How much luck has to do with Nole's success? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

How much luck has to do with Nole's success?

latso
01-30-2012, 09:12 PM
Was just thinking how many times in a row he just lucked it out in mega huge ocasions -

USO semi final 2011
USO semi final 2010
AO semi final 2012 (he was *5-5 15-40 in 5th set)
AO final 2012 (*2-4 15-30, easy passing missed Rafa, 5th set)

In 4 occasions he's just a point away of losing. He plays most these crucial points in a great way, but to be honest this kind of successive crucial points saving doesn't happen to everyone.

No deterioration of Nole's success, just thinking about how one point in all those 4 matches (maybe more than 4, can't remember) could have made his impressive run look totally different.

Some luck indeed here, no?

piksi
01-30-2012, 09:22 PM
There is no luck in this sports. You earn everything good or bad. Novak paid his dues. He lost his share of close matches. He just have the steeper learning curve.

Talking about luck, if Nadal was born the same year as Federer, Roger could have been one slam wonder and Nadal could have had 30 GS titles.

blank_frackis
01-30-2012, 09:27 PM
There is no luck in this sports. You earn everything good or bad. Novak paid his dues. He lost his share of close matches. He just have the steeper learning curve.

There's plenty of luck in tennis. When it gets down to a single point here or there then the match can go either way. If Nadal puts that easy shot away at 30-15, for instance, there's nothing Djokovic could have done about it.

So yes, I think Djokovic has had a little bit of luck. He could have easily lost these matches and he didn't just win them because of mental strength.

Time Violation
01-30-2012, 09:29 PM
Djokovic was also a point from winning in 4... wasted *0-40, wasted 5-3 in TB, if he was really lucky, there wouldn't be a 5th set in the first place :)

hipolymer
01-30-2012, 09:29 PM
There's plenty of luck in tennis. When it gets down to a single point here or there then the match can go either way. If Nadal puts that easy shot away at 30-15, for instance, there's nothing Djokovic could have done about it.

So yes, I think Djokovic has had a little bit of luck. He could have easily lost these matches and he didn't just win them because of mental strength.

And if Nadal had missed one of those points on 0-40 in the 4th set we wouldn't have a 5 set final...

damn I got Ninja'd

leng jai
01-30-2012, 09:29 PM
No luck, just egg.

Ultravox
01-30-2012, 09:29 PM
Was just thinking how many times in a row he just lucked it out in mega huge ocasions -

USO semi final 2011
USO semi final 2010
AO semi final 2012 (he was *5-5 15-40 in 5th set)
AO final 2012 (*2-4 15-30, easy passing missed Rafa, 5th set)

In 4 occasions he's just a point away of losing. He plays most these crucial points in a great way, but to be honest this kind of successive crucial points saving doesn't happen to everyone.

No deterioration of Nole's success, just thinking about how one point in all those 4 matches (maybe more than 4, can't remember) could have made his impressive run look totally different.

Some luck indeed here, no?


This is just pathetic.Djokovic wasnt a "lucky" against Rafa, as he did, he would win in 4 sets.He missed three break points with leading 4:3 in fourth set and he was "unlucky" not to win tiebreak, he had a serve and 5:3.Bue,bue:wavey:

samanosuke
01-30-2012, 09:32 PM
I am not taking anything from him except that FH in New York :facepalm:

Super Djoker
01-30-2012, 09:33 PM
Was just thinking how many times in a row he just lucked it out in mega huge ocasions -

USO semi final 2011
USO semi final 2010
AO semi final 2012 (he was *5-5 15-40 in 5th set)
AO final 2012 (*2-4 15-30, easy passing missed Rafa, 5th set)

In 4 occasions he's just a point away of losing. He plays most these crucial points in a great way, but to be honest this kind of successive crucial points saving doesn't happen to everyone.

No deterioration of Nole's success, just thinking about how one point in all those 4 matches (maybe more than 4, can't remember) could have made his impressive run look totally different.

Some luck indeed here, no?

Bitter much?

blank_frackis
01-30-2012, 09:34 PM
And if Nadal had missed one of those points on 0-40 in the 4th set we wouldn't have a 5 set final...

damn I got Ninja'd

We wouldn't have, but when you get down to 5-5 in the fifth it's often a toss of a coin as to who wins. There's this strange idea that players are in complete control of these situations (as if they have the ability to clip lines at will). In reality, there's a certain degree of circumstance that affects every point and it's unsustainable to keep winning by the odd point here or there.

Super Djoker
01-30-2012, 09:36 PM
You don,t beat rafa 7 times by luck 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 ! Maybe nadal,s a Choker ?

latso
01-30-2012, 09:37 PM
There is no luck in this sports. You earn everything good or bad. Novak paid his dues. He lost his share of close matches. He just have the steeper learning curve.

Talking about luck, if Nadal was born the same year as Federer, Roger could have been one slam wonder and Nadal could have had 30 GS titles.
If Nadal was born the same year as Federer, we'd still have courts playable for normal tennis and not sand speed and may death tear them apart...

ATP would have done the necessary to have a solid rivalry, so the slam count might have been different, but with 1-2, not more imo.

About the luck, you still need some dose of it in single points playing against absolutely equal to you adversaries.

Remember this full swing return against Roger at the USO? The flawless drive volley, this Rafa passing shot, those consecutive BPs against Murray - statistically you can't make them, it takes a bit of luck imo.

For example there was no such situation involved in his loss to Roger at RG.

So Nole together with being hyper strong mentally in all those moments, kinda had fortuna with him as well.

I realize that you need all the guts and talent, and physical form, and everything, etc. to get there to be in position having this kind of situation first, so it's no bashing or trolling, just i was thinking how close he was losing in both his last matchs at the AO and remembered his USO dramas with Roger, so was interested in others' opinions.

stewietennis
01-30-2012, 09:40 PM
He's had the same amount of luck as everyone else who has ever won a major.

latso
01-30-2012, 09:43 PM
Bitter much?
No, no, at all.

I'm actually happy that Nole is keeping Rafa's slam count down to a number which keeps a certain degree of suspense, coz if Rafa had snatched this one, considering that he has in the range of 3-4 more RGs booked, would have been a sure new Goat, now with Nole beating him around the clock there's still some suspense.

So no, not bitter at all, just noting this rare serie of interesting circumstances.

latso
01-30-2012, 09:45 PM
He's had the same amount of luck as everyone else who has ever won a major.
That's way too general.

Even at first sight you can name some absolute beat downs like most of Rafa's RGs, earlier Roger's Wimbies, as well as most his USOs.

Ultravox
01-30-2012, 09:49 PM
You didnt answer the question. Was Nadal "lucky" not to lose 3-1? Yes or no?

nole_no1
01-30-2012, 09:51 PM
If he's not winning "he's a loser"
If he's tired and retiring "he's a pussy"
If he wins easily "the field is weak"
If he wins in difficult conditions coming back in the match "he is lucky"

Pretty pathetic tbh

Time2burn
01-30-2012, 09:52 PM
Its not just luck nole has big balls if fed had noles balls he would be unbeatable

MaxPower
01-30-2012, 09:53 PM
The AO Final Nole had bad luck if anything. Had so many points lost due to bad line calls. Then when he challenged they were usually in his favor. Instead he got to replay the point and naturally lost about 50% of those bad calls. Can't remember last time I've seen a player robbed that badly by linesmen.

I do agree that he fluked out vs Fed in USO. But that's how it is. Sometimes you go for broke and make it. A funny example in 2011 was Verdasco vs Soderling when Nando had 40-0 and his own serve. Soderling goes for one big all or nothing return, then next rally hits a winner. After that Verdasco tries to go for his serve and hits like 3-4 DFs in very short time.
It's the ballsy play that puts the pressure on the opponent, especially his serve

Nole definitely took the risk to at least have some of it in his own hands. Luck to make that big return but let's not kid ourselves. He knew EXACTLY what he was doing. If he tried pushing he knew Fed would have it entirely in his hands instead and probably paint the line with a winner. Many other players wouldn't have taken that insane risk on MP and Federer wouldn't have gotten under the same pressure with his serve and probably closed it out.

As for the Murray SF it's the same as their Rome match. Nothing was over. 5-5 15-40 in 5th set? Give me a break. In Rome he even served for it but never got MPs. It was far from over

Ultravox
01-30-2012, 09:55 PM
If he's not winning "he's a loser"
If he's tired and retiring "he's a pussy"
If he wins easily "the field is weak"
If he wins in difficult conditions coming back in the match "he is lucky"

Pretty pathetic tbh

Yes, but Novak is not coming from Bulgaria. It is his greatest sin...

latso
01-30-2012, 09:57 PM
You didnt answer the question. Was Nadal "lucky" not to lose 3-1? Yes or no?
yes, of course. In the same way.

I'm not denying facts here, just stating the obvious.

SetSampras
01-30-2012, 09:58 PM
Watching the AO it seems more to do with the opponent serving like shit and getting tight in tight points. (Murray, Nadal etc) Djoker didn't look all that impressive. Certainly not as he did last year. Murray and Nadal had Nole on the ropes reeling. But then again MUrray and Nadal have never been known to be Ivanisevic or Sampras when it comes to Serving so I guess its to be expected. Djoker can get broken easy, but if you are serving like shit and hand the break back easy, it doesn't mattter

stewietennis
01-30-2012, 09:59 PM
That's way too general.

Even at first sight you can name some absolute beat downs like most of Rafa's RGs, earlier Roger's Wimbies, as well as most his USOs.

Luck is random. It doesn't favour one player over another.

Luck also exists in beatdowns although they're not really a determining factor in the outcome of the match. Maybe Rafa hits a ball that clips the net just enough to send it rolling over to Roger's side – that's luck. Maybe Roger shanks a routine backhand – that's luck. Maybe Safin hits an overhead but his opponent guesses right and sends it back – that's luck. Maybe they don't have to play Karlovic or Isner in Round 1 – that's luck. Maybe their opponent is feeling under the weather – that's luck. Maybe Roger is put in Novak's half of the draw – that's luck, for someone.

latso
01-30-2012, 10:03 PM
The AO Final Nole had bad luck if anything. Had so many points lost due to bad line calls. Then when he challenged they were usually in his favor. Instead he got to replay the point and naturally lost about 50% of those bad calls. Can't remember last time I've seen a player robbed that badly by linesmen.

I do agree that he fluked out vs Fed in USO. But that's how it is. Sometimes you go for broke and make it. A funny example in 2011 was Verdasco vs Soderling when Nando had 40-0 and his own serve. Soderling goes for one big all or nothing return, then next rally hits a winner. After that Verdasco tries to go for his serve and hits like 3-4 DFs in very short time.
It's the ballsy play that puts the pressure on the opponent, especially his serve

Nole definitely took the risk to at least have some of it in his own hands. Luck to make that big return but let's not kid ourselves. He knew EXACTLY what he was doing. If he tried pushing he knew Fed would have it entirely in his hands instead and probably paint the line with a winner. Many other players wouldn't have taken that insane risk on MP and Federer wouldn't have gotten under the same pressure with his serve and probably closed it out.

As for the Murray SF it's the same as their Rome match. Nothing was over. 5-5 15-40 in 5th set? Give me a break. In Rome he even served for it but never got MPs. It was far from over
That's fait enough and i agree with all the above.

It is exactly like this. Nole goes for the shots, he's good enough to make them and then the momentum changes.

The luck factor is there, but the better you are, the lesser luck affects your plays.

As mentionned above, except his FH return against Roger, all those points were actually flawlessly played and fought.

In an very similar way Roger put himself in position to play for and eventually win his only RG tittle, we all remember this inside out FH against Haas in a desperate situation.

These things are part of the game, but just blindly denying some facts like the other kids around is plain stupid.

tektonac
01-30-2012, 10:04 PM
when you eat lots of paprika (пипер) you grow balls of steel.

http://www.australianopen.com/images/pics/misc/f_nadal-djokovic_14_67.jpg

Right On
01-30-2012, 10:05 PM
No luck involved in getting up 7-0. You have to be blind not to see that Djoker >> Nadal right now. Djoker had a very bad day sunday, next matches between them won't be so close.

latso
01-30-2012, 10:11 PM
Luck is random. It doesn't favour one player over another.

Luck also exists in beatdowns although they're not really a determining factor in the outcome of the match. Maybe Rafa hits a ball that clips the net just enough to send it rolling over to Roger's side – that's luck. Maybe Roger shanks a routine backhand – that's luck. Maybe Safin hits an overhead but his opponent guesses right and sends it back – that's luck. Maybe they don't have to play Karlovic or Isner in Round 1 – that's luck. Maybe their opponent is feeling under the weather – that's luck. Maybe Roger is put in Novak's half of the draw – that's luck, for someone.
That's the punter speaking here :D (or a student having his statistics period :D )

I agree with you that luck is always equal to 0, But with one important condition - Over a period of time!

On a single point, when the ball clips the net - t's pure luck wether it will fall on this or that side.

On generl terms, if Nole is worth winning 10 slams in his career, it won't matter if he won them in 3 years or in 15, as he'll luck some out, some will unluckily lose, that's when it goes down to 0.

But in a shorter period of time this is a factor indeed.

just imo :)

Gagsquet
01-30-2012, 10:13 PM
No luck, just egg.

Well said

When times got tough in 2010 season, Novak's coach said to him:

Adversity provides you 2 choices:

1) To crack like an egg

or

2) To bounce back like a tennis ball better than ever.

which one will you be: The egg or the tennis ball?


Nole chose the egg, bought one and slept inside. He started to think and behave like an egg. He shaved his hair in December 2010 to look like an egg. The egg is the root of his success.

latso
01-30-2012, 10:13 PM
when you eat lots of paprika (пипер) you grow balls of steel.

http://www.australianopen.com/images/pics/misc/f_nadal-djokovic_14_67.jpg


Hvala :D

NID
01-30-2012, 10:49 PM
Djokovic is all luck, primarly because he was born in Serbia, the land of plenty. Mighty Serbian Lawn and Tennis Association helped him make the breaktrough, frequently outbidding Tio Tony and the Swiss Mafia when fixing the draws and bribing the linespeople.

stewietennis
01-30-2012, 11:55 PM
That's the punter speaking here :D (or a student having his statistics period :D )

I agree with you that luck is always equal to 0, But with one important condition - Over a period of time!

On a single point, when the ball clips the net - t's pure luck wether it will fall on this or that side.

On generl terms, if Nole is worth winning 10 slams in his career, it won't matter if he won them in 3 years or in 15, as he'll luck some out, some will unluckily lose, that's when it goes down to 0.

But in a shorter period of time this is a factor indeed.

just imo :)

This is true for a short period however it's not really a short period anymore. Novak has five majors (over four years) winning seven matches for each so that's 35 matches and take the statistics for each match – how many net clips, wrong line calls, chased-down-smashes, wrong plays, double faults, UFEs, BPs won, BPs botched, injuries/sickness, withdrawals, hail mary shots – have gone his way and how many have gone against him. Also take into account other majors he has gone deep in where he may have been lucky to win matches and he may have been unlucky to lose some - that's 2 more finals, 7 other Semi Finals and five Quarter Finals – that's maybe over 100 matches.

So it all balances out, he has the same amount of luck as everyone else.

paseo
01-31-2012, 12:02 AM
Luck is a big factor in sports.

Jimnik
01-31-2012, 12:03 AM
It's all about the luck.

Ultravox
01-31-2012, 04:16 AM
Yes, and FC Barcelona is so lucky team in fotball...

fast_clay
01-31-2012, 04:21 AM
i vote egg

Higher Power
01-31-2012, 04:25 AM
Well since we're all lucky to be alive I guess it's 100%.

TennisGrandSlam
01-31-2012, 04:35 AM
No luck

Djoker got full confidence after winning Davis Cup for Serbia!

TennisGrandSlam
01-31-2012, 04:39 AM
Yes, and FC Barcelona is so lucky team in fotball...

Universe Team has own referee and Platini.

(I prefer Galaxy Real Madrid)

Art&Soul
01-31-2012, 05:18 AM
He's only very lucky in USO semi final 2011, other match no luck

scoutreporter
01-31-2012, 05:55 AM
Was just thinking how many times in a row he just lucked it out in mega huge ocasions -

USO semi final 2011
USO semi final 2010
AO semi final 2012 (he was *5-5 15-40 in 5th set)
AO final 2012 (*2-4 15-30, easy passing missed Rafa, 5th set)

In 4 occasions he's just a point away of losing. He plays most these crucial points in a great way, but to be honest this kind of successive crucial points saving doesn't happen to everyone.

No deterioration of Nole's success, just thinking about how one point in all those 4 matches (maybe more than 4, can't remember) could have made his impressive run look totally different.

Some luck indeed here, no?


You could make the same list about some of hes loses. hes first US open final against Roger, Semi final at olympics where he lost to Nadal. Those where mathces he should have won. Half of those 18 defeats he has ti Nadal are down to luck. So shut the fuck up you troll

latso
01-31-2012, 07:37 PM
You could make the same list about some of hes loses. hes first US open final against Roger, Semi final at olympics where he lost to Nadal. Those where mathces he should have won. Half of those 18 defeats he has ti Nadal are down to luck. So shut the fuck up you troll
Don't embarass your country with those indigenous outbursts.

I was just enjoying the first part of your post which makes sense and you had to crap on it all by showing your level :facepalm:

Looner
01-31-2012, 07:49 PM
More than anything, the fact that he's pulled off so many close escapes testifies to his mental strength. That is not luck at all. So I don't see how it could be all down to luck. I am not even his fan.

MuzzahLovah
01-31-2012, 07:55 PM
Is luck a code word for drugs?

156mphserve
01-31-2012, 08:01 PM
Lets assume it takes and average of 100 points to win a GS match. Since (and including) the US Open 2010, Nole has won 38 GS matches. That's 3800 points.

You have pointed out 4 times in which he was lucky, that's 4 points.

4/3800 = 0.10526 %

so he's about 0.10526 % lucky, and 99.89474 % skill

latso
01-31-2012, 08:02 PM
More than anything, the fact that he's pulled off so many close escapes testifies to his mental strength. That is not luck at all. So I don't see how it could be all down to luck. I am not even his fan.
Only a blind Rafa tard could say that "it's all down to luck". Of course it isn't.

The discussion is rather "how much" luck counts in this case.

My personal opinion is that luck doesn't have much to do with it and it would have happened the way it all happened maybe a bit later (if he misses this return against Federer f.e.) in different circumstances, but it would have happened anyway. It was pretty much obvious that the guy is closing the gap with a solid pace, so there is no supririse.

I was just noting that there haven't been much GS winners going through what he went through.

Rafa's 2009 AO was almost as hard, Verdasco in 5 epic sets, then Federer, but he pretty much never was hanging on a do or die kind of point anywhere.

Federer's RG was hanging on this inside out FH against Haas, which was the point which (metaphorically) brought him the tittle, but these are the couple examples i remember at first sight and both are not even close to what Nole had to overcome in these 4 matches i mention.

In the last probably 30 slams, these are the moments i can remember, maybe i'm missing smth dramatic in some of Fedals at Wimby, or the 16-14 Wimby of Roger against Roddick, but it's still a very interesting fact i'm just noting.

It's just like stating - "Rafa is the first 3 times in a row runner up at GSs in history".

This doesn't mean someone is trolling Rafa, or anything, it's just stating an interesting fact.

MIMIC
01-31-2012, 08:03 PM
All of his opponents get extremely lucky as well. His luck is only in the spotlight because he's the one doing all the winning.

Looner
01-31-2012, 08:11 PM
Latso, I meant to say that the fact he's pulled so many close ones is a testament to the fact it was not a fluke he won one or two close ones.

latso
01-31-2012, 08:15 PM
Lets assume it takes and average of 100 points to win a GS match. Since (and including) the US Open 2010, Nole has won 38 GS matches. That's 3800 points.

You have pointed out 4 times in which he was lucky, that's 4 points.

4/3800 = 0.10526 %

so he's about 0.10526 % lucky, and 99.89474 % skill
Thank God tennis has noting to do with all the above.

It would be even more boring than F1 :rolleyes:

As i said, Nole's success was meant to be regardless those shots made or missed. It's nowhere near a fluke, so there isn't even base to speculate if he'd have wound up that much self esteem and confidence if he was to miss one of those shots, so it's far from based on luck, that's clear.

p.s. you can't calculate "exact" numbers based on "let's assume"

156mphserve
01-31-2012, 08:18 PM
I know, it's a joke:p

(maybe a bad one)

Moose Limb
01-31-2012, 08:21 PM
Very dumb original post. This question could be asked of anyone at any point in any sport.

latso
01-31-2012, 08:23 PM
Latso, I meant to say that the fact he's pulled so many close ones is a testament to the fact it was not a fluke he won one or two close ones.
Yes, absoluetly, i agree with you.

I just kinda winded up answering more than just your post at once :)

But this is clear, Nole showed nerves of steel and rock solid mental strength.

He's been actually acting in most those situations with a humble kind of "nothing to lose" relaxed way, despite in 3/4 of them he was actually the man to beat. The position in which many have micro choked and lost matches.

To achieve this state of mind in his position is absolutely phenomenal in my opinion.

This is what he has more than Murray imo - the ability to perfectly deal with pressure.

latso
01-31-2012, 08:30 PM
Very dumb original post. This question could be asked of anyone at any point in any sport.
Disagreed.

It is an unique situation, which hasn't happened to anyone in the last 10 years (if ever) in tennis.

That's why i believe it has its place on a board where much, much less interesting subjects are often discussed.


I'm not asking "would Federe be such goat if he had broken his ankle at age 15.." which is the kind of blind idiotic post you're reffering to.

Mine is based on an unique serrie of events.

arm
01-31-2012, 08:31 PM
I know, it's a joke:p

(maybe a bad one)

I laughed. :)

teacherling
01-31-2012, 08:41 PM
I am not taking anything from him except that FH in New York :facepalm:

That was a fluke. No?

Moose Limb
01-31-2012, 08:47 PM
Disagreed.

It is an unique situation, which hasn't happened to anyone in the last 10 years (if ever) in tennis.

That's why i believe it has its place on a board where much, much less interesting subjects are often discussed.


I'm not asking "would Federe be such goat if he had broken his ankle at age 15.." which is the kind of blind idiotic post you're reffering to.

Mine is based on an unique serrie of events.

My apologies for calling it dumb off the mark, but it's still a weird inquiry to be throwing out there. You are assuming that Nole was experiencing luck due to some of his wins coming in 5th sets...but luck can exist AT ANY POINT. Who is to say that Roger never experienced luck in the opening sets or thereinafter that ultimately had an impact on the entire match? Same goes for anyone that ever played, Rafa for example. Luck can come at any point in a match...the fact that Nole is getting more of it in the ultimate set does not negate other players from having had any less of it in past matches. That said, who is to say it's even luck we are arguing about? I mean, players will miss shots and players will make unlikely shots. Is that necessarily "luck?" Can it be attributed to anything else? Skill mayhap? Dunoon.

Marc23
01-31-2012, 08:54 PM
If he's not winning "he's a loser"
If he's tired and retiring "he's a pussy"
If he wins easily "the field is weak"
If he wins in difficult conditions coming back in the match "he is lucky"


Lol

shiaben
01-31-2012, 09:01 PM
Nothing. He earned all his success and victories.

Sunset of Age
01-31-2012, 09:02 PM
"Luck" is a factor that adds to any players' big achievements. All of the greats of the past have had their share of "luck", and their share of "mishaps" just the same, Djokovic is/will be no exception.

Woulda-coulda-shoulda is irrelevant.

The only times I feel like a "(un)lucky" discussion is appropriate are those cases when players truly get hit by a debilitating injury/disease. Muster, Kuerten, Ferrero, Haas, Hewitt, and more recently, DelPotro and Söderling come to mind.

shiaben
01-31-2012, 09:05 PM
"Luck" is a factor that adds to any players' big achievements. All of the greats of the past have had their share of "luck", and their share of "mishaps" just the same, Djokovic is/will be no exception.

Woulda-coulda-shoulda is irrelevant.

The only times I feel like a "(un)lucky" discussion is appropriate are those cases when players truly get hit by a debilitating injury/disease. Muster, Kuerten, Ferrero, Haas, Hewitt, and more recently, DelPotro and Söderling come to mind.

Del Potro's injury isn't debilitating though. The guy is getting some decent results. The problem is while he's back at his USO level, the other players have became much better. Soderling is sick, but that's his own problem.

latso
01-31-2012, 09:07 PM
My apologies for calling it dumb off the mark, but it's still a weird inquiry to be throwing out there. You are assuming that Nole was experiencing luck due to some of his wins coming in 5th sets...but luck can exist AT ANY POINT. Who is to say that Roger never experienced luck in the opening sets or thereinafter that ultimately had an impact on the entire match? Same goes for anyone that ever played, Rafa for example. Luck can come at any point in a match...the fact that Nole is getting more of it in the ultimate set does not negate other players from having had any less of it in past matches. That said, who is to say it's even luck we are arguing about? I mean, players will miss shots and players will make unlikely shots. Is that necessarily "luck?" Can it be attributed to anything else? Skill mayhap? Dunoon.
Your post kinda induces that i'm actually stating smth about luck, yet it's just a question and noting an interesting serie of events.

Some people even answered that it's stupid to base several slams on luck only, which i never did :)

It's clear to me that Roger many times had some luck in his openning or second round matches, where he had to go through 5 sets, or saving incredible and important shots, etc.

But in such case, it's against lesser players, where the battle is against yourself, your rustiness, your motivation level, your ability to work around an uncomfortable style, etc.

While in the case i've brought up it's 4 times 5th sets, BPs, hidden MPs or actual MPs against Nole, with a 100% equal adversary on the other side of the net in incredibly important and tense moments.

And i'm clearly stating that the closest to pure luck in those several points was eventually only the FH return against Roger, all the others were actually perfectly played attacking points, or 20 shots rallies won, or aces, etc.

So it's just smth that never happens and it's interesting how much of it is actually based on a phenomenal mental strength, how much would be on the oponents choking, how much on luck, etc.

It's obvious that neither Murray, nor Nadal should have even been in position to even get to this position and they were lucky not getting actually spanked earlier in their respective matches, so i'm not saying anything more than - Hey guys, interesting fact - thisandthat, what do you think?

Sunset of Age
01-31-2012, 09:09 PM
Del Potro's injury isn't debilitating though. The guy is getting some decent results. The problem is while he's back at his USO level, the other players have became much better.

DelPotro has been out of the tour for most of about 9 months, his ranking plummeted.
It's merely due to the guy's great talent and young age that he's still managed to make it back to the top-10 - a fact I'm very happy about.
You do not want to know how many players NEVER managed to make it back after an injury like he suffered.

Soderling is sick, but that's his own problem.

WTF??? So contracting a nasty virus infection is someone's "own problem", now?
Now I've heard it all. :o

shiaben
01-31-2012, 09:13 PM
DelPotro has been out of the tour for most of about 9 months, his ranking plummeted.
It's merely due to the guy's great talent and young age that he's still managed to make it back to the top-10 - a fact I'm very happy about.
You do not want to know how many players NEVER managed to make it back after an injury like he suffered.



WTF??? So contriving a nasty virus infection is someone's "own problem"?
Now I've heard it all. :o

Del Potro's injury isn't comparable to Soderling's sickness. Soderling had mono which is a kissing disease.

You act as if he was born with that virus infection. Chances are he could have prevented it, but he didn't. With this rational, people would say, "Federer is quite unlucky, if he didn't have mono, he'd have more slams by now".

Sunset of Age
01-31-2012, 09:20 PM
Del Potro's injury isn't comparable to Soderling's sickness. Soderling had mono which is a kissing disease.

You act as if he was born with that virus infection. Chances are he could have prevented it, but he didn't. With this rational, people would say, "Federer is quite unlucky, if he didn't have mono, he'd have more slams by now".

Your ignorance is staggering.
So you actually blame Söderling for getting mono? An infection that hits a majority of people in fact, the only difference being how individuals' bodies manage to cope with the effects of it, which are HUGE?

How about googling 'Ancic, Mario', just for starters?

shiaben
01-31-2012, 09:28 PM
Your ignorance is staggering.
So you actually blame Söderling for getting mono? An infection that hits a majority of people in fact, the only difference being how individuals' bodies manage to cope with the effects of it, which are HUGE?

How about googling 'Ancic, Mario', just for starters?

No, your ignorance is staggering.

There have been a series of unlucky events for each and every single player out there in the ATP.

Why single out Soderling or Del Potro when all players have had unlucky situations?

Do you think if these events had not occurred to Soderling or Del Potro, that they'd be guaranteed slams?

romismak
01-31-2012, 09:33 PM
Hard to tell, but really this has nothing to do with Novak, luck is part of everything, in private life, in bussiness in sport, even in slam final there is always some luck for either one or another party. So this is not only about Nole, everybody had some luck, we can the same said about Roger or Rafa in past- luck decides many times many matches either between them or other matches, Roger had MP in few matches he lost so really if he would be luckier who knows. So luck is normal thing nothing special only for tennis.

samanosuke
01-31-2012, 09:33 PM
That was a fluke. No?

no, just a shot of a man conciliated with defeat . just like 2 missed second serve returns before that point

tektonac
01-31-2012, 09:37 PM
That was a fluke. No?

that fh undermined fed's goat status as well as his legacy.

MatchFederer
01-31-2012, 09:41 PM
There are many different shades of grey.

peribsen
01-31-2012, 11:37 PM
I had been saying for several years that Nole deserved a brake, both in general and against Nadal in particular, after so many narrow loses.

It seems Nole took me at my word... and then just kept on winning.

Snowwy
01-31-2012, 11:43 PM
You have to be good to be lucky.

GrantOz44
01-31-2012, 11:51 PM
You have to be good to be lucky.

+1

What a stupid thread.

All this talk of "being a couple of points away on so many occasions," dropping behind and then coming back to win it - you could apply that to any player and call them 'lucky.'

The only reason we are talking about Djokovic is because he's the world number one.

Mr. Oracle
02-01-2012, 06:44 AM
Luck is when a fat person wins the lottery.

This thread is lucky too, in that it hasn't been removed for trolling.

Johnbert
02-01-2012, 07:01 AM
no luck, except the return at matchpoint #1 in uso 2011 sf :mad:

this was a "all or nothing" suicide shot.

latso
02-01-2012, 12:42 PM
Luck is when a fat person wins the lottery.

This thread is lucky too, in that it hasn't been removed for trolling.
Rather you trolls are lucky not being removed from the genuine thread.

Because if you're lazy not to read at least a couple posts in a thread, you have no right to judge.

Of course this would be understandable for intelligent ppl only, sorry.

Branimir
02-01-2012, 12:47 PM
Djokovic has balls size of 10 kg watermellons

duong
02-15-2012, 07:39 AM
Luck is very important in tennis competition, and I think many people don't accept it because they like thinking of life "you always get what you deserve" ... it's more comfortable thinking like that, that it's always fair in the end.

All of the players benefit from luck.

As a Fedfan, I can say that Federer had a lot a lot of luck in his carreer, even more than others especially because as a one-hander, sometimes missed shots or half-missed shots like returns just behind the net ... become very hard to deal for the opponent.

It happened to him very often.

And he knows it.

People have often said that Fed was a sore loser during interviews because he spoke about luck about his opponent who won.

But if you want to be fair, if you read his interviews regularly as I do, he very often says "I was lucky" when he wins as well.

Personally I like that he's the player who speaks most about luck in tennis ... because I think it's a real face of tennis : luck is very important (I also accept thinking about it more in life than most of the people).

Something else people don't understand about him is his "positive attitude" : "it was OK, I played well" and so on ... that's his way to stay optimistic and positive and keep energy for the future. Many people laugh about autosuggestion method (we call that "method of doctor Coué" in France) but it has been proved by many many studies that it IS really very effective.

When people think of young Federer often being negative on court then working with a psychologist and becoming what he has become, I think they should understand that this autosuggestion method played a big role in his success.

"Confidence" which is often used in tennis, and which has often been said as the main key of Djokovic's success last year is just another way to create autosuggestion ... and when Djokovic hit that shot on match point, I do think that he did believe in himself a lot, it was not the shot of someone who had accepted his loss as some said, and as Fed seemingly said : he badly wanted to win and hit that shot full of this willingness.

However, this shot not only implied a great deal of autosuggestion, it also implied a great deal of luck too.

Because yes, luck is very important in competitive tennis. Also with the draws and so on because match-ups are also very important in tennis ...

Hewitt =Legend
02-15-2012, 08:06 AM
Luck has nothing to do with Nole's success.

We the audience are lucky to watch him perform however.

Ajde.

ssin
02-15-2012, 09:52 AM
I think Murray, Rafa and Fed were lucky to get to the 5th set. Tons of luck.

Alex999
02-15-2012, 10:04 AM
I think Murray, Rafa and Fed were lucky to get to the 5th set. Tons of luck.
lol, I don't really believe in luck really. it's all skills. I mean sure, we all get 'lucky' sometimes but still... think about it... Djokovic has worked very hard to achieve everything... it paid off.

Felipe Abe
02-15-2012, 10:09 AM
I think that match point against Federer at USO was such a luck lol.

ssin
02-15-2012, 10:35 AM
lol, I don't really believe in luck really. it's all skills. I mean sure, we all get 'lucky' sometimes but still... think about it... Djokovic has worked very hard to achieve everything... it paid off.

There is luck and I was half joking, half serious. We can actually calculate probability of things, so we could do that for things in tennis as well. Say you are lucky if you win lottery, because your odds were very thin. You did it against the odds. Novak did nothing of the sorts, imo... I don't think Novak was lucky to win the matches, I agree with you. Luck exists, but in tennis it's very close to being entirely irrelevant.

n8
02-15-2012, 10:57 AM
There is luck all over the place in tennis.

Draws, let cords, bad line calls, injuries, schedule, weather, crowd, inconsistent umpiring, strength of peers, 'stretching the rules' (coach umpiring, time between points), even the toss!

Alex999
02-15-2012, 11:14 AM
There is luck all over the place in tennis.

Draws, let cords, bad line calls, injuries, schedule, weather, crowd, inconsistent umpiring, strength of peers, 'stretching the rules' (coach umpiring, time between points), even the toss!
I get your point and it's cool but this is life. it's what players have to deal with on a regular basis. I still wouldn't call it luck. many guys here call that shot at the USO (Nole vs. Fed) lucky. whatever. Novak simply played better and won.

paseo
02-15-2012, 11:49 AM
There is luck all over the place in tennis.

Draws, let cords, bad line calls, injuries, schedule, weather, crowd, inconsistent umpiring, strength of peers, 'stretching the rules' (coach umpiring, time between points), even the toss!

This.

Like I said, luck is a big factor in sports. If you play tennis, or any other sport, you would understand this.

duong
02-15-2012, 12:01 PM
Novak simply played better and won.

I think Novak was the better player in that match ... but he might have lost it anyway, for a few centimeters.

Usually, despite the luck involved, the better player wins.

But it's not always true.

And even the concept of "the better player" is not always clear when players are so near :lol:

thrust
02-15-2012, 12:57 PM
There's plenty of luck in tennis. When it gets down to a single point here or there then the match can go either way. If Nadal puts that easy shot away at 30-15, for instance, there's nothing Djokovic could have done about it.

So yes, I think Djokovic has had a little bit of luck. He could have easily lost these matches and he didn't just win them because of mental strength.

Confident players take risks in bad situations. Novak won those matches because he was good enough then to take successful risks and WIN the points that enabled him to stay in those matches, in order to win them. Few, if any, matches are won due to luck.

thrust
02-15-2012, 01:06 PM
This.

Like I said, luck is a big factor in sports. If you play tennis, or any other sport, you would understand this.

If a let cord turns into a winning shot, it is because the shot was good enough to go over the net despite the fact that it hit the net. Luck has nothing to do with it. If the ball does not go over the net it is because the shot was not hit well enough to do so, whether it hit the net or not.

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
02-15-2012, 01:18 PM
nadal 100% choked in the 5th at the AO

he had a break up, and he missed a sitter- biggest choke in the last few years

mentally he's completley lost in vs nole

i know we can all smile at the irony on display considering whats happened in the past

but i still feel bad for rafa- he tries really hard

fivebargate
02-15-2012, 01:57 PM
considering that he has in the range of 3-4 more RGs booked

Booked? Lol....at the moment he will be doing well to get 1. Let's just wait and see.

Alex999
02-15-2012, 02:45 PM
nadal 100% choked in the 5th at the AO

he had a break up, and he missed a sitter- biggest choke in the last few years

mentally he's completley lost in vs nole

i know we can all smile at the irony on display considering whats happened in the past

but i still feel bad for rafa- he tries really hard
again, with all respect, Nadal did not choke at all. Djokovic simply played better. Nadal played great. yes, the match was very close but it has nothing to do with luck. Novak outplayed Rafa and that's it.

duong
02-15-2012, 03:17 PM
If a let cord turns into a winning shot, it is because the shot was good enough to go over the net despite the fact that it hit the net. Luck has nothing to do with it. If the ball does not go over the net it is because the shot was not hit well enough to do so, whether it hit the net or not.

it's partly true but you go too far imo in the idea that "you always get what you deserve".

Players can't have so much control, there's of course some luck involved (whoever the player I don't say that about Djokovic ; Fed, as I said before, and even Nadal -I remember some very important points where his ball hardly touched the line- have been lucky at times)

Clay Death
02-15-2012, 03:22 PM
no luck. nole has worked very hard for his success. and he has been paying his dues over the years to fed and the clay warrior.

hiperborejac
02-15-2012, 05:44 PM
Was just thinking how many times in a row he just lucked it out in mega huge ocasions -

USO semi final 2011
USO semi final 2010
AO semi final 2012 (he was *5-5 15-40 in 5th set)
AO final 2012 (*2-4 15-30, easy passing missed Rafa, 5th set)

In 4 occasions he's just a point away of losing. He plays most these crucial points in a great way, but to be honest this kind of successive crucial points saving doesn't happen to everyone.

No deterioration of Nole's success, just thinking about how one point in all those 4 matches (maybe more than 4, can't remember) could have made his impressive run look totally different.
ain
Some luck indeed here, no?

In all these occasions you can say that Novak had luck ag Federer in USO semi 2011 - yet again he read Fed's serve perfectly and later Federer choked. In USo semi 2010 he served to stay in match so all was in his hands. This year AO he was never point away of losing - Murray still had to convert break points and serve it out - maybe Novak choked here cause he was serving for the match at 5-3 and with that Rafa's easy miss he still needed to win next point only to be 5:3 up.

Again in several occasions he was 'unlucky' (or choked if you want) like in USO final 2007 when he had several set points to win first 2 sets, last RG SF when he netted easy forehand winner to come back in 4th set TB or Bejing Olympics when he missed easy smash and in numerous other matches when gifted (choked) his victory to inferior ('lucky') opponent.

I cannot count anymore but as someone said his 'luck' is deserved and evened with 'luck' his opponents had against him.

Nole Rules
02-15-2012, 06:23 PM
All luck this faker. Can't believe he won 5 slams.

munZe konZa
02-15-2012, 08:40 PM
Its not just luck nole has big balls if fed had noles balls he would be unbeatable

But Nole is already unbeatable so we don't have to imagine anything when the reality is here. On the other hand , Federer was owned by a 17 year old Rafa Nadal

Capuccino
02-15-2012, 08:51 PM
Well, a little bit of luck at last 2 grand slams but he absolutely deserved it

teacherling
02-15-2012, 08:55 PM
Was just thinking how many times in a row he just lucked it out in mega huge ocasions -

USO semi final 2011
USO semi final 2010
AO semi final 2012 (he was *5-5 15-40 in 5th set)
AO final 2012 (*2-4 15-30, easy passing missed Rafa, 5th set)

In 4 occasions he's just a point away of losing. He plays most these crucial points in a great way, but to be honest this kind of successive crucial points saving doesn't happen to everyone.

No deterioration of Nole's success, just thinking about how one point in all those 4 matches (maybe more than 4, can't remember) could have made his impressive run look totally different.

Some luck indeed here, no?


Dear neighbor,

Nole's tennis is based on pure luck, no two ways about it. I believe that you thought deeply about the issue and came up with an error-free conclusion. Bravo for clear reasoning.

Neighborly regards.

arm
02-15-2012, 09:25 PM
This thread :facepalm:

Luck has nothing to do with Nole's success.

We the audience are lucky to watch him perform however.

Ajde.

:rolls:

leng jai
02-15-2012, 09:27 PM
I've never seen Nole live because I'm too much of a peasant to buy RLA tickets.

Unajde.

paseo
02-16-2012, 02:26 AM
If a let cord turns into a winning shot, it is because the shot was good enough to go over the net despite the fact that it hit the net. Luck has nothing to do with it. If the ball does not go over the net it is because the shot was not hit well enough to do so, whether it hit the net or not.

If the shot was good enough, it would not have hit the net.

Do you play sports? I'm not saying that luck is the only factor, it's a big factor. Skill (talent, physical, mental), is of course a bigger factor than luck. But when the skills are almost even, like top players today, a lot of time it was decided by luck. Daily form also depends a lot on luck. Sometimes your game just doesn't click one day, and in full flight in the next.

No lucky club player will ever beat a serious prime Djokovic. Unless Djokovic rolled his ankle mid-match. If that happens, what do you call it? Djokovic was not good enough, because if he was, he would never hurt his ankle?

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
02-16-2012, 02:35 AM
again, with all respect, Nadal did not choke at all. Djokovic simply played better. Nadal played great. yes, the match was very close but it has nothing to do with luck. Novak outplayed Rafa and that's it.


with all due respect-

that miss nadal made- would he have missed that same shot against any other player in tennis?

i say no, then its a choke- he choked because nole has got to him

yes nole out played him, he has outplayed everyone on tour- but a choke is a choke

Alex999
02-16-2012, 03:45 AM
with all due respect-

that miss nadal made- would he have missed that same shot against any other player in tennis?

i say no, then its a choke- he choked because nole has got to him

yes nole out played him, he has outplayed everyone on tour- but a choke is a choke
well, it's 2 great players against one another. Nadal is not a choker, he is a fighter. yes I know it must be hard for rafa to deal with Nole but that's sport.

Say Hey Kid
02-16-2012, 05:48 AM
There certainly is luck involved in every sport, and there is no doubting Djokovic has gotten the better of it last year and to start this year. But you have to credit him for alot of that "luck", he made it happen!

indianabones
02-16-2012, 08:08 AM
You might get lucky with a point here or there, with DRS here or there since it's not 100% accurate, however you are not lucky winning 2 sets or 3 in Grand Slams to win matches and then tournaments.

I do believe you get lucky here or there, but in a sport of this nature, the best player ALWAYS wins the match and the best player at that time wins the tournament.