2014 Roland Garros Final: Nadal vs. Djokovic

[calitennis127]

Congratulations on F.O. #9 and tying Sampras for 14 Rafael Nadal!

Only three more to tie Fed and become Goat!

:clap :clap :clap :celeb:

Remember when you asked "how does Federer stay motivated?" after the 2010 Australian Open and I told you that his record wasn't nearly as secure as everyone was saying?

never thought his record was secure. if rafa breaks that idk what ill do

Well, don't forget that he has nothing to play for anymore. Nothing!

Who has nothing to play for? Fed?
Maybe this is naive, but I honestly think Fed would leave if he had nothing to play for. I think that's the case with most people. The not great guys who never achieve much always have money to play for, so they'll stay til they can't function anymore. But someone like Roger who loves the game and is a historian of the game definitely knows he's playing for the history books. He knows he's already in them. And he knows Rafa is quickly encroaching. There's a reason he's been trying to change up his game and work on his core (to keep his back healthy). He clearly has something to play for.

Now I just hope you weren't talking about Rafa. That would beeee.... awkward.

I was being sarcastic and mocking the people who said this back in 2010. Have you not been reading this thread?

 

[DarthFed]

^ Acknowledge that Roger should have done better from 2008 on. He had his chances to.

The real disaster was not 2008 Wimbledon (where Nadal played very well) but the 2009 Australian Open. That match opened the floodgates as far as the Nadal menace went and Federer coughed it up - and then cried it out.

2008 Wimbledon was a disaster. Roger didn't show up for 2 sets and then played OK the last few sets. 1-12 BP's, blowing a 4-1 lead in the 2nd, hideous misses in the 5th, etc.

That opened the floodgates that allowed for AO 2009. I remember being the only one who knew that Roger would implode in the 5th set of that AO final and the only reason for that was the thought of 2008 on his mind.

Not to mention he'd be considered the best on grass and would have won 7 straight Wimbledons. An awful loss for sure.

 

[Fiero425]

Rafa was not too good today. Djokovic was too bad but whatever.

I agree with this actually, but technically it does make Nadal "too good" because when he did step up his game, Novak had no answer. Conversely, at no point in the match did Djokovic play that well, not even in the first set when he won.

Agreed, I didn't think Djokovic played all that well in the first set. His returns in his first 3 return games were off by a country mile.

I've definitely seen Nole's returns more effective and penetrating! When he actually hit a good one, he backed up allowing Rafa to stay in points he had no business winning! I thought that was why he hired Becker; to be more offensive, attack the net, and finish off points sooner! It's just not happening! Becker may be out on his arse if Nole doesn't win Wimbledon! So far I'm just not seeing a major change even when he beats Rafa on his beloved clay in other events! :nono :angel:

 

[DarthFed]

Remember when you asked "how does Federer stay motivated?" after the 2010 Australian Open and I told you that his record wasn't nearly as secure as everyone was saying?

I wouldn't have thought it'd be broken but I also didn't think Roger would only have 17 after getting #16 at AO 2010. Figured at least 19. For all the talk that Roger aged well and handled having a family well it doesn't seem to be the case.

Darth, I think you're completely missing the point. I am strictly talking about the attitude people like nehmeth and Murat expressed repeatedly that they "don't know how Fed stays motivated" after his Slam lead was up to 10.

I never bought into this idea that Nadal was going to play until he was 24 and then physically crash because his knees couldn't take it. That was one of the dumbest cliches out there. And after #6, there was scant evidence that he wasn't going to win at least another 5 or 6 French Opens. The point I also made at that time was that Federer should have been looking a generation down the pike, even if Nadal was not going to catch him, and anticipating a future great rising. His lead could never be big enough.

Now it appears that his complacency (and the complacency of everyone who was in his ear) has really put him in an ugly situation as far as defending his record.

No I agree with your points. With Roger the ups and downs and motivational issues is a combination of family and just having been around so long and accomplished so much. It is human nature. We can hope that he gets some motivation at the possibility of Wafa humiliating him and passing the slam count.

I would agree with you, if it were not for the Monte Carlo final. Fed's showing in that match against Wawrinka was one of the most disappointing I have seen from him in his career.

He's played a lot worse than that match this year. He just lost to Bert & Ernie show 8 days ago as an example.

 

[Denis]

Congrats Rafa on his 9th RG title. He didn't need to do much, Novak messed up big time.

Terrible performance really. Everything went AWOL in the second set. Backhand especially.

I don't want to rub it in, but maybe someone like Nadal deserves more respect than to hope for him in the final because "it would narrow the gap in the head-to-head" or suggest that he might tank to avoid Djokovic.

Oh you're rubbing it in allright. As you should. I was beating on the wardrums, but Novak was beaten on court today unfortunately.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

Remember when you asked "how does Federer stay motivated?" after the 2010 Australian Open and I told you that his record wasn't nearly as secure as everyone was saying?

never thought his record was secure. if rafa breaks that idk what ill do

Well, don't forget that he has nothing to play for anymore. Nothing!

Who has nothing to play for? Fed?
Maybe this is naive, but I honestly think Fed would leave if he had nothing to play for. I think that's the case with most people. The not great guys who never achieve much always have money to play for, so they'll stay til they can't function anymore. But someone like Roger who loves the game and is a historian of the game definitely knows he's playing for the history books. He knows he's already in them. And he knows Rafa is quickly encroaching. There's a reason he's been trying to change up his game and work on his core (to keep his back healthy). He clearly has something to play for.

Now I just hope you weren't talking about Rafa. That would beeee.... awkward.

I was being sarcastic and mocking the people who said this back in 2010. Have you not been reading this thread?

Welll...... no I haven't really been reading the thread. I just read your most recent post Darth that you posted while I was typing mine. Fixing to respond to it now.

 

[crystalfire]

Rafa was too good today

i beg to differ.

not sure what you meant. He was too good.

like others explained above he wasnt too good. djokovic offered no resistance after set 1.5

 

[crystalfire]

its pretty much a foregone conclusion that if rafa gets to finals here. just hand him the damn trophy.

 

[calitennis127]

^ Acknowledge that Roger should have done better from 2008 on. He had his chances to.

The real disaster was not 2008 Wimbledon (where Nadal played very well) but the 2009 Australian Open. That match opened the floodgates as far as the Nadal menace went and Federer coughed it up - and then cried it out.

2008 Wimbledon was a disaster. Roger didn't show up for 2 sets and then played OK the last few sets. 1-12 BP's, blowing a 4-1 lead in the 2nd, hideous misses in the 5th, etc.

That opened the floodgates that allowed for AO 2009. I remember being the only one who knew that Roger would implode in the 5th set of that AO final and the only reason for that was the thought of 2008 on his mind.

Not to mention he'd be considered the best on grass and would have won 7 straight Wimbledons. An awful loss for sure.

I don't completely disagree about the Wimbledon final. The breakpoint conversion issue was a huge one. I just think that Nadal played much better in that match than the 2009 Australian Open final. Unlike at Wimbledon 2008, Nadal had never even reached a Melbourne final before 2009 and he only barely squeaked into the final after the marathon with Verdasco. Federer's self-destruction in that match was on par with LeBron in the 2011 Finals, except quite possibly worse in the 5th set. Nadal basically just stood there watching his opponent crumble and fade away.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

I wouldn't have thought it'd be broken but I also didn't think Roger would only have 17 after getting #16 at AO 2010. Figured at least 19. For all the talk that Roger aged well and handled having a family well it doesn't seem to be the case.

Darth, I think you're completely missing the point. I am strictly talking about the attitude people like nehmeth and Murat expressed repeatedly that they "don't know how Fed stays motivated" after his Slam lead was up to 10.

I never bought into this idea that Nadal was going to play until he was 24 and then physically crash because his knees couldn't take it. That was one of the dumbest cliches out there. And after #6, there was scant evidence that he wasn't going to win at least another 5 or 6 French Opens. The point I also made at that time was that Federer should have been looking a generation down the pike, even if Nadal was not going to catch him, and anticipating a future great rising. His lead could never be big enough.

Now it appears that his complacency (and the complacency of everyone who was in his ear) has really put him in an ugly situation as far as defending his record.

No I agree with your points. With Roger the ups and downs and motivational issues is a combination of family and just having been around so long and accomplished so much. It is human nature. We can hope that he gets some motivation at the possibility of Wafa humiliating him and passing the slam count.

I would agree with you, if it were not for the Monte Carlo final. Fed's showing in that match against Wawrinka was one of the most disappointing I have seen from him in his career.

He's played a lot worse than that match this year. He just lost to Bert & Ernie show 8 days ago as an example.

I don't think Fed's losses in grand slams and the like come from motivation issues. Is that crazy? (I don't mean that rhetorically. I really want to know if y'all think that's crazy. Because you seem to be assuming that it's either a motivation issue or it's not.) I think he's just been outplayed by some guys. I can see where motivation arguments can come into play. Like his match against Tsonga at Wimbledon two years ago. Or the 2009 DelPo match. I'm just not sure I would agree with those arguments. DelPo is a really good player. If he weren't having this cronic wrist injury, I would think he'd be challenging Rafa and Djokovic for the slams. I honestly believe that. His shots are just so ridiculously massive. That match with Djokovic for bronze at the Olympics was so crazy. And the match they played at Wimbledon last year as a reprisal of that match. So good for the most part. Tsonga has always been good and is at his best on grass and it's the big hitter like him and DelPo and Berdych who have always bothered Fed. Anyways, I just think he's lost some matches. I don't think a lack of motivation is there and he keeps it at bay and then it creeps in in the middle of a match. He's just lost a step here and there with age. He shanks a few more forehands. People watched Rafa exploit his forehand and said, "Oh, I think I can do that too."

Am I crazy?

 

[DarthFed]

^ Acknowledge that Roger should have done better from 2008 on. He had his chances to.

The real disaster was not 2008 Wimbledon (where Nadal played very well) but the 2009 Australian Open. That match opened the floodgates as far as the Nadal menace went and Federer coughed it up - and then cried it out.

2008 Wimbledon was a disaster. Roger didn't show up for 2 sets and then played OK the last few sets. 1-12 BP's, blowing a 4-1 lead in the 2nd, hideous misses in the 5th, etc.

That opened the floodgates that allowed for AO 2009. I remember being the only one who knew that Roger would implode in the 5th set of that AO final and the only reason for that was the thought of 2008 on his mind.

Not to mention he'd be considered the best on grass and would have won 7 straight Wimbledons. An awful loss for sure.

I don't completely disagree about the Wimbledon final. The breakpoint conversion issue was a huge one. I just think that Nadal played much better in that match than the 2009 Australian Open final. Unlike at Wimbledon 2008, Nadal had never even reached a Melbourne final before 2009 and he only barely squeaked into the final after the marathon with Verdasco. Federer's self-destruction in that match was on par with LeBron in the 2011 Finals, except quite possibly worse in the 5th set. Nadal basically just stood there watching his opponent crumble and fade away.

Good post. Roger and Rafa are, or were, both much better on grass than the AO hardcourts. After RG 2008 it was up to Roger to hold serve and step up and acquit himself well on a surface he had won 65 straight on. He failed and the rest is history.

 

[Denis]

its pretty much a foregone conclusion that if rafa gets to finals here. just hand him the damn trophy.

I think Novak can beat him here. We will have to wait for another 12 months to see it though, but I do think at some point he'll prevail. I also wonder how much good years Nadal has left in him. He was vulnarable (also today), more so than previous years. This can't go on forever.

 

[calitennis127]

I would agree with you, if it were not for the Monte Carlo final. Fed's showing in that match against Wawrinka was one of the most disappointing I have seen from him in his career.

He's played a lot worse than that match this year. He just lost to Bert & Ernie show 8 days ago as an example.

Yeah, but the Monte Carlo final was a chance to get a big title against someone that he has dominated in his career - AFTER already beating his toughest possible opponent in Djokovic.

That loss to Wawrinka just confirmed once and for all that he is no longer in the same competitive frame of mind that he once was. A truly focused and fully motivated Federer wins that in straight sets.

 

[crystalfire]

^ Acknowledge that Roger should have done better from 2008 on. He had his chances to.

The real disaster was not 2008 Wimbledon (where Nadal played very well) but the 2009 Australian Open. That match opened the floodgates as far as the Nadal menace went and Federer coughed it up - and then cried it out.

2008 Wimbledon was a disaster. Roger didn't show up for 2 sets and then played OK the last few sets. 1-12 BP's, blowing a 4-1 lead in the 2nd, hideous misses in the 5th, etc.

That opened the floodgates that allowed for AO 2009. I remember being the only one who knew that Roger would implode in the 5th set of that AO final and the only reason for that was the thought of 2008 on his mind.

Not to mention he'd be considered the best on grass and would have won 7 straight Wimbledons. An awful loss for sure.

I don't completely disagree about the Wimbledon final. The breakpoint conversion issue was a huge one. I just think that Nadal played much better in that match than the 2009 Australian Open final. Unlike at Wimbledon 2008, Nadal had never even reached a Melbourne final before 2009 and he only barely squeaked into the final after the marathon with Verdasco. Federer's self-destruction in that match was on par with LeBron in the 2011 Finals, except quite possibly worse in the 5th set. Nadal basically just stood there watching his opponent crumble and fade away.

WHY ARE WE BRINGING UP BAD MEMORIES UGHHH

 

[huntingyou]

I thought Nadal's forhand CC and DTL was spectacular and even when novak hit great returns he still managed to recover by taking the forehand early DTL.

I don't know how many times it has to be said but beating Rafa in Paris has proven to be to the toughest ask in sport.

If the weather was like first week, this match would have been a 4 set victory for Novak. Can't downplay the effect of dealing with wicked bounce and action for 3 plus hours in such conditions.

 

[brokenshoelace]

its pretty much a foregone conclusion that if rafa gets to finals here. just hand him the damn trophy.

I think Novak can beat him here. We will have to wait for another 12 months to see it though, but I do think at some point he'll prevail. I also wonder how much good years Nadal has left in him. He was vulnarable (also today), more so than previous years. This can't go on forever.

I agree with this. Novak is obviously the second best on clay and as long as he keeps that consistency up (no reason why he shouldn't), he'll be there in the final again. I question for how many more years can Rafa defend his territory. He's really Novak's only real obstacle (as big as that obstacle is).

 

[Ricardo]

Rafa was not too good today. Djokovic was too bad but whatever.

I agree with this actually, but technically it does make Nadal "too good" because when he did step up his game, Novak had no answer. Conversely, at no point in the match did Djokovic play that well, not even in the first set when he won.

Agreed, I didn't think Djokovic played all that well in the first set. His returns in his first 3 return games were off by a country mile.

I've definitely seen Nole's returns more effective and penetrating! When he actually hit a good one, he backed up allowing Rafa to stay in points he had no business winning! I thought that was why he hired Becker; to be more offensive, attack the net, and finish off points sooner! It's just not happening! Becker may be out on his arse if Nole doesn't win Wimbledon! So far I'm just not seeing a major change even when he beats Rafa on his beloved clay in other events! :nono :angel:

whatever coach you hire, the player still has to execute. Look how many volleys Novak stuffed up, Becker might even walk out on him before Wimbledon.

no major change is required really, Novak has enough baseline ability but just needed a bit of net play to help put away points a bit quicker. But bottom line, he needs to execute what he practiced.

 

[tented]

its pretty much a foregone conclusion that if rafa gets to finals here. just hand him the damn trophy.

I think Novak can beat him here. We will have to wait for another 12 months to see it though, but I do think at some point he'll prevail. I also wonder how much good years Nadal has left in him. He was vulnarable (also today), more so than previous years. This can't go on forever.

Well put, Denisovich.

 

[Fiero425]

its pretty much a foregone conclusion that if rafa gets to finals here. just hand him the damn trophy.

I think Novak can beat him here. We will have to wait for another 12 months to see it though, but I do think at some point he'll prevail. I also wonder how much good years Nadal has left in him. He was vulnarable (also today), more so than previous years. This can't go on forever.

I agree with this. Novak is obviously the second best on clay and as long as he keeps that consistency up (no reason why he shouldn't), he'll be there in the final again. I question for how many more years can Rafa defend his territory. He's really Novak's only real obstacle (as big as that obstacle is).

Oh I believe others have the ability to beat Rafa in Paris; just don't have the self-belief to finish! Ferrer showed how a lack of confidence, even with a lead drags some back to mediocrity!

 

[Ricardo]

^ Acknowledge that Roger should have done better from 2008 on. He had his chances to.

The real disaster was not 2008 Wimbledon (where Nadal played very well) but the 2009 Australian Open. That match opened the floodgates as far as the Nadal menace went and Federer coughed it up - and then cried it out.

2008 Wimbledon was a disaster. Roger didn't show up for 2 sets and then played OK the last few sets. 1-12 BP's, blowing a 4-1 lead in the 2nd, hideous misses in the 5th, etc.

That opened the floodgates that allowed for AO 2009. I remember being the only one who knew that Roger would implode in the 5th set of that AO final and the only reason for that was the thought of 2008 on his mind.

Not to mention he'd be considered the best on grass and would have won 7 straight Wimbledons. An awful loss for sure.

I don't completely disagree about the Wimbledon final. The breakpoint conversion issue was a huge one. I just think that Nadal played much better in that match than the 2009 Australian Open final. Unlike at Wimbledon 2008, Nadal had never even reached a Melbourne final before 2009 and he only barely squeaked into the final after the marathon with Verdasco. Federer's self-destruction in that match was on par with LeBron in the 2011 Finals, except quite possibly worse in the 5th set. Nadal basically just stood there watching his opponent crumble and fade away.

WHY ARE WE BRINGING UP BAD MEMORIES UGHHH

why is it turning into a federer thread first?