundstrokes aren't good enough. At the other end, you have Simon and Robredo who won't win a lot of match by out-aggressing their opponent, at least they won't against any other player of this list.

 

[Chico]

Really no. Agassi and Nalbandian were never going to win a match with their defense, they had to play aggressive in order to win. For Djokovic it isn't the case. He can win a lot of matches primarily thanks to his defense, and obviously as talented as he is, he can make incredible shots or play a very aggressive match. But mostly he play really aggressive against lower ranked players.

Now I asked you yesterday to rank some players from most aggressive to most defensive. I think something like this would be quite right:
Raonic, Anderson, Lopez, Berdych, Cilic, Del Potro, Gulbis, Wawrinka, Federer, Dimitrov, Djokovic, Nadal, Murray, Ferrer, Robredo, Simon (I didn't rank Agut because I don't think I ever saw him play).

Now this ranking doesn't reflect who is better at playing aggressive, all-court, shotmaking, etc. This ranking reflect who has the biggest need to dedicate himself to aggressive/defensive tennis in order to win a match. For this reason, although Nadal and Djokovic are clearly the best defenders of the list, they are not ranked after Simon because they have enough weapon to win a match without fully dedicating themselves to retrieving.

Raonic, Anderson and Lopez really live by their offensive game, they can't out-rally anyone, because their movement and groundstrokes aren't good enough. At the other end, you have Simon and Robredo who won't win a lot of match by out-aggressing their opponent, at least they won't against any other player of this list.

Bolded is what is wrong with all these "Djokovic is defensive player" incorrect accusations.
Only because Djokovic is more versatile player and can play excellent defense when needed, does not mean he is not a shotmaker and that his shotmaking skills are not up to par with some less versatile players like Nalbandian, Agassi or Davydenko.

The list itself is not bad - Shows Djokovic is close to Federer when it comes to being offensive player, but I would not put servebots and lesser, less skilled players who lack defensive and some offensive skills as well - i.e. serving aces or running to the net due to lack of attacking baseline game or proper movement, is not necessary more offensive than blasting baseline winners like Fed or Djokovic do so much in front - i.e. Anderson, Raonic, Lopez, Cilic, Berdych.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

Bolded is what is wrong with all these "Djokovic is defensive player" incorrect accusations.
Only because Djokovic is more versatile player and can play excellent defense when needed, does not mean he is not a shotmaker and that his shotmaking skills are not up to par with some less versatile players like Nalbandian, Agassi or Davydenko.

Let's remove Nalbandian and Davydenko from the discussion because they aren't close to the tier of Agassi and Djokovic. As much as Agassi can't win a match against a fellow all time great by playing mostly defensively, Djokovic can't win a match against a fellow all time great by playing mostly offensively. He will either make to many errors or more likely his attacks won't be decisive enough.

The list itself is not bad - Shows Djokovic is close to Federer when it comes to being offensive player, but I would not put servebots and lesser, less skilled players who lack defensive and some offensive skills as well - i.e. serving aces or running to the net due to lack of attacking baseline game or proper movement, is not necessary more offensive than blasting baseline winners like Fed or Djokovic do so much in front - i.e. Anderson, Raonic, Lopez, Cilic, Berdych.

Djokovic is close to Federer relatively to the other players listed. Really being offensive or defensive isn't an absolute thing, it's more relative to how other players win their matches.
In this regard, both Federer and Djokovic will win matches against the Del Potro, Raonic, etc. by successfully blunting theirs attacks before going on the offensive themselves. Fed will attack sooner and maybe more successfully, Djoko will defend better and provoke more unforced error. This isn't true for Del Potro and Raonic, who need to outhit them in order to have a chance.

And their is really nothing more aggressive than a player who try to win every points in less than 3 shots because he knows that any longer "rally" will see him lose it (Raonic).

 

[ArcspacE]

That's what happens when parents forget to lock their computers and kids can access the Internetz

 

[Chico]

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=517306

From Federer's interview in The Thelegraph:

"Nadal and Murray more defensive,Novak and i are more attacking players

But you can work on everything and the best players can play offensive and defensive. I guess Rafa [Nadal] and Andy have more the defensive DNA: they really don’t want to miss but today they’re great attacking players, some of the best in the game. And the same for me and Novak, we’re more attacking players but we’ve also gotten very good at defence.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/rogerfederer/11216129/Roger-Federer-reveals-the-secrets-behind-his-incredible-success.html

Do you agree with Roger Federer?

Federer proving me right

THANK YOU MR FEDERER!

Nice to see some here proven wrong by their idol himself.

Thank you very much.

 

[Chico]

Time for another bumpity bump.

Since some forgot what they said here couple of weeks ago, now when Fed repeated my words here and made them look like fools for ridiculing me for claiming Djokovic is an offensive player with a style similar to Federer

 

[RFGOAT1992]

coric is so overated. watch him fail

 

[kandamrgam]

Because Coric is a natural talent at net and in transition game, whereas Djokovic isn't. And dat overhead!

It seems people have memory loss. Some of the Djoker bashing has got to do with his defensive transition in 2011 which for some reason Federer fans dont like, and they outnumber everyone else everywhere. Novak was a highly rated talent in 2007 when he first broke into the scene. He promised to be a big match player with all around abilities - technical, mental and physical. Which he proved. Even today I believe he is a more technical player than Rafa, reason which he is able to hit balls on the rise better, and win Bo3s more than Bo5s. His deficiency at the net is grossly overrated. He approaches net much more often than Rafa, and if he is not successful there a methodical player like him wouldnt be doing it.