What was it about the TBs

[GabeT]

So as a Novak fan I’m very happy with last Sunday’s results but I don’t kid myself. It was a very close match. But for one ball a few inches away, Fed would have won by finishing with three straight aces against one of the greatest returners of the game. Imagine how that would have changed not just the result (obviously) but the whole talk of mental strength. We are probably reading way too much on the results of just one shot.

But there was a portion of the match that is sufficiently distinct and sufficiently long to warrant a separate analysis. That’s the tiebreaks. I still don’t fully understand why Fed lost all of them.

First of all Fed is pretty good at TBs and has a long record. Sure, one could expect him to lose one, maybe two. But all of them?

Some will argue that it was nerves or lack of mental strength. I can see that for the CPs but those were just two points. All it takes is a blink and you’ve lost your chance. But TBs aren’t like that. You have many more opportunities. They played a total of 33 points on TB.

And it’s not like Fed didn’t show mental strength in some key points. There’s a lot of talk about the two CPs but Fed was a break down at 4-2 in the fifth. It didn’t faze him and he broke back.

Maybe it was the different rhythm of the TB, where you only serve two consecutive points? But he’s done that thousands of times.

Thoughts?

 

[Tennis_Hands]

..

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

Federer was better mentally than we give him credit. He cruised through the 2nd set after not converting his chances in the 1st. Same story for the next two sets. He broke back in the decider. He didn't fade away after wasting CPs and was actually closer to winning the whole thing before the 12-12 tiebreak. All the things which we generally didn't expect. His resistance was exceptional.

But Djokovic was a giant in tiebreaks. Felt like he imposed himself in several big points, but more importantly, he didn't make an unforced error in any of the three tiebreaks. It was always going to be a struggle even for Fed if his opponent refused to gift him even a single point.

 

[GabeT]

Federer was better mentally than we give him credit. He cruised through the 2nd set after not converting his chances in the 1st. Same story for the next two sets. He broke back in the decider. He didn't fade away after wasting CPs and was actually closer to winning the whole thing before the 12-12 tiebreak. All the things which we generally didn't expect.

But Djokovic was a giant in tiebreaks. Felt like he imposed himself in several big points, but more importantly, he didn't make an unforced error in any of the three tiebreaks. It was always going to be a struggle even for Fed if his opponent refused to gift him even a single point.

I think that if you look at the TBs and the rest of the match as two separate events you reach very different conclusions. Outside the TBs Nole was always fighting to stay alive. In the TBs he was dominant. I read somewhere that Fed had like 11 UEs in the TBs and Novak has none.

 

[r2473]

If Federer had hit an ace or unreturnable at 40-15, he’d be a mental giant.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

The fix was in

 

[Tennis_Hands]

..

 

[DjokoLand]

Djokovic hit 0UE’s in the three TB’s which was 33 points while Fed hit 11. Djokovic went into wall mode Fed sprayed errors

 

[DjokoLand]

If Federer had hit an ace or unreturnable at 40-15, he’d be a mental giant.

Would he though ? Fed was the better player but don’t think he was mentally though. When it got tight in any set he lost

 

[ScottleeSV]

Hats off to Djokovic, that's it.

Before this, Federer was 8-3 against Djokovic and Nadal in Wimby tie breaks so just had a bad day with them (although Djokovic not missing a ball was more crucial).

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

I think that if you look at the TBs and the rest of the match as two separate events you reach very different conclusions. Outside the TBs Nole was always fighting to stay alive. In the TBs he was dominant. I read somewhere that Fed had like 11 UEs in the TBs and Novak has none.

When I watched the match live, during one of the 5th set changeovers, Djokovic actually asked Steiner when is the final tiebreak. At 10 all, 12 all?

He knew what he had to do...

 

[tennisaddict]

It is not Federer lost tiebreaker 0 and 1.

The issue here is Federer made as many errors what you expect facing a GOAT ROS like Djokovic. Nothing too much out of the norm

Fed did not get aces in TB and he started neutral on all points . Novak committed 0 UFE in all 3 tiebreaks

So this topic should not be about Federer

If anything it should be how Novak managed to have 0 UFE across 3 tiebreaks

 

[GabeT]

It is not Federer lost tiebreaker 0 and 1.

The issue here is Federer made as many errors what you expect facing a GOAT ROS like Djokovic. Nothing too much out of the norm

Fed did not get aces in TB and he started neutral on all points . Novak committed 0 UFE in all 3 tiebreaks

So this topic should not be about Federer

If anything it should be how Novak managed to have 0 UFE across 3 tiebreaks

It’s true that Nole’s play improved in the TB but Fed also got worse. Fed’s UEs almost tripled in the TBs compared the rest of the match. 13% of non-TB points ended in Fed UEs (if I calculated correctly). That jumped to 33% for TB points.

 

[RF-18]

Points won in the 3 TBs:

21-12 Djokovic. Also he hit 0 UEs.

Really hard to say exactly what it was but I believe Djokovic had more belief than Federer that he would prevail in the tighter moments. When it's just a matter of few points here and there like it is in a TB, it takes alot.

But it's also combination of Djokovic tightening his game while Fed couldn't keep his level pre- TBs. Fact that Djokovic had 0 UEs in THREE TBs is unplayable. It was like two different Djokovic in one match.

 

[GabeT]

It was like two different Djokovic in one match.

Yes, very much so.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Fed has suffered with mental issues against Djokovic for years, we all know that. He solved Nadal off clay, I doubt this will happen with Novak, since Fed's too old at this point. RF-18 summed it up about the TB's:

21-12 Djokovic. Also he hit 0 UEs.

 

[ScottleeSV]

22-26 is mental issues?

So Djokovic is such a poor tennis player that if you don't have a winning h2h against him, you have mental issues?

Could it not just be that Djokovic is very very good at what he does?

 

[Gary Duane]

So as a Novak fan I’m very happy with last Sunday’s results but I don’t kid myself. It was a very close match. But for one ball a few inches away, Fed would have won by finishing with three straight aces against one of the greatest returners of the game. Imagine how that would have changed not just the result (obviously) but the whole talk of mental strength. We are probably reading way too much on the results of just one shot.

But there was a portion of the match that is sufficiently distinct and sufficiently long to warrant a separate analysis. That’s the tiebreaks. I still don’t fully understand why Fed lost all of them.

First of all Fed is pretty good at TBs and has a long record. Sure, one could expect him to lose one, maybe two. But all of them?

Some will argue that it was nerves or lack of mental strength. I can see that for the CPs but those were just two points. All it takes is a blink and you’ve lost your chance. But TBs aren’t like that. You have many more opportunities. They played a total of 33 points on TB.

And it’s not like Fed didn’t show mental strength in some key points. There’s a lot of talk about the two CPs but Fed was a break down at 4-2 in the fifth. It didn’t faze him and he broke back.

Maybe it was the different rhythm of the TB, where you only serve two consecutive points? But he’s done that thousands of times.

Thoughts?

I've been thinking about the same thing. Fed's career record in TBs is just about at the top, but I believe that is because it was so ridiculously high during his peak.

https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/statsLeaders

In finals it shows Djokovic at 76.92%. Fed at 66.67%. I don't want to read too much into this, but I would tend to think that the guys who have very high game% and also a very balanced game are mostly likely to win TBs.

Some of the lists seem pretty incomplete. The problem with this site is that you never know how accurate the data is.

I don't know if there is enough data here to be useful. Check against top 5.

 

[r2473]

The people who make all the mental gymnastics to tarnish Federer know that.

Would he though ? Fed was the better player but don’t think he was mentally though. When it got tight in any set he lost

If Federer had served it out, it would have been said that he dominated. Only losing sets in tiebreaks. Coming back from a break down in the 5th. One of his best matches ever. Etc

Djokovic would have been ridiculed as a choker for blowing his lead in the 5th. People would have been comparing him to the player of a few years ago with his “lapses” in the 2nd and 4th sets.

Oh what a difference one point makes

 

[Ray Mercer]

Djokovic is awesome at keeping the ball in play and with his defence can be the ultimate pusher. When it becomes a game of who can keep the ball in in play the longest Federer’s one hander can’t keep up.

 

[xFedal]

I've been thinking about the same thing. Fed's career record in TBs is just about at the top, but I believe that is because it was so ridiculously high during his peak.

https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/statsLeaders

In finals it shows Djokovic at 76.92%. Fed at 66.67%. I don't want to read too much into this, but I would tend to think that the guys who have very high game% and also a very balanced game are mostly likely to win TBs.

Some of the lists seem pretty incomplete. The problem with this site is that you never know how accurate the data is.

I don't know if there is enough data here to be useful. Check against top 5.

Have you done Post Modem on Wimbledon 19? Was there signs before the final of Novaks huge clutchness? did he save a lot of break points?

 

[GabeT]

22-26 is mental issues?

So Djokovic is such a poor tennis player that if you don't have a winning h2h against him, you have mental issues?

Could it not just be that Djokovic is very very good at what he does?

I think you misunderstood. I never even mentioned the H2H.


I am simply trying to understand why there was such a difference between TBs and the rest of the match. It’s almost two separate matches.

Outside of the TBs Fed either completely dominated (sets 2 and 4) or was fighting with Novak head to head (the other three). Look at the results in the three TB sets excluding the TBs themselves. In the first set Fed had the only BP. In the third set the same thing and this time it was also a set point. In the fifth set you famously had two set points (which were also championship points). Novak never once had a set point outside of the TBs. The closest he got was the 4-2 break in the fifth but he was promptly broken back.

And then you have the TBs, which Novak dominated. Won all three, not a single UE Vs 11 for fed. And he got progressively better, winning the first 7-5, the second 7-4, and the last 7-3.

It‘s almost like there were two levels of mental strength required. One in general, for over 90% of the match, where Fed did very well (better than Novak or at least his equal). And then you have the mental strength required for the TBs where Novak just steamrolled Fed. And that, to me, is a bit strange.

 

[MeatTornado]

Fed has suffered with mental issues against Djokovic for years, we all know that. He solved Nadal off clay, I doubt this will happen with Novak, since Fed's too old at this point.

I think the biggest turnaround in the Nadal rivalry was mainly the passage of time, and that's not a luxury he has vs Novak.

When Fedal reignited their rivalry in 2017, they were both so much older that the dynamic had changed. Nadal had lost a lot of speed and Roger had shored up his backhand. Physically, it was a brand new match-up. Added on with no mental baggage from not playing on clay in forever, it was a total reset.

The best chance Roger had to turn around the Djokovic rivalry was also in 2017. Some wins there when Novak was weak could've paid future dividends. Instead, they didn't play for 2.5 years, waiting until Novak was finally back at full strength. Now at 38 there simply isn't enough time left in Fed's career for this rivalry to fundamentally change unless Novak suffers a serious injury that makes him overhaul his game style.

 

[ScottleeSV]

I think you misunderstood. I never even mentioned the H2H.


I am simply trying to understand why there was such a difference between TBs and the rest of the match. It’s almost two separate matches.

Outside of the TBs Fed either completely dominated (sets 2 and 4) or was fighting with Novak head to head (the other three). Look at the results in the three TB sets excluding the TBs themselves. In the first set Fed had the only BP. In the third set the same thing and this time it was also a set point. In the fifth set you famously had two set points (which were also championship points). Novak never once had a set point outside of the TBs. The closest he got was the 4-2 break in the fifth but he was promptly broken back.

And then you have the TBs, which Novak dominated. Won all three, not a single UE Vs 11 for fed. And he got progressively better, winning the first 7-5, the second 7-4, and the last 7-3.

It‘s almost like there were two levels of mental strength required. One in general, for over 90% of the match, where Fed did very well (better than Novak or at least his equal). And then you have the mental strength required for the TBs where Novak just steamrolled Fed. And that, to me, is a bit strange.

Ok fair enough.

It was a match full of weird anomalies. Djokovic in the tie breaks was one of them.

 

[73west]

So as a Novak fan I’m very happy with last Sunday’s results but I don’t kid myself. It was a very close match. But for one ball a few inches away, Fed would have won by finishing with three straight aces against one of the greatest returners of the game. Imagine how that would have changed not just the result (obviously) but the whole talk of mental strength. We are probably reading way too much on the results of just one shot.

But there was a portion of the match that is sufficiently distinct and sufficiently long to warrant a separate analysis. That’s the tiebreaks. I still don’t fully understand why Fed lost all of them.

First of all Fed is pretty good at TBs and has a long record. Sure, one could expect him to lose one, maybe two. But all of them?

Some will argue that it was nerves or lack of mental strength. I can see that for the CPs but those were just two points. All it takes is a blink and you’ve lost your chance. But TBs aren’t like that. You have many more opportunities. They played a total of 33 points on TB.

And it’s not like Fed didn’t show mental strength in some key points. There’s a lot of talk about the two CPs but Fed was a break down at 4-2 in the fifth. It didn’t faze him and he broke back.

Maybe it was the different rhythm of the TB, where you only serve two consecutive points? But he’s done that thousands of times.

Thoughts?

Theory 1: random chance. There is a 1/8 chance that you flip head 3 times in a row, and that's what happened.
Theory 2: I think this is what PMac was getting at ... as Federer has gotten older, he's had to pick his spots. He kind of coasts, waits for an opening then goes all out to sieze it. He struggles to go all out all the time. In the tiebreak, there isn't time to wait for an opening, so he had to press and make one.

 

[ScottleeSV]

I think the biggest turnaround in the Nadal rivalry was mainly the passage of time, and that's not a luxury he has vs Novak.

When Fedal reignited their rivalry in 2017, they were both so much older that the dynamic had changed. Nadal had lost a lot of speed and Roger had shored up his backhand. Physically, it was a brand new match-up. Added on with no mental baggage from not playing on clay in forever, it was a total reset.

The best chance Roger had to turn around the Djokovic rivalry was also in 2017. Some wins there when Novak was weak could've paid future dividends. Instead, they didn't play for 2.5 years, waiting until Novak was finally back at full strength. Now at 38 there simply isn't enough time left in Fed's career for this rivalry to fundamentally change unless Novak suffers a serious injury that makes him overhaul his game style.

I'm not sure they think in terms of 'overturning' the rivalry. More..what I can do to maybe win the next big match against him?

 

[Rabe87]

Novak Clutchovic happened in the Tiebreaks.

 

[icedevil0289]

honestly did not expect fed to break more but bottle tbs

 

[jm1980]

Djokovic hit 0UE’s in the three TB’s which was 33 points while Fed hit 11. Djokovic went into wall mode Fed sprayed errors

I call it "lockdown mode"

 

[Rabe87]

I call it "lockdown mode"

Revenge mode

 

[metsman]

You actually have to win points from the ground in the TB and every point counts. For the player that knows he's overmatched in baseline rallies, that takes a toll. That's at least what happened in the 3rd and 5th sets, first set you can say was a choke.

 

[MeatTornado]

honestly did not expect fed to break more but bottle tbs

Paris 2018 all over again, just in a bigger scale.

 

[MeatTornado]

Revenge mode

What in God's name did Novak have to avenge against Federer at Wimbledon?

 

[Rabe87]

What in God's name did Novak have to avenge against Federer at Wimbledon?

You do realise they detest one another? He used to intimidate baby Nole before Nole was a multi-time Slam champ, it's kinda like Serena-Sharapova but reversed.

 

[MeatTornado]

You do realise they detest one another? He used to intimidate baby Nole before Nole was a multi-time Slam champ, it's kinda like Serena-Sharapova but reversed.

But that's not revenge. Just good old fashioned motivation.

 

[Rabe87]

I call it revenge you call it motivation, it's a tale of two opinions I guess.

 

[gn]

Here is the breakdown of the tiebreaks by the Atp site.

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/djokovic-wimbledon-2019-final-brain-game

Federer played into the hands of Djokovic by staying at the baseline.
During TB, 61% of points played at the baseline and Djokovic won 75% of them.

 

[JasonZ]

So as a Novak fan I’m very happy with last Sunday’s results but I don’t kid myself. It was a very close match. But for one ball a few inches away, Fed would have won by finishing with three straight aces against one of the greatest returners of the game. Imagine how that would have changed not just the result (obviously) but the whole talk of mental strength. We are probably reading way too much on the results of just one shot.

But there was a portion of the match that is sufficiently distinct and sufficiently long to warrant a separate analysis. That’s the tiebreaks. I still don’t fully understand why Fed lost all of them.

First of all Fed is pretty good at TBs and has a long record. Sure, one could expect him to lose one, maybe two. But all of them?

Some will argue that it was nerves or lack of mental strength. I can see that for the CPs but those were just two points. All it takes is a blink and you’ve lost your chance. But TBs aren’t like that. You have many more opportunities. They played a total of 33 points on TB.

And it’s not like Fed didn’t show mental strength in some key points. There’s a lot of talk about the two CPs but Fed was a break down at 4-2 in the fifth. It didn’t faze him and he broke back.

Maybe it was the different rhythm of the TB, where you only serve two consecutive points? But he’s done that thousands of times.

Thoughts?

Federers record in deciding set tiebreaks is clearly below his general tiebreak record, while Djokovic excels in deciding set tiebreaks more than in other tiebreaks. So it is no surprise Djokovic won the 5th set tiebreak.

But it is still hard to believe that Federer lost all 3. He had a crazy good tiebreak record in wimby finals before that match. 13 - 3, thats unbelievable.

But it seems Djokovics mental edge on Federer is so big, that now he even owns him totally in tiebreaks, which was not the case before.

 

[upchuck]

Here is the breakdown of the tiebreaks by the Atp site.

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/djokovic-wimbledon-2019-final-brain-game

Federer played into the hands of Djokovic by staying at the baseline.
During TB, 61% of points played at the baseline and Djokovic won 75% of them.

This. Craig O'Shannessy's article pretty much has it all covered.

https://deadspin.com/novak-djokovic-is-a-fortress-1836369554 :
"About those tiebreaks: There’s something fragile about watching Federer operate at the highest level against his best competition, a brittleness his fans know more intimately than they’d like. His game of fine margins is susceptible to go haywire: to shank forehands into the clouds, to miss those unearthly mid-court pickups so often taken for granted, to plunk a crucial ball off the top of the net cord. These errors are nonfatal in the context of a service game, where a few casual aces might quickly right all wrongs, and where the holistic goal is to win the game. In a tiebreak, where every point is part of the race to seven, any single lapse on serve could cost the set. Rooting for Federer in these moments is like participating in a mass prayer to ward off these moments. The sensation could not be more different, watching Djokovic operate in those same situations. Nobody has won more of their breakers in the last year than the Serbian, who can summon a level of complete tennis hygiene that is rarely detected anywhere else on the planet. Any number of things might happen on the opponent’s side, but Djokovic can be counted on to pound that ball, with depth, back into the middle of the court until he has his seven points."

 

[Fintft]

Djokovic hit 0UE’s in the three TB’s which was 33 points while Fed hit 11. Djokovic went into wall mode Fed sprayed errors

Yes but why?

Was it b/c:

a) He is so much better then the old man, or at least has gotten into Federer's head.?

b) He was managing his energies (being impeded for whatever reason since the second set)?

c) Both?

 

[powerangle]

Federer was better mentally than we give him credit. He cruised through the 2nd set after not converting his chances in the 1st. Same story for the next two sets. He broke back in the decider. He didn't fade away after wasting CPs and was actually closer to winning the whole thing before the 12-12 tiebreak. All the things which we generally didn't expect. His resistance was exceptional.

But Djokovic was a giant in tiebreaks. Felt like he imposed himself in several big points, but more importantly, he didn't make an unforced error in any of the three tiebreaks. It was always going to be a struggle even for Fed if his opponent refused to gift him even a single point.

I think that if you look at the TBs and the rest of the match as two separate events you reach very different conclusions. Outside the TBs Nole was always fighting to stay alive. In the TBs he was dominant. I read somewhere that Fed had like 11 UEs in the TBs and Novak has none.

Great summaries. I agree.

 

[Purplemonster]

Djokovic hit 0UE’s in the three TB’s which was 33 points while Fed hit 11. Djokovic went into wall mode Fed sprayed errors

Simply put Djokovic has a bigger set of balls than Federer.

 

[Mark-Touch]

If Federer had served it out, it would have been said that he dominated. Only losing sets in tiebreaks. Coming back from a break down in the 5th. One of his best matches ever. Etc

Djokovic would have been ridiculed as a choker for blowing his lead in the 5th. People would have been comparing him to the player of a few years ago with his “lapses” in the 2nd and 4th sets.

Oh what a difference one point makes

...and that's what all of these discussions since the final come down to.

But here's the thing, as I have pointed out now numerous times now.
It wasn't a one point coin toss, win it or lose it. No. Not even close.

It was a FOUR (4) shot opportunity that Fed had, didn't realize, and wasted!

 

[NoleFam]

Federers record in deciding set tiebreaks is clearly below his general tiebreak record, while Djokovic excels in deciding set tiebreaks more than in other tiebreaks. So it is no surprise Djokovic won the 5th set tiebreak.

But it is still hard to believe that Federer lost all 3. He had a crazy good tiebreak record in wimby finals before that match. 13 - 3, thats unbelievable.

But it seems Djokovics mental edge on Federer is so big, that now he even owns him totally in tiebreaks, which was not the case before.

It seems like there was some type of shift in that Paris match that carried over to this one. Djokovic never broke Federer's serve in Paris but won both tiebreaks. Before that match, Federer actually led Djokovic in tiebreaks 12-10. Now he has lost the last 5 in a row. Djokovic is a good tiebreak player but Federer is the best tiebreak player but seems to now be struggling mentally in them against Djokovic.

 

[KINGROGER]

1st set tiebreak went well until he missed an easy FH. Then was downhill from there.

Don’t remember 3rd apart from more UFE, more big 1st serves and big shots from Djokovic.

5th set was just poor all round. Lack of free points, dominated in every baseline rally by the superior baseliner as Djokovic went into wall mode and wasn’t missing.

 

[Deleted member 762049]

Novak simply upped his level during the tie breaks and it took Fed by surprise.

 

[timnz]

If Federer had hit an ace or unreturnable at 40-15, he’d be a mental giant.

Yes exactly the whole match came down to one point.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

..

 

[ibbi]

I think the first two are distinct from the third. In the last one Novak was generally really good and he just outplayed him and took control. In the first two I think if I'm recalling rightly Novak got 5 points in each off of Federer's unforced errors, and they're all pretty undeniable unforced errors. Federer is good (great even, I think he played 3 tie breakers in the tournament prior to the final and won them all) at them and always has been to the degree that my younger brother who is a dyed in the wool Federer hater used to refer to the guy as Roger Tie-Break Federer. In those first two breakers Djokovic did almost nothing special, he maybe played one or two good/great points, they were both of them defined by great Federer serving, and woeful Federer errors. He choked pure and simple, which is very strange considering he played the rest of the match so (visibly, at least) free of that sort of pressure. It's like he got overexcited maybe because he was playing so well? Maybe going for too much at the wrong times? Tough to say, but it was pretty vividly clear that the first two breakers stood out in isolation from the rest of the match for at least the first four and a half sets. From the moment that Federer had 2 championship points Djokovic suddenly woke up. The match should probably not have gotten that far.

 

[Wurm]

As some of the old pros now commentating keep saying - the nerves only get worse with age as any big opportunity like that might be the last one a player gets.

Novak, on the other hand, has got to be looking ahead another 3-4 years and thinking there's really not a lot to stop him being in the Wimbledon final every year :/