Novak Djokovic has played a lot of major semifinals. He’s squeaked out wins by slim margins (2011 U.S. Open), he’s thrashed his opponents (pretty much every Australian Open semifinal he’s played besides 2012), and he’s suffered a heartbreaking loss or two (2013 Roland-Garros). Djokovic has felt just about all there is to feel in major semifinals by themselves, let alone majors in general. At this stage in his legendary career, he has learned how to navigate matches to great effect. He can afford a dip here and there — and he most certainly has dips — but when crunch time arrives, he knows exactly what he needs to do.
Obtaining this knowledge is difficult. Djokovic has probably built it up through match after match, trial-and-error, repeating what brings him success and eradicating the choices that produce the suboptimal result. And it was this vast experience that presented the biggest advantage in his Wimbledon semifinal today.
Denis Shapovalov, Djokovic’s young challenger, played an exceptional match. He hurled down thundering serves throughout the semifinal, collecting more holds to love than anyone could reasonably expect to have against Djokovic. Simultaneously, Djokovic played fairly poorly. It took him a while to find his first serve and his rally shots lacked bite for the first half of the match. Yet despite all this, Djokovic won the semifinal 7-6 (3), 7-5, 7-5.
The obvious place to start dissecting this seeming contradiction of a result is big point play. Shapovalov produced 11 break points in the match, managing to convert just one (in a set he ended up losing, obviously). He hit a handful of unforced errors when trying to serve out the first set, including a gimme of a forehand winner that would have created a set point. He double faulted on set point in the tiebreak, and again on break point at 5-all in the second set. Losing most of the big points in the match essentially neutralized the fact that Shapovalov’s base level was at least as good as Djokovic’s for most of the time.
Djokovic is better at denying his opponents a key point than anyone else. Even when he’s far from his best, it seems that the mere threat of a high level is enough to evoke some errors from rivals. Not only that, but the well-roundedness of his game is such that there’s no easy, reproducible plan on big points. Against Roger Federer, you can at least try to pepper his backhand. If he survives the onslaught and comes up with a winner, it might be easier to take, since that’s not something Federer does too often. But Djokovic’s backhand is insanely solid, and though his forehand isn’t in the same realm as Federer’s once was, it can end points easily enough and doesn’t exactly break down often.
Without a clear path through a big point, mistakes are inevitable. Combine that with Djokovic’s ability to play a point on his terms under pressure, and it’s not surprising his opponents are constantly accused of choking when they lose a set or a match from a winning position. Of course players choke against Djokovic — how is it reliably preventable when there’s a player on the other side of the net capable of being both a wall and big serve machine? And the latter comparison isn’t much of an exaggeration — Djokovic saved two break points with aces early in the third set.
While Shapovalov blinked on big points, Djokovic was steady. He threw in an unexpected serve-and-volley play at 5-3 up in the first set tiebreak and executed it soundly. He faced five break points in the second set and saved three with forcing play: two winners and a big serve. On the other two, he kept the ball in play long enough for Shapovalov to self-destruct with an unforced error from the baseline.
Shapovalov can find solace in the fact that the way he lost is far from a unique failure to capitalize on opportunities. No top player on tour is without a deep Djokovic-inflicted scar from a close loss. The Serb’s experience and balanced game are a death trap for high-risk, high-reward tennis like Shapovalov’s, even when the power is directed well.
It was insightfully pointed out in the above tweet that crushing losses are often a requisite experience for tennis players aiming for the top. Winning a major before learning how it feels to fall just short is a rare thing. Shapovalov may currently be feeling disappointment that exceeds any he’s felt on court before, but stronger emotions will eventually obscure the current sensation. He could one day play his first major final, where the pressure and potential reward is magnified even further. He might play a five-setter late in a major semifinal or final, or get close to a medal at the Olympics, or win a first Masters 1000. All these stages offer a wide range of joy and pain, with it all depending on the result.
Experiencing the sting, and the steps taken to arrive there, can later be priceless information when a similar situation comes up. In his next major semifinal (assuming it happens), Shapovalov will know from experience that he must make the most of break points, or keep an eye on his opponent for a millisecond longer to hit into the open court more often when he has a sitter. In tennis and in life, knowing something as logically true is often different than experiencing that truth. It’s a long road to the top of the sport, littered with hidden pitfalls that reveal themselves after an ungodly amount of match practice. Djokovic completed the same path a decade ago when he ascended to world number one at Wimbledon in 2011.
With today’s loss, Shapovalov has taken an important step.