The Zone

[El Dude]

Perhaps we could define greatness by how frequently a player can get into the zone, and how they are able to maintain it despite adversity.

I'm not sure I agree with this. The Zone is a place that all players might find, occasionally, but few can maintain. I think "greatness" has much more to do with playing at a high level, week in and week out, and finding a way to win, even when you're not at your best.

Here's an example: Rosol was in the zone when he beat Nadal at Wimbledon in 2012, I think. He's done creditably well since then, and moved up in the rankings, but he's never played a match at that level again. Nadal, (or Federer, Djokovic, Murray) can scrap a win and get to a final, most of the time. Yes, they find the Zone more often, but they don't have to count on it. Their best is good enough, even if they're not "zoning." When they are, though, they're unbeatable.

OK, I don't disagree with you. Perhaps great players are those that can frequently access/maintain the Zone (or "Flow") AND play well enough to beat people when they aren't at their best.

I've said before that nearly all top 100 players are so good at their peak that anyone can beat anyone, if the time is right - Rosol-Nadal is a good example.

Maybe part of Nadal's edge over Federer is that his style of play prohibits Roger from maintaining the Zone, and his lower levels of performance simply aren't enough to compete.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Maybe part of Nadal's edge over Federer is that his style of play prohibits Roger from maintaining the Zone, and his lower levels of performance simply aren't enough to compete.

Pretty much. That's the match-up part, more or less.

 

[Billie]

So are you saying that when Rafa is around, Federer is never in the zone?

 

[brokenshoelace]

So are you saying that when Rafa is around, Federer is never in the zone?

Against each other, yup. Though in fairness, Federer played insanely well against Rafa in a couple of indoor matches (2006 and 2011).

 

[Billie]

So are you saying that when Rafa is around, Federer is never in the zone?

Against each other, yup. Though in fairness, Federer played insanely well against Rafa in a couple of indoor matches (2006 and 2011).

I don't know what is the definition of "zone" for everybody then. For me it would be an example of a player beating everybody in front of him, match ups or not, match points down or not, just somebody you look and see he can't lose; for a tournament or a match or longer period of time. When you start talking about the matchups then it defeats the notion of the zone, does it not?:idea:

 

[Moxie]

So are you saying that when Rafa is around, Federer is never in the zone?

Against each other, yup. Though in fairness, Federer played insanely well against Rafa in a couple of indoor matches (2006 and 2011).

I don't know what is the definition of "zone" for everybody then. For me it would be an example of a player beating everybody in front of him, match ups or not, match points down or not, just somebody you look and see he can't lose; for a tournament or a match or longer period of time. When you start talking about the matchups then it defeats the notion of the zone, does it not?:idea:

"Being in the zone" isn't just being good. It's a state that athletes can find themselves in when everything is clicking in their game, they're totally focused, mind/body/game in total sync. Sometimes you hear the commentators say, 'He's seeing the ball like a watermelon out there.' Their brains aren't getting in the way of what their body knows how to do. That's why I said earlier that top players don't have to be in the zone to out-perform most others on most days, but most players probably have to be in the Zone to beat the top guys, esp. on the biggest stages.

That's why El Dude said Roger has trouble maintaining the zone against Rafa, who often disrupts his flow and brings him back down to earth. Or say, when Novak was in the Zone for so much of 2011, Rafa (along with everyone else, basically) couldn't break up his effortless flow, and Djokovic was never getting in his own way. Since the 2012 AO final (and including it,) neither Rafa nor Nole has played a full match in the Zone against the other, as they tend to trade momentum swings a few times, because they do know how to harsh each others' mellow, to put it in hippie terms.

To your other question: I don't know that match-ups negate the concept of the zone, just that some players will have a tougher time finding it against a particular other. One reason you may see it less when the top guys play each other is that they know what they're up against, and they're basically always playing for high stakes. That makes it harder to swing away with no care for tomorrow. And that's where you get guys like Rosol and Soderling finding the Zone when they need it...because facing a Nadal or Federer in a Slam, you know you throw everything you have at it, or you go home tomorrow. Which is also why you often find a big upset is followed by a loss to the erst-while vanquisher.

 

[Billie]

That is the reason I question the match ups between players when we talk about being in the zone. To me Rafa was in the zone during Montreal, Cincy and USO tournaments last year, don't you think so Moxie?

On the other hand, Nole to me was totally in the zone in Asia and WTF last year. He just didn't look like he was going to lose at all regardless of who he was playing and even if he dropped a set in these matches and towards the end of the season looked a bit tired. Just had that "not going to lose" attitude.

EDIT: I posted my original post before you added that 3rd paragraph, Moxie. But it doesn't change my opinion about being in the zone and match ups.

 

[Moxie]

That is the reason I question the match ups between players when we talk about being in the zone. To me Rafa was in the zone during Montreal, Cincy and USO tournaments last year, don't you think so Moxie?

On the other hand, Nole to me was totally in the zone in Asia and WTF last year. He just didn't look like he was going to lose at all regardless of who he was playing and even if he dropped a set in these matches and towards the end of the season looked a bit tired. Just had that "not going to lose" attitude.

EDIT: I posted my original post before you added that 3rd paragraph, Moxie. But it doesn't change my opinion about being in the zone and match ups.

I'm still not sure why match-ups confuse the question of being in the Zone. Nadal was the more focused and more likely to find the zone during (well, much of 2013, but) the No. American HC swing/USO series, and Djokovic found his rhythm after. They're both top 2 guys, so if one is feeling it more than the other, he's likely to get the win. Novak is a difficult match-up to Rafa, but not an impossible one, and vice-versa. (I will revise my opinion, however about Nole-Rafa matches always being contested. You are right that in Beijing and esp. WTF last year, Rafa had no way into Novak's game.)

The match-up issues might lead us to predict an outcome, though without certainty, of course. If/when a player finds the Zone is a different question, and the more ephemeral one. Does that make sense?

 

[Kieran]

A player who's in the zone busts the match-up thingies. That's what in the zone is.

By the way, we had a chat that sort of related to this, it threw up some interesting obs...

 

[Billie]

A player who's in the zone busts the match-up thingies. That's what in the zone is.

I am glad night hawk agrees with me.

 

[Moxie]

A player who's in the zone busts the match-up thingies. That's what in the zone is.

By the way, we had a chat that sort of related to this, it threw up some interesting obs...

That conversation was well-cited. It has a lot to say about the Zone.

 

[mrzz]

Very nice topic. The fact that "the zone" exists (and I guess that no one disputes that) is what always refrain me from certainty of anything in a tennis match or in a tennis tournament. Everyone is basically just "being in the zone" away from a big, even improbable win. It does not happen much, yes, but on the other hand there's a lot of tournaments, so a lot of "this never gonna happen" kind of prediction fall victim of "the zone".