why is Djokovic only aggressive against Nadal?

Firstly, this is not a novak bashing thread.

I was rewatching the 4th and fifth sets of the 2013 French open semi where novak was playing great attacking tennis. Inside out forehands better than Federer, great backhand crosscourt and DTL. It prompts me to ask: why does he not play like this all the time.

It is out of choice, or is it that Nadal at the French gives him the high balls which make it easier to attack?

I think it is a combination but more down to choice. He's got into a comfort zone where he knows he can beat most players most of the time by playing a safe style of tennis. We have seen he has come a cropper due to this passivity (Wawrinka, nishikori), and I believe it is preventing him from winning more slams (and fans).

I also think it is damaging his ability to attack, as he is simply not practicing them enough, most notably the powerful DTL backhand close to the line.

What do others think about this?

He knows if he plays defensively against Nadal it will be carnage, Nadal will move him around the court in every rally and Djokovic will either be out of position or out of breath; while at the same time by attacking Nadal's topspin (and he is one of the players who can deal with Nadal's ball consistently) he can keep in control of the rally and dictate the play.
In the fifth set of that match Djokovic was playing phenomenal tennis (apart from occasionally falling into the net), but Nadal was ridiculous, I think he hit double the winners of Djokovic and was nailing the lines.

I, too would be aggressive and even hostile if I was playing a player fiddled with his hair, rocked too and fro and picked clinkers from his ar$e all before a serve!

It Must Be Love wrote:He knows if he plays defensively against Nadal it will be carnage, Nadal will move him around the court in every rally and Djokovic will either be out of position or out of breath; while at the same time by attacking Nadal's topspin (and he is one of the players who can deal with Nadal's ball consistently) he can keep in control of the rally and dictate the play.
In the fifth set of that match Djokovic was playing phenomenal tennis (apart from occasionally falling into the net), but Nadal was ridiculous, I think he hit double the winners of Djokovic and was nailing the lines.

Yes both were playing brilliantly, so why not play that style all the time? Its the same question for murray (Henman asks it everytime he commentates on him). Its a comfort zone. I thought becker might get him out of it, but sadly looks like he's another yes man

greengoblin wrote:

Yes both were playing brilliantly, so why not play that style all the time? Its the same question for murray (Henman asks it everytime he commentates on him). Its a comfort zone. I thought becker might get him out of it, but sadly looks like he's another yes man

Being told to play aggressive against Nadal is another way of saying you haven't got a chance in hell of winning unless you take some really low percentage hit or miss swings at the ball. Credit to Djokovic and Federer that they are the only players that can have a hope of living with him (when he isn't injured) if they don't throw caution to the wind. But then they are also the only two players who are talented enough to play him at his own game and even they sometimes give in and play like an underdog. ie swing as hard as you can and aim roughly in the direction of the lines.

Because Novak is a strategist he can adapt his game according to his opponents weaknesses.  He has to take the initiative away from Rafa for the reasons IMBL state.. There is no love in war and Novak is fully aware, as are the rest of us, Nadal has suffered physically. When he is firing on all four cylinders Rafa is equally capable of turning the tables. Its a war of attrition which develops into long rallies which actually now doesn't suit either of them.. it will be interesting to see how their matches develop in 2015 but should they meet in Australia.. the climatic difficulties will take its toll more on Novak than Rafa

Haddie-nuff wrote:Because Novak is a strategist he can adapt his game according to his opponents weaknesses.  He has to take the initiative away from Rafa for the reasons IMBL state.. There is no love in war and Novak is fully aware, as are the rest of us, Nadal has suffered physically. When he is firing on all four cylinders Rafa is equally capable of turning the tables. Its a war of attrition which develops into long rallies which actually now doesn't suit either of them.. it will be interesting to see how their matches develop in 2015 but should they meet in Australia.. the climatic difficulties will take its toll more on Novak than Rafa

That's Love sacks and you know it. He plays the same way against everyone apart from rafa and roger. Its pathetic and he's throwing away his career. Same as Murray

greengoblin wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Because Novak is a strategist he can adapt his game according to his opponents weaknesses.  He has to take the initiative away from Rafa for the reasons IMBL state.. There is no love in war and Novak is fully aware, as are the rest of us, Nadal has suffered physically. When he is firing on all four cylinders Rafa is equally capable of turning the tables. Its a war of attrition which develops into long rallies which actually now doesn't suit either of them.. it will be interesting to see how their matches develop in 2015 but should they meet in Australia.. the climatic difficulties will take its toll more on Novak than Rafa

That's Love sacks and you know it. He plays the same way against everyone apart from rafa and roger. Its pathetic and he's throwing away his career. Same as Murray

I would ask you not to address me like that thank you
What is the matter with you ?? you have a downer on Novak.  I am no fan of his but to belittle his talent the way you do says more about you than him.  Ive yet to read one positive post of yours since you arrived... negative negative

Look at Murray- he hired mauresmo so someone would be nice to him- and now his game's a mess. He needs someone like Connors to tell him he throwing his career away and he should be playing the tennis he's capable of- not the dismal passivity and lack of purpose that characterised his performance against Federer.

I'm trying to help these players, you can't do that unless you criticise.

Yeah because Connors did such a great job with Roddick and Sharapova

Im sure they are very grateful... free advice

legendkillarV2 wrote:Yeah because Connors did such a great job with Roddick and Sharapova

Actually Roddick did pretty well with Connors. Got back to being aggressive and made us open 2006 final and gave Federer a great match us open 2007. I imagine Sharapova soon realised he wasn't going to take away of her nonsense.

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Yeah because Connors did such a great job with Roddick and Sharapova

Actually Roddick did pretty well with Connors. Got back to being aggressive and made us open 2006 final and gave Federer a great match us open 2007. I imagine Sharapova soon realised he wasn't going to take away of her nonsense.

He totally ruined Roddick's game and if it wasn't for the miracle performed by Stefanki he would've fallen by the wayside earlier.

Murray needs a coach he can work with, not clash with. Hence why Jimmy isn't in work as a coach.

It's time Murray shouldered the responsibility of his game and it's current state.

Haddie-nuff wrote: Im sure they are very grateful... free advice

Ha ha! Advice to some is only worth what you pay. The more you pay the more valuable it must be

legendkillarV2 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Yeah because Connors did such a great job with Roddick and Sharapova

Actually Roddick did pretty well with Connors. Got back to being aggressive and made us open 2006 final and gave Federer a great match us open 2007. I imagine Sharapova soon realised he wasn't going to take away of her nonsense.

He totally ruined Roddick's game and if it wasn't for the miracle performed by Stefanki he would've fallen by the wayside earlier.

Murray needs a coach he can work with, not clash with. Hence why Jimmy isn't in work as a coach.

It's time Murray shouldered the responsibility of his game and it's current state.

Are you serious? Stefanki made his forehand an absolute joke

I couldn't agree with you more. about Murray. I just don't understand how anyone can be so dense as murray seems to be in not realising what is wrong

Eh? Roddick won more matches and played much better under Stefanki. Hell his best match came under Stefanki.

to be honest I used to think Novak was pretty defensive but he is more attacking than he appears, he stands so close to the baseline which means he takes the ball on the rise almost every time which takes incredible talent. He doesn't have a big forehand like Rafa or Roger exactly although there are days I think its right up there, so it doesn't look always like he's trying to finish the point. He has the best DTL backhand in the game in my opinion and thats a great attacking shot.

Federer said himself that Novak has this incredible ability to be offensive while he's on the defence, which is incredible true. For me, Murray is far more defensive overall and Rafa can be too passive too and in my opinion more so than Novak, that being said when he decides to go on the attack there isn't much you can do!

legendkillarV2 wrote:Eh? Roddick won more matches and played much better under Stefanki. Hell his best match came under Stefanki.

LK I think you might be whistling down the wind

When Djokovic plays well, he's aggressive against everyone. He looks to strike first in the rally, open the court and end the point. His court position is usually aggressive, right up on the baseline. The recent efforts to improve his net game are an extension of being aggressive - they are a way to finish a point early.

But he plays his margins appropriately. If he's well on top of an opponent, he doesn't flatten his shots to his blazing winners. There's no value in increasing the risk.

Against Nadal and Federer, he often has to narrow the margins. Playing with big margins won't get the job done. You can perhaps argue that this is being more aggressive but it's just risk vs reward. His general tactics and approach are pretty much what they normally are. They just being played with smaller margins.

But Rafa is the same. When he's well on top of an opponent, he plays a very safety first game. He is behind the baseline, his net clearance is monstrous and he's quite happy to play cross court endlessly if it wins him the point.

When he plays well against Novak though, he's on the baseline and he hits his forehand down the line much more often.

Playing better players forces you to play more aggressively.

But you are right that Novak has 'comfort zone' that he can slip into that can cause him to come a cropper. He doesn't try to win the point, he tries not to lose the point. The Nishikori match at USO was a good exampe of this. I don't think this is ever a tactic though. It's just where he regresses to when he doesn't feel good on court.

Same with Rafa. You can tell when he doesn't feel confident because he positions himself very deep and just tries to keep getting one more ball back in play.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Eh? Roddick won more matches and played much better under Stefanki. Hell his best match came under Stefanki.

If I am right in thinking you are referring to wim 2009, then you are wrong, because he played better in 2004 final and imo really ought to have won, but for dumping his serve twice!! at the start of the second set. Ironic that Federer dominated Roddick but in 2/3 wimb finals Roddick ought to have won . Its a shame that under brad gilbert Roddick became a shadow of that player.

Haddie nuff: You came onto to this thread with no intention of responding to my original post about what djokovic should be doing. You just appear to be a novak fan girl who can't bear any criticism, and seemingly can't understand that people are not always on their computers.

HM Murdoch wrote:When Djokovic plays well, he's aggressive against everyone. He looks to strike first in the rally, open the court and end the point. His court position is usually aggressive, right up on the baseline. The recent efforts to improve his net game are an extension of being aggressive - they are a way to finish a point early.

But he plays his margins appropriately. If he's well on top of an opponent, he doesn't flatten his shots to his blazing winners. There's no value in increasing the risk.

Against Nadal and Federer, he often has to narrow the margins. Playing with big margins won't get the job done. You can perhaps argue that this is being more aggressive but it's just risk vs reward. His general tactics and approach are pretty much what they normally are. They just being played with smaller margins.

But Rafa is the same. When he's well on top of an opponent, he plays a very safety first game. He is behind the baseline, his net clearance is monstrous and he's quite happy to play cross court endlessly if it wins him the point.

When he plays well against Novak though, he's on the baseline and he hits his forehand down the line much more often.

Playing better players forces you to play more aggressively.

But you are right that Novak has 'comfort zone' that he can slip into that can cause him to come a cropper. He doesn't try to win the point, he tries not to lose the point. The Nishikori match at USO was a good exampe of this. I don't think this is ever a tactic though. It's just where he regresses to when he doesn't feel good on court.

Same with Rafa. You can tell when he doesn't feel confident because he positions himself very deep and just tries to keep getting one more ball back in play.

Agreed but don't you think Novak should force himself to be more aggressive even when its not necessary?

Unless he truly believes he will lose playing aggressively, I don't see a counter argument. Tell me if I'm wrong.

greengoblin wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:When Djokovic plays well, he's aggressive against everyone. He looks to strike first in the rally, open the court and end the point. His court position is usually aggressive, right up on the baseline. The recent efforts to improve his net game are an extension of being aggressive - they are a way to finish a point early.

But he plays his margins appropriately. If he's well on top of an opponent, he doesn't flatten his shots to his blazing winners. There's no value in increasing the risk.

Against Nadal and Federer, he often has to narrow the margins. Playing with big margins won't get the job done. You can perhaps argue that this is being more aggressive but it's just risk vs reward. His general tactics and approach are pretty much what they normally are. They just being played with smaller margins.

But Rafa is the same. When he's well on top of an opponent, he plays a very safety first game. He is behind the baseline, his net clearance is monstrous and he's quite happy to play cross court endlessly if it wins him the point.

When he plays well against Novak though, he's on the baseline and he hits his forehand down the line much more often.

Playing better players forces you to play more aggressively.

But you are right that Novak has 'comfort zone' that he can slip into that can cause him to come a cropper. He doesn't try to win the point, he tries not to lose the point. The Nishikori match at USO was a good exampe of this. I don't think this is ever a tactic though. It's just where he regresses to when he doesn't feel good on court.

Same with Rafa. You can tell when he doesn't feel confident because he positions himself very deep and just tries to keep getting one more ball back in play.

Agreed but don't you think Novak should force himself to be more aggressive even when its not necessary?

Unless he truly believes he will lose playing aggressively, I don't see a counter argument.  Tell me if I'm wrong.

It's all about the percentages. If you know you will neatly always win by playing high percentage stuff, it makes sense to use it, with no need to go for low percentage shots a lot which increases the risk of losing a match. Playing the percentages is also a lot easier mentally, Novak can play high percentage tennis pretty much on muscle memory alone, with little need for thought, which he can thus save for his attacking noggin later on.

GG quote:


Haddie nuff: You came onto to this thread with no intention of responding to my original post about what djokovic should be doing. You just appear to be a novak fan girl who can't bear any criticism, and seemingly can't understand that people are not always on their computers.


Oh too bloody right Im a Novak fan girl...Im well known on 606v
for my unrequited love for the guy... ask any of the posters on here and they will confirm it Im sure

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Eh? Roddick won more matches and played much better under Stefanki. Hell his best match came under Stefanki.

If I am right in thinking you are referring to wim 2009, then you are wrong, because he played better in 2004 final and imo really ought to have won, but for dumping his serve twice!! at the start of the second set. Ironic that Federer dominated Roddick but in 2/3 wimb finals Roddick ought to have won . Its a shame that under brad gilbert Roddick became a shadow of that player.

Haddie nuff: You came onto to this thread with no intention of responding to my original post about what djokovic should be doing. You just appear to be a novak fan girl who can't bear any criticism, and seemingly can't understand that people are not always on their computers.

The one thing Stefanki bestowed on Roddick that Gilbert and Connors failed to was movement. He dropped 15 lbs and became much lighter around the court. Now imagine if he had that at the early parts of his career. Might have been a different story.

From 2004-2008 he was awful. Simple.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Eh? Roddick won more matches and played much better under Stefanki. Hell his best match came under Stefanki.

If I am right in thinking you are referring to wim 2009, then you are wrong, because he played better in 2004 final and imo really ought to have won, but for dumping his serve twice!! at the start of the second set. Ironic that Federer dominated Roddick but in 2/3 wimb finals Roddick ought to have won . Its a shame that under brad gilbert Roddick became a shadow of that player.

Haddie nuff: You came onto to this thread with no intention of responding to my original post about what djokovic should be doing. You just appear to be a novak fan girl who can't bear any criticism, and seemingly can't understand that people are not always on their computers.

The one thing Stefanki bestowed on Roddick that Gilbert and Connors failed to was movement. He dropped 15 lbs and became much lighter around the court. Now imagine if he had that at the early parts of his career. Might have been a different story.

From 2004-2008 he was awful. Simple.

Please rewatch 2004 final, and tell me he was 'awful'

temporary21 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:When Djokovic plays well, he's aggressive against everyone. He looks to strike first in the rally, open the court and end the point. His court position is usually aggressive, right up on the baseline. The recent efforts to improve his net game are an extension of being aggressive - they are a way to finish a point early.

But he plays his margins appropriately. If he's well on top of an opponent, he doesn't flatten his shots to his blazing winners. There's no value in increasing the risk.

Against Nadal and Federer, he often has to narrow the margins. Playing with big margins won't get the job done. You can perhaps argue that this is being more aggressive but it's just risk vs reward. His general tactics and approach are pretty much what they normally are. They just being played with smaller margins.

But Rafa is the same. When he's well on top of an opponent, he plays a very safety first game. He is behind the baseline, his net clearance is monstrous and he's quite happy to play cross court endlessly if it wins him the point.

When he plays well against Novak though, he's on the baseline and he hits his forehand down the line much more often.

Playing better players forces you to play more aggressively.

But you are right that Novak has 'comfort zone' that he can slip into that can cause him to come a cropper. He doesn't try to win the point, he tries not to lose the point. The Nishikori match at USO was a good exampe of this. I don't think this is ever a tactic though. It's just where he regresses to when he doesn't feel good on court.

Same with Rafa. You can tell when he doesn't feel confident because he positions himself very deep and just tries to keep getting one more ball back in play.

Agreed but don't you think Novak should force himself to be more aggressive even when its not necessary?

Unless he truly believes he will lose playing aggressively, I don't see a counter argument.  Tell me if I'm wrong.

It's all about the percentages. If you know you will neatly always win by playing high percentage stuff, it makes sense to use it, with no need to go for low percentage shots a lot which increases the risk of losing a match. Playing the percentages is also a lot easier mentally, Novak can play high percentage tennis pretty much on muscle memory alone, with little need for thought, which he can thus save for his attacking noggin later on.

Sorry, don't agree

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Eh? Roddick won more matches and played much better under Stefanki. Hell his best match came under Stefanki.

If I am right in thinking you are referring to wim 2009, then you are wrong, because he played better in 2004 final and imo really ought to have won, but for dumping his serve twice!! at the start of the second set. Ironic that Federer dominated Roddick but in 2/3 wimb finals Roddick ought to have won . Its a shame that under brad gilbert Roddick became a shadow of that player.

Haddie nuff: You came onto to this thread with no intention of responding to my original post about what djokovic should be doing. You just appear to be a novak fan girl who can't bear any criticism, and seemingly can't understand that people are not always on their computers.

The one thing Stefanki bestowed on Roddick that Gilbert and Connors failed to was movement. He dropped 15 lbs and became much lighter around the court. Now imagine if he had that at the early parts of his career. Might have been a different story.

From 2004-2008 he was awful. Simple.

Please rewatch 2004 final, and tell me he was 'awful'

Don't need to re-watch it. It is my opinion he was awful.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Oh too bloody right Im a Novak fan girl...Im well known on 606v
for my unrequited love for the guy... ask any of the posters on here and they will confirm it Im sure

Haddie loves everything about Novak apart from his personality, his behaviour and his tennis.

All i know is that HN loves me more then DJoko.

Maybe she can confirm it discreetly somehow, but I doubt it and she is very shy.

Haddie-nuff wrote:GG quote:


Haddie nuff: You came onto to this thread with no intention of responding to my original post about what djokovic should be doing. You just appear to be a novak fan girl who can't bear any criticism, and seemingly can't understand that people are not always on their computers.


Oh too bloody right Im a Novak fan girl...Im well known on 606v
for my unrequited love for the guy... ask any of the posters on here and they will confirm it Im sure

That comment from me was a bit childish, sorry about that. But what irritates me is I opined that Djokovic's loss Nishikori, his near loss against cillic at wim. etc were due to his passivity. Instead of debating these points, you came on here, ignored the premise, and pretended everything was rosy with his game.

So I will try again. What do you think went wrong in these matches?

legendkillarV2 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Eh? Roddick won more matches and played much better under Stefanki. Hell his best match came under Stefanki.

If I am right in thinking you are referring to wim 2009, then you are wrong, because he played better in 2004 final and imo really ought to have won, but for dumping his serve twice!! at the start of the second set. Ironic that Federer dominated Roddick but in 2/3 wimb finals Roddick ought to have won . Its a shame that under brad gilbert Roddick became a shadow of that player.

Haddie nuff: You came onto to this thread with no intention of responding to my original post about what djokovic should be doing. You just appear to be a novak fan girl who can't bear any criticism, and seemingly can't understand that people are not always on their computers.

The one thing Stefanki bestowed on Roddick that Gilbert and Connors failed to was movement. He dropped 15 lbs and became much lighter around the court. Now imagine if he had that at the early parts of his career. Might have been a different story.

From 2004-2008 he was awful. Simple.

Please rewatch 2004 final, and tell me he was 'awful'

Don't need to re-watch it. It is my opinion he was awful.

Ok keep telling yourself that

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Eh? Roddick won more matches and played much better under Stefanki. Hell his best match came under Stefanki.

If I am right in thinking you are referring to wim 2009, then you are wrong, because he played better in 2004 final and imo really ought to have won, but for dumping his serve twice!! at the start of the second set. Ironic that Federer dominated Roddick but in 2/3 wimb finals Roddick ought to have won . Its a shame that under brad gilbert Roddick became a shadow of that player.

Haddie nuff: You came onto to this thread with no intention of responding to my original post about what djokovic should be doing. You just appear to be a novak fan girl who can't bear any criticism, and seemingly can't understand that people are not always on their computers.

The one thing Stefanki bestowed on Roddick that Gilbert and Connors failed to was movement. He dropped 15 lbs and became much lighter around the court. Now imagine if he had that at the early parts of his career. Might have been a different story.

From 2004-2008 he was awful. Simple.

Please rewatch 2004 final, and tell me he was 'awful'

Don't need to re-watch it. It is my opinion he was awful.

Ok keep telling yourself that

You too.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

From 2004-2008 he was awful. Simple.

May I ask if you include 2003 in this period. The year when he won his sole GS. Stange that you omitted it

His movement was better under stefanki but his forehand like I say was a joke. 2003-2004 was his peak. This is backed up by his results....

HM Murdoch wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Oh too bloody right Im a Novak fan girl...Im well known on 606v
for my unrequited love for the guy... ask any of the posters on here and they will confirm it Im sure

Haddie loves everything about Novak apart from his personality, his behaviour and his tennis.

O come on HM you know thats not true..  well part of it is .. his tennis is not that bad lol..

Jahu:  My feelings for you go without saying

gg.  I wouldn't presume to suggest what "Djokovic is doing wrong"  he seems to be doing quite well for himself without my help

Haddie-nuff wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Oh too bloody right Im a Novak fan girl...Im well known on 606v
for my unrequited love for the guy... ask any of the posters on here and they will confirm it Im sure

Haddie loves everything about Novak apart from his personality, his behaviour and his tennis.

O come on HM you know thats not true..  well part of it is .. his tennis is not that bad lol..

Jahu:  My feelings for you go without saying

gg.  I wouldn't presume to suggest what "Djokovic is doing wrong"  he seems to be doing quite well for himself without my help

Again refusal to debate the issue. Nothing went wrong in those matches for novak.....

greengoblin wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

From 2004-2008 he was awful. Simple.

May I ask if you include 2003 in this period. The year when he won his sole GS. Stange that you omitted it

His movement was better under stefanki but his forehand like I say was a joke. 2003-2004 was his peak. This is backed up  by his results....

No you may not ask I include 2003. When he broke onto the scene in 2001 he was actually very light on his feet and wasn't carrying the bulk of muscle that he would develop 18 months after.

Your argument was Roddick was better under Connors than Stefanki. He won 3 titles under Connors compared with the 9 he won under Stefanki.

As you say "This is backed up by his results"

Stop friggin hounding me.. WHAT is the title of your article????"Why is Djokovic only aggressive against Nadal ???yes?

i ANSWERED IT


by greengoblin Yesterday at 10:19 pm

   Haddie-nuff wrote:Because Novak is a strategist he can adapt his game according to his opponents weaknesses.  He has to take the initiative away from Rafa for the reasons IMBL state.. There is no love in war and Novak is fully aware, as are the rest of us, Nadal has suffered physically. When he is firing on all four cylinders Rafa is equally capable of turning the tables. Its a war of attrition which develops into long rallies which actually now doesn't suit either of them.. it will be interesting to see how their matches develop in 2015 but should they meet in Australia.. the climatic difficulties will take its toll more on Novak than Rafa


That's Love sacks and you know it. He plays the same way against everyone apart from rafa and roger. Its pathetic and he's throwing away his career. Same as Murray

and your quite ridiculous reply.

You are now leading this thread  in a totally different direction.  I refuse to reply to your assertions that Djokovic is doing something wrong and throwing away his career ... how ludicrous can it get.
Djokovic like any other player cannot win all the time.. he is not a machine and I see nothing wrong in what he is doing .. Does that answer your question.

Now the one player he cannot outlast.

LuvSports! wrote:Now the one player he cannot outlast.

Agreed. Best 1-line answer btw.

Blue Moon, welcome

Thanks!

Welcome to the forum BM !

How did you find us ?

And thanks to you too, IMBL.

waste of time creating a thread whose premise is first ignored by the wilfully blind, then is hijacked by someone who thinks that Roddick with a powder puff forehand is better than 2004 Roddick

Thank god your opinion isn't universal

To be fair. A thread about Djokovic playing the margins becoming one about which version of Andy Roddick was better is a bit of a stretch even by our standards.


With that said 2004 Roddick was a pretty one dimensional player. The 2008-09 edition was a pretty good player. Skills around the net, still had the all powering serve, and could at least move

legendkillarV2 wrote:Thank god your opinion isn't universal

greengoblin wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:Because Novak is a strategist he can adapt his game according to his opponents weaknesses.  He has to take the initiative away from Rafa for the reasons IMBL state.. There is no love in war and Novak is fully aware, as are the rest of us, Nadal has suffered physically. When he is firing on all four cylinders Rafa is equally capable of turning the tables. Its a war of attrition which develops into long rallies which actually now doesn't suit either of them.. it will be interesting to see how their matches develop in 2015 but should they meet in Australia.. the climatic difficulties will take its toll more on Novak than Rafa

That's Love sacks and you know it. He plays the same way against everyone apart from rafa and roger. Its pathetic and he's throwing away his career. Same as Murray

No what is love sacks is you continually feeling that your unsupported opinions are correct. Djokovic is a player because of his athleticism and well rounded game who can adjust his style to the opponent and the conditions. He plays Roger and Rafa aggressively but it might not be the best strategy against every opponent. The part of your comment that truly is love sacks is the part where he "quote is throwing away his career". How can the best tennis player in the world 3 of the last 4 years be throwing away his career? What does that tell us about the other 1000 pro players on tour, then they should all commit mass suicide by your standards. You don't have to play like Federer or Sampras or Mcenroe, you can also have a great career playing more like Borg or Nadal.

HM Murdoch wrote:When Djokovic plays well, he's aggressive against everyone. He looks to strike first in the rally, open the court and end the point. His court position is usually aggressive, right up on the baseline. The recent efforts to improve his net game are an extension of being aggressive - they are a way to finish a point early.

But he plays his margins appropriately. If he's well on top of an opponent, he doesn't flatten his shots to his blazing winners. There's no value in increasing the risk.

Against Nadal and Federer, he often has to narrow the margins. Playing with big margins won't get the job done. You can perhaps argue that this is being more aggressive but it's just risk vs reward. His general tactics and approach are pretty much what they normally are. They just being played with smaller margins.

But Rafa is the same. When he's well on top of an opponent, he plays a very safety first game. He is behind the baseline, his net clearance is monstrous and he's quite happy to play cross court endlessly if it wins him the point.

When he plays well against Novak though, he's on the baseline and he hits his forehand down the line much more often.

Playing better players forces you to play more aggressively.

But you are right that Novak has 'comfort zone' that he can slip into that can cause him to come a cropper. He doesn't try to win the point, he tries not to lose the point. The Nishikori match at USO was a good exampe of this. I don't think this is ever a tactic though. It's just where he regresses to when he doesn't feel good on court.

Same with Rafa. You can tell when he doesn't feel confident because he positions himself very deep and just tries to keep getting one more ball back in play.

Agree with much of this post. Also agree that he did let Nishikori beat him to the punch at the USO and his desire to be safe hurt him in that match. But that isn't typically the way Nish has played. If you look at the fact that Nishikori typically in his career is a player who gives up a lot of errors and while always aggressive often will go off boil and have huge swings in matches then you can see why Novak would play that match in that way. But Nish was in great form and his haymakers kept landing. If he played Nish ten times 8 times or more Nishikori being that aggressive would probably go away in a flurry of errors at some point while snagging a set maybe. But Djokovic did err in not recognizing soon enough that today would be different if he didn't change his typical style of play.