2019 Wimbledon...ATP 2000...London, England

[don_budge]

Incredibly Interesting and Incredibly Boring...The Novak Djokovic Legacy

Amazing how quickly there are those that are quick to jump up and claim that this was one for the ages. If anything it illustrates just how far the sport of tennis has sunk when only a 37 ageing SuperStar in Roger Federer can put up any kind of fight to Novak Djokovic...the most one dimensional number one player in the world ever. But the comments here on tennisplayer.net are in keeping with what we've got going here on the forum...good solid thoughts and different sort of opinions.

Once Federer got behind in that set he realised the amount of energy he would need to expend to get even and win it. He elected not to and to bank on the third set. I will refer to "The Book" and William Tilden to clarify. In his section on "Match Play and Tennis Psychology" he expands a bit on his thought about the psychology in five set matches. His thoughts are crystal clear and hit the astute tennis aficionado in the forehead like a beam of white light. Inspiration.

"In a three out of five set match, the climactic set in my opinion is usually the third. The first is naturally of great psychological value but it is not actually decisive. If you can win both the first two sets so much the better. Still the third set is the critical one. If the score is 2 sets to 0 a victory in the third means the match. If you are behind at 0-2 you must win the third or the match is lost. But in many three out of five set matches the players divide the first two sets and stand at 1 set apiece. Now the real importance of the. third set comes to the fore. If you win it and lead 2 sets to 1 the discouragement to your opponent is tremendous. By the end of a third set any player will be feeling the physical strain, more or less. To face the necessity of winning two sets in a row places a great burden on the mental and physical courage of your opponent. It looks like an awfully long road back. You may even be able to afford taking a chance of running him in the fourth set and even if you lose it, tire him so much that he will be easy in the fifth. It is, of course, better to keep pressure on in the fourth set and take no chances.

If your opponent leads you 1-2 then it's up to you to muster all the guts you have, go out for a quick victory in the fourth set and shoot the works in the fifth even if you wind up flat on your face at the end."

The match was true to form with respect to the analysis of five set tennis psychology written by none other than William Tilden back in the 1950's. It is incredible to me how timeless this guys writings are and how they hold up to the test of time. As with King Solomon it is with tennis...there is nothing new under the sun. Djokovic stole the first set in a tie-breaker and that sure set the tone for the rest of the match and led Federer to chase him all day long. Djokovic was as elusive as he was present. Sort of a rope-a-dope specialist. Now you see him...now you don't. He merely disappeared for the second set taking a page out of Federer's script for his semifinal with Nadal. Novak added his own little wrinkle of course with his requesting refreshments to bolster him for the rest of the afternoon. He appeared to be on the ropes but I wasn't having any of that. I have seen it before. Another time...another match with Federer when Roger appeared to have him on the ropes only to see him slither out of reach to land the crushing blow on the final point.

Novak tried the very same trick in the third set...somehow allowing Federer to stay in the set long enough to deal him another crushing blow in the tie-breaker. It looked like this was Novak's revenge on the public...he was going to keep them waiting all day only to plunge his assassin's dagger when it fit best into the plot. What timing to elevate his game at the crucial moments...or was it? Federer raced off from the beginning of the fourth set as if he had picked up telepathically on what I had written about Tilden's theory of five set match play psychology. But even here Novak was sublty showing his domination of a match that he nearly always seemed to be losing. Or was he? Federer attempted to serve out the fourth once only to be denied...but fortunately for him two was a charm. Nevertheless Novak was showing him who the boss was before they entered into the fifth and final set.

Once again Roger had the opportunity to serve out the set and consequently the match. He even had match points. He didn't play them very well on his own serve. Novak quickly made sure of that. On one point Federer went to the net on a poorly advised approach and that wasn't the first time he had done that this day. Or was it that Novak was always one step ahead of the Swiss Maestro. Always there when he shouldn't have been. I'm telling you...Novak was seemingly orchestrating this whole thing. There wasn't much doubt in the end once the match was to be concluded in the tie-breaker. There wasn't much hope either. It would have been better for everyone if the match had ended about an hour earlier...even if it meant a tie-breaker at six all. Why play a tie-breaker at twelve all anyways? Just let the thing go on until one of the players could end it. Who knows...they might still be playing. Novak's revenge. So much for the entire audience rooting for their boy. Novak had them all under control. A real psychopath.

Roger Federer needs to take advantage of every single thing that he can and the one thing that is truly in his hands is the service game. He must take care of his serve as efficiently as he can. I don't think that he has yet to serve lights out this tournament and this would be a perfect time to do just that. He has to play a brilliant tactical match and I would bet that the slice off of the backhand side is top on the list. He must use this shot judiciously to do exactly what you imply...move Djokovic off of the baseline. But the serve is paramount. As his serve goes so will the rest of his game. He opened the match with an ace. That's a perfect start. Keep the service games quick and put pressure on the Djokovic serve.

Roger did an unreal job of taking care of his serve as much as he did. Only in the tie-breaks did it sort of get away from him. But he stared everything down that Novak could muster in the return department. The slice backhand? He played it to perfection. To attempt to drive returns back at Novak on his service would have been pure folly. First of all he would have missed a certain percentage of the returns giving Novak points outright. Those that would have landed in play probably would have landed in the middle of the court which is cat food for Djokovic and it is why he is such a master of taking care of his own serve...which isn't the greatest in the world but it just might be the greatest 119-123 mph serve in the world seeing as he can back it up by eating up the returns.

Roger Federer's use of the slice is what kept him in the match as long as it did. Novak had zeroed in on the Federer backhand. One stat that was missing in the reams of statistics was how many backhands did Federer hit compared to forehands. The same could be said of Djokovic. That is the most important stat in this incredibly lone and incredibly boring match. Endless rallies...a real lack of any consistent net play. Really now something must be done. Apparently the grass was so slow this year and God only knows what they did to the balls. The tennis officials had taken the air completely out of the ball or so it seems. Or is it that the game has been reengineered to the mediocrity that I perceive it to be. So many times it appeared that Federer might dart to the net but thought better of it and retreated. How many times did he do this? Where is that statistic?

Roger did do everything he possibly could. He controlled all that was within his control. The slice backhand kept him in a match where he might had been discarded like the rest of Djokovic's opponents who attempted to match him drive for drive. Only with the change of pace was he able to keep Novak off balance and bide for time. That eventually ran out on him as well.

Federer looked like he was going to run through the fourth. Now he takes another chance to serve out the fourth. Djokovic has orchestrated this match like a virtuoso. As much as Federer has performed like the Maestro that he is...Djokovic is banking on the fifth. That is if he doesn't even the fourth and win it here.

It was a strange match in the end. At no point did Federer look like he was going to win it. I had the feeling all along that Djokovic was somehow in control...even when it looked like he wasn't. Djokovic is a slippery character as well as being a rock solid performer. This isn't the first time he has beaten Federer when it looked as if Roger was on the verge. Djokovic banked on the fifth alright. On the slimmest of margins...seemingly. But it all seemed to go with the script. It was inevitable. I wasn't really disappointed when Federer lost. I was only relieved. As bman said below...I am done with watching tennis indefinitely. The Swedish Open is being played down in south of Sweden and I don't even have the energy to see who is playing. I can only imagine how Roger Federer is feeling. Novak woke up the next day with a huge grin on his face. He played everyone...and won.

I'm done. No more watching tennis indefinitely.

Better match than 2008 final but even more painful. Federer needs to commit to coming over his backhand return just like against Nadal and taking his forehand and backhand down the line more often. I honestly think in the return games he needs to try to bully Novak and if he misses, that's OK because he will lose most long rallies anyway. The dinky chips don't work. By the way, is Don Budge on suicide watch?

Actually it sort of played true to form. Djokovic didn't give Federer much to swing at on the forehand side. Clever tactic...much as he plays Nadal. When he plays the forehand it is only when he can overwhelm him on that side. He rarely loses playing to the forehand. He just gives a nibble here and nibble there. He put as much pressure on the Federer backhand as he could. I don't think Federer could have match him drive for drive. Roger played him pretty clever in this regard. The grass played like velcro otherwise I am convinced that the slice would have given Djokovic more problems than it did. As it was Djokovic was dealing with Federer slightly off balance all afternoon with the assortment of slice...short and deep. At least Roger kept the ball in play and didn't make a lot of stupid errors on the backhand side. If anything it was the forehand of Federer that was slightly off and this was more or less as a result of Djokovic not letting him get a bead on it. Interesting tactics to a point. But also dreadfully boring. I remember telling my wife that Novak Djokovic is the most boring best player in the world ever. No doubt you have heard me talk of my experience at the French Open only surviving the boredom with coffee after coffee.

Anybody who started off consuming alcohol for this match surely had a massive headache before the match was over. With the exposure to the heat and the sun and the dreadfully long baseline rallies. A recipe for a pounding headache.

Here is the most telling stat of all...
Unforced errors in 1st, 3rd and 5th set tiebreaks combined:
Federer 11
Djokovic 0

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Truly telling klacr. Novak Djokovic did a masterful job of orchestrating this match.

Novak has been called the greatest grass player of all time. How grass and times have changed: this about a player who does not know how to volley...

The most telling comment of all.

[jeffreycounts]

Do you guys think that Federer should use a stats guy? Or maybe he already does?

I doubt it, but he sure should.

[arturohernandez]

Article from Craig O'Shannessey

What happened in the three tie-breaks was the exact opposite of what happened all around them.

Novak Djokovic defeated Roger Federer 7-6(5), 1-6, 7-6(4), 4-6, 13-12(3) in Sunday’s Wimbledon final after saving two match points with Federer serving 8-7, 40/15 in the fifth set, and then Djokovic dramatically saved two break points on his own serve at 11-11, Ad Out, just a few games later.

The match statistics were overwhelmingly dominated by Federer, except for a handful of moments when Djokovic was able to reign supreme. In all three sets Djokovic won, he controlled the tie-breaks, making Federer significantly bend to his own intentions of playing the big points on the Serbian’s terms with both players trading blows from the back of the court.

At first glance, Federer’s overall net stats look extremely impressive. But when you break down when they occurred – and more importantly when they didn’t – the first real glimpse of this stunning defeat becomes clearer.

More From The Championships
Match Report: Djokovic Saves Two Match Points To Beat Federer
Djokovic Joins Nadal In Qualifying For #NittoATPFinals
Roger & Novak: Every Match Ever Played
How Djokovic Beat Federer To Win 2019 Title At SW19

Federer won 13/15 points serving and volleying and 51/65 points approaching the net from a baseline position. But in the 33 total points in all three tie-breaks combined, the Swiss won only one solitary point at net from just two forays forward.

Check mate.

Twenty of the 33 points (61%) in the three tie-breaks were contested with both players standing at the baseline, which played perfectly into Djokovic’s masterplan. Djokovic won 16 of the baseline exchanges, while Federer accumulated only four. Of the eight rallies that reached double digits, Djokovic won six.

In the big moments at the end of sets one, three and five, with an illustrious Wimbledon title up for grabs, Djokovic fought the fight on his terms – and ultimately on his turf. To rub salt into the wound, Djokovic won more points at net (three) than Federer did (one) in the three tie-breaks.

Three Tie-Breaks: Points Won By Strategy

(ND = Novak Djokovic / RF = Roger Federer)

Tie-Break	Both At Baseline	Federer At Net	Djokovic At Net	Ace/ Return Error / Service Winner
Set 1 Tie-Break 7-5	ND 5 / RF 1	ND 0 / RF 0	ND 2 / RF 1	ND 0 / RF 3
Set 3 Tie-Break 7-4	ND 5 / RF 1	ND 0 / RF 1	ND 1 / RF 0	ND 1 / RF 2
Set 5 Tie- Break 7-3	ND 6 / RF 2	ND 1 / RF 0	ND 0 / RF 0	ND 0 / RF 1
W/L Totals	ND 16 / RF 4	ND 1 / RF 1	ND 3 / RF 1	ND 1 / RF 6
Percentage Played	61%	6.0%	12%	21%

The difference in average rally length in the three tie-breaks when both players finished the point standing at the baseline compared to coming forward or winning the point in the serve and return phase of the point was staggering.

Average Rally Length
Fifth-Set Tie-Break
Both At Baseline = 8 rallies / 53 shots = 6.6 shot average.
All Other Points = 2 rallies / 3 shots = 1.5 shot average.

Third-Set Tie-Break
Both At Baseline = 6 rallies / 51 shots = 8.5 shot average.
All Other Points = 5 rallies / 11 shots = 2.2 shot average.

First-Set Tie-Break
Both At Baseline = 6 rallies / 48 shots = 8.0 shot average.
All Other Points = 6 rallies / 10 shots = 1.7 shot average.

Three Tie-Breaks Combined
Both At Baseline = 20 rallies / 152 shots = 7.6 shot average.
All Other Points = 13 rallies = 24 shots = 1.8 shot average.

When Federer held two championship points serving at 8-7, 40/15 in the fifth set, he lost four consecutive points. Three of them were contested with both players standing at the back of the court.

The match contained 422 points, with almost half of them (46%) finishing with both players standing on their own baseline after the serve and return had successfully been hit in the court.

Throughout the match, when Djokovic kept Federer back and was able to go toe-to-toe from the trenches, he crafted a vastly superior advantage.



You May Also Like: Djokovic Matches Federer On 'Big Titles' Leaderboard


Baseline to Baseline Rallies: Total Points Won
Djokovic = 59% won (113/194)
Federer = 41% won (80/194)

First Serves To The Body
Serving right at the body with first serves is a forgotten tactic of yesteryear, rarely seen on the ATP Tour on any surface. Djokovic might have single-handedly revived it on Sunday at SW19. In an effort to jam up Federer’s forward-moving return strategy, Djokovic aimed right at Federer 10 times in the final, winning an impressive eight of those points.

Djokovic First Serves To The Body
Deuce Court = Won 4/4
Ad Court = Won 4/6
Total Won = 8/10

By contrast, Federer served only one first serve at Djokovic’s body in the final, winning the point. Djokovic also hit nine first serves at the body against Hubert Hurkacz in the third round, winning eight of nine. If we start seeing an uptick in body serves in the upcoming North-American hard-court swing, we might know why.

Djokovic’s fifth Wimbledon title is impressive on so many levels. Forcing Federer to play the majority of tie-break points in baseline-to-baseline exchanges is as close to the bullseye of why he won as you will get.

Very eye opening!!

Not sure that everyone knows Djokovic works with O'Shaghnessy. I have been following Brain Game for a while and he really digs deep into the numbers. This represents an interesting conundrum for Federer. He can now win longer rallies against Nadal. Or at least stay even in the rallies so that his dominant service games put more pressure on Nadal.


I was watching a Sampras and Fed replay the other day (as I noted earlier) and I had the same feeling watching Sampras. Peter Bodo said that there was no one he ever knew who had such absolute belief in his game. And Sampras knew that against Agassi he was going to keep coming and let the chips fall where they may. Staying back and rallying with Agassi was not a winning game plan. Federer has a much more complete game than Sampras, Djokovic and Nadal. He can play from the frontcourt or the backcourt. Both work. But against Djokovic he is forced to come in or lose points. I am not sure what his serve and volley stats where on Sunday but I don't remember him using it that much and did not use SABR at all. O'Shaughnessy is right. He definitely did not come to the net at all in the tiebreaks. If you serve and volley, the point will be played at the net. Not every point but at least some points.

The loss by Federer is difficult to swallow because for those of us rooting for him there are a number of ways we can imagine him winning it. He could win it from the baseline or from the net. He could serve and volley. He could do a delayed approach. He could hit a forehand winner. Djokovic had only one way to win and he stuck to it. His job was to get Federer into baseline rallies and just weather the storm from Federer's forays to the net. It worked but barely. But in the tie breaks he could just play steady from the baseline knowing that his chances were much higher in longer rallies.

Djokovic is now the new Nadal for Fed. He can counterpunch all day and there is little Federer can do to win points from the baseline.

Federer seems to be getting closer to Djokovic in the last few years. Just a few years ago he could not get to a fifth set against Djokovic. Maybe this win will open his eyes to how he should play on key points. Serve and volley, SABR. He tried it on his second match point. Maybe he should have done it on every match and set point he had. How about kick serve and then approach the net. Risky but staying at the baseline is not a winning proposition.

The good news is that Fed can finally develop a key point strategy against Djokovic. Become Sampras for those points. He did it in 2001. He can do it today, at least when he really needs to. And on match points against Djokovic he needs to. 40/60 is a losing proposition.

Do you guys think that Federer should use a stats guy? Or maybe he already does?

[stotty]

Interesting the way others view the match. Sometimes it's better to watch the match and to hell with the stats. Just watch what is going on. It was a good observation in Seano's post about Novak's body serves. He left it late in the match to start doing that and should've embarked on the ploy earlier. It is a great tactic against someone standing in close to return.

I thought Roger's sliced backhand was essential in the match and by no means a go to security shot. I thought he might have more joy than he did knifing the sliced backhand down the line to Novak's backhand. He managed to get vicious inside out slice on some them too. I was surprised how well Novak dealt with those on his forehand. I think he only had trouble with one and belted the rest crosscourt with little trouble at all. Driving backhands at Novak would just have played into his wheelhouse. Wawrinka can do that, no one else.

One poster said Novak played badly. Actually, he didn't play that great but at least tow-thirds of that was down to Roger's slicing and dicing and brilliant serving. Novak was deep in the third set before he became even close to reading Roger's serve.

I have seen matches won completely against the run of play, but these have always been with mammoth servers like Roddick, etc. It's almost unheard of for a baseliner to do it.

Having got himself into tiebreaks three times, it really came down to mindset and balls, and I am afraid Novak won out there.

If there is one mistake Roger made it was he might have toyed with Novak a little more...taken a leaf out of Kyrgios's book.

[stroke]

I thought the slice backhand really hurt Roger. He relies on it like a security blanket, but the only thing that shot did, from what I could see, was give Djokovic a nice opportunity to dictate the point. I think his over reliance on that shot cost him the match. I'll also say that I think Novak's game and mind are better under extreme pressure thdan . Roger has the better game for sure on grass, but under extreme pressure I would take Novak every time. The more reliable two handed backhand and the mindset just seem superior from Novak in those situations. Roger lost because he was beaten in high pressure situations, plain and simple. He lost all three tie breaks and lost both match points. That's the definition of losing under pressure.

I would say it was the worst loss of his career. I was personally devastated by it, so I can't imagine how Roger feels. He had the match won, but Novak just ripped it out of his hands due to being better in those few high pressure situations. Ugh!

I would agree it was the worst loss of Fed's career. And as much as I like Fed's backhand, and I do think overall(particularly because he can take the ball on so early on it) it is the best one hander in the game, but Novak's is simply more reliable. That is the only match I can ever remember watching where the losing player seemed so much the better player and the one that should have won the match.

[seano]

Article from Craig O'Shannessey

What happened in the three tie-breaks was the exact opposite of what happened all around them.

Novak Djokovic defeated Roger Federer 7-6(5), 1-6, 7-6(4), 4-6, 13-12(3) in Sunday’s Wimbledon final after saving two match points with Federer serving 8-7, 40/15 in the fifth set, and then Djokovic dramatically saved two break points on his own serve at 11-11, Ad Out, just a few games later.

The match statistics were overwhelmingly dominated by Federer, except for a handful of moments when Djokovic was able to reign supreme. In all three sets Djokovic won, he controlled the tie-breaks, making Federer significantly bend to his own intentions of playing the big points on the Serbian’s terms with both players trading blows from the back of the court.

At first glance, Federer’s overall net stats look extremely impressive. But when you break down when they occurred – and more importantly when they didn’t – the first real glimpse of this stunning defeat becomes clearer.

More From The Championships
Match Report: Djokovic Saves Two Match Points To Beat Federer
Djokovic Joins Nadal In Qualifying For #NittoATPFinals
Roger & Novak: Every Match Ever Played
How Djokovic Beat Federer To Win 2019 Title At SW19

Federer won 13/15 points serving and volleying and 51/65 points approaching the net from a baseline position. But in the 33 total points in all three tie-breaks combined, the Swiss won only one solitary point at net from just two forays forward.

Check mate.

Twenty of the 33 points (61%) in the three tie-breaks were contested with both players standing at the baseline, which played perfectly into Djokovic’s masterplan. Djokovic won 16 of the baseline exchanges, while Federer accumulated only four. Of the eight rallies that reached double digits, Djokovic won six.

In the big moments at the end of sets one, three and five, with an illustrious Wimbledon title up for grabs, Djokovic fought the fight on his terms – and ultimately on his turf. To rub salt into the wound, Djokovic won more points at net (three) than Federer did (one) in the three tie-breaks.

Three Tie-Breaks: Points Won By Strategy

(ND = Novak Djokovic / RF = Roger Federer)

Tie-Break	Both At Baseline	Federer At Net	Djokovic At Net	Ace/ Return Error / Service Winner
Set 1 Tie-Break 7-5	ND 5 / RF 1	ND 0 / RF 0	ND 2 / RF 1	ND 0 / RF 3
Set 3 Tie-Break 7-4	ND 5 / RF 1	ND 0 / RF 1	ND 1 / RF 0	ND 1 / RF 2
Set 5 Tie- Break 7-3	ND 6 / RF 2	ND 1 / RF 0	ND 0 / RF 0	ND 0 / RF 1
W/L Totals	ND 16 / RF 4	ND 1 / RF 1	ND 3 / RF 1	ND 1 / RF 6
Percentage Played	61%	6.0%	12%	21%

The difference in average rally length in the three tie-breaks when both players finished the point standing at the baseline compared to coming forward or winning the point in the serve and return phase of the point was staggering.

Average Rally Length
Fifth-Set Tie-Break
Both At Baseline = 8 rallies / 53 shots = 6.6 shot average.
All Other Points = 2 rallies / 3 shots = 1.5 shot average.

Third-Set Tie-Break
Both At Baseline = 6 rallies / 51 shots = 8.5 shot average.
All Other Points = 5 rallies / 11 shots = 2.2 shot average.

First-Set Tie-Break
Both At Baseline = 6 rallies / 48 shots = 8.0 shot average.
All Other Points = 6 rallies / 10 shots = 1.7 shot average.

Three Tie-Breaks Combined
Both At Baseline = 20 rallies / 152 shots = 7.6 shot average.
All Other Points = 13 rallies = 24 shots = 1.8 shot average.

When Federer held two championship points serving at 8-7, 40/15 in the fifth set, he lost four consecutive points. Three of them were contested with both players standing at the back of the court.

The match contained 422 points, with almost half of them (46%) finishing with both players standing on their own baseline after the serve and return had successfully been hit in the court.

Throughout the match, when Djokovic kept Federer back and was able to go toe-to-toe from the trenches, he crafted a vastly superior advantage.



You May Also Like: Djokovic Matches Federer On 'Big Titles' Leaderboard


Baseline to Baseline Rallies: Total Points Won
Djokovic = 59% won (113/194)
Federer = 41% won (80/194)

First Serves To The Body
Serving right at the body with first serves is a forgotten tactic of yesteryear, rarely seen on the ATP Tour on any surface. Djokovic might have single-handedly revived it on Sunday at SW19. In an effort to jam up Federer’s forward-moving return strategy, Djokovic aimed right at Federer 10 times in the final, winning an impressive eight of those points.

Djokovic First Serves To The Body
Deuce Court = Won 4/4
Ad Court = Won 4/6
Total Won = 8/10

By contrast, Federer served only one first serve at Djokovic’s body in the final, winning the point. Djokovic also hit nine first serves at the body against Hubert Hurkacz in the third round, winning eight of nine. If we start seeing an uptick in body serves in the upcoming North-American hard-court swing, we might know why.

Djokovic’s fifth Wimbledon title is impressive on so many levels. Forcing Federer to play the majority of tie-break points in baseline-to-baseline exchanges is as close to the bullseye of why he won as you will get.

[jeffreycounts]

I thought the slice backhand really hurt Roger. He relies on it like a security blanket, but the only thing that shot did, from what I could see, was give Djokovic a nice opportunity to dictate the point. I think his over reliance on that shot cost him the match. I'll also say that I think Novak's game and mind are better under extreme pressure than Roger's. Roger has the better game for sure on grass, but under extreme pressure I would take Novak every time. The more reliable two handed backhand and the mindset just seem superior from Novak in those situations. Roger lost because he was beaten in high pressure situations, plain and simple. He lost all three tie breaks and lost both match points. That's the definition of losing under pressure.

I would say it was the worst loss of his career. I was personally devastated by it, so I can't imagine how Roger feels. He had the match won, but Novak just ripped it out of his hands due to being better in those few high pressure situations. Ugh!

[arturohernandez]

Roger played the match perfectly. He was tactically superb and played with his full repertoire from start to finish. He was on his favourite court with just a feintest breeze which made it perfect for lights out serving. He played all the tennis and often completely out-manoeuvred, out-pointed, and out-played Novak. He really couldn’t have done any more or played the match any better. All Novak did was hang in. He won the first set despite serving terribly and having to rely mostly on his second serve. He won the third set in much the same vein.

The only certain thing in that match is that when it came to serving for the match, standing with two match points, is you knew, absolutely knew, that if Roger did not serve an ace then he would be made to win those match points with a hard fought rally. That, at least, was a given certainty.

The match was indescribable for it’s against-all-the-odds outcome. Novak is the hardest player to put away ever. He only did one thing better than Roger all afternoon and that was to play three magnificent tie-breaks. No one can deny him that. In the clutch he was absolutely superb and just raised himself above Roger for around 15 minutes during those breakers.

Tennis is amazing like that. That the most magnificent player with the most amazing repertoire imaginable lost, on his favoured surface, to someone not fit to lace his tennis shoes in terms of natural talent and shot-making.

In essence, Novak won the match completely alone with hardly a fan in the house. The crowd, unusual by British standards of fair play, were, it seemed, 100% on Roger’s side. Novak questioned one late call and even got booed. You have to admire the inner strength it takes to win a match like that. The boy has some metal. I thought I’d seen everything when it comes to tennis. It’s seems I hadn’t. It’s ineffable.


And let’s not forget Simona Halep. She was not intimidated one little bit by Serena and completely outplayed her. She made Serena look slow and pedestrian. She kept the pressure up from start to finish and didn’t allow her opponent any breathing space. It was a terrific performance and a terrific win.

Yes, an ace would have sealed it. I was rewatching Sampras-Fed today for just a short while. Fed is kind of stuck in between. Not a serve and volleyer and not a baseline backboard either. This creates uncertainty for the opponent but also for him. Djokovic would simply not go away. But he looked off to me. Not playing the way he did in the past. I wonder if this is a sign of another drop in play for Djokovic moving forward.

[stroke]

Here is the most telling stat of all...
Unforced errors in 1st, 3rd and 5th set tiebreaks combined:
Federer 11
Djokovic 0

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

that is the most telling stat of the match. no doubt

[arturohernandez]

Novak has been called the greatest grass player of all time. How grass and times have changed: this about a player who does not know how to volley...

He doesn't really know how to volley well and yet it is hard to exploit this weakness in today's game.

[stotty]

Roger played the match perfectly. He was tactically superb and played with his full repertoire from start to finish. He was on his favourite court with just a feintest breeze which made it perfect for lights out serving. He played all the tennis and often completely out-manoeuvred, out-pointed, and out-played Novak. He really couldn’t have done any more or played the match any better. All Novak did was hang in. He won the first set despite serving terribly and having to rely mostly on his second serve. He won the third set in much the same vein.

The only certain thing in that match is that when it came to serving for the match, standing with two match points, is you knew, absolutely knew, that if Roger did not serve an ace then he would be made to win those match points with a hard fought rally. That, at least, was a given certainty.

The match was indescribable for it’s against-all-the-odds outcome. Novak is the hardest player to put away ever. He only did one thing better than Roger all afternoon and that was to play three magnificent tie-breaks. No one can deny him that. In the clutch he was absolutely superb and just raised himself above Roger for around 15 minutes during those breakers.

Tennis is amazing like that. That the most magnificent player with the most amazing repertoire imaginable lost, on his favoured surface, to someone not fit to lace his tennis shoes in terms of natural talent and shot-making.

In essence, Novak won the match completely alone with hardly a fan in the house. The crowd, unusual by British standards of fair play, were, it seemed, 100% on Roger’s side. Novak questioned one late call and even got booed. You have to admire the inner strength it takes to win a match like that. The boy has some metal. I thought I’d seen everything when it comes to tennis. It’s seems I hadn’t. It’s ineffable.


And let’s not forget Simona Halep. She was not intimidated one little bit by Serena and completely outplayed her. She made Serena look slow and pedestrian. She kept the pressure up from start to finish and didn’t allow her opponent any breathing space. It was a terrific performance and a terrific win.

[stroke]

We have thought that before, I would not write him off yet.....

agreed

[gzhpcu]

It is hard to believe that Roger will get another shot at a Major as great as he is.

We have thought that before, I would not write him off yet.....

[gzhpcu]

Novak has been called the greatest grass player of all time. How grass and times have changed: this about a player who does not know how to volley...

[klacr]

Federer won 218 points. Djokovic 204.
Another Simpson's paradox match for Fed.
He also had 40 more winners than Djokovic. 15 more aces. A higher first serve and 2nd serve percentage, as well as a higher percentage of points won on 1st and 2nd serves. More net points won and a higher percentage. More break points won and a higher percentage. More receiving points won.

10 more unforced errors for Fed.

You don't have to win the most points. Just the important ones.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Here is the most telling stat of all...
Unforced errors in 1st, 3rd and 5th set tiebreaks combined:
Federer 11
Djokovic 0

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton