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

[jeffreycounts]

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

I doubt it, but he sure should.

[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.