Australian Open 2019

Schwarzer Kaffee Mit Sahne wrote: »

I'm also using my eyes, watch footage of Federer in 2005-2007 and then compare against footage in 2008. The precision, power and athleticism was noticably diminished in 2008.

Why are you fixating on 2008?

What about all the other seasons/years?

Fed in 2004-2007 was brilliant. He was also brilliant in 2009 and 2017, and some other seasons..

2004-2007 he was beating much lesser players than a mature Nole and Nadal..

And, in the circa 14 seasons between 2005-20018 v Nadal, Nadal has led the H2H in most of these seasons..early/mid and later seasons...

Nole has always been very competitive v Fed in their H2H matches though many seasons..

lbc2019

Delighted Djokovic beat Nadal in straight sets!

Chivito550

The Golden Miller wrote: »

So all this talk of Nadal's new great serve, did turn out to be a bit of a false dawn. It was non-existent. Demolition job really. Was hoping for a better spectacle.

Well for a start, when Nadal got injured, Federer continued winning slams in the same easy fashion. Looking at the longevity of Novak and Nadal, it's clear that players are able to stay at the top for longer from a physical point of view, it really does cast doubt that Federer declined by 08. Is Novak WAY past his peak now by 5 years? Federer got usurped, deal with it!

Easy fashion?

He won RG coming through a couple of 5 setters along the way (a real dogfight against Delpo in semi) He won Wimbledon because Roddick choked away 4 set points for a 2-0 lead. Federer then choked away a US Open final he was in complete control of.

You are deluded if you think 2008/2009 Federer was of the same level as 2004-2007 Federer.

Fed fans need to let go of 2004-2007; it’s like a desperate security blanket...

Success wise it was his peak..

We get this..

Stop hanging on so definitively claiming he was at his absolute tennis best here, in order to explain away why two other greats took away a lot of his later success..

velo.2010

Does Djokovic 'just do enough' to get through the early rounds or is that giving him too much credit for playing mind games with the other top players?

Surprised Nadal was beaten so easily. Perhaps he did look at Djokovic's early round scores and thought he could win if they met in the final. Djokvic then produces that semi-final performance and, for Nadal, its suddenly a case of 'oh sh*t,he's back to form'!

Certainly seems like Djokovic has one over Nadal in the way that Nadal has had one over Federer for the longest time.

Gwynplaine

After watching that match, I think Novak is on for winning all 4 slams this year.

josip

This AO has clarified a couple of things.

1. Federer is no longer part of the Big 3.
2. Nadal and Djokovic are way ahead of everyone else, at least for the slams.
3. Barring injuries, Djokovic has the measure of Nadal outside Roland Garros.
4. Federer's 20 slam titles is very likely to be equalled/surpassed by either Djokovic or Nadal.

5. Will Federer be stuck on 99forever, or will he try to find an easy 100th somewhere this year?

C__MC

Some turn of fortunes for djoker from this time time last year

He can be the greatest of all time come the French Open In May-

I fancy him to catch fed as well in next few years-

Nadal missed his chance in 2017 to win all slams twice

Chivito550 wrote: »

Easy fashion?

He won RG coming through a couple of 5 setters along the way (a real dogfight against Delpo in semi) He won Wimbledon because Roddick choked away 4 set points for a 2-0 lead. Federer then choked away a US Open final he was in complete control of.

You are deluded if you think 2008/2009 Federer was of the same level as 2004-2007 Federer.

Roddick had an indian summer. Played out of his skin in that tournament. His serve was bang on. Federer went back to beating him easily before and after that tournament. Del Potro was a far better player than anything Federer was facing between 04-07, but he was injured most of the time. After Nadal was put out with his first major injury, Federer started winning slams again, including the French, that simple. We can nit pick other individual games between 04-07 that also went to 5 sets for Federer, doesn't mean he deteriorated by 08 because he had a few 5 setters. Unless Novak is way better than Federer ever was, cruising to slams 4 years "past his peak"?

Schwarzer Kaffee Mit Sahne wrote: »

Let's look at the 2009 French Open, he was very lucky to win that tournament, he came from 2 sets down twice in that tournament. In 2005 to 2007 he cruised through the rounds until he met Nadal.

In Wimbledon 2009 he barely beat Roddick by the skin if his teeth, he was very lucky, that says it all. In previous years Roddick didn't pose much of a threat.

Then in 2009 US Open final he lost to Del Potro.

In 2010 he lost in the quarter final of the French and Wimbledon. He was obviously past his best.

These are the facts, deal with it.

Read above, addresses most of these points. Also, between 04-07, Federer had little competition. So in his "GOAT years", he actually had no one to measure his greatness against? See that's par for the course with competition, it's going to rattle your confidence. Federer's free ride ended in 08, doubt was feeding into his mind, particularly against Nadal.

josip wrote: »

This AO has clarified a couple of things.

1. Federer is no longer part of the Big 3.
2. Nadal and Djokovic are way ahead of everyone else, at least for the slams.
3. Barring injuries, Djokovic has the measure of Nadal outside Roland Garros.
4. Federer's 20 slam titles is very likely to be equalled/surpassed by either Djokovic or Nadal.

5. Will Federer be stuck on 99forever, or will he try to find an easy 100th somewhere this year?

1. Federer would have smashed Nadal today, so that is just plain silly.
2. Djokovic is way ahead, except at Roland Garros.
3. True
4. Very unlikely, by both.
5. Federer doesn't play easy tournaments, and winning any tournament is not easy when you're approaching 38. Try brushing up on your tennis knowledge.

Djokovic will have a real go at the French. Certainly not a gimme for Nadal this year

Angliru

Novak is unreal. Fortune is in his favour too, given the other big three are fading if not gone and the others are simply not competitive and consistent enough. Nadal will probably win another few FOs and maybe another hard court slam but other than that Joker has a clear road to Federer's 20. I still think Nadal>Federer>Novak overall and considering f the weak talent coming through that won't change but the record might swing it for Djokovic in the fickle public eye when all is said and done.

Schwarzer Kaffee Mit Sahne wrote: »

Actually look back at old footage and observe the difference say between 2006 and 2008 Federer, it's night and day. Nadal wasn't much better on clay in 2008 yet he destroyed Federer in 2008 much worse than in previous years.

Novak gets more credit in my book because his peak level lasted longer, did I ever argue otherwise. I'm merely arguing that Federer was past his peak in 2008, and I'm winning.

You're winning because you randomly selected two games which you think suits your narrative? Federer also had 5 setters between 04-07. Other than that, all we have is your say so.

Angliru

SophieLockhart wrote: »

1. Federer would have smashed Nadal today, so that is just plain silly.
2. Djokovic is way ahead, except at Roland Garros.
3. True
4. Very unlikely, by both.
5. Federer doesn't play easy tournaments, and winning any tournament is not easy when you're approaching 38. Try brushing up on your tennis knowledge.

Try brushing up on looking at things objectively and not with a picture of Roger Federer naked staring at you. Federer was absolutely brutal this slam, whereas Nadal looked devastating. Sure he got smashed by the best hard court player ever, still doesn't take away from him having a scintillating tournament.

Angliru wrote: »

Try brushing up on looking at things objectively and not with a picture of Roger Federer naked staring at you. Federer was absolutely brutal this slam, whereas Nadal looked devastating. Sure he got smashed by the best hard court player ever, still doesn't take away from him having a scintillating tournament.

It's incredible that Nadal fanatics even have the temerity to show up here today. Your idol got absolutely pasted and is now utterly ruled out of the GOAT debate. No go off and start weeping bitter tears in a dark room, like your hero currently is in Melbourne.

dominatinMC

The amount of hyperbole being spouted online after this match is unreal, talk of Djokovic as the GOAT, will get to 20+ slams, etc. Which he may very well do, but a lot can change in sport over a very short period. What we can say with some certainty is that we have 3 GOATS on their respective surfaces - Fed on grass, Nadal on clay, and Djokovic on hard.

I think Fed will struggle to get anymore and Nadal/Djokovic each have a chance to reach his tally. For Nadal, it seems easier (as he is closer) but now has a serious problem in the form of Djokovic again. What today's match showed is that Djokovic is in Nadals head. Djokovic played very well, but Nadal gifted him so many points, and exerted zero pressure on his serve. Nadal has (had) a new attacking hard court game coming into the match, but reverted to clay court tennis as he obviously was not confident enough to execute this against Djokovic. I'm not saying for a second that he would have won, but he surely would have made it a lot closer if he brought his A game, and of course the inability to bring that A game has everything to do with the opponent. The only caveat of hope for Nadal is that this is the first tournament where he has tried to implement this new game, and it broke down in the end. Will be interesting if it stands up over time, given more matches.

Finally, despite what this tournament has given us, I live in hope that the "next gen" can do something meaningful in the next few slams!

Angliru

SophieLockhart wrote: »

It's incredible that Nadal fanatics even have the temerity to show up here today. Your idol got absolutely pasted and is now utterly ruled out of the GOAT debate. No go off and start weeping bitter tears in a dark room, like your hero currently is in Melbourne.

And this wan is saying to people to brush up on their tennis knowledge. Good grief give it a rest, it is a Sunday.

Schwarzer Kaffee Mit Sahne wrote: »

It amazes me that people can claim that Federer was at his best in 2008. Why did his. winning percentage drop so much? Why did he lose to people he never lost to before?

It's called competition mate. Nadal rattled his confidence. Doubt he had the same belief. Same happened to Borg, all players infact. Don't see how the physical and technical side of his game deteriorated. Today's strength and conditioning shows players can stay at the top, or near the top of the game, for longer. But, but, but.....

dominatinMC

SophieLockhart wrote: »

It's incredible that Nadal fanatics even have the temerity to show up here today. Your idol got absolutely pasted and is now utterly ruled out of the GOAT debate. No go off and start weeping bitter tears in a dark room, like your hero currently is in Melbourne.

Utterly pathetic trolling. He was destroyed today, but that statement says all I need to know about your understanding of tennis

Final slam count

Fed 20
Nadal 18......just
Nole 18

Been wrong on Fed before, but very confident he stays on 20

Nadal may squeeze RG this year..

Nole can win all remaining three this year and Oz 2919..maybe 19 slams.

Schwarzer Kaffee Mit Sahne wrote: »

It amazes me that people can claim that Federer was at his best in 2008. Why did his. winning percentage drop so much? Why did he lose to people he never lost to before?

Watch the footage, he lost his sharpness in 2008. He got a bit better in 2009 but still well off his peak years, then he went back into decline in 2010 until his lowest moment in 2013. He changes his Racquet and his performance has improved since then, but he hasn't got back to he level in his peak years. It's ridiculous to think a man in his mid thirties could do that.

Very true, he was being beaten by several lesser players after 2008. Nadal and Djokovic were very lucky not to face him in his GOAT years, and could share the titles with very little competition.

Schwarzer Kaffee Mit Sahne wrote: »

We have overall stats against the field, I'm almost certain if we examine unforced errors in 2008 vs previous years this will prove my point, and we can ignore leave the stats out against Nadal and Djokovic to negate your likely rebuttal.

I've been watching Federer closely since 2003, I know what I witnessed. 2008 was a huge drop in form. Suddenly he was struggling to hit winners against nobodies.

The field improved, was improving, by 08/09. Also Federer's confidence was shot

dominatinMC wrote: »

Utterly pathetic trolling. He was destroyed today, but that statement says all I need to know about your understanding of tennis

What's wrong with the statement? You can't seriously claim he's ahead of Djokovic in the GOAT debate after today's embarrassment.

Johnmb

walshb wrote: »

Final slam count

Fed 20
Nadal 18......just
Nole 18

Been wrong on Fed before, but very confident he stays on 20

Nadal may squeeze RG this year..

Nole can win all remaining three this year and Oz 2919..maybe 19 slams.

I can't see Nadal not winning RG this year.

SophieLockhart wrote: »

What's wrong with the statement? You can't seriously claim he's ahead of Djokovic in the GOAT debate after today's embarrassment.

Who's saying he is? Federer fans are the only one's obsessed with this "GOAT" thing as far as I can see.

SophieLockhart wrote: »

Very true, he was being beaten by several lesser players after 2008. Nadal and Djokovic were very lucky not to face him in his GOAT years, and could share the titles with very little competition.

And Fed could be very lucky that he got them slams in 2004-2007..

Had he been meeting Nole and Nadal on their form he loses a good few possibly..

Try to assess this objectively..

Johnmb

SophieLockhart wrote: »

What's wrong with the statement? You can't seriously claim he's ahead of Djokovic in the GOAT debate after today's embarrassment.

I'm not really going to get into a GOAT debate, because I think they are pointless, and I certainly wouldn't be saying that Nadal is it if I was, but do you understand what the letters stand for? The AT part means "All Time", not just one match. One defeat doesn't negate all the other successes any player has had.

SophieLockhart wrote: »

Very true, he was being beaten by several lesser players after 2008. Nadal and Djokovic were very lucky not to face him in his GOAT years, and could share the titles with very little competition.

Who did Federer face between 04-07 to test/measure his supposed "GOAT"-ness against?