AUSTRALIAN OPEN, Melbourne, ATP GRAND SLAM

[Carol]

Not a convincing win, but Nadal will be glad it didn't end up going 5.

Jzzzz , some of you are too demanding with Rafa, you should learn of Roger's fans and their approval it doesn't matter what he has played if he wins

 

[Carol]

Roger goes to the net more than most.

I'm not saying he doesn't but not with enough precision . If I recall well he just did pretty well two years ego when he changed a little bit the tactic going more often to the net

 

[Moxie]

I'm not saying he doesn't but not with enough precision . If I recall well he just did pretty well two years ego when he changed a little bit the tactic going more often to the net

Not enough precision? Carol, this whole line of argument by you is risible. I read back over. Rafa is always called "underrated" at the net, which is a cliche by now, but Roger is a natural to S&V and has always had a net game. He actually pulled back to adapt to today's more baseline game. As to 2 years ago, you're talking about the SABR "sneak attack by Roger." That was a specific strategy he invented to rush the net on the 2nd serve on occasion. It's only tangentially related to the discussion of his volleying capabilities. (In that, if he weren't such a good volleyer, he wouldn't even have bothered to invent it.)

 

[Carol]

Not enough precision? Carol, this whole line of argument by you is risible. I read back over. Rafa is always called "underrated" at the net, which is a cliche by now, but Roger is a natural to S&V and has always had a net game. He actually pulled back to adapt to today's more baseline game. As to 2 years ago, you're talking about the SABR "sneak attack by Roger." That was a specific strategy he invented to rush the net on the 2nd serve on occasion. It's only tangentially related to the discussion of his volleying capabilities. (In that, if he weren't such a good volleyer, he wouldn't even have bothered to invent it.)

He tried the SABR but it didn'last too long because the result. You can laugh whatever you want but I still don't see Roger with a great volley like he should have having so good serve, that's all

 

[Moxie]

He tried the SABR but it didn'last too long because the result. You can laugh whatever you want but I still don't see Roger with a great volley like he should have having so good serve, that's all

If you're tying it to his serve, you're talking about an S&V game, which is different, and so maybe you're talking about frequency not quality? As I mentioned, he backed off of S&V earlier in his career because of the nature of the game, i.e., more baseline. If you're talking about quality of his volleys, I don't think anyone agrees with you.

 

[Moxie]

^If both guys pick up a bit their levels it could be a classic match, given yet the difference in styles.

It may be my natural disinclination to Raonic's game, but I have a hard time picturing any version as a "classic."

 

[mrzz]

It may be my natural disinclination to Raonic's game, but I have a hard time picturing any version as a "classic."

I am not exactly a fan too, but he got more palatable as of late. Anyway, picture the following scenario: Raonic has a very good serving day, Nadal is playing well, and the match turns out to be a titanic battle between a helluva a server and Nadal trying to find a break. A lot of tie breakers, and the fifth going long. Not too many chances, but not too few to become boring. One of the players finally breaks to get a 9-7 or 8-6 result. It spells like classic to me.

 

[Vince Evert]

in case you missed the action...



Enjoy Rafa fans. Nadal playing a lot better than this time last year.

 

[Vince Evert]

 

[Vince Evert]

Raonic's QF. He's going to dethrone Nadal. Could be the match OF THE YEAR !

 

[Vince Evert]

Monfils while a great athlete and shot maker and crowds pleaser but is a mental midget.

 

[Tennis Fan]

I'm not saying he doesn't but not with enough precision . If I recall well he just did pretty well two years ego when he changed a little bit the tactic going more often to the net

That's what I think too, the precision is not there. It seems hit or miss to me. Suffice it to say I don't get worried when he goes to net. He's OK, but nothing great up there, IMO.

 

[Tennis Fan]

If you're tying it to his serve, you're talking about an S&V game, which is different, and so maybe you're talking about frequency not quality? As I mentioned, he backed off of S&V earlier in his career because of the nature of the game, i.e., more baseline. If you're talking about quality of his volleys, I don't think anyone agrees with you.

I do. I see it exactly the same way. The only time I see Federer volley much during a match is with lesser players. In a competitive match hardly at all, and that's when the precision is sorely lacking.

 

[masterclass]

Brazilian author Nelson Rodrigues has a lot of good quotes, one them is, roughly translated, "Nothing is more tiring then defending the obvious". I cannot believe people write what they write. Now I know I really should not even care to read (but unfortunately I generally do). Ok, some stats from the AO website. Net points won by Nadal, from the first three rounds:

17/24 (71%)
9/13 (69%)
11/16 (69%)

From Federer

20/23 (87%)
24/29 (83%)
16/24 (67%)

Even without considering multiple known facts as:

1) Federer is coming back after 6 months lay off;
2) Nadal in general rushes to the net only to finish off points (thus his success rate gets higher);
3) Federer faced better ranked playes (just check and don´t preach);

and so on and so forth, even so, Federer´s success rate is higher, and the total number of net points is higher.

And I really find hilarious that people came with one youtube video as "evidence"... go to the same youtube and count the videos with Nadal volleys. They are good videos, he is indeed a good volleyer. Now search for Federer volley videos. There are 100 times more.

I really cannot believe I am wasting my time on this.

Edit: Fact number 3) is incorrect. It is only true when you count the first four rounds (and Includes Nishikori). For the first three, Federer faced a top 10 in Berdych, which Nadal did not, but faced lower ranked players in the earlier rounds.

Yes, mrzz, thanks for that. It's quite unfortunate that some are apparently so ill-informed, but one hopes the following Federer's net stats from majors provided below will help shine the light of truth.

Federer's net stats in finals and semifinals at Majors from 2003-2016 (under 50% pct. highlighted in red):
(Note that net stats do not include serve & volley efforts where the returner failed to return the serve - which would make them even higher).

Finals - 27

AO:
2004 Australian............d. Safin..........…….....3 sets............17 of 25............68%
2006 Australian............d. Baghdatis..........….4 sets............32 of 41............78%
2007 Australian............d. Gonzalez..........…...3 sets............34 of 43............79%
2009 Australian............Lost to Nadal.........….5 sets............43 of 60............72%
2010 Australian............d. Murray..........……...3 sets............31 of 43............72%

RG:
2006 RG................……Lost to Nadal........….4 sets............30 of 41............73%
2007 RG................……Lost to Nadal..........…4 sets............21 of 34............62%
2008 RG................……Lost to Nadal........…..3 sets............18 of 42............43%
2009 RG................……d. Soderling.........…...3 sets..............9 of 11.............82%
2011 RG................……Lost to Nadal........…..4 sets............30 of 41............73%

Wimbledon:
2003 Wimbledon..........d. Philippoussis..........3 sets............20 of 29............69%
2004 Wimbledon..........d. Roddick..........…....4 sets............27 of 44............61%
2005 Wimbledon..........d. Roddick..........……3 sets............17 of 25............68%
2006 Wimbledon..........d. Nadal..........………4 sets............21 of 33............64%
2007 Wimbledon..........d. Nadal..........………5 sets............30 of 51............59%
2008 Wimbledon..........Lost to Nadal......…....5 sets............42 of 75............56%
2009 Wimbledon..........d. Roddick........….….5 sets............38 of 59............64%
2012 Wimbledon..........d. Murray.......…….....4 sets............53 of 68............78%
2014 Wimbledon..........Lost to Djokovic.........5 sets............44 of 67............67%
2015 Wimbledon..........Lost to Djokovic.........4 sets............42 of 58............72%


USO:
2004 USO..........……...d. Hewitt..........……..3 sets............31 of 35............89%
2005 USO.........……....d. Agassi..........……..4 sets............15 of 25............60%
2006 USO..........……...d. Roddick........…......4 sets............26 of 38............68%
2007 USO..........……...d. Djokovic..........…..3 sets............19 of 24............79%
2008 USO..........……..d. Murray........….……3 sets............31 of 44............70%
2009 USO..........……...Lost to Del Potro........5 sets............31 of 47............66%
2015 USO....................Lost to Djokovic..........4 sets............39 of 59............66%
------------------------

Semifinals - 40

AO :
2004 AO - d Ferrero............3 sets - 16 of 21 (76%)
2005 AO - Lost to Safin...... 5 sets - 52 of 68 (76%)
2006 AO - d Kiefer............ ..4 sets - 19 of 24 (79%)
2007 AO - d Roddick...........3 sets - 10 of 11 (91%)
2008 AO - Lost to Djokovic..3 sets - 22 of 31 (71%)
2009 AO - d Roddick.......... 3 sets - 17 of 27 (63%)
2010 AO - d Tsonga............ 3 sets - 22 of 30 (73%)
2011 AO - Lost to Djokovic. 3 sets - 17 of 26 (65%)
2012 AO - Lost to Nadal..... 4 sets - 35 of 57 (61%)
2013 AO - Lost to Murray.... 5 sets - 29 of 44 (66%)
2014 AO - Lost to Nadal......3 sets - 23 of 42 (55%)
2016 AO - Lost to Djokovic..4 sets - 22 of 38 (58%)

RG :
2005 RG - Lost to Nadal......4 sets - 36 of 59 (61%)
2006 RG - d Nalbandian......3 sets - 14 of 19 (74%)
2007 RG - d Davydenko......3 sets - 14 of 26 (54%)
2008 RG - d Monfils.............4 sets - 49 of 64 (77%)
2009 RG - d Del Potro.........5 sets - 24 of 33 (73%)
2011 RG - d Djokovic...........4 sets - 15 of 19 (79%)
2012 RG - Lost to Djokovic..3 sets - 12 of 16 (75%)

Wimbledon:
2003 Wimbledon - d Roddick....3 sets - 29 of 39 (74%)
2004 Wimbledon - d Grosjean...3 sets - 28 of 37 (76%)
2005 Wimbledon - d Hewitt........3 sets - 14 of 22 (64%)
2006 Wimbledon - d Bjorkman...3 sets - 13 of 19 (68%)
2007 Wimbledon - d Gasquet.....3 sets - 13 of 23 (57%)
2008 Wimbledon - d Safin..........3 sets - 04 of 11 (36%)
2009 Wimbledon - d Haas..........3 sets - 38 of 43 (88%)
2012 Wimbledon - d Djokovic.....4 sets - 13 of 25 (52%)
2014 Wimbledon - d Raonic.......3 sets - 24 of 32 (75%)
2015 Wimbledon - d. Murray.......3 sets - 29 of 42 (69%)
2016 Wimbledon - L. to Raonic..5 sets - 25 of 37 (68%)

USO :
2004 USO - d Henman..........3 sets - 11 of 20 (55%)
2005 USO - d Hewitt..............4 sets - 34 of 49 (69%)
2006 USO - d Davydenko .....3 sets - 13 of 20 (65%)
2007 USO - d Davydenko......3 sets - 20 of 30 (67%)
2008 USO - d Djokovic..........4 sets - 18 of 30 (60%)
2009 USO - d Djokovic..........3 sets - 29 of 36 (81%)
2015 USO - d. Wawrinka.......3 sets - 22 of 28 (79%)
2010 USO - Lost to Djokovic..5 sets - 40 of 55 (73%)
2011 USO - Lost to Djokovic..5 sets - 18 of 27 (67%)
2014 USO - Lost to Cilic........3 sets - 11 of 23 (48%)
=====================

So there we have it. So far, Federer has won less than 50% at net only 3 out of 67 (4%) of his total final and semifinal matches in majors (slams). Remarkably, he had only 11 of 67 (16%) where he won less than 60% at net. Note that he only played 12 out of 52 majors where he did not reach the SF since Wimbledon 2003.

One thing to note about net stats and serve & volley mentality in general that many people don't understand it today who don't know that game.
Players that do not venture in often can have quite high net win percentages, say upwards of 75-80%. They are usually playing it safe and only coming in when they are drawn in by a short ball.
When players are pure serve and volley players (hardly any these days) and chip/charge returners, the net attempts are quite high and a good pct is 55-65%.

Look at the recent AO 2017 M. Zverev vs. Andy Murray as an example. Zverev was 65/118 (55%) at the net.
Players who play S&V and go to net understand the percentage won rate won't be high. They don't panic when they lose almost as many points as they win. To be effective, they pretty much just need to win a few percent more than they lose since such a high percentage of their points involve net play. Also, net stats don't include the situation when the player approached the net and the opponent under pressure failed to return. That's the biggest idea behind approaching the net. Put pressure on the opponent to pass you. Ask the question.

On return of 2nd serve, Roger's SABR gambit is a high risk variation of the old chip & charge return. The half volley return's purpose is to put high pressure on the server by surprising him and forcing him to come up with a passing shot very soon after serving. The SABR win pct therefore doesn't have to be high, it can even be under 50% as long as it is doing the job of adding pressure to the opponent to make mistakes and maybe cause them to change/question what they do on second serve, like double faults and different placement. If it makes the opponent distracted, concerned, worried, or even rattled about the possibility of it being used, then the SABR has done its job.

Respectfully,
masterclass

 

[britbox]

Excellent post @masterclass - really interesting read.

 

[britbox]

Nadal Presser after Monfils:

 

[britbox]

3-Milos Raonic (Canada) beat 13-Roberto Bautista (Spain) 7-6(6) 3-6 6-4 6-1

Raonic Presser:

 

[britbox]

15-Grigor Dimitrov (Bulgaria) beat Denis Istomin (Uzbekistan) 2-6 7-6(2) 6-2 6-1

 

[britbox]

Order of Play - Tuesday

 

[britbox]