Nick Bollettieri: ´Djokovic is the most perfect player I´ve ever seen and best in tennis history'

[Federberg]

I don't know who measures how fast they really are, but lots have always cited Monfils.

The very fact that the likes of Monfils aren't mentioned makes me doubt the credibility of the analysis. As for Roger being one of the fastest? That's laughable. The guy's positioning is exceptional so perhaps he has less ground to cover, but that's a different thing

 

[Moxie]

The very fact that the likes of Monfils aren't mentioned makes me doubt the credibility of the analysis. As for Roger being one of the fastest? That's laughable. The guy's positioning is exceptional so perhaps he has less ground to cover, but that's a different thing

BB said in another post that it's Roger's anticipation more than his speed, and I think that's a smart comment. Which is another version of your point: his positioning. Rafa's always been faster than Roger. And probably all of the Big 4 have great anticipatory skills, which gives a head start. But on sheer fast-twitch sprinting, I'd put Monfils near the top. Plus, he's long-limbed, and I'd say those were a couple of keys to his career. That, plus his creativity.

 

[Mastoor]

I don't know who measures how fast they really are, but lots have always cited Monfils.

I don't remember who measured, from memory some organisation in Australia, but from the fact they made article in serious magazine and their claim they timed top players for 2 years (not only 2 minutes) I'd say it had to be some serious research.

Yes, Monfils was towards the top but not with faster average speed than Murray and Federer. And how he can be, when he is not chasing half the balls?

 

[Moxie]

I spilled berocca trough my nose. You mean No1e didn't beat Fed when he was beating Roddick, Ferrero, Baghdatis and Nalbandian?

You are really amusing with this. Sure, Novak was 6-13 v. Roger between 2007 and 2011. But neither Roddick, Ferrero, Baghy nor Nalbandian really featured in that time. In that time period, Roddick beat Roger twice (in their 21-3 H2H Ferrero didn't beat him once after 2003 (in their 10-3 H2H Baghdatis beat him once, (in their 1-7 H2H and Nalby beat him once (in their 11-8 H2H.) I'm not sure what your point is by bringing these particular players up. Novak's wins over Fed in that period were at one Major, and all went the distance. Sure, he had wins, as a future major player, but he wasn't owning Roger until Roger was beginning to hit his plateau/decline. Same with Nadal, for the most part.

 

[Moxie]

I don't remember who measured, from memory some organisation in Australia, but from the fact they made article in serious magazine and their claim they timed top players for 2 years (not only 2 minutes) I'd say it had to be some serious research.

Yes, Monfils was towards the top but not with faster average speed than Murray and Federer. And how he can be, when he is not chasing half the balls?

I'm not that interested in your vague memory of an organization in Australia. If you don't have a link, it's just anecdotal. Others here put the eye test to it, and doubt those findings. If you want to press it, find a link. Thanks.

 

[Mastoor]

I'm not that interested in your vague memory of an organization in Australia. If you don't have a link, it's just anecdotal. Others here put the eye test to it, and doubt those findings. If you want to press it, find a link. Thanks.

Funny, but my memory is still more to trust than your opinion. Here is a link, not that I read the first time from here, but the same thing:

http://tennismash.com/2016/11/24/gig-djokovic-fastest-tennis-player-world/:

That group of researchers is not to be doubted because they are backed by both Tennis Australia and Victoria University.

 

[Mastoor]

You are really amusing with this. Sure, Novak was 6-13 v. Roger between 2007 and 2011. But neither Roddick, Ferrero, Baghy nor Nalbandian really featured in that time. In that time period, Roddick beat Roger twice (in their 21-3 H2H Ferrero didn't beat him once after 2003 (in their 10-3 H2H Baghdatis beat him once, (in their 1-7 H2H and Nalby beat him once (in their 11-8 H2H.) I'm not sure what your point is by bringing these particular players up. Novak's wins over Fed in that period were at one Major, and all went the distance. Sure, he had wins, as a future major player, but he wasn't owning Roger until Roger was beginning to hit his plateau/decline. Same with Nadal, for the most part.

You didn't read at all what i wrote, but I still got angry reply. Your reply suggests that I wrote that Roddick and others beat Federer regularly in his prime what I didn't even think of, rather I listed some of the players who Federer beat on regular basis in his prime. But thanks for the stats. I wonder why don't you have some sleep? Wouldn't make you any harm.

 

[Moxie]

Funny, but my memory is still more to trust than your opinion. Here is a link, not that I read the first time from here, but the same thing:

http://tennismash.com/2016/11/24/gig-djokovic-fastest-tennis-player-world/:

That group of researchers is not to be doubted because they are backed by both Tennis Australia and Victoria University.

Well at least you've given an attribution.

 

[Moxie]

You didn't read at all what i wrote, but I still got angry reply. Your reply suggests that I wrote that Roddick and others beat Federer regularly in his prime what I didn't even think of, rather I listed some of the players who Federer beat on regular basis in his prime. But thanks for the stats. I wonder why don't you have some sleep? Wouldn't make you any harm.

It wasn't angry, it was just informational. And it's early here, so don't worry about my sleep. You are, as always, a bit defensive. Perhaps it's you who are sleep-deprived. :whistle:

 

[Ricardo]

Funny, but my memory is still more to trust than your opinion. Here is a link, not that I read the first time from here, but the same thing:

http://tennismash.com/2016/11/24/gig-djokovic-fastest-tennis-player-world/:

That group of researchers is not to be doubted because they are backed by both Tennis Australia and Victoria University.

oh boy, so Monfils is slower than Berdych according to these researchers? it mentions nothing about the methods used, when it was taken, or any other important details, and you take it as gospel?

Yeah ok, Berdych is much faster than Monfils (obviously, since he didn't even make the list). Funny how almost all players say Gael is the fastest of them all.

who hired these so called researchers?

 

[Ricardo]

I don't remember who measured, from memory some organisation in Australia, but from the fact they made article in serious magazine and their claim they timed top players for 2 years (not only 2 minutes) I'd say it had to be some serious research.

Yes, Monfils was towards the top but not with faster average speed than Murray and Federer. And how he can be, when he is not chasing half the balls?

so where did it show that Monfils was towards the top? your reference is right there, and here you go making up stories again......(from what i saw Monfils was nowhere to be seen).

please enlighten us.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Peak Djokovic has smart and efficient serve and he is deadly from both wings, not just fh. Peak Djokovic is more complete than peak Federer.

And this is the biggest misconception when it comes to this topic.

Peak Novak is nowhere near as complete as peak Federer. What peak Novak has over peak Roger, is fewer exploitable weaknesses, which people confuse with being complete.

Basically, it boils down to this. Today's game is baseline heavy, almost exclusively. Novak is arguably the best baseliner in history and is great off both wings. Meaning there isn't a side to attack. As a result, it is harder to exploit his weaknesses (which exist) because he's so in control of the rallies and even when he isn't, he defends so, so well.

But, if we're talking about being complete, then we have to look at every aspect of the game. Peak Novak isn't even comparable to peak Federer in terms of first serve, second serve, touch, volleying, movement around the net, slice backhand, variety, etc... The very fact that Roger was a grand slam winner as a serve and volley player (Wimbledon 2003) then went on to become the best baseliner on tour in his heyday says everything about how complete he was.

However, not all skills are equal in terms of importance. In other words, if you gave me the choice between having Federer's touch, backhand slice, and volleying, or Novak's backhand, I would go for Novak's backhand, because that shot will have a bigger impact on the outcome of the match.