ATP/WTA Tennis - The Luckiest Shots Ever 

So actually you are lucky because we now have technology where we CAN see the ball compared to many years ago .

maestro h yeah though I'm sure you can see the ball more clearly when uploader doesn't butcher the video quality :)

The most stupid comment i red in a very long time.

RossFaderable it's actually not, he lost the point

bennjenn929 they really don’t. They look like they were lucky. Quit putting everything he does on a pedestal please

Greg Baxter That was a joke, of course those were lucky shots, all of them are. Just joking that he had so many of them. Sheesh!

bennjenn929 8:20 was my favorite

The blurry one. No no, the other blurry one.

Take your pick... There’s plenty to choose from.

@@bcdm999 no i think its that one there

looool

No I think it’s that one

Hornet CZ jajajajaja, me too!!!

It happened once ! But he still managed to rush to the ball in time, and counter with his own "ball to the net"...

Obviously the net is a Federer fan duh

Yeah, these shots are so "lucky" that they typically happen about once per set at all levels of tennis.

johnbcollier the ones of them hitting the net where it would be out and going back into the court tho are pretty interesting

Would be dangerous to jump over the net. not orth it

Thành Đào-Công, this rule does not exist at the atp tour. Just imagine in Murray vs Djokovic Match that there was a single‘s net murrays ball would go in also. So does not matter if it hits the outside of the single‘s net...

TheCaveWarrior Do you know where the rules say that for ATP? I suppose the rules are universal otherwise ATP and WTA or even each tournament could change the rules and it would be confusing to watch. And if there was only singles net post, of course Murray's shot was legal if the ball didn't pass over the net. No rule states that you have to hit the ball over the net. But if you hit the ball to any permanent fixture before it lands into court, you lose point right away.

Thành Đào-Công i thought the same when i saw the Point!

@@thecavewarrior1715 bhs indonesia

Gregory Ashton Bro These Clips are 20 years or older. You can’t make them better

Different Music how do u explain Federer’s match point? He was off balance falling backwards

Lmao I said the same thing, no idea what happened

he returned the ball and it hight the top of the singles stick then went in

I saw it🙄

yeah its all skills

lol u stupid

Od course it is all of these shots were luck

@@victorlupas4875 lol it was a joke

ikr? I'm still wandering which pixel I'm suppose to look at

Because it was too far over by the time he was aware of what was going on and got to it.

He shoulda jumped the net for it

Very true, according to the ITF if the ball his any part of the net past the singles poles it's considered to have hit a fixture, and if the ball hits a fixture before hitting the correct ground, it's point for the opposite player

not true

Gabriel Hernandez well you could argue that Halep dug her grave way before that break point and this was just a nail

Jack Lo the rule says the raxket shouls be before and after hita the ball. That's not the same as you said. If you are skilled enough (or lucky enough) to do something like that with the racket it is not a problem.

Joe...don't guess and act like you know what you're talking about. This is a VERY famous point by Connors. And no....it did not count for the very reason given in the OP. Nor did Connors expect it to count. And his opponent ALSO knew it wouldn't count which is why he didn't make even the slightest move toward the ball which he easily could have gotten to. The reason why he didn't go for is is because he knows the rule, which says "A player shall lose the point if the ball in play touches the racket when the player is not holding it."

KnickKnack07 I love to read someone that for some mental problem has not the ability to understand sarcasm. I guess for some people is easier to write things like "don't act like you know" than use their brains. True story...

Yeah, right: sarcasm. Why didn't we see that!?!

No rule about the hand that must touch the racket all time.

that was the most luckiest shot ever

spywhale good saying, or "good players make their own luck"

Happened during an exhibiton match. Did not win the point.

Obi-Wan Banan nadal doesnt need luck to win xD

net clearance is the keyword here. nadal moonballs on really hard balls to return (he moonballs with topspin). federer risks more and he always plays it flatter or just slices it (if he moonballs it's underspin, rarely topspin). basically nadal gets less lucky shots because he risks less, like djokovic. federer has a really offensive game and takes lots of risks, aswell taking the ball early with decreases net clearance probabilities. these "lucky" shots of federer's are just results of his playstyle

As well as

Nadal has higher average speed and spin on his ground strokes than Federer so if that’s moonballing then I wanna moonball more...

John Gray's The Journal Kylie Minogue-I should be so lucky