Joined
·
7,558 Posts
This might seem an absurd question. I mean, the guy has passed Sampras's haul of slams and may soon pass Federer's record for weeks at number one. By any measure, he's one of the most successful men's tennis players there has ever been.
But there is more to it:
In 2007, he contested his first slam final at the US Open. He was an exciting fresh face, known for his powerful forehand, his strong serve, his backhand dtl and his deft drop-shots (not to mention of course his sense of humour and impressions of other players). In the final, against 11-time slam winner Roger Federer, Novak was the better player. He played an attractive mix of attack and defence, and played better in his first slam final, and gave Federer more problems, than Hewitt, Agassi and Roddick had done the three previous years at Flushing Meadows. Only his choking on big points (understandable for a player of tender years) cost him the match and the title. But he left behind a strong impression as an exceptional talent.
Since then he has contested another 24 slam finals, and won 16 of them. But, over the years, he has also increasingly lost the attacking component to his game. Moreover, his game sometimes appears to have calcified, with him shuttling from side to side on the baseline and playing elastic defence. He still plays forehand winners of course, and he still does a mean drop shot, but in many respects there is a sense that the game of that young man from 2007 has retreated into a core of strengths instead of expanding to its full potential.
But there is more to it:
In 2007, he contested his first slam final at the US Open. He was an exciting fresh face, known for his powerful forehand, his strong serve, his backhand dtl and his deft drop-shots (not to mention of course his sense of humour and impressions of other players). In the final, against 11-time slam winner Roger Federer, Novak was the better player. He played an attractive mix of attack and defence, and played better in his first slam final, and gave Federer more problems, than Hewitt, Agassi and Roddick had done the three previous years at Flushing Meadows. Only his choking on big points (understandable for a player of tender years) cost him the match and the title. But he left behind a strong impression as an exceptional talent.
Since then he has contested another 24 slam finals, and won 16 of them. But, over the years, he has also increasingly lost the attacking component to his game. Moreover, his game sometimes appears to have calcified, with him shuttling from side to side on the baseline and playing elastic defence. He still plays forehand winners of course, and he still does a mean drop shot, but in many respects there is a sense that the game of that young man from 2007 has retreated into a core of strengths instead of expanding to its full potential.
