Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Australian Open 2020

11112131416

Comments



  • It’s gamesmanship...

    No rule breaking, but maybe lacking in the spirit of the game!




  • Regardless of someone taking a break, if you are good enough you will win anyway. I am sure all the players use it to their advantage, not saying it is right but it’s up to the other player to use it as further motivation.

    Players like Federer and Nadal have done it against Djokovic and Novak has still won. Just suck it up and play




  • If Djokovic gets to 20 slams he will be the GOAT for me.

    He has beaten Federer and Nadal on the head-to-head stats, won his titles in a very tough era with Fed, Nadal, Murray, Stan around.

    Nadal has most of his titles in one place and Federer picked up the vast majority of his titles in an era where the competition was comparatively weak and certainly nowhere near as tough as when Djokovic won his.

    buymeacoffee.com/glassopy





  • All 3 could end up on 20, as the next gen guys appear to be finally stepping up and closing the gap and we should see a break through this year, if this happens the dam could burst.

    Don't think Federer will win anymore, Nadal will struggle to win 2 more FO and don't think he'll win outside of FO. By the time Djokovic has 3 more slams won (if he does), I think the younger guys will finally be able to take him at the Grand Slams.




  • glasso wrote: »
    If Djokovic gets to 20 slams he will be the GOAT for me.

    He has beaten Federer and Nadal on the head-to-head stats, won his titles in a very tough era with Fed, Nadal, Murray, Stan around.

    Nadal has most of his titles in one place and Federer picked up the vast majority of his titles in an era where the competition was comparatively weak and certainly nowhere near as tough as when Djokovic won his.

    He's picking up a lot of slams in a terrible era right now where the next gen are fairly hopeless. If you mention Federer's supposed weak era then you have to acknowledge that this is a terrible era too, where nobody under 30 can win a slam. You can't have it both ways.

    Federer had Rafa and Novak come along to stop him winning.

    Who have Rafa and Novak had come along to do similar?

    The lost generation has had a huge part to play in Rafa and Novak picking up so many slams in the last few years, with Federer benefitting too to a lesser extent.

    Roger was 26-27 when the other 2 came to the fore. You would expect somebody else to come yo the fore when Rafa and Novak were 26-27. But nobody did. Nobody seeks to acknowledge how much Rafa and Novak have benefitted from this.


  • Advertisement


  • Chivito550 wrote: »
    He's picking up a lot of slams in a terrible era right now where the next gen are fairly hopeless. If you mention Federer's supposed weak era then you have to acknowledge that this is a terrible era too, where nobody under 30 can win a slam. You can't have it both ways.

    Fed won well over 12 titles in that weak era (only counting to 2007 I could go further). You can't say Djokovic picked anywhere near that many up in a handy era.

    Federer also benefited from Djookovic's marital / mental whatever problems period 16 to 18- Djokovic would most likely be tied with him already if not for that.

    buymeacoffee.com/glassopy





  • No doubt about it, 10 of Federer slams were against weaker opponents like phillipousis, roddick, gonzalez etc. That being said you can only beat who is in front of you. I do think Federers losing record vs Djokovic and Nadal is a big one.

    People can point to some of these wins being against a post prime Federer but the reality is even a very young Djokovic in 2007 and 2008 was already causing roger problems.

    The three of them are incredible players but I would already have Djokovic right up there with Federer and Nadal. Winning 4 slams in a row, wins against Federer and Nadal at all four slams, winning all the masters series, 5 tour finals etc. He could well beat Federer for weeks at world number one too




  • No doubt about it, 10 of Federer slams were against weaker opponents like phillipousis, roddick, gonzalez etc. That being said you can only beat who is in front of you. I do think Federers losing record vs Djokovic and Nadal is a big one.

    People can point to some of these wins being against a post prime Federer but the reality is even a very young Djokovic in 2007 and 2008 was already causing roger problems.

    The three of them are incredible players but I would already have Djokovic right up there with Federer and Nadal. Winning 4 slams in a row, wins against Federer and Nadal at all four slams, winning all the masters series, 5 tour finals etc. He could well beat Federer for weeks at world number one too

    When Federer was at his peak, nearly all his main challengers were in their 20s (Agassi was a bit of an outlier). Nowadays, we have nobody on this planet younger than 31 who have won a slam, and we are only recently starting to see signs that this will change.

    This current era is very uninspiring. The sport feels so stale now. The last 13 slams have been won by the Big 3.




  • I am sorry but this is not a weak era. The reality is Djokovic, Nadal and Federer are freaks in terms of how good they are. Medvedev, Thiem, Tsitsipas, Zverev, del Potro, Cilic, Raonic etc are all very good players. You also up until recently had the likes of Ferrer, Tsonga, Berdych. These are all very good players who could well have won slams in another era
    Chivito550 wrote: »
    When Federer was at his peak, nearly all his main challengers were in their 20s (Agassi was a bit of an outlier). Nowadays, we have nobody on this planet younger than 31 who have won a slam, and we are only recently starting to see signs that this will change.

    This current era is very uninspiring. The sport feels so stale now. The last 13 slams have been won by the Big 3.




  • Chivito550 wrote: »
    This current era is very uninspiring. The sport feels so stale now. The last 13 slams have been won by the Big 3.

    the mental toughness / resilience / will to win does seem to be a bit lacking in the newcomers alright compared to that of Djokovic and Nadal.

    to me that seems to be the difference why the younger guys can't crack them still.

    but I do agree that we are talking about the best ever here and that combined with advances in sports science and a change in general attitude about career length and ability to keep competing has meant that the titans just won't go away.

    buymeacoffee.com/glassopy



  • Advertisement


  • Nole has definitely won his slams at the toughest stages of the big three..

    2011 to 2020 he has won, what, 16 or so slams?

    This span has serious talent and depth. Roger would be on 24/25 slams had Nole not been so good during theses years, and Roger was still winning some slams during these years...Nadal would be past 20 as well..




  • You got to hand it to Djokovic, the guy is a great competitor. It was an enjoyable match and I do feel sorry for Thiem. He will win himself a slam at some point, though.

    I wouldn't make too much of on court breaks by players. As stated previously, it's been part of the game for years and everybody uses them from time to time.




  • I can see why Djokovic is so unpopular, this aura of pure falseness about him, I mean did he know Kobe Bryant well ?
    Yet he had to virtue signal and mention his death - I mean is he not embarrassed ??




  • I can see why Djokovic is so unpopular, this aura of pure falseness about him, I mean did he know Kobe Bryant well ?
    Yet he had to virtue signal and mention his death - I mean is he not embarrassed ??


    According to Bryant, not Djokovic.
    At Flushing Meadows Bryant was in conversation with ESPN and there reflected upon his relationship with Djokovic.“He was going through a process of, ‘Physically, I’m not where I used to be. How did you adjust and change your game? We talked about it for a while and having the acceptance of an athlete to say, ‘I’m not what I used to be.’ Novak’s my guy. We have a relationship. We’ve had a relationship for a long time,” Bryant shared.




  • Yes Djokovic and Bryant knew each other well, why would he would make that up???

    People will just find any way they can to dig at Djokovic. He took a toilet break, yeah guess what so do the other top players! Federer did it vs Sandgren and Djokovic.

    Djokovic throws a temper tantrum, yes so do most players. These guys are not robots, when you are playing at that level the intensity must be off the charts. Some players need to let it out in order to play better, Murray was always giving out.

    Djokovic is an unbelievable player, can people just accept it even if you can’t stand him beating Federer all the time at grand slams




  • I can see why Djokovic is so unpopular, this aura of pure falseness about him, I mean did he know Kobe Bryant well ?
    Yet he had to virtue signal and mention his death - I mean is he not embarrassed ??

    Uhhh...

    https://youtu.be/k-1XtlP6vjw

    https://youtu.be/DoDd-eImX9E




  • Apparently Bryant got big into tennis since he retired from basketball in 2016 and described himself as "addicted" to it.

    Even was involved in writing a fiction a book about tennis

    buymeacoffee.com/glassopy





  • Interesting chart
    7595.jpeg




  • john9876 wrote: »
    Interesting chart
    7595.jpeg

    US Open is the only slam that's actually close in the win count between all of the Big 3, which is kind of interesting.




  • Very good chart. Remember when it was "the big 4" though I think it was only the BBC at that carry on. Murray was unfortunate in a few finals. A great player, but not a special player like the other 3.


  • Advertisement


  • Gwynplaine wrote: »
    Very good chart. Remember when it was "the big 4" though I think it was only the BBC at that carry on. Murray was unfortunate in a few finals. A great player, but not a special player like the other 3.


    I wouldn't go there Gwyn, there are still a few 'Big 4' holdouts on here. :)




  • Yes talk of big 4 all the more odd given Wawrinka has won as many slams as Murray and has won 3 different slams, Murray only 2.




  • Yes talk of big 4 all the more odd given Wawrinka has won as many slams as Murray and has won 3 different slams, Murray only 2.


    You've just dropped the sodium into the beaker of sulphuric acid Slasher.
    There's probably a salvo of weeks at No.1, H2H against Big 3, etc, etc coming your way even as I type...




  • I like Murray but history will primarily judge him on slams but the fact that he got to world no. 1 will also be remembered

    His record of 3 slams out of 11 slam finals should have been better really although many of those came against Djokovic in Australia (4 finals, 0 titles)

    He was a lot more of a consistent performer than Stan overall and Stan only got to no.3 as a highest rank.

    buymeacoffee.com/glassopy





  • josip wrote: »
    You've just dropped the sodium into the beaker of sulphuric acid Slasher.
    There's probably a salvo of weeks at No.1, H2H against Big 3, etc, etc coming your way even as I type...

    All of which would be correct? Just because you don't agree doesn't mean it isn't true ¯\_(ツ)_/¯




  • josip wrote: »
    You've just dropped the sodium into the beaker of sulphuric acid Slasher.
    There's probably a salvo of weeks at No.1, H2H against Big 3, etc, etc coming your way even as I type...

    He has a lobsided losing record vs big 3 too. No shame in that mind you. Murray was a super player but his time at number one coincided with a period when the top 3 had a slump in form




  • So, of all the 56 slam wins from the big three

    Your favorite win for each player...

    Me: Fed's 2017 Australian title......epic win. Not really expected. Magic tennis, comeback from behind, and against a man who had broken his heart so many times...

    Nole: 2012 Australian final in one of the greatest matches ever. Hours long, so intense, so nervy and exciting. What a match.

    Nadal: 2008 SW19.......He was a beast that day....even if it was so close...

    Overall favorite is 2017 Federer Australia.....




  • josip wrote: »
    You've just dropped the sodium into the beaker of sulphuric acid Slasher.
    There's probably a salvo of weeks at No.1, H2H against Big 3, etc, etc coming your way even as I type...

    The sheer force of the centre court crowd were such a huge help to Murray in the 2 Wimbledon finals. It put his opponent each time at a terrible disadvantage. I’m not alleging it was unfair or anything but it can’t be ignored either.




  • splinter65 wrote: »
    The sheer force of the centre court crowd were such a huge help to Murray in the 2 Wimbledon finals. It put his opponent each time at a terrible disadvantage. I’m not alleging it was unfair or anything but it can’t be ignored either.

    Oh for God's sake, this is scraping the barrel now :D Are we really gonna try go down a road of asterisking people's slam wins because of home advantage? We'll need to scratch a few off Sampras and Agassi then so.


  • Advertisement


  • Oh for God's sake, this is scraping the barrel now :D Are we really gonna try go down a road of asterisking people's slam wins because of home advantage? We'll need to scratch a few off Sampras and Agassi then so.

    Well Sampras won 7 Wimbledons and only for a blip in 96 when T Gullikson died it would have been 8 so we won’t be scratching them....
    If you’re a Murray fan then good for you! I’m not running him down, but you can’t pretend that he was ever even remotely in the same league as the other 3.
    If he was he’d have won more GSs. The Big 4 was an invention of the BBC, nothing more then that.


Advertisement