Ultimate mental toughness?

mike danny said:
One thing impressed me though at a Federer loss. Wimb 2008 final. The way Fed crawled his way back into that match by winning tiebreaks no less was super impressive. He lost, but many other players would have lost in less than 5, including Djokovic and Nadal.
Click to expand...
Novak from 2 sets down and match points and break down as well Against Fed.
 
xFedal said:
Novak from 2 sets down and match points and break down as well Against Fed.
Click to expand...

Could be wrong but think Djokovic has saved the most MPs of the big three in coming back to win matches? Maybe the best when truly at the brink of losing a match.
 
xFedal said:
Novak from 2 sets down and match points and break down as well Against Fed.
Click to expand...
Fed wasn't playing as well as Nadal was in that Wimb final though. Nadal never gave up for a second in any of the sets. Fed had to work to push it to 5. Rafa wasn't giving it to him.

Impressive win by Novak, but Fed suffered a letdown in the 3rd and 4th sets. He picked his game back up in the 5th, but too little too late. Novak was already fully engaged in the battle by then.
 
-NN- said:
Could be wrong but think Djokovic has saved the most MPs of the big three in coming back to win matches? Maybe the best when truly at the brink of losing a match.
Click to expand...
Yes he has the best percentage I am not sure if has saved the most match points maybe Fed due to playing longer but certainly the percentage..Also Novak best a breaking back after being broken.
 
-NN- said:
Could be wrong but think Djokovic has saved the most MPs of the big three in coming back to win matches? Maybe the best when truly at the brink of losing a match.
Click to expand...
I don't think he has ever beaten Nadal from MP down. If that's what you truly meant.

Denied Rafa a lot of SF though. Rome 2016, I'm looking at you.
 
mike danny said:
I don't think he has ever beaten Nadal from MP down. If that's what you truly meant.

Denied Rafa a lot of SF though. Rome 2016, I'm looking at you.
Click to expand...

I just mean against the field. Djo recently saved 5 against Verdasco and didn't he manage 4 against Tsonga years back at RG? There are the MPs saved against Federer at USO 2010-11 and the 5(?) MPs saved against Murray Shanghai 2012. He won the lot. Think of any others?
 
-NN- said:
I just mean against the field. Djo recently saved 5 against Verdasco and didn't he manage 4 against Tsonga years back at RG? There are the MPs saved against Federer at USO 2010-11 and the 5(?) MPs saved against Murray Shanghai 2012. He won the lot. Think of any others?
Click to expand...
He also saved 5 macth points 3 other times in his career one against verdasco/murray/stepanek.
 
-NN- said:
I just mean against the field. Djo recently saved 5 against Verdasco and didn't he manage 4 against Tsonga years back at RG? There are the MPs saved against Federer at USO 2010-11 and the 5(?) MPs saved against Murray Shanghai 2012. He won the lot. Think of any others?
Click to expand...
Federer saved MP many times too. Most recently against Cilic last year at Wimb.
 
mike danny said:
Federer saved MP many times too. Most recently against Cilic last year at Wimb.
Click to expand...

Would be good if someone could compile stats on set points and match points saved in winning and losing efforts, as well as stats for players failing to convert their set and match points. Anyone know if these stats are already available somewhere?
 
-NN- said:
I guess Federer's career and long-term toughness >>> Borg's. In match toughness; Borg, Nadal, Sampras and Djokovic stand out to me.
Click to expand...

I agree with the first three on your list but not sure if Djokovic belongs on there. He's had some moments where he was incredibly mentally tough, but this has been compensated by moments where he was very mentally weak, up to the point of losing slam finals to lesser players.
 
Jackuar said:
Nope. Easy answer. I'll say this even as a Fed fan. I'll give it to Rafa. He is the toughest indeed. Losing one tight 5th set doesn't make one mentally weaker. Look at the BPs save and BPs converted and UEs throughout their career. Roger fails miserably. He'd have been on 25 slams if not.
Click to expand...

I think his haters were...!!
 
Jackuar said:
Nope. Easy answer. I'll say this even as a Fed fan. I'll give it to Rafa. He is the toughest indeed. Losing one tight 5th set doesn't make one mentally weaker. Look at the BPs save and BPs converted and UEs throughout their career. Roger fails miserably. He'd have been on 25 slams if not.
Click to expand...
Here's an interesting stat about both Federer and Nadal. Make of it what you will.

Federer in GS finals ending in 5 sets: 3 W - 4L = 42.85% winning percentage.

Nadal in GS finals ending in 5 sets: 2W - 3L = 40% winning percentage

So the mentally stronger player has a weaker winning percentage in GS finals ending in 5 sets than the mentally weaker one. The mentally weaker player has won more GS finals ending in 5 sets than the mentally stronger one.

I'll just leave it here.
 
mike danny said:
Here's an interesting stat about both Federer and Nadal. Make of it what you will.

Federer in GS finals ending in 5 sets: 3 W - 4L = 42.85% winning percentage.

Nadal in GS finals ending in 5 sets: 2W - 3L = 40% winning percentage

So the mentally stronger player has a weaker winning percentage in GS finals ending in 5 sets than the mentally weaker one. The mentally weaker player has won more GS finals ending in 5 sets than the mentally stronger one.

I'll just leave it here.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's a huge 2.85% advantage. :rolleyes:

Can you get something similar over their careers? And add in more stats that I mentioned like BPs and UEs. If that convinces me, I'll accept to change my stand. But from memory over the past 15 years, there are only more moments where I wish Fed had more clutch and shown toughness and only very less memories where I've actually seen him show that clutch. If you simply refer stats, obviously he will have good numbers because of all his success over every other player throughout his career. But there's no easy way to measure 'moments' unless we hand pick them from over a 1000 matches. Stats would becomes smaller and less relevant when you put him vs similar legends in his own tier in his era - vs Nadal, Djoko that is.
 
xFedal said:
Yes, how many times you have lost a match when leading a set! When leading 2 sets and when leading 2 sets to 1.... I'd get them for you hold on....

Fed is 981-71 (93%) when he won 1st set!
Fed is at 297-4 (99%) when leading 2 sets.
Fed is at 84-10 (89%) When leading 2 sets to 1.!

Nadal is 727-42 (95%) when he won 1st set!
Nadal is at 178-2 (99%) when leading 2 sets.
Nadal is at 58-4 (94%) When leading 2 sets to 1.

Novak is at 672-24 (97%) When he won 1st set!
Novak is at 183-1 (99%) When leading 2 sets!
Novak is at 70-6 (92%) When leading 2 sets to 1!
Click to expand...

Let's rehash this in another 4-6 years, alright bro?
 
The OP is clearly a moron. Hello, Sampras just found out his good mate and coach was dying and in a match against Courier, no slouch himself, and without a coach in the stand, broke down on court and still found a way to win in 5 sets. That is the epitome and gold standard example of mental toughness.
 
Sampras was mentally so tough largely because of his belief in his own game, I'd wager. I think Federer sometimes felt against his biggest rivals that even if he's on he might lose. I think Sampras had an unwavering belief that if he executes his game, his best will be better.
 
-NN- said:
Sampras was mentally so tough largely because of his belief in his own game, I'd wager. I think Federer sometimes felt against his biggest rivals that even if he's on he might lose. I think Sampras had an unwavering belief that if he executes his game, his best will be better.
Click to expand...
True, but understandably Sampras never had anyone of Djokovic's or Nadal's level to implant seeds of doubt in his mind.
 
This is from Federer's most recent interview with Time:
In your matches against Nadal, the narrative has always been that he has the superior mental toughness. Do you think your mental game is under-appreciated?

I know the way I play is more visible than my mental toughness. I really had to work a lot on my mental toughness. Early on in my career, I was quite unstable. If people were going into a match with me, they knew if you could hang with me for two hours, after two hours, you’d probably be the favorite. Because I would run out of gas, or start checking out. It didn’t come naturally for me, the whole mental toughness.

I wanted to create a kind of aura that if people played against me, I was not going anywhere mentally and physically. That took me years to build up. Only when I started to win consecutive Grand Slams, and I was able to show that tenacity week in and week out, that’s when I felt like the locker room was actually starting to respect me. Before that, maybe I had that image [of mental inferiority] sometimes. In the years since, I don’t really think I’ve had this.

My mental toughness has always been overshadowed by my virtuosity, my shot-making, my technique, my grace. That's why when I lose, it seems like, "Oh, he didn't play so well." And when I win, it looks so easy. I had that already when I was a little boy. You know, "Why don’t you try harder?" I mean, honestly I tried everything that I possibly could. Just because I don't sweat like crazy and I don't grunt, I don't have this face on when I hit the shot like I'm in pain, doesn't mean I'm not trying hard. It's just how I play. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Really tells you how important mental strength is for athletes.
 
mike danny said:
True, but understandably Sampras never had anyone of Djokovic's or Nadal's level to implant seeds of doubt in his mind.
Click to expand...

This is a ridiculous comment. When Sampras played the two names you quoted were unheard of. Those two names only became household because the pissweak competitors of their era let them become household, and I include Federer in that group of competitors. Sampras had no say in them winning a combined 26 slams, but he had a say in how many Agassi, Courier and Ivanisevic won. Take Sampras out of the equation and Agassi would probably have won another 5 or 6 slams and Ivanisevic would probably be a 5 time Wimbledon champion. Federer has had a very significant hand in the elevation of Nadal and Djokovic because he was powerless to stop them on several occasions, and honestly,, the other players in this so called toughest era, what have they been doing because to me it appears they haven't been playing tennis?

If Djokovic and Nadal did get to play against Sampras, in particular at the USO and W, the world's two biggest events, where it really matters, he'd send them packing, he'd say who the hell are you? Those names would mean nothing to him so cut the crap about not having to play D and N, it's childish and excuse making.
 
Blocker said:
This is a ridiculous comment. When Sampras played the two names you quoted were unheard of. Those two names only became household because the pissweak competitors of their era let them become household, and I include Federer in that group of competitors. Sampras had no say in them winning a combined 26 slams, but he had a say in how many Agassi, Courier and Ivanisevic won. Take Sampras out of the equation and Agassi would probably have won another 5 or 6 slams and Ivanisevic would probably be a 5 time Wimbledon champion. Federer has had a very significant hand in the elevation of Nadal and Djokovic because he was powerless to stop them on several occasions, and honestly,, the other players in this so called toughest era, what have they been doing because to me it appears they haven't been playing tennis?

If Djokovic and Nadal did get to play against Sampras, in particular at the USO and W, the world's two biggest events, where it really matters, he'd send them packing, he'd say who the hell are you? Those names would mean nothing to him so cut the crap about not having to play D and N, it's childish and excuse making.
Click to expand...
Honestly, you are an example of one extreme of a subjective argument.

It's either 3 clear dominant players = all are weak because they were powerless to stop each other or 1 clear dominant player = weak rest of field, so easy pickings.

Now there's no "talent meter" so we will never be able to tell if Sampras was as good, worse, or better than Federer. So let's just use Occam's razor and say Fed, Nadal, and Djok are probably as good as Sampras. No need to make outlandish claims over who's best between eras without evidence.
 
The Fedfather said:
This is from Federer's most recent interview with Time:


Really tells you how important mental strength is for athletes.
Click to expand...

That's your interpretation? Great champions are all mentally strong, that's a given. What was telling was this statement:

"My mental toughness has always been overshadowed by my virtuosity, my shot-making, my technique, my grace. That's why when I lose, it seems like, "Oh, he didn't play so well." And when I win, it looks so easy. I had that already when I was a little boy. You know, "Why don’t you try harder?" I mean, honestly I tried everything that I possibly could. Just because I don't sweat like crazy and I don't grunt, I don't have this face on when I hit the shot like I'm in pain, doesn't mean I'm not trying hard. It's just how I play. Sorry."

To reach the champion level, all must be in sync: the skills, the form, the soundness of direction, the whole approach, the mental game. Once these great champions have these all in working order they can win the biggest events, but in Federer's case his style creates an illusion that causes people to default to faulty arguments.
 
-NN- said:
That's your interpretation? Great champions are all mentally strong, that's a given. What was telling was this statement:

"My mental toughness has always been overshadowed by my virtuosity, my shot-making, my technique, my grace. That's why when I lose, it seems like, "Oh, he didn't play so well." And when I win, it looks so easy. I had that already when I was a little boy. You know, "Why don’t you try harder?" I mean, honestly I tried everything that I possibly could. Just because I don't sweat like crazy and I don't grunt, I don't have this face on when I hit the shot like I'm in pain, doesn't mean I'm not trying hard. It's just how I play. Sorry."

To reach the champion level, all must be in sync: the skills, the form, the soundness of direction, the whole approach, the mental game. Once these great champions have these all in working order they can win the biggest events, but in Federer's case his style creates an illusion that causes people to default to faulty arguments.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's my interpretation. You were arguing that mental toughness is overrated in sports, right? Clearly, it's not.
 
The Fedfather said:
Yes, that's my interpretation. You were arguing that mental toughness is overrated in sports, right? Clearly, it's not.
Click to expand...

What's clear about it? Federer doesn't have a bad H2H record with Nadal because he's mentally weaker. Mental problems in the match-up were caused due to the skill match-ups. That's just pointing out the obvious though. Of course skills are more important than mental strength. Where it becomes overrated is the constant default arguments about players choking without linking it to other factors such as skills, form and match-up. Remember that I've never said that mental strength is not important. It is extremely important. It's just overrated and used as an excuse too often by fans.
 
Am I missing something? Didn't Nadal come back from a 5th set deficit against djokovic in the 2013 RG final or is my memory hazy?
 
Mr Feeny said:
Am I missing something? Didn't Nadal come back from a 5th set deficit against djokovic in the 2013 RG final or is my memory hazy?
Click to expand...

Yes that is true. He was a break down in the 5th against Djokovic but managed to turn it around.

Great match that was.
 
-NN- said:
What's clear about it? Federer doesn't have a bad H2H record with Nadal because he's mentally weaker. Mental problems in the match-up were caused due to the skill match-ups. That's just pointing out the obvious though. Of course skills are more important than mental strength. Where it becomes overrated is the constant default arguments about players choking without linking it to other factors such as skills, form and match-up. Remember that I've never said that mental strength is not important. It is extremely important. It's just overrated and used as an excuse too often by fans.
Click to expand...
It's clear that lack of mental toughness was a big problem for Federer and he had to fix it in order to be successful. And I don't think Federer has a poor record against Nadal because he's mentally weaker, but I do think that some of their matches he lost mentally. This is what Roger said about his AO victory over Rafa: "I think it was very much of a mental match. You know as much as we're talking tactically about the match, at the end Severin and Ivan and me said 'it's all mental'." Anyway, I agree that skills are more important than mental strength but if the gap in skills isn't too big, the mentally weaker player might lose despite displaying better skills in the match than his opponent.
 
The Fedfather said:
It's clear that lack of mental toughness was a big problem for Federer and he had to fix it in order to be successful. And I don't think Federer has a poor record against Nadal because he's mentally weaker, but I do think that some of their matches he lost mentally. This is what Roger said about his AO victory over Rafa: "I think it was very much of a mental match. You know as much as we're talking tactically about the match, at the end Severin and Ivan and me said 'it's all mental'." Anyway, I agree that skills are more important than mental strength but if the gap in skills isn't too big, the mentally weaker player might lose despite displaying better skills in the match than his opponent.
Click to expand...
I mean, it's not like Nadal is a more skilled player than Federer. That's false.
 
It's about the skill match-up. It doesn't always align with the skill advantage that presents itself against the field. The inherent skill match-up problem was evidenced emphatically in the early stages of the rivalry between Federer and Nadal and was exacerbated hastily due to many early clay match-ups where Fed loses clearly on the skill match-up, which in turn harvested a negative mental state which proved to be one of the key differences in the 2008 Wimbledon final and 2009 AO final.
 
-NN- said:
It's about the skill match-up. It doesn't always align with the skill advantage that presents itself against the field. The inherent skill match-up problem was evidenced emphatically in the early stages of the rivalry between Federer and Nadal and was exacerbated hastily due to many early clay match-ups where Fed loses clearly on the skill match-up, which in turn harvested a negative mental state which proved to be one of the key differences in the 2008 Wimbledon final and 2009 AO final.
Click to expand...
Front runner stats weren't enough want Comebacks stats?
 
-NN- said:
I'm not sure what your point here is, xFedal. I'm not saying that Federer is mentally tougher than Nadal.
Click to expand...
Not saying that, Nadal percentage for TB and deciding sets has gone down!! Murrays has gone up higher than both Pete/Fed/Nadal:eek:
 
xFedal said:
Not saying that, Nadal percentage for TB and deciding sets has gone down!! Murrays has gone up higher than both Pete/Fed/Nadal:eek:
Click to expand...

Lol, really? Murray's TB percentage AND deciding sets record? Are you using the main ATP site for all your stats, and/or tennisabstract?
 
Federer the mentally toughest? Yea... Um No. He spent 10 years getting mentally browbeaten by Nadal

Nadal's mental toughness was insane in his prime. But he has lost a lot of confidence in himself and his mental toughness has gone down with it. He isn't the mental man of steel lie he was when he was younger. Confidence has waned and he's 2nd guessing himself. Afraid to go for more on that FH side.

Nole's lack of desire since last year has had me questioned what in the hell is going on with him mentally. This guy was at the peak of his career than just DISAPPEARS and starts playing like a damn journeymen. WTF!!!!


As it stands.. Sampras is far and away more mentally tough than all of them
 
90's Clay said:
Federer the mentally toughest? Yea... Um No. He spent 10 years getting mentally browbeaten by Nadal

Nadal's mental toughness was insane in his prime. But he has lost a lot of confidence in himself and his mental toughness has gone down with it. He isn't the mental man of steel lie he was when he was younger. Confidence has waned and he's 2nd guessing himself. Afraid to go for more on that FH side.

Nole's lack of desire since last year has had me questioned what in the hell is going on with him mentally. This guy was at the peak of his career than just DISAPPEARS and starts playing like a damn journeymen. WTF!!!!


As it stands.. Sampras is far and away more mentally tough than all of them
Click to expand...
His AO 95 win against courier comes to mind! Sampras just knew how to win when things went against him.

I might throw Sampras' precursor of mental toughness, Pancho Gonzalez, in the mix.

Federer at the beginning of his dominance was very strong. I do give him credit for persevering year after year as well.
 
Rod Laver said:
I might throw Sampras' precursor of mental toughness, Pancho Gonzalez, in the mix.
.
Click to expand...

And I'll throw in your avatars namesake.

Rod Laver is just under 50% winning after losing the first set!

Have you seen the scorecards for the slams he played? He's been taken to five sets in every one he won or reached a final at least once, sometimes more.

The sheet makes me think of Serena Williams. When Serena goes 'clutch', I don't think she's going clutch per se... it seems more like she's been screwing around up til then and she could have blown her opponent away ages ago if she'd wanted.
 
Gazelle said:
I agree with the first three on your list but not sure if Djokovic belongs on there. He's had some moments where he was incredibly mentally tough, but this has been compensated by moments where he was very mentally weak, up to the point of losing slam finals to lesser players.
Click to expand...
In fairness, hasn't everyone been pretty much a lesser player than him for the past six years? Just seems a bit unrealistic to me to expect him to have won all 18 GS finals he's competed in since 2011 - you can't win them all.
 
Last edited:
For Djokovic, the 2 losses to Wawrinka are curious, particularly since he won the first set both times.

I saw a stat that the loss to Wawrinka @ US Open was the 1st time in 45 matches he'd lost there after winning first set.

I think it's because Wawrinka can rattle his patterns. Djokovic typically uses the backhand to control his opponent

Wawrinka, when he fires, can blast through that strategy. He might be the only player in the world who can.

Furthermore, perhaps because Wawrinka is seen as a lesser player, Djokovic plays too safe against him?

A generally brilliant strategy of his when he's down is to attack almost wildly for a few return games in a row, it really throws people for a loop.

Didn't even try it on Wawrinka in either final
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tennisjedi
Is Djokovic the mentally toughest player?
Replies
5
Views
466
Milehigh5280
Milehigh5280
Dean Winchester
Is Performance in the 5th Set of a Grand Slam a true indicator of Mental Toughness & Durability for an ATG???
Replies
7
Views
541
Hitman
Hitman
Nadalgaenger
What is the most clutch performance by each of the Big 3 in a big match?
Replies
14
Views
936
augustobt
augustobt
B
Federer mentally tougher than everyone?
Replies
12
Views
1K
lecter255
lecter255
D
Federer's 5 set Record against Top Players
Replies
31
Views
3K
Deleted member 716271
D
Back
Top