Wimbledon 2019

forumdedum

walshb wrote: »

And what about all the "mess" ups that Nole had in the match?

It's swings and roundabouts.....overall Fed for me was that little bit better, but sometimes what separates winners and losers isn't always so clear-cut.

No excuse for not serving out on championship point imo.

Also throwing away a 4-2 lead in final set not worthy of a champion.

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

I stopped watching when Federer failed to serve it out. Even if Federer had won after that I would not have been interested in the result. I didn't check the result, it appeared on a facebook feed a few hours later.

I didn't see any post match interviews or reactions so I don't know about Djokovic's reaction.

I can tell you if I was a Djokovic fan (which I once was until his playing became negative and dull) I would not celebrate this prize.

all sounds a bit irrational to me, sorry!

forumdedum

glasso wrote: »

all sounds a bit irrational to me, sorry!

Fine.

walshb

forumdedum wrote: »

No excuse for not serving out on championship point imo.

Also throwing away a 4-2 lead in final set not worthy of a champion.

You aren't really embracing, or it seems, understanding the whole concept and brilliance of sport, so.

sxt

Hector Savage wrote: »

Nonsense, this won't last.

Djokovic at best will finish on 19.

Nadal will win at least 2 FO's and hope no other slams.

We could see Fed + Nadal finish on 20, Nole on 19 .... fitting...

He's won 4 out of 5 slams on three occasions. He's winning 2 or 3 slams per calendar year since 2015.Only exception was 2017 when he missed halve season through shoulder injury

Federer might only have one really competitive season left before he retires?.I wouldn't put a lot of money on him beating Djkovic in another grand slam final. Nadal ailing career injuries might take their ultimate toll sooner rather than later.

Who's going to stop him going on a run of 4out of 5 slams again going forward? A pushing 40 year old Federer,? an injury prone Nadal? Andy Murray?

Andy Murray is the last guy that was not named dkjovic,Federer, Nadal to win a grand slam and that was 2016

AbusesToilets

Think the talk of him being too old to compete is a touch premature. Brady is winning SBs at 41, nothing I saw yesterday suggested a man over the hill. Whether he has the drive to continue is another question for sure.

josip

forumdedum wrote: »

I stopped watching when Federer failed to serve it out. Even if Federer had won after that I would not have been interested in the result. I didn't check the result, it appeared on a facebook feed a few hours later.
...

For someone who claims not to have been interested, you've been posting an awful lot on here.

EagererBeaver

I think it's simple. Final set tie break in all rounds but the final.

fryup

^^^^^^^^^^^^

nah, they would've been there all night

forumdedum

josip wrote: »

For someone who claims not to have been interested, you've been posting an awful lot on here.

I watched the match until 8-8, 5th set. Lost interest there.

Did not seek the result, appeared on Facebook feed. Here I have expressed views.

yerwanthere123

forumdedum wrote: »

I watched the match until 8-8, 5th set. Lost interest there.

Did not seek the result, appeared on Facebook feed. Here I have expressed views.

You watched an almost five hour match, yet gave up as it approached the climax? :pac:

forumdedum

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

You watched an almost five hour match, yet gave up as it approached the climax? :pac:

Yes. I knew what the outcome would be.

lostcat

Have just watched this, having been otherwise engaged yesterday. Some of the excitement/engagement is certainly not there when knowing the result. The final set turned it into an epic, but i thought the first four sets were at a slightly lower level that their previous Wimbledon finals. Djokovics performance being erratic meant that they were not both playing well at the same time for the majority of the match.

It was heroic performance from both players for different reasons, Federer played high level attacking tennis for the guts of five hours and Djokovic, while not really being at it, hung around long and maintained enough clarity of thought to pounch at the key moments.

Statistially, over a season or a career, players generally loose as many tie breaks as they win. Each tie break is a 50-50 scenario. For Djokovic to win 3 in a row in the same match is lotto winning stuff, but Federer seemed to back off slightly in the tiebreaks while Djokovic elevated.

I can see how the match might be viewed as Federer 'being robbed' in light of the above, but Djokovic, through sheer determinism, won the few points that matters, and enough of the rest to keep himself afloat.

sacamano

Cringing at how edgy forumdedum is trying to come across as.

C__MC

Weird game yesterday
I thought Novak would beat him in 4
Was it a classic?

It felt gripping but the ending was weird. Kinda felt roger just throw in the towel knowing he had screwed up prior to the tie break.

Novak is a battler but the public dont seem to connect with him as youd like.

walshb

forumdedum wrote: »

Yes. I knew what the outcome would be.

Your posts come across as you being both angry and frustrated with the result, and it’s not allowing you to be objective. You so wanted a Fed win, and because it didn’t happen, you’re searching for an answer, other than “sometimes these things happen in sport.”

That’s not a dig at you, btw. Many many Fed fans probably feel the same, me included..

Sheridan81

sacamano wrote: »

Cringing at how edgy forumdedum is trying to come across as.

What do you mean!?

If he beat Federer in the longest final ever at Wimbledon, saving two match points in the process-something that's not been done since the forties- in front of his parents and son and millions of viewers around the world, winning his 16th slam with most of the crowd against him, he would just refuse to accept the trophy and tell Sue Barker :

"No thanks, Sue. I was a bit passive out there. Give it to Roger, he deserves it more than me. I'll just go home and have a good long look at myself in the mirror and question what I'm doing with my career. Maybe browse boards for a while. I used to be more attacking you know... once upon a time. In fact, I might just retire. Bye all."

yerwanthere123

C__MC wrote: »

Weird game yesterday
I thought Novak would beat him in 4
Was it a classic?

It felt gripping but the ending was weird. Kinda felt roger just throw in the towel knowing he had screwed up prior to the tie break.

Novak is a battler but the public dont seem to connect with him as youd like.

I didn't see much of the first four sets, but saw all of the last. From the general feedback I've seen online the quality wasn't that high for a lot of the match but the gripping fifth made up for it. Would that be a fair assessment, for those who saw the whole thing?

forumdedum

sacamano wrote: »

Cringing at how edgy forumdedum is trying to come across as.

I don't try to "come across" as anything thank you.

sacamano

Sheridan81 wrote: »

What do you mean!?

If he beat Federer in the longest final ever at Wimbledon, saving two match points in the process-something that's not been done since the forties- in front of his parents and son and millions of viewers around the world, winning his 16th slam with most of the crowd against him, he would just refuse to accept the trophy and tell Sue Barker :

"No thanks, Sue. I was a bit passive out there. Give it to Roger, he deserves it more than me. I'll just go home and have a good long look at myself in the mirror and question what I'm doing with my career. Maybe browse boards for a while. I used to be more attacking you know... once upon a time. In fact, I might just retire. Bye all."

Think you've quoted the wrong quote!

dominatinMC

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

I didn't see much of the first four sets, but saw all of the last. From the general feedback I've seen online the quality wasn't that high for a lot of the match but the gripping fifth made up for it. Would that be a fair assessment, for those who saw the whole thing?

Would pretty much agree with that assessment. In the immediate aftermath, some were proclaiming it as an all-time classic (up there with the '07 and '08 finals), but I guess once the adrenaline/endorphins wore off and logic set in, most seemed to conclude that it was a very good match which was somewhat short on high quality tennis but was compensated for by the drama and tension.

forumdedum

Sheridan81 wrote: »

What do you mean!?

If he beat Federer in the longest final ever at Wimbledon, saving two match points in the process-something that's not been done since the forties- in front of his parents and son and millions of viewers around the world, winning his 16th slam with most of the crowd against him, he would just refuse to accept the trophy and tell Sue Barker :

"No thanks, Sue. I was a bit passive out there. Give it to Roger, he deserves it more than me. I'll just go home and have a good long look at myself in the mirror and question what I'm doing with my career. Maybe browse boards for a while. I used to be more attacking you know... once upon a time. In fact, I might just retire. Bye all."

Naturally Djokovic would have to accept the trophy in the public view. I guess Novak isn't aware of his negative approach.

ballyargus

dominatinMC wrote:

Would pretty much agree with that assessment. In the immediate aftermath, some were proclaiming it as an all-time classic (up there with the '07 and '08 finals), but I guess once the adrenaline/endorphins wore off and logic set in, most seemed to conclude that it was a very good match which was somewhat short on high quality tennis but was compensated for by the drama and tension.

There has been excessive fanfare in the wake of this game. A competitive final that would have been passable otherwise has been punctuated by all the drama of the fifth.

It will live long in the memory for the fifth set alone

Jaklmex

I was willing fed on but I knew he'd find a way to lose

forumdedum

Jaklmex wrote: »

I was willing fed on but I knew he'd find a way to lose

So true so often.

walshb

ballyargus wrote: »

There has been excessive fanfare in the wake of this game. A competitive final that would have been passable otherwise has been punctuated by all the drama of the fifth.

It will live long in the memory for the fifth set alone

Agreed.

It was missing the speed and intensity of a peak classic. Seemed to be played at a “casual” pace..

BarryD2

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

I didn't see much of the first four sets, but saw all of the last. From the general feedback I've seen online the quality wasn't that high for a lot of the match but the gripping fifth made up for it. Would that be a fair assessment, for those who saw the whole thing?

Didn't see it all either but from what I did, all sets bar the second were very competitive and closely fought. All those could have gone either way.

yerwanthere123

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

I didn't see much of the first four sets, but saw all of the last. From the general feedback I've seen online the quality wasn't that high for a lot of the match but the gripping fifth made up for it. Would that be a fair assessment, for those who saw the whole thing?

the quality was decent up until the 5th set (2nd set Fed was v good and Djo not obv)

there were a lot of errors in the 5th set

quality dropped as the tiredness set in

but the 5th was always going to have drama as someone had to win and it was still close / matching games.

Chivito550

BarryD2 wrote: »

Didn't see it all either but from what I did, all sets bar the second were very competitive and closely fought. All those could have gone either way.

The 4th was one way traffic to be honest. Federer got up 2 breaks. Djokovic got one back but result was never in doubt.

The Golden Miller

In the past, when Nadal and Novak have gotten at Federer, he rattles a bit too much and far too often for my liking. He was the better player yesterday, but again rattled when Novak upped it at key times. His on court persona usually goes quite when it's put to Federer, but unusually it was him who kept taking the game to Djokovic yesterday. In reality, Novak has another few gears in him, has just been struggling to get going lately.

Federer was unlucky, but these things go in circles, he's also got the rub of the green more often than not in his career