If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

by socal1976 Mon 02 Feb 2015, 8:19 am

First topic message reminder :

The fact is that we have seen this double standard and Fedal myopia by many fans. And as Roger rides into the sunset having completed a spectacular and historic career we are constantly told how the game is endless retrieval and that this matchup in particular doesn't provide any excitement. Interestingly, this matchup with Fed going away soon will be one that should capture the imagination of tennis fans. And it has provided some great matches like the semi in Rome, the semi in 2012 and I think a good match last night. The match can't be an epic although for 3 sets it was. Murray somehow just completely went away at the end of the third and in the 4th set. Instead on the match thread we were bombarded by negative comments from the same cast of characters who couldn't stop watching or telling us over and over again how bored they are. Djokovic in particular started the first few games on fire blasting winner after winner. Murray went on a run and played really well from the start of the match up till his collapse at the end of the third. There were some jaw dropping shots, and both players moved into the net quite often.

Lets take a look at the stats:

Djokovic 53 winners, 40 errrors
Murray 41 winners, 49 errors.

The two players combined for 70 net approaches. Of the 254 total points 94 of them ended on winners not endless rallies of the same thing over and over again. 27.5% of the points featured one or both player at net. And 37 percent of the points finished on winners. Djokovic in particular despite his lull in the second and early in the third hit way more winners than errors and this against one of the best retrievers in the game on one of the slowest non-clay surfaces.

While this match which was competitive and featured some incredible shots as well as defense is subject to constant moaning and criticism watch the reaction the next time Nadal mauls federer in a dull and one sided affair.

by Guest Mon 02 Feb 2015, 10:20 pm

HM Murdoch wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote: Wimbledon 2014 was testament to Djokovics survival skills given how well Federer played the whole match.
Not so sure about that.

It took Federer until the end of the second set to force his first break point.

He only forced 7 BPs in the whole match, compared to Novak's 15.

So, although Novak had his 4th set melt down, it's not as if Federer was all over him prior to that.

Look at the BP conversion though. Federer much more clinical.

Federer for where he had been in previous years, for 5 sets I don't think Federer could've played any better. Anyone else that day I think would've been toast. That's why I say it's testament to Novaks survival. Went walkabout and still pulled it from the fire.

by HM Murdock Mon 02 Feb 2015, 10:21 pm

I'd rate W09 higher than W14.

In fact, I perhaps prefer 09 to 08.

I think the reputation of 08 rests a lot upon that amazing tie break. I don't recall being dazzled by the previous 4 sets but maybe my memory of it is fading.

by HM Murdock Mon 02 Feb 2015, 10:25 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote: Anyone else that day I think would've been toast. That's why I say it's testament to Novaks survival. Went walkabout and still pulled it from the fire.

I get you. I'd also say the Novak of the previous few slam finals would have lost too.

Federer was unfortunate to face the first truly good performance in a final that Novak had produced in some time (melt down notwithstanding!)

by It Must Be Love Mon 02 Feb 2015, 10:30 pm

HM Murdoch wrote:I'd rate W09 higher than W14.

In fact, I perhaps prefer 09 to 08.

I think the reputation of 08 rests a lot upon that amazing tie break. I don't recall being dazzled by the previous 4 sets but maybe my memory of it is fading.

The level of quality in 2008 was so so high, especially from Federer in the final 2 sets (and Nadal throughout).
2009, Roddick played very cleverly, but Federer was not really close to his best- but he's a great champion and his mental strength won him the match.
Even Wimbledon 2007 for the first 4 sets was better than Wimbledon 2009; a shame Nadal fell away at the end of the 2007 match or it could have been a real tense epic.

by Guest Mon 02 Feb 2015, 10:39 pm

HM Murdoch wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote: Anyone else that day I think would've been toast. That's why I say it's testament to Novaks survival. Went walkabout and still pulled it from the fire.
I get you. I'd also say the Novak of the previous few slam finals would have lost too.

Federer was unfortunate to face the first truly good performance in a final that Novak had produced in some time (melt down notwithstanding!)

That's the thing with stats. Not a true reflection of the match. Djokovics winners/UEs in that match just unbelievable. Not seen him like that for a whole 5 setter. He kept himself alive in rallies that would've been winners against others. It's the first time I had seen Roger put a string of strong performances together in a Slam since his peak years. The semi against Raonic was just a masterclass in tennis perfection.

Once it became apparent in the 5th that the Djokovic serve wasn't going to buckle, it was only a matter of time before Roger's metal would crack and it did and the most important time.

Like I say in terms of survival, Djokovic has to be the best there has ever been.

by Born Slippy Mon 02 Feb 2015, 10:44 pm

Best Fed ever played in a Wimbledon final. Novak was absolutely incredible in that match. In my view, it was the best slam final of the past 20 years.

09 was poor. Fed was awful in that final and not that much better in the first half of 08. 08 wins for drama but 2014 was far better consistent quality.

by It Must Be Love Mon 02 Feb 2015, 11:09 pm

Born Slippy wrote:Best Fed ever played in a Wimbledon final. Novak was absolutely incredible in that match. In my view, it was the best slam final of the past 20 years.

09 was poor. Fed was awful in that final and not that much better in the first half of 08. 08 wins for drama but 2014 was far better consistent quality.

Best Fed played ever in a Wimbledon final ??
No way for me, his forehand was off. It's lucky for Federer he was serving like a God, or the match wouldn't have even gone to 5 sets. Djokovic was playing stunning tennis from the back of the court, hitting the ball with superb length.

by Guest Mon 02 Feb 2015, 11:16 pm

I agree IMBL, Fed was pretty solid and his serve kept him in it but he wasn't hitting and dominating with his FH the way he can.

In the 2003 final Fed hit 50 winners to 9 UE's in three sets Shocked

His best W final performance was against Roddick in '05. He was sublime for 3 sets.

by It Must Be Love Mon 02 Feb 2015, 11:22 pm

emancipator wrote:I agree IMBL, Fed was pretty solid and his serve kept him in it but he wasn't hitting and dominating with his FH the way he can.

Yep, that's what I saw too.
He was serving at his absolute best, his backhand was probably looking better than ever (new racket helped with that perhaps ?), but his forehand was not devastating. Not that he made lots of mistakes on it, he still timed the ball sweetly, but it wasn't the spellbinding weapon we've seen before.

emancipator wrote:
In the 2003 final Fed hit 50 winners to 9 UE's in three sets

His best W final performance was against Roddick in '05. He was sublime for 3 sets.

As I've said before I agree with you that Federer was better in his prime, and disagree with Tenez who said Federer got better as he got older.
Nevertheless I do think we have to also consider the aspect that someone like Djokovic, when he plays at the ridiculous level he did in the Wimbledon final, could push Federer more than Roddick and Phili.

by Born Slippy Mon 02 Feb 2015, 11:24 pm

Do you think Fed would have gone 50/9 against Novak had he faced him in 2003? He went 75/29 against one of the best defensive players of all-time in 2014. That, to me, is substantially better than his stats against an outright aggressor like Scud.

by Guest Mon 02 Feb 2015, 11:37 pm

Against Roddick in 2005 he went 49/12 in three sets.

He probably wouldn't have got those stats against Djokovic even at his peak. However the courts were faster in 2003 and Djokovic would've struggled more to keep balls in play.

Let's not forget what an accomplished grass court player Roddick was. Both he and Scud had huge serves. The fact that Federer dismissed them so clinically is proof to me that his performances in those finals were better than '14. He only played two tie breakers in 6 sets against two of the biggest servers ever, and on a grass court. And he made just 9 and 12 UE's! That's ridiculous. Only Nadal on clay has ever matched those kind of stats.

Besides, I've seen all of those matches and Federer was flat out a better player on grass at that time.

by Born Slippy Tue 03 Feb 2015, 12:39 am

Murray went 76/20 in losing to Roddick in 2009 (interestingly Roddick's only ever win against a top 10 player on grass). He is the type of player who, for the very best, it was relatively easy on a quick court to rack up impressive stats.

Fed played a great match, under limited pressure from a player who he knew he could handle, in 2005. He was simply sublime, against a player who was good enough to challenge him, in 2014.

by Belovedluckyboy Tue 03 Feb 2015, 3:35 am

I don't think Fed was playing better on grass in 2014 than during his earlier days on and prior to 2008. I would say Novak's great serving in their final contributed to his win; Fed couldn't even smell a single BP chance in the first two sets. It's not unlike Novak's match vs Delpo in 2013, Novak won that one by his great serving. Though Novak is an incredible defender, on grass he couldn't rely solely on his defence to win the match, he served really well on that day. While watching that match, I felt that Fed was the one giving chase, even though he won the first set, in a TB. Novak was the one having the upperhand, at least that's the impression they gave me during the match. The match is of high quality, but Fedal's 2007/2008 finals edged this one, for both were playing their best tennis during those times. Fed was playing well in 2014 Wimbledon, but speed around the court, he couldn't match himself of 2007/2008.

by socal1976 Tue 03 Feb 2015, 5:42 am

theslosty wrote:
socal1976 wrote:theslotsy, Nadal plays Federer exactly the same and Federer responds pretty much exactly the same in almost every match I have seen them play. Federer doesn't come in very much the one exception was the Rome match they played. And it is a complete myth that Murray and Djokovic don't have weapons to hit people off the court. Did you see the returns, the backhand winners, the forehand winners. Nearly 30 percent of the points ended with one or both player at the net. Were do you get this idea that Murray is not a good volleyer. He is at least as good volleyer as either Fed or Nadal. You give Federer and Nadal credit for things they don't do, and you don't give credit to Djokovic and Murray for qualities they do have. But hey you are free to like and dislike whichever matchup you like. But don't tell fedal matches have more variety they have none. Fed isn't net rushing Nadal all the time and Nadal is hitting the exact same ball to him a thousand times over. Also please don't tell me that Djokovic and Murray don't have shots to finish points or hit someone off the court its simply not true.
socal
Firstly, I'd plainly disagree with your suggestion Federer does not come in very much against Nadal. For better or for worse he is often in situations at the net with the point finely poised. He also loves to serve-volley to the Nadal backhand on the the deuce court.
I would also strongly contend with your view Murray is just as good as Federer in the volleying department. For me Federer is at another level in this department compared to the other three, he can punch volleys through the court much better (albeit Novak did this well yesterday) and his sublime drop volleys and pick ups are skills nobody else on tour can match. I'm confident the stats would back me up here if you so require.
Personally I think Murray's net game is pretty overrated and even if it was that good he very rarely comes in. It may be my selective memory but the only volleys I remember him hitting yesterday was that stinker of a volley at the end of the first set and a woeful drop shot in the 3rd or 4th which was easily picked off by Novak. However if you can source me that stat saying nearly 30% of points ended at the net I am happy to eat my words (though I bet most of those points are overheads and drop shots rather than conventional volleys).

I think you missed the point of my post. I was not saying Murray and Djokovic are weak in any department but rather their relative strengths are more in defence rather than offence. I stand by my comment neither are really able to open the court up against each other, but this is more a credit of their defensive skills than a criticism of their offensive abilities. Neither have a weapon like either of Fedal's forehands or Federer's sheer creativity and imagination to open up a point. Again that is not a criticism of Murray or Djokovic but I believe Federer is truly unique in that regard, look at the way he has dismantled Murray in GS finals, Djokovic doesn't beat Murray in that kind of way.
Again, you missed my point re returns, they are so good they make it incredibly difficult for the other to open up the court rather than the other way round. Neither have a forehand like Fedal, Novak's is underrated but still a way off those two. They probably have the best two backhands in the game but generally one can cope with whatever the other has thrown at him. It's also just a fact of tennis that it is easier to open up a point with a forehand than a backhand, even if a player has a relatively stronger backhand. I would make an exception for the single handed backhand as it naturally creates more options and has that extra flexibility, albeit with much less solidity.
I never said Djokovic and Murray don't have the shots to finish off opponents. I am specifically referring to when they play each other when they struggle a bit.

EDIT: You will probably find this an uninspiring opinion but there really is no one else on tour that plays like Federer. You are within your rights to disagree but for me his skill level and imagination just brings a completely different element to any other match up. Djokovic, Murray are at an extremely high level but you couldn't say their style is radically different to the rest of the tour, no matter how good the standard is. Heck, I would even say my own personal style isn't far off Djokovic, but I'll never be able to play like Federer. Even Nadal's style of play, which may not to be everyone's taste, is so unorthodox and unique compared to many others.

Good post, but I can't agree that Murray is a poor volleyer. You point out one poor volley he made and that is the only time you can remember him coming into the net? He also made a couple of very sensational pick ups of ridiculous passing shots he picked up off his shoe strings. There were 70 net approaches between the two of them in really 3 and half sets. If you don't believe me you can look it up on the ATP match stats. Of the 53 of 130 some odd points that Djokovic won came on winners. The rest off of forced or uneforced errors. There actually weren't very many 20 shot rallies in the course of the match. I would venture to say no more than 5-8 percent of the rallies were over 20 shots. Yet you claim you don't like this matchup because there are endless 20 shot rallies over and over again. Wrong, there just isn't. There are very few of those rallies and you may not like them but I do.

As regards to playing like Federer, well no 17 time slam champions don't grow on trees. If you are talking about style of play well Federer's style of play is not really that unique. Most top pros played very much like Federer in the era of faster conditions. See Sampras. And Dimitrov also plays a great deal like Federer albeit a very poor man's version of Federer.

by socal1976 Tue 03 Feb 2015, 5:48 am

PS, lets not get carried away by unforced error stats on grass everyone and their grandmother has high winner counts on grass.

by Guest Tue 03 Feb 2015, 9:03 am

When I think of Wimbledon 2014 I think of the US Open 2005. I know the age gap between Federer and Djokovic is smaller than that of Federer and Agassi, but still the same principle of logic applies. The guy with less matches in the legs, will win. It's that simple. My Mum is an Agassi fanatic and she called it at the beginning that Agassi had to win the first 2 sets to win the match. He didn't. Come TB in the third, my Mum said Agassi was cooked and he lost 7-1. Agassi played a blinder, but he didn't have it in the legs to go the distance. He could play his shots, but not at the frequency like he could in his heyday. It's the same with Federer. A focused Djokovic should've won in 4 and didn't. If Federer's level in that 05 final had dropped like Djokovic's did in the 4th last year, Agassi could've got a 5th set out of it.

Like emanci said, Federer's days of dominating Slams against the rest of the field are long gone. He played well in the 2014 final no doubt, but against a much younger opponent who is at his peak and dominating the outcome was all the same.

by Born Slippy Tue 03 Feb 2015, 10:27 am

Well though Agassi played in 05, Fed was also very slow out of the start gates. I didn't feel Andre faded significantly in that match. He was just, by age 35, not quite at the level needed to compete with an all-time great playing well. He was reliant on Fed under-performing. As soon as Fed stepped it up he was done.

I don't think that was the case with Fed last year. He was only 32 and he was facing a guy who has been his equal for a number of years before. It was a quite remarkable performance by Novak, on his worst surface, to edge out Fed playing very close to his best.

by bogbrush Tue 03 Feb 2015, 11:04 am

This is true. He has chances to steal a Slam if the stars align, but if we get to the quarters and the bigger boys are all still in there's no way.

OK, I can't let it go. Maybe, just maybe, he could. If everything is just so.

I hope.

Very Happy

by Guest Tue 03 Feb 2015, 11:33 am

He had it at the US Open last year Sad

by bogbrush Tue 03 Feb 2015, 1:06 pm

legendkillarV2 wrote:He had it at the US Open last year

Grrrrr.

True, just goes to show the circumstances can arise. I can't believe he's incapable of getting past that calibre of player even if he didn't that day.

by Guest Tue 03 Feb 2015, 1:15 pm

bogbrush wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:He had it at the US Open last year
Grrrrr.

True, just goes to show the circumstances can arise. I can't believe he's incapable of getting past that calibre of player even if he didn't that day.

When the draw panned out for him I had him dead cert to win. Just his A game or even B game beats the rest hands down.

The situation as say can arise. I just hope if it does anytime this year, he takes the opportunity.

by summerblues Wed 04 Feb 2015, 3:51 am

Born Slippy wrote:Best Fed ever played in a Wimbledon final.

It Must Be Love wrote:Best Fed played ever in a Wimbledon final ??
No way for me, his forehand was off. It's lucky for Federer he was serving like a God, or the match wouldn't have even gone to 5 sets.

Certainly not anywhere near the best Fed played in a Wimby final. He played quite solid, and parts of his game were close to spectacular, but, as Amri and Eman said, his FH was just not there. He was lucky to keep it as close as he did. The only stretch where he played even anywhere near top level was in the fourth set from a break down.

by socal1976 Wed 04 Feb 2015, 6:06 am

Djokovic should have closed Fed out in 3 or 4 sets last year at wimby. The guy has so many ups and downs of a bizarre nature over the course of 5 set match. That being said it isn't remarkable that Fed at 33 is still competing near the top. Lets remember Agassi won a slam, and was number at age 33 and made a slam final at 35. If Fed is way more accomplished than Agassi we shouldn't doubt that he will still be able to produce great tennis at times. That being said he is clearly passed his best and is not nearly as good as peak Federer.

by bogbrush Thu 05 Feb 2015, 1:15 pm

It Must Be Love wrote:
HM Murdoch wrote:I'd rate W09 higher than W14.

In fact, I perhaps prefer 09 to 08.

I think the reputation of 08 rests a lot upon that amazing tie break. I don't recall being dazzled by the previous 4 sets but maybe my memory of it is fading.
The level of quality in 2008 was so so high, especially from Federer in the final 2 sets (and Nadal throughout).
2009, Roddick played very cleverly, but Federer was not really close to his best- but he's a great champion and his mental strength won him the match.
Even Wimbledon 2007 for the first 4 sets was better than Wimbledon 2009; a shame Nadal ~~fell away at the end of the 2007 match~~ lost or it could have been a real tense epic.

I thought I'd express what you meant more clearly.

by temporary21 Thu 05 Feb 2015, 3:42 pm

socal1976 wrote:Djokovic should have closed Fed out in 3 or 4 sets last year at wimby. The guy has so many ups and downs of a bizarre nature over the course of 5 set match. That being said it isn't remarkable that Fed at 33 is still competing near the top. Lets remember Agassi won a slam, and was number at age 33 and made a slam final at 35. If Fed is way more accomplished than Agassi we shouldn't doubt that he will still be able to produce great tennis at times. That being said he is clearly passed his best and is not nearly as good as peak Federer.

Last years final turned me into a djoko fan proper. It took some proper Cojones to pick himself up after that terrible choke on the 4th set. And what an emotional speech too

by socal1976 Sat 07 Feb 2015, 6:15 am

temporary21 wrote:
socal1976 wrote:Djokovic should have closed Fed out in 3 or 4 sets last year at wimby. The guy has so many ups and downs of a bizarre nature over the course of 5 set match. That being said it isn't remarkable that Fed at 33 is still competing near the top. Lets remember Agassi won a slam, and was number at age 33 and made a slam final at 35. If Fed is way more accomplished than Agassi we shouldn't doubt that he will still be able to produce great tennis at times. That being said he is clearly passed his best and is not nearly as good as peak Federer.
Last years final turned me into a djoko fan proper. It took some proper Cojones to pick himself up after that terrible choke on the 4th set. And what an emotional speech too

Yeah, he has become pretty good at the post match interview win or lose. He really did nearly choke away the match and with all the bizarre tough grandslam losses having piled up a lesser player would not have found away to win. He was in control of the match for the first 3 and half sets and then all of sudden massive brain fart on the biggest stage there is in tennis. It did take a lot mentally to not fall to pieces, a player with less experience and talent would have.

by break_in_the_fifth Sat 07 Feb 2015, 9:56 am

It was an ok final. They spent somewhat less time hitting the ball to each other than they have in their other matches and I was happy with the result.

I'm sure in time when the rivalry becomes more one sided we'll look back and say Murray never had a chance and the winner was always a foregone conclusion.

by break_in_the_fifth Sat 07 Feb 2015, 9:59 am

Also disagree that Fed was anywhere near his best in that final, only his serving. Djokovic was playing like Federer with his forehand and deserved to win. Federer has become overcautious (don't blame him with all the slow surfaces nowadays) and Djokovic played the shots that I would've expected from Federer.

by summerblues Sun 08 Feb 2015, 1:40 am

temporary21 wrote:It took some proper Cojones to pick himself up

Of course, this being Djoko, it also took a tactical MTO to pick himself up.

by Sponsored content

If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever

Re: If Federer and Nadal were playing this final it would be deemed the most wonderful ever