Novak Djokovic has claimed his first French Open crown in a commanding come-from-behind victory over Andy Murray at Roland Garros.
RE-LIVE ALL THE ACTION WITH OUR LIVE BLOG
The victory puts Djokovic in elite company – his 12th grand slam title. It moves him ahead of Rod Laver and Bjorn Borg, and equal with Roy Emerson, while it also means he has won all four grand slams since his loss to Stan Wawrinka in the 2015 French Open Final.
It wasn’t all one-way traffic though, with Murray firing out of the gates under overcast skies and claiming the first set in dominant style to surprise everyone.
It wouldn’t have been a great surprise to see Murray win the first set, but the way it was won would have left those in the Serbian’s camp very worried.
Djokovic looked to be feeling the effects of playing three games in three days – he simply wasn’t hitting the ball well, not serving well and making a lot of unforced errors.
Following the first set loss though, something seemed to spark for Djokovic and he was a completely different player coming out of the break as he dropped just three individual games over the next two sets.
Djokovic was ruthless in his aggression, hitting very close to the baseline more often than not and keeping Murray under all sorts of pressure – something he didn’t handle well, not hitting the ball with any fire or intent, and before long he was down two sets to one.
Murray’s biggest problem though wasn’t Djokovic – rather, it was himself. He missed way too many first serves, and ended up with just 55 of 109 in at the end of the match.
The amount of time Murray has spent on court throughout the Open – with his first two rounds which both went to five sets being the key culprits – really came back to hurt Murray today. He made too many errors and couldn’t control his play, and with his serving the way it was Djokovic simply punished him.
Djokovic also had a 50 per cent break point success rate, with 7 of 14 as Murray buckled under pressure.
Another key to Djokovic’s final three sets was his aggression level off the racket. He was looking to hit the winner down the line wherever he could, and as good as Murray’s defence is it simply wasn’t enough to stave off the Serbian who ended with 41 winners.
The final set was a little more closely fought, but again Djokovic would run away with a double break.
Doubt looked to be creeping into the world No.1’s game though, as he failed to serve out the match once, and then Murray held serve.
When Murray was on his game he was a sight to watch, with plenty of nice drop shots and perfect angles and power thrown in for good measure. However, he was far too inconsistent and Djokovic would race to a 40-15 advantage in what turned out to be the final game of the match.
Djokovic would double fault, before Murray brought it back to deuce. For a moment it looked like the set would be back on serve, but some cracking forehands following strong serves ensured there would be no coming back for Murray who ultimately put the final shot of the match into the net.
In the end, Djokovic was simply too good in Paris winning his fourth grand slam final in a row and first in Paris as Murray once again was the runner up at a grand slam.
Final score
Novak Djokovic 3 6 6 6
Andy Murray 6 1 2 4
Stats
Aces: Djokovic (4), Murray (5)
Double faults: Djokovic (3), Murray (3)
First serves in: Djokovic (76/110), Murray (55/109)
Points won on first serve: Djokovic (49/76), Murray (34/55)
Points won on second serve: Djokovic (20/34), Murray (22/34)
Break points won: Djokovic (7/14), Murray (3/10)
Winners: Djokovic (41), Murray (23)
Unforced errors: Djokovic (37), Murray (39)
Total points won: Djokovic (122), Murray (97)
Johnno
Guest
I reckon the 70's-80's-90's were a golden or decent age for clay a high standard. The courts today seem less specialised, wimbledon grass has slowed alot. Fed was good on clay agreed, and maybe Lendl wasn't so bad on grass. I'll keep Agassi in Tier 3, very good player but he wasn't Bjorg Mcenroe in my view.
clipper
Guest
Don't think those claycourters come close to Nadal, and I don't think it was a golden age for clay courters, there's always been specialists. Sampras wasn't even close to being the best on clay - just one semi in all his years there, that makes him poor on clay compared to his other results. Federer reached many finals - he would probably be one of the best claycourters. Agree with Hugh that Agassi belongs in Tier 2 - won on all surfaces, went off for awhile, come back just as strong.
Johnno
Guest
Hugh good points on Sampras. He wasn't terrible on clay not the best. But in yes in the 90's surfaces were far more specialised and Sampras had to come across some of the best clay courters of all time. The Spanish Matadors e.g. Brugera and others, who grew up on clay unlike in the US, Thomas Muster/Gomez/Moya/Kuerten/Chang/Courier/Agassi/Petra Korda//Rios/and the all the other South Americans e.g. Argenitians and others e.g. Kafelnnikov. Pete had to face some of the best ever on clay some real specialists who would give Nadal a run for his money and others of the 2000's era. Wilander won the Australian open when it was on grass at Kooyong/plus clay at French and hard court at US. But Wilander in 80's may of won his Australian opens when not all the best players would show. Bjorg missed many Australian opens in the 70's and early 80's.
Johnno
Guest
clipper it's not about "Tier 3" having just 1 player it's just that in my view Agassi is stuck in the middle. He's not good enough to make the Tier 1 or 2 group, and he's above those in Tier 4. He was the only guy who was good enough to be in Tier 3.
Bandy
Roar Guru
Not GOAT yet for mine but definitely in that top tier. Agassi deserves tier 2 as he won all 4 slams in very polarising conditions - something none of the players today have to contend with. Sampras should be in their company - the slams are much friendlier now given 32 seeds instead of 16, and surfaces/playing styles all much easier to adapt to than the 90s. I think Novak is probably playing the most complete game of tennis we have ever witnessed, maybe Fed 2006/7 is there about, but he still has to earn the GOAT tag and win more than 12 majors, which Im confident he will. Incredible player and what an incredible era we are witnessing, surface homogenisation aside.
clipper
Guest
I would say he's by far the best at the moment, but still not GOAT. Don't know if I would have a tier 3 with just Agassi in it. Sampras never even got close to winning the French, so would rate the other 3 higher. It is amazing that this era has 3 of the top 5 players of all time - making it hard for Murray, who would probably be around the Becker / Wilander level. I think Andy has the worst loss ration in GS finals, Lendl did lose 11, but won 8.
Johnno
Guest
Typo- "He might end up next ever"-correction "He might end up best ever"
Johnno
Guest
Djokovic is in the top level now Tier 1: Fed/Nadal/Sampras/Djokovic Tier 2: Bjorg/Mcenroe/Connors Tier 3: Agassi Tier 4: Becker/Edberg/Lendl/Wilander Tier 5:Hewitt/Safin/Roddick/Murray/Rafter/Kaflelinikov/Vilas/Nastase Laver im not including as he didn't play much in the open era. But Djokovic is Tier 1 and maybe best ever in open era. Djokovic and Murray are only 1 year younger than Nadal,but both players feel so much younger. Little stat, Fed and Djokovic both got there French open's with out playing Nadal to win French. Nadal didn't play this year, Djokovic beat him last year at RG, and Fed in 2009 won after Soderling knocked Nadal out. But you can only play what's in front of you. Djokovic is a closer in grand slam finals too. His stat was 9-0 wins whenever he's gone 2 sets to 1 up. Now it's 10-0. Andy Murray had a 26-0 record at RG everytime he won first set. That stat was broken today. Andy Murray won in a pre-french open torunament final at the Rome masters beating Djokovic in straight sets to win last Month. It shows grand slam finals are totally different intensity and pressure. Novak is the Goat right now, there's no Big 4. He might end up next ever, some say he's the best ever in the Open era now. A champion.