2015 U.S. Open Final: Djokovic v. Federer

[Johnsteinbeck]

Congratulations to Novak. when it mattered the most, he came up with the goods. some really impressive stuff. and i shall take comfort in the fact that i predicted the outcome correctly (like so many of us... i kinda felt it would be the second, too... should've placed a bet on some combination of that...)

 

[jhar26]

I wanted Fed to win this one badly. But I gotta hand it to Novak, he's the man. So, I guess that's it where Fed winning slams is concerned. I can't imagine him playing better at age 34 than he did at Wimbledon and this USO and it still wasn't good enough to get past this guy. He had his chances but didn't take enough of the many breakpoint opportunities he had. So he was really in it and it was very close. One could say that there are a lot of positives to take from that, but he doesn't have the time anymore to take positives from losses because he's only getting older, although one could be excused for thinking that he's actually getting younger when you see him play. In short - if it was gonna happen it would have happened at this year's Wimbledon or the USO. Wimbledon and the USO are the slams where he still had a real shot, and he'll be a year older by the time they come around again. He's already been making a joke of the age argument for years now. But even the great Roger Federer can't keep on freezing the clock forever.

As for Djokovic - well, things couldn't be better than they are. His dominance of the tour is Serena-like (or young Fed-like) and at the moment and I don't see anyone out there to threaten him. Murray could win another major. Wawrinka may beat him here or there. But if he stays healthy Novak will win more slams and masters 1000's than anyone else for the next couple of years. I don't think that he has much to fear from the likes of Raonic or Dimitrov. The're good, but not as good as those we refer to as the big four (or five if we include Stan). If anything, the're already back peddling. Nishikori is probably the best of them, or at least the one with the best results so far. He's a spoiler who could beat a big four/five member at a slam here or there. Perhaps he can even win one if the stars align in the right way for him. But I don't see him as a consistent contender for slam titles but more as a super dangerous outsider.

So, things are looking great for the Djoker. Not so much for Federer, but I suppose that making two slam finals at 34 only adds to his legend as opposed to take away from it.

 

[crystalfire]

feel like fed to win he has to face someone other than nole in the final of a slam.

 

[Dhilip kumar]

Your comments are very true. Things could have not been better for Djoker. I thot the slam was there for Roger to take when he won the 2nd second. His serve looked good than Djoker except a few sets which he dropped and Djoker was not surely at his best today.

A more appropriate statement would be Djokovic took most of those oppurtunities that came his way whereas Roger failed miserably whenever it mattered and he lost the match as if it was fate..!

Moreover it was heart breaking to see the legend play unbeatable throughout both the wimbledon and us open tourny's just to loose in the Final to Djoker..!

 

[DarthFed]

I wanted Fed to win this one badly. But I gotta hand it to Novak, he's the man. So, I guess that's it where Fed winning slams is concerned. I can't imagine him playing better at age 34 than he did at Wimbledon and this USO and it still wasn't good enough to get past this guy. He had his chances but didn't take enough of the many breakpoint opportunities he had. So he was really in it and it was very close. One could say that there are a lot of positives to take from that, but he doesn't have the time anymore to take positives from losses because he's only getting older, although one could be excused for thinking that he's actually getting younger when you see him play. In short - if it was gonna happen it would have happened at this year's Wimbledon or the USO. Wimbledon and the USO are the slams where he still had a real shot, and he'll be a year older by the time they come around again. He's already been making a joke of the age argument for years now. But even the great Roger Federer can't keep on freezing the clock forever.

As for Djokovic - well, things couldn't be better than they are. His dominance of the tour is Serena-like (or young Fed-like) and at the moment and I don't see anyone out there to threaten him. Murray could win another major. Wawrinka may beat him here or there. But if he stays healthy Novak will win more slams and masters 1000's than anyone else for the next couple of years. I don't think that he has much to fear from the likes of Raonic or Dimitrov. The're good, but not as good as those we refer to as the big four (or five if we include Stan). If anything, the're already back peddling. Nishikori is probably the best of them, or at least the one with the best results so far. He's a spoiler who could beat a big four/five member at a slam here or there. Perhaps he can even win one if the stars align in the right way for him. But I don't see him as a consistent contender for slam titles but more as a super dangerous outsider.

So, things are looking great for the Djoker. Not so much for Federer, but I suppose that making two slam finals at 34 only adds to his legend as opposed to take away from it.

You had me to the last sentence. Losing the big matches never helps anyone's legacy. Novak is a greater player today than he was before the match yesterday, Roger is the same as he was before the tournament, nothing added.

Roger might not consistently play as well next year as he did this year but the question is if he can bring any kind of a good game when it matters. Playing well against overmatched peons before the final only matters so much. I thought he'd rise to the occasion at Wimbledon this year, he might still do so next year but it will only be tougher.

 

[jhar26]

I wanted Fed to win this one badly. But I gotta hand it to Novak, he's the man. So, I guess that's it where Fed winning slams is concerned. I can't imagine him playing better at age 34 than he did at Wimbledon and this USO and it still wasn't good enough to get past this guy. He had his chances but didn't take enough of the many breakpoint opportunities he had. So he was really in it and it was very close. One could say that there are a lot of positives to take from that, but he doesn't have the time anymore to take positives from losses because he's only getting older, although one could be excused for thinking that he's actually getting younger when you see him play. In short - if it was gonna happen it would have happened at this year's Wimbledon or the USO. Wimbledon and the USO are the slams where he still had a real shot, and he'll be a year older by the time they come around again. He's already been making a joke of the age argument for years now. But even the great Roger Federer can't keep on freezing the clock forever.

As for Djokovic - well, things couldn't be better than they are. His dominance of the tour is Serena-like (or young Fed-like) and at the moment and I don't see anyone out there to threaten him. Murray could win another major. Wawrinka may beat him here or there. But if he stays healthy Novak will win more slams and masters 1000's than anyone else for the next couple of years. I don't think that he has much to fear from the likes of Raonic or Dimitrov. The're good, but not as good as those we refer to as the big four (or five if we include Stan). If anything, the're already back peddling. Nishikori is probably the best of them, or at least the one with the best results so far. He's a spoiler who could beat a big four/five member at a slam here or there. Perhaps he can even win one if the stars align in the right way for him. But I don't see him as a consistent contender for slam titles but more as a super dangerous outsider.

So, things are looking great for the Djoker. Not so much for Federer, but I suppose that making two slam finals at 34 only adds to his legend as opposed to take away from it.

You had me to the last sentence. Losing the big matches never helps anyone's legacy. Roger might not consistently play as well next year as he did this year but the question is if he can bring any kind of a good game when it matters. Playing well against overmatched peons only matters so much.

It depends on which stage of your career you're at imo. Connors' run to the semis at age 39 has become as legendary as any of the slams where he actually won the entire thing. Similarly, to still be ranked number two at age 34 and make two slam finals where he gives another and younger all time great a run for his money will, in my opinion at least, ADD to his legacy and not take away from it. But truth be told, I don't think that anything he does from now on can take away from his legacy. That goes for all the greats really. When you say "Borg" you think about his FO and Wimbledon wins. Nobody cares or hardly even remembers his embarrassing come back attempts. Champions are remembered for their best, not their worst.

 

[DarthFed]

I wanted Fed to win this one badly. But I gotta hand it to Novak, he's the man. So, I guess that's it where Fed winning slams is concerned. I can't imagine him playing better at age 34 than he did at Wimbledon and this USO and it still wasn't good enough to get past this guy. He had his chances but didn't take enough of the many breakpoint opportunities he had. So he was really in it and it was very close. One could say that there are a lot of positives to take from that, but he doesn't have the time anymore to take positives from losses because he's only getting older, although one could be excused for thinking that he's actually getting younger when you see him play. In short - if it was gonna happen it would have happened at this year's Wimbledon or the USO. Wimbledon and the USO are the slams where he still had a real shot, and he'll be a year older by the time they come around again. He's already been making a joke of the age argument for years now. But even the great Roger Federer can't keep on freezing the clock forever.

As for Djokovic - well, things couldn't be better than they are. His dominance of the tour is Serena-like (or young Fed-like) and at the moment and I don't see anyone out there to threaten him. Murray could win another major. Wawrinka may beat him here or there. But if he stays healthy Novak will win more slams and masters 1000's than anyone else for the next couple of years. I don't think that he has much to fear from the likes of Raonic or Dimitrov. The're good, but not as good as those we refer to as the big four (or five if we include Stan). If anything, the're already back peddling. Nishikori is probably the best of them, or at least the one with the best results so far. He's a spoiler who could beat a big four/five member at a slam here or there. Perhaps he can even win one if the stars align in the right way for him. But I don't see him as a consistent contender for slam titles but more as a super dangerous outsider.

So, things are looking great for the Djoker. Not so much for Federer, but I suppose that making two slam finals at 34 only adds to his legend as opposed to take away from it.

You had me to the last sentence. Losing the big matches never helps anyone's legacy. Roger might not consistently play as well next year as he did this year but the question is if he can bring any kind of a good game when it matters. Playing well against overmatched peons only matters so much.

It depends on which stage of your career you're at imo. Connors' run to the semis at age 39 has become as legendary as any of the slams where he actually won the entire thing. Similarly, to still be ranked number two at age 34 and make two slam finals where he gives another and younger all time great a run for his money will, in my opinion at least, ADD to his legacy and not take away from it. But truth be told, I don't think that anything he does from now on can take away from his legacy. That goes for all the greats really. When you say "Borg" you think about his FO and Wimbledon wins. Nobody cares or hardly even remembers his embarrassing come back attempts. Champions are remembered for their best, not their worst.

I agree with that. Certainly what Roger is doing is inspirational given his age and past achievements. He is still motivated and still ambitious and he is ALMOST still great. He might have one last dance with glory and he has been trying like hell to do it. But sport is cruel and nobody remembers 2nd place unless they become historical losers like the Buffalo Bills.

 

[19USC66]

Roger Federer need never worry about his legacy in the game of tennis. However, with Novak heading for his 29th birthday when are some young guys going to step up? I don't see anyone remotely threatening to the big four? If this continues those four guys are going to be still playing for grand slam titles when they are forty.

 

[herios]

Roger Federer need never worry about his legacy in the game of tennis. However, with Novak heading for his 29th birthday when are some young guys going to step up? I don't see anyone remotely threatening to the big four? If this continues those four guys are going to be still playing for grand slam titles when they are forty.

Rafa is not much of a contender anymore. Time will come for the other 3 as well. Over 30 inconsistency becomes a norm.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Yesterday was the busiest day of my life probably, so I just finished watching the match. I have not read anything posted here but I am sure everyone congratulates Nole and rightfully so. I have guessed it correct as well, but the way the match went, I really thought towards the end of the third set, Roger had a serious shot. I know most of the time Nole makes Roger go for extra and makes him miss, but the lack of BP conversion and the forehand that went on vacation killed that one shot for Roger. I truly believe had he gotten the third, he could take it to the finish line with the momentum. Too bad for Roger, Kudos to Nole.

 

[jhar26]

Roger Federer need never worry about his legacy in the game of tennis. However, with Novak heading for his 29th birthday when are some young guys going to step up? I don't see anyone remotely threatening to the big four? If this continues those four guys are going to be still playing for grand slam titles when they are forty.

Rafa is not much of a contender anymore. Time will come for the other 3 as well. Over 30 inconsistency becomes a norm.

It doesn't look good for Rafa, but perhaps it's a bit too early to write him off completely. First of all, he's only having a bad season compared to what he did before. Secondly, there's always the chance that his 2015 is what 2013 was for Federer and that he'll be back to his best (or close) next year. Personally I don't think so, but when I watched Fed in 2013 I didn't think that he would make three more slam finals either. Of course his style of of play may mean that he will age quicker than Fed, but still. I don't rule out that he at least will still be, or will become again a factor on clay. The days when he completely dominated on the surface, let alone anywhere else are probably over though, on that I can agree.

 

[Dhilip kumar]

Roger Federer need never worry about his legacy in the game of tennis. However, with Novak heading for his 29th birthday when are some young guys going to step up? I don't see anyone remotely threatening to the big four? If this continues those four guys are going to be still playing for grand slam titles when they are forty.

Rafa is not much of a contender anymore. Time will come for the other 3 as well. Over 30 inconsistency becomes a norm.

It doesn't look good for Rafa, but perhaps it's a bit too early to write him off completely. First of all, he's only having a bad season compared to what he did before. Secondly, there's always the chance that his 2015 is what 2013 was for Federer and that he'll be back to his best (or close) next year. Personally I don't think so, but when I watched Fed in 2013 I didn't think that he would make three more slam finals either. Of course his style of of play may mean that he will age quicker than Fed, but still. I don't rule out that he at least will still be, or will become again a factor on clay. The days when he completely dominated on the surface, let alone anywhere else are probably over though, on that I can agree.

Sure your comparison with Fed are considerable. But you have to accept that Rafa was consistently inconsistent for past couple of years. Even at his peak time Rafa had injuries becos of his playing style. But Fed is consistent both physically and in producing results. So my opinion is There is no Big four at the moment. Only there is one Big One 'Novak' and a warrior Fed battling for a Grand slam.

 

[herios]

I am not saying Rafa will or cannot improve on his 2015 performance, but as far as slams is concerned, he is done.

 

[ftan]

Ok I am sad

 

[jhar26]

I am not saying Rafa will or cannot improve on his 2015 performance, but as far as slams is concerned, he is done.

Probably. With the possible exception of the FO if Novak would slip up.

 

[jhar26]

Rafa is not much of a contender anymore. Time will come for the other 3 as well. Over 30 inconsistency becomes a norm.

It doesn't look good for Rafa, but perhaps it's a bit too early to write him off completely. First of all, he's only having a bad season compared to what he did before. Secondly, there's always the chance that his 2015 is what 2013 was for Federer and that he'll be back to his best (or close) next year. Personally I don't think so, but when I watched Fed in 2013 I didn't think that he would make three more slam finals either. Of course his style of of play may mean that he will age quicker than Fed, but still. I don't rule out that he at least will still be, or will become again a factor on clay. The days when he completely dominated on the surface, let alone anywhere else are probably over though, on that I can agree.

Sure your comparison with Fed are considerable. But you have to accept that Rafa was consistently inconsistent for past couple of years. Even at his peak time Rafa had injuries becos of his playing style. But Fed is consistent both physically and in producing results. So my opinion is There is no Big four at the moment. Only there is one Big One 'Novak' and a warrior Fed battling for a Grand slam.

In terms of who ends up winning these things it's indeed a case of "the big one." In terms of who's likely to be there at the business end of majors perhaps the name of Nadal should be replaced by Wawrinka's at this point. But out of respect for past achievements I guess Rafa has earned his spot even though it's unlikely that he will live up to it again in the future.

 

[BIG3]

I like both Fed and Nole. It didn't matter who won the championship as far as they played another classic match. Have to say it was a let down.

1. Nole didn't play well, but toughed out. Fed couldn't covert that many BP, credit to Nole toughness and a few his own poor play. Harder to swallow is that he donated a couple of his own serve games out of nowhere. After the first few games, Fed didn't ever had 15-40 big holes. His serve were broken mostly from 30-30 or even 40-15. He still could land first serve on those crucial points and Nole barely got it back with short balls, then Fed overcooked, sailing either long or wide. Nole accepted his gift and didn't do anything particular. I agreed the match was on Fed's racket, different from Wimbledon of last two years.

2. Fed is still in great position to have his #18. Yes, he played poorly, but only to Nole, and is dominating the rest of field. He can dispatch Murray/Stan much easier. If Murray/Stan land in Nole's half, they will bring stiff competition, at the very least, wear out him. Nole had favor of draw, didn't play tough semi and came out fresh against Fed. Without Nole at the final, Fed would have trophies of IW, ROME, WIMBLEDON, USO, plus Cincinnati now, any difference from 10 years ago?

3. Congratulations to Nole. This is truely BIG3 era. Each of them has 10+ majors and 20+ masters. Unbelievable to witness each of them crossing bar in the last 10 years. Nole is still not in Fedal league, but he can write his own history by
i) 30+ masters. Very likely
ii) Nole slam. Very probable. I have strange feeling that Nole's dominance in majors in descending order, with AO best and USO worst. Cannot believe 0 RG and 3 Wimbledon.
iii) 2+ of each major. Call me crazy. I think it possible if Rafa won't have another 2013 comeback.

 

[Front242]

Novak at least equaling Nadal's 14 slams or exceeding it seems very likely at this point as there aren't a whole lot of players out there to challenge him enough to win. Watched until the 2nd game of set 3 before it got too late here. Surprisingly felt fresh a daisy at work and still but skipped the gym out of principle. Can't lift heavy weights after 2 hours sleep Would've liked to have seen how the match went in drier, sunnier conditions without the cool air 'cos the surface looked pretty damn slow out there last night. Of all the players out there not named Federer who could win it, I'm glad it was Novak. Can't really think of anyone else I'd like to have won except maybe Tommy Haas or Nishikori but dream on

 

[nehmeth]

Can't really think of anyone else I'd like to have won except maybe Tommy Haas...

:cover Tommy Haas, I thought he would have won a slam, until that initial injury to his shoulder when he was #2 in the world... and then all the other things that happened to him subsequently.

 

[Denis]

Watching the rest of the final now (went to bed end of the second set).

Some really stunning clutch play by Djokovic at the end of the third set. Wow.