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

[don_budge]

The War on Men...not so subtle anymore

Is anyone else repulsed by the media fawning over "Coco"? I am and think it's not only premature but disrespectul to where she is in her career. I wish her the best but these kinds of expecations are ridiculous and could truly mess with this kid's psyche. Remember Melanie Oudin? Genie Bouchard? Cici Bellis? Let's wait til she does something significant besides win one match against Venus.

She's black and she's female. The perfect media darling. Reverse racism. But in a sense I think she may be an outstanding prospect yet, of course, the media overplays it's hand. It's no surprise that they gave this rather young and untested prospect a rather unreasonable of coverage. But we are in those times. Post 1984...Orwellian style.

I watched more of Serena Williams than I maybe ever have and that isn't because I chose to do so. Serena was playing Sanchez-Navarro and it was truly a horrible match. Just disgusting. The level was so bad that I couldn't take my eyes off of it. At the same time Rafael Nadal was playing on centre court but somehow the coverage was focused on Serena and I wonder if anyone else thought what I was thinking. It was amazing how much was made of the new "American Princess" Meghan Markle and how she was trotted out to hammer the point home. The British Monarchy will live to regret the choice of the idiot Prince if they haven't already. The Duke warned him...you play around with actresses...you don't marry them. Silly Prince. Thinking with the wrong head. More on Serena later.

This business of the American soccer team getting as much coverage and politicising the rather meaningless victory was another not so subtly example of the "War on Men" that I have been writing about. It goes hand in hand with the current "reverse racism" where it is okay to advocate reparations to a class of people at the expense of another class. It's all so convoluted and bizarre that the ensuing discussion will quickly devolve into accusations of the flavour of the day...take your pick. Racism, misogyinism or what the other nineteen other favourite go to charges. The purple headed bimbo wants to run for political office now on the "Hate Trump" platform. Silly idiot.

So that brings us back to the discussion regarding equal pay. The female Swedish female commentator who is sidekick to Jonas "what's his name" advocated that the women play best of five as a go along with the equal pay. I'll go one step further and suggest that the "ladies" are included in a draw without gender bias. Let's go the whole nine yards children. Jonas Bjorkman. Wrap all of them in the same enchilada...call it the "diversity" taco. Pink hair soccer player, Serena, Princess Markle...all of the advocates of the "new normal" and throw them head first into the mulch pile.

I did watch the entire "Ladies Final" and understandably happy that Simona Halep took the bully Serena Williams to the wood pile and gave here the ass kicking that she so richly deserved after bullying the girls on the tour all of these years. When Serena put her arm around Simona her hand was clearly visible for an extended moment and lo and behold here ring finger is so much longer than her index finger. It isn't the final proof...just another clue. What is life other than put the clues...the endless clues together? Like the three little dots there are no definite...there is no right or wrong. I am not agreeing or disagreeing. But I am not afraid of the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

It's a "War on Men". It isn't so subtle anymore. The Prince and the Duchess were out on the town with Beyonce and Jay Z last night. That's normal now. The new normal. The Queen must be just rolling her eyes into the back of her head.

[stroke]

As far as I am concerned, even though I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of Meghan, Britain is getting what it deserves with its state sponsored royal family nonsense. As for as purple hair and Serena, what more is there to say. It is all in plain sight.

[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

[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...

[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.....

[stroke]

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

agreed

[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.

[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.

[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]

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.

[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!

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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?