Federers 1st serve not that good... [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federers 1st serve not that good...

marcRD
03-04-2007, 01:55 PM
I dont know why there is so much talk about how Federers serve is so effective even if he doesnt hit that many aces. The last 3 years or so I have always followed the stats of 1st serve % won and Federer is constantly around 77-78% on 1st serves won. That is just enought to be top 10 every year, but far behind players like Roddick and Ljubicic who always are +80% and even behind Hewitt who is around 79%.

Ofcourse 77% is not that bad, but if you take into consideration that Federer is such a great player beyond serving, most of these he probably wins because of his baseline skills. HE should atleast be above Hewitt in 1st serve points won. Maybe Federers serve is his most overrated weapon, only in wimbledon I think it is a great weapon, elsewhere it is not reliable. Players like Kuerten, Safin and maybe even HEwitt have greater 1st serves, harder and flatter. Give Federers 1st serve to Roddick and I am sure he would only win 60% of his 1st serves.

Federers 1st serve sometimes looks very good against bad 1st serve returners like Roddick, Nadal and the old Agassi (who he constantly hit +20 aces). However against great returners like Nalbandian and Murray it is even often attacked directly on the return.

I think Federer should put some effort to improve his 1st serve, on clay a serve with great velocity can be such a weapon, it may have been one of Kuertens most underrated weapons (also one of the weapons which makes me think he would defeat Nadal on clay). Federers slow 1st serves get the velocity on grass, but on clay it is a nonfactor.

Sometimes it almost doesnt matter if he gets the 1st serve in as his 2nd serve is amazing. He definetly has the best 2nd serve on the tour, he can hit it really close to the line with alot of kick and still hit so few DFs. He can also find great angles and he is one of the few who hits the 2nd serve constantly both to the forehand and backhand of his opponents (making it completely unpredictable).

If his 1st serve could be a weapon too outside grass, he would be truly unbeatable.

RonE
03-04-2007, 01:59 PM
I think you are doing him a disservice by just looking at his first serve in terms of how many aces / cheap points he wins off it.

Many times his first serve is used to set up the point- i.e. get a short mid court return from where he can dictate the rallies.

And the most potent component of his first serve has never been sheer power- it is the deceptiveness of the toss whereby the toss remains constant and the opponent doesn't usually know where he is going to hit it and his accuracy to be able to hit the ball exactly where he wants to.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 02:05 PM
Before I used to complain also about Federers 2nd serve return which always was lame slices to get the point started. He used to wi naround 52-53% of points returning the 2nd serve and it was terrible to slice it back to Nadal on clay. Federers 1st serve return is in my opinion the greatest the game has ever seen and he constantly leads statistics winning 35-38% returning the 1st serve.

Federer has now improved his 2nd serve return by much since last year and is 2nd in the statistics winning 61% this year!

He is praticaly leading stats on 1st serve, 2nd serve returns and also ofcourse the 2nd serve statistics (he always wins it every year winning +60% of points on 2nd serve). But on 1st serves won he is only nr16 this year and last year I think he was nr 10, just not good enought for Roger Federer. I know he has it in him improve any weakness, if he wants he could work hard on his serve like he did on his backhand since last year. By the end of the year he would be winning +80% of points on 1st serve and hitting +10 aces every match.

bandabou
03-04-2007, 02:05 PM
His game isn't built around his serve. I do agree that he needs some oomph on that serve from time to time..could well be the key in beating Nadal on clay imo.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 02:05 PM
I think you are doing him a disservice by just looking at his first serve in terms of how many aces / cheap points he wins off it.

Many times his first serve is used to set up the point- i.e. get a short mid court return from where he can dictate the rallies.

And the most potent component of his first serve has never been sheer power- it is the deceptiveness of the toss whereby the toss remains constant and the opponent doesn't usually know where he is going to hit it and his accuracy to be able to hit the ball exactly where he wants to.

No I am not, I am talking about 1st serve % won, not aces or cheap points won.

sarciness
03-04-2007, 02:10 PM
Very interesting point. I don't know enough to comment, but it's certainly a good looking argument to me.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 02:12 PM
Nadals greatest weakness is his 1st serve return, come with only a monsterserve and no game and even on clay you can take him to a tiebreak (which u cant do against Federer). If Federer had that monster serve I would say all his problems against Nadal would disappear.

RonE
03-04-2007, 02:13 PM
No I am not, I am talking about 1st serve % won, not aces or cheap points won.

I realize that but in the beginning of your first paragraph:

I dont know why there is so much talk about how Federers serve is so effective even if he doesnt hit that many aces.

I was addressing that part of your post.

Still, there is no doubt if he could increase the % of first serves won he would be even more difficult to beat than he already is.

But then again, if he does go for more "oomph" on the first serve to do that he might do it at the expense of consistency and accuracy and that could negatively impact the rest of his game.

Roger being Roger I trust he knows what he is doing and he has found the right balance between power and precision where the first serve is concerned, even if it means he is not the outright best player in % of first serves won.

RonE
03-04-2007, 02:17 PM
Nadals greatest weakness is his 1st serve return, come with only a monsterserve and no game and even on clay you can take him to a tiebreak (which u cant do against Federer). If Federer had that monster serve I would say all his problems against Nadal would disappear.

I wouldn't go so far as to say "all his problems against Nadal would disappear" but the less he has to rely on the 2nd serve against him the better.

However, as I said in my previous post there is a danger that if he does up the pace in his first serve to try to do that it could have a negative impact on the rest of his game. Remember, there are many other players against whom he needs to compete, not just Nadal, and changing such an aspect of your game that could potentially impact other aspects for only one player is a rather risky thing to do.

Rogiman
03-04-2007, 02:18 PM
Most of the time he holds routinely, sometimes when 40-0 up he lets himself play a couple of loose points, and that appears in the stats.
If you look at his AO final, for instance, he didn't even face a single break point (I don't think there was even a deuce situation) in the last two sets.

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 02:19 PM
So you are saying for Federer to beat Nadal on clay, he all of a sudden needs more power on his serve?

marcRD
03-04-2007, 02:22 PM
I realize that but in the beginning of your first paragraph:



I was addressing that part of your post.

Still, there is no doubt if he could increase the % of first serves won he would be even more difficult to beat than he already is.

But then again, if he does go for more "oomph" on the first serve to do that he might do it at the expense of consistency and accuracy and that could negatively impact the rest of his game.

Roger being Roger I trust he knows what he is doing and he has found the right balance between power and precision where the first serve is concerned, even if it means he is not the outright best player in % of first serves won.

There is no power, only precision. He rarely hits above 200 kph. The serve is great on grass, just good enought on hc and a nonfactor on clay. He should take a look at Gugas serves to get an idea of an effective clay 1st serve.

How many oppurtunities have Federer had against NAdal on clay where only holding his serve would be enought to win a set and still he blows it?

marcRD
03-04-2007, 02:24 PM
So you are saying for Federer to beat Nadal on clay, he all of a sudden needs more power on his serve?

Yes.

Komodo
03-04-2007, 02:24 PM
RonE, the effectiveness of Rogers first serve can only be measured objectively by how many percent of the points he actually wins with it.
It doesn't matter if he plays it to prepare points or goes for clean aces, obviously the result of whatever he does isn't even in the top 10.

The fact that Roger has the best baseline game makes the stat look even worse for him in relation to other players.

Of course, now one would have to look at the percentage of first serves that he get's in. If it is higher, it may show that Federer is relying more on placement on his first serve to actually get to play more on his first serve, instead of winning over 80 percent on it, but 80 percent of a much lower number and consequently more points lost on second serve.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 02:27 PM
Most of the time he holds routinely, sometimes when 40-0 up he lets himself play a couple of loose points, and that appears in the stats.
If you look at his AO final, for instance, he didn't even face a single break point (I don't think there was even a deuce situation) in the last two sets.

I wonder that is? Is it because of the 82% 1st serve points he won?

Or is it because of the amazing 77% 2nd serve points he won?

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 02:30 PM
Yes.

That isn't going to happen. Youzhny and Andreev trouble Nadal and they don't have massive serves, so that has escaped you?

You are isolating one thing without looking at the overall picture. Federer doesn't need a massive serve in pace terms if it takes a way from other parts of his game. He serves intelligently and pace is irrelevant if a server can't get the good serves in on the big points.

It's called not taking your opportunities when they came on offer and Federer didn't do that when he played Nadal on clay in 2006, Monte Carlo aside. The other 2 matches there were more than enough chances for Federer to win, but he wasn't able to take them or execute his gameplan on the day and deservedly got beaten.

Feketepuss
03-04-2007, 02:33 PM
Two things: don't forget that Federer reaches the final of just about every tournament he plays. Meaning he routinely plays the better returners. So the serve statistic is inevitably going to be lower than someone like Hewitt who these days is knocked out early in the competition (losing very often to average returners.)

The second factor is that a hard serve risks injury and Federer's avoidance of shoulder and wrist injuries owes something to the economical nature of his serve. Yes, a faster serve would help him in some situations but as he is about 260-15 since the 2003 Masters Final, it hasn't impeded a pretty successful career. Interestingly his only injuries have been ankle related.

Komodo
03-04-2007, 02:33 PM
Ok, looking at the stats...

First serve points won

1. Karlovic, Ivo 86 12
2. Ljubicic, Ivan 83 17
3. Fish, Mardy 82 16
4. Querrey, Sam 82 11
5. Guccione, Chris 80 10
6T. Canas, Guillermo 79 9
6T. Johansson, Thomas 79 9
8. Hewitt, Lleyton 79 7
9. Youzhny, Mikhail 78 18
10T. Blake, James 78 15
10T. Roddick, Andy 78 15
12. Haas, Tommy 78 14
13. Berdych, Tomas 78 8
14. Kuerten, Gustavo 78 4
15. Becker, Benjamin 77 15
16. Federer, Roger 77 7


First serve percentage

1. Horna, Luis 73 10
2T. Llodra, Michael 73 5
2T. Patience, Olivier 73 5
4. Monaco, Juan 71 12
5. Ferrero, Juan Carlos 70 10
6. Starace, Potito 69 9
7. Rochus, Christophe 69 4
8. Hartfield, Diego 68 8
9. Pavel, Andrei 68 5
10. Djokovic, Novak 67 14
11. Karlovic, Ivo 67 12
12. Roitman, Sergio 67 7
13. Peya, Alexander 67 4
14. Davydenko, Nikolay 66 16
15. Roddick, Andy 66 15
16. Gasquet, Richard 66 14
17T. Benneteau, Julien 66 11
17T. Soderling, Robin 66 11
19T. Hernych, Jan 66 7
19T. Lee, Hyung-Taik 66 7
21T. Ferrer, David 65 14
21T. Haas, Tommy 65 14
23. Moya, Carlos 65 13
24. Vassallo Arguello, Martin 65 11
25. Nadal, Rafael 65 10
26T. Garcia-Lopez, Guillermo 65 8
26T. Melzer, Jurgen 65 8
28. Ancic, Mario 65 7
29. Verdasco, Fernando 65 6
30. Alves, Thiago 65 5
31. Robredo, Tommy 64 13
32. Andreev, Igor 64 10
33. Massu, Nicolas 64 8
34T. Bjorkman, Jonas 64 7
34T. Stepanek, Radek 64 7
36. Johansson, Joachim 64 6
37. Capdeville, Paul 64 4
38T. Gonzalez, Fernando 63 10
38T. Montanes, Albert 63 10
40. Rochus, Olivier 63 9
41. Vliegen, Kristof 63 8
42. Saretta, Flavio 63 7
43. Ginepri, Robby 63 6
44. Lapentti, Nicolas 63 4
45. Koubek, Stefan 62 12
46T. Dancevic, Frank 62 9
46T. Serra, Florent 62 9
48. Devilder, Nicolas 62 7
49. Safin, Marat 62 6
50. Wawrinka, Stanislas 62 5
51. Kuerten, Gustavo 62 4
52. Almagro, Nicolas 61 11
53T. Del Potro, Juan Martin 61 10
53T. Di Mauro, Alessio 61 10
55T. Korolev, Evgeny 61 9
55T. Pless, Kristian 61 9
57. Lopez, Feliciano 61 6
58. Mirnyi, Max 61 5
59T. Falla, Alejandro 61 4
59T. Jones, Alun 61 4
59T. Luczak, Peter 61 4
62. Ljubicic, Ivan 60 17
63. Spadea, Vincent 60 14
64. Mayer, Florian 60 12
65T. Federer, Roger 60 7


You see that there are quite a few players that both have a higher percentage of points won on first serve AND actually have a higher first serve percentage.
Obviously, this one part of his game isn't in the very top.

RonE
03-04-2007, 02:33 PM
Of course, now one would have to look at the percentage of first serves that he get's in. If it is higher, it may show that Federer is relying more on placement on his first serve to actually get to play more on his first serve, instead of winning over 80 percent on it, but 80 percent of a much lower number and consequently more points lost on second serve.

AFAIK his average first serve % for 2007 thus far has been pretty high - I don't have the exact numbers here.

So if that is the case the questions that beckon are:
1.) Is it a big enough cause for concern that he should make changes to ensure he wins a higher % of his first serve points?
2.) What changes should he make to achieve that goal?
3.) How would those changes potentially influence and change his game? Could making those changes do more damage than good? (look at Rafael Nadal who tried to up the power on his serve, ended up getting stuck in neutral often and is now reverting to his old serve).

CmonAussie
03-04-2007, 02:34 PM
%@@%.
...
Give me Federer`s 1st serve & I`m a happy man!!

rofe
03-04-2007, 02:35 PM
Yes, Federer has lost power on his serve if you compare him to say the Federer in 2004. Cliff Drysdale actually commented on this change when he noticed that Federer is arching his back a lot more nowadays than he did previously thereby imparting more spin and less power on his first serve.

It is hard to say whether this is by accident or intentional but since 2004 he has won 6 more grand slams ( the latest without losing a set) so it hardly worthy of any sort of analysis right now.

He does have the ability to serve bombs if he wants to however. For example, he hit a 130mph serve in the Dubai final against Misha.

Another thing to notice is that his second serve has improved a lot over the past few years and is less attackable. I am not sure if there is a correlation here.

Komodo
03-04-2007, 02:36 PM
Two things: don't forget that Federer reaches the final of just about every tournament he plays. Meaning he routinely plays the better returners. So the serve statistic is inevitably going to be lower than someone like Hewitt who these days is knocked out early in the competition (losing very often to average returners.)

The second factor is that a hard serve risks injury and Federer's avoidance of shoulder and wrist injuries owes something to the economical nature of his serve. Yes, a faster serve would help him in some situations but as he is about 260-15 since the 2003 Masters Final, it hasn't impeded a pretty successful career. Interestingly his only injuries have been ankle related.

Very true. I have never or seldomly seen someone with such a smooth service motion. It, like the rest of what he does on the court, looks so effortless & conservating. He may benefit from this in the long run.

RonE
03-04-2007, 02:40 PM
That isn't going to happen. Youzhny and Andreev trouble Nadal and they don't have massive serves, so that has escaped you?

You are isolating one thing without looking at the overall picture. Federer doesn't need a massive serve in pace terms if it takes a way from other parts of his game. He serves intelligently and pace is irrelevant if a server can't get the good serves in on the big points.

It's called not taking your opportunities when they came on offer and Federer didn't do that when he played Nadal on clay in 2006, Monte Carlo aside. The other 2 matches there were more than enough chances for Federer to win, but he wasn't able to take them or execute his gameplan on the day and deservedly got beaten.

Yes that is exactly right. But even in the Monte Carlo final remember he was 3-0 up in the fourth set tiebreak with two mini breaks, he could have won the tiebreak and taken the match into a fifth set where again it would be right back in the balance so in a sense that was also a wasted opportunity.

Bobby
03-04-2007, 02:43 PM
Two things: don't forget that Federer reaches the final of just about every tournament he plays. Meaning he routinely plays the better returners. So the serve statistic is inevitably going to be lower than someone like Hewitt who these days is knocked out early in the competition (losing very often to average returners.)

The second factor is that a hard serve risks injury and Federer's avoidance of shoulder and wrist injuries owes something to the economical nature of his serve. Yes, a faster serve would help him in some situations but as he is about 260-15 since the 2003 Masters Final, it hasn't impeded a pretty successful career. Interestingly his only injuries have been ankle related.


I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that a player who wins matches and advances to final usually has worse serve statistics than a guy who is knocked out in the first round? If a player loses in the first round, he usually doesn't win all his service games, right?

GonzoFed
03-04-2007, 02:44 PM
That isn't going to happen. Youzhny and Andreev trouble Nadal and they don't have massive serves, so that has escaped you?

You are isolating one thing without looking at the overall picture. Federer doesn't need a massive serve in pace terms if it takes a way from other parts of his game. He serves intelligently and pace is irrelevant if a server can't get the good serves in on the big points.

It's called not taking your opportunities when they came on offer and Federer didn't do that when he played Nadal on clay in 2006, Monte Carlo aside. The other 2 matches there were more than enough chances for Federer to win, but he wasn't able to take them or execute his gameplan on the day and deservedly got beaten.

This post sums it up perfectly.

Komodo
03-04-2007, 02:45 PM
I don't want to spam posts here, but on a closer look, you will find that only Karlovic, Ljubicic, Roddick, Haas and Kuerten are better than Federer in both statistics.

Considering that, i no longer see a basis to change anything at all. I think you can live with being less effective on first serve than only five other guys.

JustmeUK
03-04-2007, 02:51 PM
wait till the end of the year. u're basing your conclusions on two tounaments that Roger has played the second of which was 6 weeks after the AO he won. of course his stats aren't going to be impressive. he was not match fit through most of Dubai. but I'm willing to bet by the end of the year he'll have stats which look much better.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 02:51 PM
That isn't going to happen. Youzhny and Andreev trouble Nadal and they don't have massive serves, so that has escaped you?

You are isolating one thing without looking at the overall picture. Federer doesn't need a massive serve in pace terms if it takes a way from other parts of his game. He serves intelligently and pace is irrelevant if a server can't get the good serves in on the big points.

It's called not taking your opportunities when they came on offer and Federer didn't do that when he played Nadal on clay in 2006, Monte Carlo aside. The other 2 matches there were more than enough chances for Federer to win, but he wasn't able to take them or execute his gameplan on the day and deservedly got beaten.

You are doing that logical mistake so many does.

I said big servers cause big trouble to Nadal. You then say some players without a big serve cause trouble to Nadal. That doesnt take away the fact that big servers cause problem for Nadal. Now what do you think is more easy for Federer, reinventing his game, hit flatter, harder and more risky to beat Nadal on clay or simply jsut improving his 1st serve, hitting it harder and maybe a little more risky (it is not like he loses much by having to hit his wonderful 2nd serve instead).

I think I made my point. There are 4 different stats you can see, 1st serve points won, 2nd serve points won, 1st serve returns won and 2nd serve returns won.

Federer is ranked 1,1,2,16 in these 4 stats. I think there is need to argue on which one he needs to improve.

disturb3d
03-04-2007, 02:53 PM
Fed could pound 210km first serves like Roddick and Ljubicic to hit aces and force errors. But chooses to hit consistent and precise serves that drag his opponent wide or force a poor return.
The difference is that unlike other big servers, Federer's comfort zone is his 3rd ball attack. Where he most frequently puts an end to points.

But when facing Nadal, he will hit a serve as big as anyone's, primarily because Nadal's reactions are a split step faster than anyone else's on tour, and a 185km slice wide would get eaten up.
On serve, you MUST force Nadal to stand as far behind the baseline as possible. And when facing him, Federer does this as well as anyone.

Why doesn't Fed go for big serves against everyone?
1) The bigger you serve, the more prone your service action is to breaking down.
2) Hitting every serve 15km faster will eventually take it's toll on your body in latter stages of a tournament.
4) Wants to exercise his ground and volley game.
4) Is too complete of a player to need to serve big.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 02:54 PM
Yes that is exactly right. But even in the Monte Carlo final remember he was 3-0 up in the fourth set tiebreak with two mini breaks, he could have won the tiebreak and taken the match into a fifth set where again it would be right back in the balance so in a sense that was also a wasted opportunity.

I mean Ljubicic or Berdych would easily have helt those 2 minibreaks on that tiebreak. In every single tiebreak Federer lost to Nadal on clay he had minibreaks and failed to just hit some great 1st serves on those moments to win the tiebreak.

R.Federer
03-04-2007, 02:56 PM
Is it possible that against better returners, Federer is going for much more on his first serve (not just trying to set up a point, but try to win through an ace or unreturnable) and this is bringing his 1st serve % won down?

He might be going for less on 1st serve against poorer returners, because he knows his baseline game will likely win the point eventually. Playing against these types might bring up his average 1st serve %.

Also, the difference in 1st serve % won between #3 and #16 -- is that statistically significantly different from zero? I can't imagine that 77% and 79% are really different statistically

marcRD
03-04-2007, 02:57 PM
wait till the end of the year. u're basing your conclusions on two tounaments that Roger has played the second of which was 6 weeks after the AO he won. of course his stats aren't going to be impressive. he was not match fit through most of Dubai. but I'm willing to bet by the end of the year he'll have stats which look much better.

No, Federer is always around 77-78% at the end of every year. Always jsut behind Hewitt

Black Adam
03-04-2007, 02:59 PM
I dont know why there is so much talk about how Federers serve is so effective even if he doesnt hit that many aces. The last 3 years or so I have always followed the stats of 1st serve % won and Federer is constantly around 77-78% on 1st serves won. That is just enought to be top 10 every year, but far behind players like Roddick and Ljubicic who always are +80% and even behind Hewitt who is around 79%.

Ofcourse 77% is not that bad, but if you take into consideration that Federer is such a great player beyond serving, most of these he probably wins because of his baseline skills. HE should atleast be above Hewitt in 1st serve points won.
Hewitt only gets 30% of his 1st serves in so it's kinda normal for him to most of those few.

rofe
03-04-2007, 03:00 PM
I mean Ljubicic or Berdych would easily have helt those 2 minibreaks on that tiebreak. In every single tiebreak Federer lost to Nadal on clay he had minibreaks and failed to just hit some great 1st serves on those moments to win the tiebreak.

But on clay Nadal can get to most big serves because it is a clay and he stands 10 ft behind the baseline. This is true for most good clay courters so why would Roger bother with a more powerful serve especially on clay?

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 03:02 PM
You are doing that logical mistake so many does.

I said big servers cause big trouble to Nadal. You then say some players without a big serve cause trouble to Nadal. That doesnt take away the fact that big servers cause problem for Nadal. Now what do you think is more easy for Federer, reinventing his game, hit flatter, harder and more risky to beat Nadal on clay or simply jsut improving his 1st serve, hitting it harder and maybe a little more risky (it is not like he loses much by having to hit his wonderful 2nd serve instead)..

Actually you are just overreacting big time against a guy who has not lost a match this year and will more than likely lose less than 7 this year.

Next point, it's not always about big servers causing Nadal problems, some of them have and there are others without big serves that don't. This goes back to only seeing 1 side of the argument.

Federer has to be more patient when he is playing Nadal, as he will get the short balls, just has to take advantage of that and not get pissed off. He is going to be around the current service speeds that he is now and if he has to step it up, in most cases he will do so.

Well Federer needs to hit more of the short sliding angles serves to the deuce court against Nadal to get out of him position, so serving harder isn't going to help that.

I think I made my point. There are 4 different stats you can see, 1st serve points won, 2nd serve points won, 1st serve returns won and 2nd serve returns won.

Federer is ranked 1,1,2,16 in these 4 stats. I think there is need to argue on which one he needs to improve

Have you actually watched Federer play this year or what? Those stats are virtually irrelevant considering he has played 2 events for 2007, the more important ones are how he is on break points converted and break points saved. Also a lot of the players doing well in the service stats are playing on clay in the high percentages, there are a lot of problems just going off raw data without looking at all things.

The point is you have a narrow argument.

jazar
03-04-2007, 03:06 PM
he doesnt have the fastest serve, but he still hits a fair amount of aces, mixes it up well and its sets the point up nicely for him to dominate

disturb3d
03-04-2007, 03:07 PM
Hewitt's serve is flat, fast, and difficult to read.
But it's also low percentage, and his feet are set in cement after the service action.

Against a top 20 player, Hewitt would be forced to hit a more realistic serve.
And the point would be over for him every time the return is made deep.

The North American swingers like Roddick, Hewitt, Safin who play MM tournaments for a living are always going to have unbelievable success on first serve.

Feketepuss
03-04-2007, 03:10 PM
The original poster is using Federer's statistics for 2007, based on his 7 matches in Australia.

What were his statistics for the 97 matches he played in 2006? They are more a basis for discussion.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 03:13 PM
But on clay Nadal can get to most big serves because it is a clay and he stands 10 ft behind the baseline. This is true for most good clay courters so why would Roger bother with a more powerful serve especially on clay?

Verkerk managed to get to a RG final with his great serve, players like Ljubo and Ancic managed to get far last year with their great serves. A powerful serve i underrated on clay, If your serve is truly powerful not even clay can slow it down and you get an advantage over all players, because they dont get any free points at all on clay. Kuerten had a truly powerful clay serve, it was very flat and he got many free points from his 1st serve. I remember it felt impossible for him to get broken when he had a broken his opponents, the set was almost over then.

Clay makes a 200 kph serve look like 185 and a 220 look like 205. The difference between them is huge, one doesnt get any free points the other still gets many. On grass the 200kph looks like 210 and the 220 like 230, both are fast and placement becomes the decisive factor.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 03:15 PM
The original poster is using Federer's statistics for 2007, based on his 7 matches in Australia.

What were his statistics for the 97 matches he played in 2006? They are more a basis for discussion.

I totaly agree, would like to find them too. I remember the 2007 stats beeing identical.

Feketepuss
03-04-2007, 03:17 PM
I remember him being second behind Roddick which would rather undermine your argument. But my memory could undermine my own!

ATP site doesn't have them.

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 03:24 PM
Verkerk managed to get to a RG final with his great serve, players like Ljubo and Ancic managed to get far last year with their great serves. A powerful serve i underrated on clay, If your serve is truly powerful not even clay can slow it down and you get an advantage over all players, because they dont get any free points at all on clay. Kuerten had a truly powerful clay serve, it was very flat and he got many free points from his 1st serve. I remember it felt impossible for him to get broken when he had a broken his opponents, the set was almost over then.

Clay is Verkerk's best surface and just cause he made the RG final doesn't mean serving bombs is going to work for everyone, he was even hitting well from the baseline. It's how well you move on clay. Verkerk, Ljubo (easy draw at RG) but has done well at clay TMS events and Ancic have played a lot on clay, so they are familiar with how to play on the surface, it's just their games aren't suited overall and when they are off, they are in theory easier to defeat than other surfaces, though Ljubo is worse on grass.

The way you are talking then Roddick should be a clay genius cause of his excellent and very powerful serve.

Clay and grass can't be compared, they are totally different types of matches.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 03:26 PM
Actually you are just overreacting big time against a guy who has not lost a match this year and will more than likely lose less than 7 this year.

Next point, it's not always about big servers causing Nadal problems, some of them have and there are others without big serves that don't. This goes back to only seeing 1 side of the argument.

Federer has to be more patient when he is playing Nadal, as he will get the short balls, just has to take advantage of that and not get pissed off. He is going to be around the current service speeds that he is now and if he has to step it up, in most cases he will do so.

Well Federer needs to hit more of the short sliding angles serves to the deuce court against Nadal to get out of him position, so serving harder isn't going to help that.



Have you actually watched Federer play this year or what? Those stats are virtually irrelevant considering he has played 2 events for 2007, the more important ones are how he is on break points converted and break points saved. Also a lot of the players doing well in the service stats are playing on clay in the high percentages, there are a lot of problems just going off raw data without looking at all things.

The point is you have a narrow argument.

Overreacting? There is no way Federer is going to keep improving with a mentality of yours, I have lost 5 matches this year so I guess my game must be perfect....

Federers game is not perfect and will never be perfect. Federer must strive for perfection all the time. I used to complain about the 2nd serve returns, he has greatly improved it and become a better player. He could have stayed nr 1 with his old avarage sliced 2nd serve returns but he certanly would not be the dominant player he is today and no way he would have won RG slicing 2nd serves back to Nadals forehand.

Now, Federer could win even RG with his slow 1st serves, but it would be alot easier if he would constantly hit serves around 205 kph instead of 190 kph. Winning 82% of 1st serves instead of 77% would mean alot for Federer, specialy in decisive moments when he is serving for the match (when he so often chokes).

I know that everytime Federer is serving for the match there is something which is missing. Many of the matches he has lost the last couple of years was when he could serve for the match (Nadal, Nalby, Safin). All of the matches he lost to NAdal was when he could serve to hold minibreaks in very important tiebreaks. Ljubo and Roddick would rarely let go of a situation when they are serving for tha match, Sampras would never let that happen.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 03:31 PM
Clay is Verkerk's best surface and just cause he made the RG final doesn't mean serving bombs is going to work for everyone, he was even hitting well from the baseline. It's how well you move on clay. Verkerk, Ljubo (easy draw at RG) but has done well at clay TMS events and Ancic have played a lot on clay, so they are familiar with how to play on the surface, it's just their games aren't suited overall and when they are off, they are in theory easier to defeat than other surfaces, though Ljubo is worse on grass.

The way you are talking then Roddick should be a clay genius cause of his excellent and very powerful serve.

Clay and grass can't be compared, they are totally different types of matches.

No, a big serve is great on clay but you need to as you say also have some good movement and also a powerful weapon from the baseline which can decide baseline ralies. Roddick is just too defensive from the back of the court to be a great clay court player, I mean he cant hit winners from the baseline if not the 3rd shot after serve.

Once again I am not saying big servers are good on clay, just that a big serve is a good weapon on clay (whatever you might say about Ancic, Ljubo and Verkerks other strengths, their greatest strength even on clay is their serve) and something which is missing in Federers arsenal.

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 03:35 PM
Overreacting? There is no way Federer is going to keep improving with a mentality of yours, I have lost 5 matches this year so I guess my game must be perfect....

Wrong again. I never said he doesn't have to improve, all players have to try and get better. Hope that's clear enough for you.

Federers game is not perfect and will never be perfect. Federer must strive for perfection all the time. I used to complain about the 2nd serve returns, he has greatly improved it and become a better player. He could have stayed nr 1 with his old avarage sliced 2nd serve returns but he certanly would not be the dominant player he is today and no way he would have won RG slicing 2nd serves back to Nadals forehand.

It depends on the player he is playing, sometimes he slices the ball, sometimes he blocks them back and other times he goes for the return. Different players require different tacitcs or is that problematic?

Now, Federer could win even RG with his slow 1st serves, but it would be alot easier if he would constantly hit serves around 205 kph instead of 190 kph. Winning 82% of 1st serves instead of 77% would mean alot for Federer, specialy in decisive moments when he is serving for the match (when he so often chokes).

You really sound like you have no idea about tennis on clay to be honest? Federer is very efficient in his game and so why would he create extra strain to serve harder for longer on the most demanding surface physically and mentally for him, when it can detract from the other strengths of his game?

I know that everytime Federer is serving for the match there is something which is missing. Many of the matches he has lost the last couple of years was when he could serve for the match (Nadal, Nalby, Safin). All of the matches he lost to NAdal was when he could serve to hold minibreaks in very important tiebreaks. Ljubo and Roddick would rarely let go of a situation when they are serving for tha match, Sampras would never let that happen.

Of course you forget about the matches that Federer has won, cause other players have shat themselves when it comes to the big moment to beat the big man? If it was all about service speed then Rusedski, Karlovic and Roddick would have all the Slams?

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 03:40 PM
No, a big serve is great on clay but you need to as you say also have some good movement and also a powerful weapon from the baseline which can decide baseline ralies. Roddick is just too defensive from the back of the court to be a great clay court player, I mean he cant hit winners from the baseline if not the 3rd shot after serve.

Once again I am not saying big servers are good on clay, just that a big serve is a good weapon on clay (whatever you might say about Ancic, Ljubo and Verkerks other strengths, their greatest strength even on clay is their serve) and something which is missing in Federers arsenal.

You are unbelievable, even Federer was undefeated for the year you seem the type of guy who would bitch about something wasn't right.

Big serve works well anywhere, but a bad serving day on clay and then the weaknesses will get exposed, hence these guys become easier to defeat when the ball keeps coming back and they have to try and use other methods to win and aren't as successful.

Oh! yeah patience, tactical awareness, fitness are things that Federer lack and have held him back as well on clay.

nobama
03-04-2007, 03:41 PM
wait till the end of the year. u're basing your conclusions on two tounaments that Roger has played the second of which was 6 weeks after the AO he won. of course his stats aren't going to be impressive. he was not match fit through most of Dubai. but I'm willing to bet by the end of the year he'll have stats which look much better.Yes pulling stats early in the season makes no sense to me. Do we have year-end stats from 2006?

rafagirlno1
03-04-2007, 03:41 PM
fed improves his serve or serves at 100% first serve in , or serves at 240(like roddick) , or any other crap . nothing is going to change the end result at roland garros :devil:

GonzoFed
03-04-2007, 03:47 PM
fed improves his serve or serves at 100% first serve in , or serves at 240(like roddick) , or any other crap . nothing is going to change the end result at roland garros :devil:


hahaha. you were the only one missing on this thread
.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 03:50 PM
Wrong again. I never said he doesn't have to improve, all players have to try and get better. Hope that's clear enough for you.

Federer can hardly get a better forehand than he has, he needs to improve where there is most room to improve. I am saying it is his 1st serve whcih is the part of his game where there is most room to improve, which part of his game do you think has more room to improve?




It depends on the player he is playing, sometimes he slices the ball, sometimes he blocks them back and other times he goes for the return. Different players require different tacitcs or is that problematic?

That is the variety he got in his returns, he didnt have before. His 2nd serve returns where weak and the slices back to the court where eaten up by the likes of Nalbandian and Nadal. Now he can attack the 2nd serve making his game less predictable and was important specialy in the matches against Nadal and Nalby in the end of the season.



You really sound like you have no idea about tennis on clay to be honest? Federer is very efficient in his game and so why would he create extra strain to serve harder for longer on the most demanding surface physically and mentally for him, when it can detract from the other strengths of his game?

I dont see how it would detract him from other strengths of his game. As much as a harder serve takes more energy the easy free points you get from a monster serve lets you conserve energy too. Also I have never seen Federer physicaly tired in any game, I dont think a slightly more powerful serve would make his game physicaly and mentally more demanding for him.



Of course you forget about the matches that Federer has won, cause other players have shat themselves when it comes to the big moment to beat the big man? If it was all about service speed then Rusedski, Karlovic and Roddick would have all the Slams?

Once again, this makes no sense at all. When did I ever say tennis was all about serving speed? When I say Federer needs to improve his backhand do I mean tennis is all about the backhand?

I mean, we must keep some logics when we make arguments. This argument is so illogical I dont even know how to answer it.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 03:56 PM
You are unbelievable, even Federer was undefeated for the year you seem the type of guy who would bitch about something wasn't right.

Big serve works well anywhere, but a bad serving day on clay and then the weaknesses will get exposed, hence these guys become easier to defeat when the ball keeps coming back and they have to try and use other methods to win and aren't as successful.

Oh! yeah patience, tactical awareness, fitness are things that Federer lack and have held him back as well on clay.

Federer has amazing fitness and tactical awareness in my opinion. Patience is just not good enought against Nadal on clay, you need to be aggresive all the time because Nadal wont make more UEs than Federer. In Rome Federer served alot better than in RG and MC which gave him oppurtunity to all the time beeing aggresive and even get to the net and finish the point many times.

Black Adam
03-04-2007, 03:56 PM
Federer can hardly get a better forehand than he has, he needs to improve where there is most room to improve. I am saying it is his 1st serve whcih is the part of his game where there is most room to improve, which part of his game do you think has more room to improve?


Who cares, but if he were to work on on-court Charisma it would be already better. Besides with his Service Motion (Shoulder Rotation is very short) he isn't going to be consistently serving above 215kph. His Strategy like Henam said isn't to get an ace or Service winner but to set up the point for an easy winner. He can improve percentages by putting extra pressure by systematically following every serve to the net.

almouchie
03-04-2007, 04:03 PM
i would go into the detail of the first serve percentage points, aces, DFs , etc

to be a top player, a champion, a no1
its the SECOND SERVE
that matters,
many players have a decent & capable first serve
but its their second serve that is their undoing
many times, players face an off day, or an average serving match
what helps them out of their slump is how good their second serve is, it automaticaly takes the pressure of the server

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 04:05 PM
Federer can hardly get a better forehand than he has, he needs to improve where there is most room to improve. I am saying it is his 1st serve whcih is the part of his game where there is most room to improve, which part of his game do you think has more room to improve?


Forehand
Backhand
Volleys
Serve

In other words the lot.

That is the variety he got in his returns, he didnt have before. His 2nd serve returns where weak and the slices back to the court where eaten up by the likes of Nalbandian and Nadal. Now he can attack the 2nd serve making his game less predictable and was important specialy in the matches against Nadal and Nalby in the end of the season.

You can have every plan and shot in the book, but it counts for shit if you can't execute it. As for predictable, yes Federer is one of the few players in the game at the moment who is able to vary his game, when one style isn't working, he can go to the other. Or do you need specific examples of this?

I dont see how it would detract him from other strengths of his game. As much as a harder serve takes more energy the easy free points you get from a monster serve lets you conserve energy too. Also I have never seen Federer physicaly tired in any game, I dont think a slightly more powerful serve would make his game physicaly and mentally more demanding for him.

You seriously couldn't see it? I will give you another example of how it can and has impacted negatively. Nadal has tried to beef up his serve and while he is in the process of doing this, look at what has happened to him? He has started losing more matches.

To undertake these changes, one they should be done in the off season for the most part and while trying to adapt there are going to be problems. Another example Federer wouldn't have the specific fitness to serve/volley all the time on clay, these require different movements, plus the mental fatigue as well.

You never see Federer tired is cause he trains hard and so efficient in his game and his movement and that includes his serve. He can hit them hard, but he plays within himself and that contributes to his success and also it's hard to test him when not many of his recent matches go to 5 sets, a lot of that is mental as well as the physical.

Once again, this makes no sense at all. When did I ever say tennis was all about serving speed? When I say Federer needs to improve his backhand do I mean tennis is all about the backhand?

I mean, we must keep some logics when we make arguments. This argument is so illogical I dont even know how to answer

Says the man who is bitching about Federer's serve after he has played 2 tournaments for 2007 and won them. Yes, that's a good one baby when it comes to logical arguments bitching about serving stats, when they are flimsy at best.

Have you actually thought about what you are saying?

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 04:09 PM
Federer has amazing fitness and tactical awareness in my opinion. Patience is just not good enought against Nadal on clay, you need to be aggresive all the time because Nadal wont make more UEs than Federer. In Rome Federer served alot better than in RG and MC which gave him oppurtunity to all the time beeing aggresive and even get to the net and finish the point many times.

Well he played poorly tactically at RG after the 1st set whether you like or not and got criticised for it?

Missed the point again about patience vs. Nadal. It's not about trying to outlast him in a war of attrition, it's about outmanouvering him and that can't be done just in 1 shot. This requires patience and Federer will get the short balls from Nadal, then he has to make his move and not get pissed off when 3 or 4 of his good shots will come back and they will on clay.

TheBoiledEgg
03-04-2007, 04:12 PM
and Federer still takes the shit out of everyone !!!!!!!!!!

marcRD
03-04-2007, 04:21 PM
Forehand
Backhand
Volleys
Serve

In other words the lot.


Well, that is your opinion. I cant belive you think there is more room to improve on his forehand than his serve.


You can have every plan and shot in the book, but it counts for shit if you can't execute it. As for predictable, yes Federer is one of the few players in the game at the moment who is able to vary his game, when one style isn't working, he can go to the other. Or do you need specific examples of this?

Well, Federer can execute it and the variety on 2nd serves has helped him against Nadal and Nalby. What you are saying is what I already know, I know Federer can vary his game when one style isnt working. Dont need any examples of that.



You seriously couldn't see it? I will give you another example of how it can and has impacted negatively. Nadal has tried to beef up his serve and while he is in the process of doing this, look at what has happened to him? He has started losing more matches.

To undertake these changes, one they should be done in the off season for the most part and while trying to adapt there are going to be problems. Another example Federer wouldn't have the specific fitness to serve/volley all the time on clay, these require different movements, plus the mental fatigue as well.

Federer is not Nadal. If Federer wants to improve something he does it without hurting his game. I dont really belive you think Nadals serve has caused him all the problems this year. Most people would agree Nadal is doing a major mistake going back to his old serve.

Federer doesnt need to wait for the offseason to improve anything, after RG final his topspin backhand constantly was improving and becoming more aggresive without losing accurity, the climax was masters cup where he hit bh winners from all over the court against Blake.


You never see Federer tired is cause he trains hard and so efficient in his game and his movement and that includes his serve. He can hit them hard, but he plays within himself and that contributes to his success and also it's hard to test him when not many of his recent matches go to 5 sets, a lot of that is mental as well as the physical.

Once again I disagree, I dont think his avarage serves make him less tired. Mentaly it is more exhausting to never get cheap points on clay and to play long rallies against Nadal where Nadal keeps hitting spins up to Federers backhand, that is extremly physically exhausting.



Says the man who is bitching about Federer's serve after he has played 2 tournaments for 2007 and won them. Yes, that's a good one baby when it comes to logical arguments bitching about serving stats, when they are flimsy at best.

Have you actually thought about what you are saying?


I already said I have seen stats from both 2005, 2006 and they are the same. How many times do I need to repeat this?

Can somebody please find stats from 2005 and 2006?

fenomeno2111
03-04-2007, 04:27 PM
Give me that 'mediocre' serve with 10 Grand Slams...I'll be more than happy to take that.

Gulliver
03-04-2007, 04:28 PM
Yes pulling stats early in the season makes no sense to me. Do we have year-end stats from 2006?


EOY stats (Nov 11th 2006):
Number of matches: 95

Aces 3rd 656
1st serve % 14th 63%
1st Serve points won 3rd 77%
2nd serve points won 1st 59%
Service games won 1st 90%
BPs saved 1st 70%

Points won returning 1st serve 1st 35%
Points won returning 2nd serve 5th 54%
Return games won 5th 32%
BPs converted 14th 43%

To be in the top 5 in 5/6 categories for "Service Game Leaders" and in the top 5 for 3/4 categories for "Return of Service Leaders" shows just what an excellent all round game he has.

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 04:31 PM
EOY stats (Nov 11th 2006):
Number of matches: 95

Aces 3rd 656
1st serve % 14th 63%
1st Serve points won 3rd 77%
2nd serve points won 1st 59%
Service games won 1st 90%
BPs saved 1st 70%

Points won returning 1st serve 1st 35%
Points won returning 2nd serve 5th 54%
Return games won 5th 32%
BPs converted 14th 43%

To be in the top 5 in 5/6 categories for "Service Game Leaders" and in the top 5 for 3/4 categories for "Return of Service Leaders" shows just what an excellent all round game he has.

Thanks for that information and I'd love a mediocre 1st serve and wouldn't mind those stats at all.

DrJules
03-04-2007, 04:33 PM
There are 2 main errors that Federer historically made when playing Nadal.

1) He avoided playing backhands by moving across the court and leaving a large gap on the forehand side for Nadal to hit winners. The improving backhand means Federer does this less these days so the gap appears less.

2) Federer hit too many powerful shots to the Nadal backhand which is technically a better shot and handles pace far better than the forehand. Federer is now hitting more powerful shots to the Nadal forehand which responds with short mid court balls.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 04:38 PM
EOY stats (Nov 11th 2006):
Number of matches: 95

Aces 3rd 656
1st serve % 14th 63%
1st Serve points won 3rd 77%
2nd serve points won 1st 59%
Service games won 1st 90%
BPs saved 1st 70%

Points won returning 1st serve 1st 35%
Points won returning 2nd serve 5th 54%
Return games won 5th 32%
BPs converted 14th 43%

To be in the top 5 in 5/6 categories for "Service Game Leaders" and in the top 5 for 3/4 categories for "Return of Service Leaders" shows just what an excellent all round game he has.

Those stats might be slightly wrong. I remember him having 77% at the end of 2006 but beeing nr10. Maybe I am wrong, but I also remember Karlovic and other big servers having major errors in their serve stats leading to some fans of Roddick to think Roddicks serve was better than Karlovic.

Anyway thank you for finding them, I think it is too bad you cant find stats from previous years in atps homepage. I would like to see Sampras and Agassi in the old days and compare to today but that is not possible.

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 04:41 PM
Well, that is your opinion. I cant belive you think there is more room to improve on his forehand than his serve.

If you can't believe that players need to work on every part of their game strengths and weaknesses inclusive, then you are the one with that problem. Plus this mediocre 1st serve that you are going on about has won him 10 Slams and will win more of them.

Well, Federer can execute it and the variety on 2nd serves has helped him against Nadal and Nalby. What you are saying is what I already know, I know Federer can vary his game when one style isnt working. Dont need any examples of that.

His whole serve is based on variety and keeping the opponents guessing and off balance, therefore being able to execute his gameplan. It's not hard to work out is it.

Federer is not Nadal. If Federer wants to improve something he does it without hurting his game. I dont really belive you think Nadals serve has caused him all the problems this year. Most people would agree Nadal is doing a major mistake going back to his old serve.

Missed the point. Any adjustments in any players game take time before real success or failure can be measured with any accuracy.

Federer doesnt need to wait for the offseason to improve anything, after RG final his topspin backhand constantly was improving and becoming more aggresive without losing accurity, the climax was masters cup where he hit bh winners from all over the court against Blake.

Are you deliberately not reading or something? I said most of the work, does this mean all the work should be done in the off season? You do the base and ground work during the off season, then the non-tournament weeks mixed in with the physical stuff is the things you need to do on court.

Well he is going to be confident going off his worst surface onto one he likes playing and ever heard the saying "that you learn more from your defeats"

Once again I disagree, I dont think his avarage serves make him less tired. Mentaly it is more exhausting to never get cheap points on clay and to play long rallies against Nadal where Nadal keeps hitting spins up to Federers backhand, that is extremly physically exhausting.

I am very aware of their matches on clay. Why did you not comment when I made the point about slice serves to the deuce court? You really don't understand how Federer's game works then do you in relation to serve. Have already gone over the points in relation to Fed vs. Nadal on clay, but you have missed those too many times and doesn't need to be repeated.

Gulliver
03-04-2007, 04:47 PM
I'll add something else about these stats. A lot depends on who else is in the mix. For example, in 2005, Federer's 1st serve percentage was also 63%, but he was ranked 20th. In 2006, same percentage, but ranked 14th.

Points won returning 1st serve in 2005, he was ranked 4th with 35%, exactly the same % giving him 1st ranking in 2006.

You can't take stats in isolation from what else players do on court.

One of the biggest misleaders is BPs. We've had this discussion before. Could be 5 in one game only, saved by aces, but the stat goes out that 5 were "squandered" for the whole match.

DrJules
03-04-2007, 04:55 PM
The Federer serve is actually based on the fact he has more control on where he serves than any player in the history of tennis. Has there ever been a player better at serving either to the central service box junction and the wide service box junction?

He is certainly not the fastest and his 1st serve % could be higher. However, his % and ace count is probably higher later in the tournament against better players which can make statistics deceptive.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 05:08 PM
I am very aware of their matches on clay. Why did you not comment when I made the point about slice serves to the deuce court? You really don't understand how Federer's game works then do you in relation to serve. Have already gone over the points in relation to Fed vs. Nadal on clay, but you have missed those too many times and doesn't need to be repeated.


Look it is simple. I know how federer uses his slices serves to finish the point of in the open area of the court. Everyone keep saying how effective his serve is without him wining cheap points and hiting aces on them. But at the end of the day he only wins 77% of the points on his 1st serve, that includes 2006 and 2005. That is simply not good enought, he wins matches not because of his 1st serves but because of his 2nd serve and his return games. His 1st serves are at best avarage. The stats speak the truth, 2005 and 2006 was no different. His 1st serves is his biggest weakness. I am not complaining on Federer, I am just pointing out an area of his game which is far from its full potential.

You may say all you want about how it would destroy the way he construct his points.

But it wont change his 2nd serve stats which are the best in the tour and it wont change his return games which are the best in the tour. It would only put at risk his 1st serve stats which already doesnt live up to what it could be. I really think this is the area of his game which can be most improved and the only area he hasnt worked enought on since he started dominated.

nobama
03-04-2007, 05:25 PM
EOY stats (Nov 11th 2006):
Number of matches: 95

Aces 3rd 656
1st serve % 14th 63%
1st Serve points won 3rd 77%
2nd serve points won 1st 59%
Service games won 1st 90%
BPs saved 1st 70%

Points won returning 1st serve 1st 35%
Points won returning 2nd serve 5th 54%
Return games won 5th 32%
BPs converted 14th 43%

To be in the top 5 in 5/6 categories for "Service Game Leaders" and in the top 5 for 3/4 categories for "Return of Service Leaders" shows just what an excellent all round game he has.Thanks for the stats. If he needs to work on something it's probably bp conversions, though he probably gets more bp opportunities than anyone else. Looking at the stats of the top 30 this year (not including tournaments this week) Federer is 25th in bp opportunities, but 3rd in bp conversion at 53% and 1st in average per match at 11, Murray coming in second with 10.

Beforehand
03-04-2007, 05:29 PM
That isn't going to happen. Youzhny and Andreev trouble Nadal and they don't have massive serves, so that has escaped you?

You are isolating one thing without looking at the overall picture. Federer doesn't need a massive serve in pace terms if it takes a way from other parts of his game. He serves intelligently and pace is irrelevant if a server can't get the good serves in on the big points.

It's called not taking your opportunities when they came on offer and Federer didn't do that when he played Nadal on clay in 2006, Monte Carlo aside. The other 2 matches there were more than enough chances for Federer to win, but he wasn't able to take them or execute his gameplan on the day and deservedly got beaten.
What should he have done at RG? Not being confrontational, I'm legitimately asking.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 05:29 PM
Forehand
Backhand
Volleys
Serve

In other words the lot.


Just to make it clear what I mean when Federers 1st serve is his weakness.

I would not change Federers serve return, forehand, backhand, volley, 2nd serve against any serve return, forehand, backhand, volley, 2nd serve on the tour.

In my opinion he is the best or among the best in all these cathegories.

His 1st serve however is much weaker than Ljubo, Karlovic, Johansson and many others. I would definetly rather have Ljubos 1st serve than Federers.

All other part of his game is the best or arguably the best.

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 05:36 PM
What should he have done at RG? Not being confrontational, I'm legitimately asking.

He played a poor tactical match after doing well in the 1st set and didn't convert the chances at the start of the 2nd and then when Nadal came back as expected, he didn't come up with anything different.

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 05:38 PM
Just to make it clear what I mean when Federers 1st serve is his weakness.

I would not change Federers serve return, forehand, backhand, volley, 2nd serve against any serve return, forehand, backhand, volley, 2nd serve on the tour.

In my opinion he is the best or among the best in all these cathegories.

His 1st serve however is much weaker than Ljubo, Karlovic, Johansson and many others. I would definetly rather have Ljubos 1st serve than Federers.

All other part of his game is the best or arguably the best.

Can't you handle the fact that there are some players that can hit or play certain shots better than Federer. Look at the respective heights of those guys you mentioned and they move like moose around the court, goes back to what I was saying before, trying too hard to change one aspect of a players game.

Actually the heavy ball to his backhand is more of a problem than his serve.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 05:43 PM
He played a poor tactical match after doing well in the 1st set and didn't convert the chances at the start of the 2nd and then when Nadal came back as expected, he didn't come up with anything different.

Even if it would be true that it was his tactical awareness that failed him it is extremly difficult to train it (kind of like mental strength), it is not really a weapon but something you just have either by experience or you are simply born with it(Hingis, Murray).

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 05:45 PM
Look it is simple. I know how federer uses his slices serves to finish the point of in the open area of the court. Everyone keep saying how effective his serve is without him wining cheap points and hiting aces on them. But at the end of the day he only wins 77% of the points on his 1st serve, that includes 2006 and 2005. That is simply not good enought, he wins matches not because of his 1st serves but because of his 2nd serve and his return games. His 1st serves are at best avarage. The stats speak the truth, 2005 and 2006 was no different. His 1st serves is his biggest weakness. I am not complaining on Federer, I am just pointing out an area of his game which is far from its full potential.

The stats say what? All it shows you are basing one thing on stats alone without actually watching these matches and not noting how the opponent is playing, what weather conditions were like ( not indoors). For once and for all there are only 2 stats that count in tennis it's called Win and Loss.

Where are these 2005 Stats you are talking about? Bring them out and paste them in here? Gulliver did them for 2006.

You are complaining about a non issue at the moment. What matters is with the serve is how well you play the big points? Or is that lost on you? Not hard to see play the big points well, then that player wins the match.

Action Jackson
03-04-2007, 05:46 PM
Even if it would be true that it was his tactical awareness that failed him it is extremly difficult to train it (kind of like mental strength), it is not really a weapon but something you just have either by experience or you are simply born with it(Hingis, Murray).

He is tactically very good, but even the best ones get it wrong now and then. That day he got it wrong. Of course it's a weapon and so is mental toughness.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 06:01 PM
The stats say what? All it shows you are basing one thing on stats alone without actually watching these matches and not noting how the opponent is playing, what weather conditions were like ( not indoors). For once and for all there are only 2 stats that count in tennis it's called Win and Loss.

Where are these 2005 Stats you are talking about? Bring them out and paste them in here? Gulliver did them for 2006.

You are complaining about a non issue at the moment. What matters is with the serve is how well you play the big points? Or is that lost on you? Not hard to see play the big points well, then that player wins the match.

I dont have them, I hope someone have them and can past them over.

You think Federer serves good on big points I disagree. He returnes great when he is under pressure (how many times have we seen him get back when he is down 4-5) but his serves gets shaky. I am not talking about 3 set matches which doesnt matter here, but in the big moments in grand slams. Against Safin 2005 (he was 5-2 with to minibreaks on tiebreak and had match point, in the 5th set he couldnt get in any 1st serves), against Nalbandian 2005 (30-0 and lets Nalby attack his serve 3 times ), against Nadal on clay countless times (every single tiebreak played between them Federer had minibreaks). How many times did he lose his serve against Murray in cincinatty in a row in that 1st set? You remember Blake in usopen where every single time he would serve to close a set he would choke, he almost lost a 5-1 lead in the 4th set.

It is his serve which constantly lets him down in these big moments, he does play good from the baseline on big points but his serve gets very shaky. I have seen this countless amount of times.

Rogiman
03-04-2007, 07:45 PM
His 1st serve however is much weaker than Ljubo, Karlovic, Johansson and many others. I would definetly rather have Ljubos 1st serve than Federers.

All other part of his game is the best or arguably the best.That has a lot more to do with his frame, though, than all other parts of his game.

He's not going to grow taller anytime soon, and I don't think I need to elaborate about how much that affects the serve.

Rogiman
03-04-2007, 07:46 PM
It is his serve which constantly lets him down in these big moments, he does play good from the baseline on big points but his serve gets very shaky. I have seen this countless amount of times.That's more mental than anything else.

Gulliver
03-04-2007, 07:53 PM
EOY stats (Nov 21st 2005):
Number of matches: 84

Aces 6th 599
1st serve % 20th 63%
1st Serve points won 8th 76%
2nd serve points won 1st 59%
Service games won 2nd 89%
BPs saved 9th 64%

Points won returning 1st serve 4th 35%
Points won returning 2nd serve 16th 52%
Return games won 8th 31%
BPs converted 11th 44%

nanoman
03-04-2007, 08:39 PM
More stats:
Nadal's 1st serve return points won on clay (2006)

Coria 66% :haha:(MC QF)
Volandri 64% (Rome 2R)
Monfils 48% (Rome SF)
Vliegen 47% (MC 3R)
F.Gonzalez 46% (Rome QF)
Djokovic 44% (RG QF)
Henman 44% (Rome 3R)
Gaudio 44% (MC SF)
Robredo 43% (Barce F)
Mathieu 42% (RG 3R)
Soderling 41% (RG 1R)
Kim 41% (RG 2R)
Lisnard 40% (MC 2R)
F.Lopez 37% (Barce 2R)
Clement 37% (MC 1R)
Federer 37% (MC F)
Nieminen 36% (Barce QF)
Navarro Pastor 33% (Barce 3R)
Moya 33% (Rome 1R)
Hewitt 32% (RG 4R)
Ljubicic 31% (RG SF)
Federer 31% (RG F)
Federer 23% (Rome F)
Almagro 20% :eek: (Barce SF)

In each tournament they both participate in, Fed has the best winning 1st serve percentage against Nadal. (Monte Carlo, Rome, Roland Garros)
Maybe we just have to accept that it is hard to get 1st serve freepoints against Nadal on Clay.

marcRD
03-04-2007, 10:22 PM
More stats:
Nadal's 1st serve return points won on clay (2006)

Coria 66% :haha:(MC QF)
Volandri 64% (Rome 2R)
Monfils 48% (Rome SF)
Vliegen 47% (MC 3R)
F.Gonzalez 46% (Rome QF)
Djokovic 44% (RG QF)
Henman 44% (Rome 3R)
Gaudio 44% (MC SF)
Robredo 43% (Barce F)
Mathieu 42% (RG 3R)
Soderling 41% (RG 1R)
Kim 41% (RG 2R)
Lisnard 40% (MC 2R)
F.Lopez 37% (Barce 2R)
Clement 37% (MC 1R)
Federer 37% (MC F)
Nieminen 36% (Barce QF)
Navarro Pastor 33% (Barce 3R)
Moya 33% (Rome 1R)
Hewitt 32% (RG 4R)
Ljubicic 31% (RG SF)
Federer 31% (RG F)
Federer 23% (Rome F)
Almagro 20% :eek: (Barce SF)

In each tournament they both participate in, Fed has the best winning 1st serve percentage against Nadal. (Monte Carlo, Rome, Roland Garros)
Maybe we just have to accept that it is hard to get 1st serve freepoints against Nadal on Clay.

You also see why Federer did so well in rome. It was because of his 1st serve. If he served like in Rome in every game against Nadal it would be alot easier for him.

mecir72
03-05-2007, 05:58 AM
Well Federer is no Sampras and yes his second serve is relatively speaking better than his second.
What I'd like to see him do better is serve out sets and matches. He seemed to be doing it well in Dubai but last year and the year before it seemed like alot of the breaks he suffered came when trying to close out a set or a match. Of course he ended up winning most anyway but it just doesnt look right.
He seemed to lose his shot selection a little when serving for sets and matches.

Action Jackson
09-11-2007, 12:38 PM
It's done well enough to win him 3 Slams this year.

bokehlicious
09-11-2007, 12:40 PM
Nice bump GWH :)

Action Jackson
09-11-2007, 01:05 PM
It would be great to win 12 Slams with a not so good 1st serve.

Forehander
09-11-2007, 01:29 PM
If federer has a roddick serve i think everybody here will just have to stfu

Action Jackson
09-11-2007, 01:36 PM
If federer has a roddick serve i think everybody here will just have to stfu

That good elsewhere , he doesn't need it. :)

TennisGrandSlam
09-11-2007, 02:17 PM
Of course, :devil:

If his 1st serve is as good as A-Rod, he will be perfect!

Why he always lost to Nadal on clay, because his 1st serve on clay against Nadal is too bad :mad:

Polikarpov
09-11-2007, 04:18 PM
I think Roger's serve is underrated. He might not have the biggest serve but its placement is excellent.

marcRD
09-11-2007, 05:53 PM
Well, Federer himself mentioned his serve was not on during the clay season and that he counted on more free points. I think these free points may be really important to make Federer relax a little.

World Beater
09-11-2007, 06:01 PM
More stats:
Nadal's 1st serve return points won on clay (2006)

Federer 31% (RG F)
Federer 23% (Rome F)
Almagro 20% :eek: (Barce SF)

In each tournament they both participate in, Fed has the best winning 1st serve percentage against Nadal. (Monte Carlo, Rome, Roland Garros)
Maybe we just have to accept that it is hard to get 1st serve freepoints against Nadal on Clay.

this is one of the reasons why almagro could be a beast on clay. he's kind of similar to kuerten except he has a bigger serve and but perhaps his point construction is a little suspect.

Action Jackson
09-10-2009, 01:29 PM
Not so sure about that.

Chiseller
09-10-2009, 01:42 PM
What a bump :lol:

NYCtennisfan
09-10-2009, 02:33 PM
To be fair, his serve has gotten better and better the past few years in terms of consistent power and ace production. His corkscrew up the middle serve on the AD side has improved tremendously.

marcRD
09-10-2009, 03:31 PM
Maybe I overreacted at that time, but I did say that poor 1st serve returners like Roddick and Söderling made his serve look amazing, which is constantly repeated. Söderling and Roddick reads the Federer serve about as good as they can read chinese, but Nadal and Murray knows how to read it and have less difficulty with the serve than against players with more powerful serves (like Del Potro, Roddick and Tsonga).

Jimnik
09-10-2009, 05:51 PM
Even Nadal and Murray struggle with Fed's first serve most of the time. Actually Roddick had days when he returned very well, Wimby 2004 is a good example.

ballbasher101
09-10-2009, 07:09 PM
The key reason why Federer has improved his first serve is that he has worked a lot on his second serve thus he goes for more on his first serve. I know who Federer should thank for improving his serve, it is Tony Roche. They worked a lot on improving Federer's second serve.

abraxas21
09-10-2009, 08:25 PM
EOY stats (Nov 21st 2005):
Number of matches: 84

Aces 6th 599
1st serve % 20th 63%
1st Serve points won 8th 76%
2nd serve points won 1st 59%
Service games won 2nd 89%
BPs saved 9th 64%


Very interesting thread. These stats will help me compare his situation in 2005 (his prime) to now and see where he stands.

in 2005
P(winning a point with his serve)= p(winning it with hist first serve) + p(winning it with his second serve) = 0.63*0.76 + 0.37*0.59 = 0.6971

in 2009 thus far

p(winning a point with his serve)= 0.62*0.79 + 0.38*0.57 = 0.7064

so his first serve has certainly improved but his second serve is actually a bit worse. overall he's gotten a little bit better at serving compared to his prime but the difference is so small that it might not be that significant in the first place. Nevertheless Federer has marginally improved from 89% to 90% in service games won in the two relevant time periods.

As for break points saved, Fed has improved quite a bit. In 2005 he ended up saving 64% and this year he's saved 68%.

Conclusion: Federer's serve is actually marginally better than in 2005, arguably one of the years of his prime.

EOY stats (Nov 21st 2005):
Number of matches: 84

Points won returning 1st serve 4th 35%
Points won returning 2nd serve 16th 52%
Return games won 8th 31%
BPs converted 11th 44%

And in 2009 thus far

Points won returning 1st serve 31%
Points won returning 2nd serve 51%
Return games won 25%
BPs converted 42%

Here the differences are much more stark, esp. in return games won with a decreaee of 6%!
Conclusion: Federer is clearly a worse returner of serve (and probably this also applies more to this whole level of playing) than in 2005.

Jaz
09-10-2009, 10:10 PM
Conclusion: Federer is clearly a worse returner of serve (and probably this also applies more to this whole level of playing) than in 2005.

You would need to look at the whole field, are the whole field serving better?

abraxas21
09-10-2009, 10:31 PM
You would need to look at the whole field, are the whole field serving better?

yes, you're right but it would be pretty damn difficult and time consuming to take that into account in a cuantitative manner.