2015 Wimbledon Semifinal: Federer v. Murray

[tented]

Oy ... I picked Murray to win the title in the draw challenge, but now I'm thinking Fed will win this SF. I don't think it will be straight sets, but I also don't think it will be 5, so I voted 4.

 

[crystalfire]

bummer i cant watch this :'(

 

[tented]

bummer i cant watch this :'(

Can you record it?

 

[Busted]

Federer pretty much always has the edge in this match-up, especially at Wimbledon.

I'm a huge Fed fan, but I have to disagree with that. Their H2H is 12-11 in Roger's favor and until the last 2 years it was Murray with a considerable lead. Murray gets to Roger (as in annoys him) and he knows it and he uses that to his advantage. Roger obviously can't take any mental vacations in this match. If he brings the focus and intensity he had in London at the Tour Finals then it'll be lights out for Murray. If he plays a so-so match like he did again Simon - then Murray will win it. He needs to be sharp - and he needs to stop screwing around with that damned forehand drop shot unless he's hitting it better (he looked like he was using the Simon match for practices!). Oh yeah - and play the backhand down the line and use the forehand to end points instead of just to set them up.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Their H2H is 12-11 in Fed's favor. They have played 23 matches so far. This morning I heard Brad Gilbert saying on TV that they don't really have a signature match. i.e., a match that you remember to be a nice competitive match where both played well. I tried to think for myself of such a match and I could not either.

But, we can easily do so for Novak-Fed matchup (e.g. RG 11, Wimby 14, many USO SFs), for Rafa -Fed matchup (e.g. Rome 2006, Wimby 2007 and 2008), Rafa-Novak (too many to mention), Andy-Novak (too many to mention).

We don't have a signature match for Rafa-Andy, but this is probably because they played too less matches. But, Andy-Fed have played 23 matches so far, nothing that we can remember as a good match.

In Wimbledon 2012, Andy was blown off. In Olympics 12, Fed did not show up. In almost all of their matches, it is rarely the case that both played well.

They expect one tomorrow.

 

[tented]

This morning I heard Brad Gilbert saying on TV that they don't really have a signature match. i.e., a match that you remember to be a nice competitive match where both played well. I tried to think for myself of such a match and I could not either.

Interesting. I can't think of one either, now that you mention it.

 

[Moxie]

This morning I heard Brad Gilbert saying on TV that they don't really have a signature match. i.e., a match that you remember to be a nice competitive match where both played well. I tried to think for myself of such a match and I could not either.

Interesting. I can't think of one either, now that you mention it.

There really isn't one. There is the quid pro quo parallel when Fed won Wimbledon and then Murray beat him on the same court in the Olympics 6 weeks later. That's the closest they come, I think.

 

[crystalfire]

bummer i cant watch this :'(

Can you record it?

nope :/

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The last missing piece has arrived. Tignor has jinxed Andy. :celeb:

 

[brokenshoelace]

Not that surprised. I would've seen it like that a week ago and the bookies are going to open the line based on who would've been favored in this matchup at the start of the tourney.

But I'm sure BS will be here relating this all to the 2008 match

They didn't play in 2008

 

[Federberg]

Their H2H is 12-11 in Fed's favor. They have played 23 matches so far. This morning I heard Brad Gilbert saying on TV that they don't really have a signature match. i.e., a match that you remember to be a nice competitive match where both played well. I tried to think for myself of such a match and I could not either.

But, we can easily do so for Novak-Fed matchup (e.g. RG 11, Wimby 14, many USO SFs), for Rafa -Fed matchup (e.g. Rome 2006, Wimby 2007 and 2008), Rafa-Novak (too many to mention), Andy-Novak (too many to mention).

We don't have a signature match for Rafa-Andy, but this is probably because they played too less matches. But, Andy-Fed have played 23 matches so far, nothing that we can remember as a good match.

In Wimbledon 2012, Andy was blown off. In Olympics 12, Fed did not show up. In almost all of their matches, it is rarely the case that both played well.

They expect one tomorrow.

I have to say I don't find their matches enjoyable at all. I think there was one on clay in Rome some years back when Novak was on the streak that was pretty good. But generally there's not much but attritional tennis

 

[brokenshoelace]

Their H2H is 12-11 in Fed's favor. They have played 23 matches so far. This morning I heard Brad Gilbert saying on TV that they don't really have a signature match. i.e., a match that you remember to be a nice competitive match where both played well. I tried to think for myself of such a match and I could not either.

But, we can easily do so for Novak-Fed matchup (e.g. RG 11, Wimby 14, many USO SFs), for Rafa -Fed matchup (e.g. Rome 2006, Wimby 2007 and 2008), Rafa-Novak (too many to mention), Andy-Novak (too many to mention).

We don't have a signature match for Rafa-Andy, but this is probably because they played too less matches. But, Andy-Fed have played 23 matches so far, nothing that we can remember as a good match.

In Wimbledon 2012, Andy was blown off. In Olympics 12, Fed did not show up. In almost all of their matches, it is rarely the case that both played well.

They expect one tomorrow.

Yeah, good post.

Though Nadal and Murray have played some good matches that would get more recognition if not for the circumstances. Their first meeting, oddly enough, was absolutely fantastic, which ended in a Nadal victory in 5 sets at the 2007 Australian Open and it was one of the matches that made people take notice of Murray. However, because that was before Murray was a rival and because it was a mere 4th round match, not much is made of it.

Their best match IMO was of insane quality. The 2010 WTF semi final. Breathtaking stuff but it's oddly often forgotten.

Agreed about Federer and Murray and I think it's because of the nature of the match-up. In other words, when Murray wins, it is by bringing Fed's level down and force him to be erratic, which doesn't make for the best viewing (even in competitive matches such as their 2013 AO semi). When Federer wins, it's usually due to an incredible offensive performance, which means it's not the most competitive match in the world (see pretty much any match they played at a major that Federer won).

I do think that if they are going to have a classic, it's going to be on grass. But I don't know if this will be it.

I'm picking Murray to win, by the way, but I change my mind about this by the second.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Their H2H is 12-11 in Fed's favor. They have played 23 matches so far. This morning I heard Brad Gilbert saying on TV that they don't really have a signature match. i.e., a match that you remember to be a nice competitive match where both played well. I tried to think for myself of such a match and I could not either.

But, we can easily do so for Novak-Fed matchup (e.g. RG 11, Wimby 14, many USO SFs), for Rafa -Fed matchup (e.g. Rome 2006, Wimby 2007 and 2008), Rafa-Novak (too many to mention), Andy-Novak (too many to mention).

We don't have a signature match for Rafa-Andy, but this is probably because they played too less matches. But, Andy-Fed have played 23 matches so far, nothing that we can remember as a good match.

In Wimbledon 2012, Andy was blown off. In Olympics 12, Fed did not show up. In almost all of their matches, it is rarely the case that both played well.

They expect one tomorrow.

I have to say I don't find their matches enjoyable at all. I think there was one on clay in Rome some years back when Novak was on the streak that was pretty good. But generally there's not much but attritional tennis

They've had some incredible ones and they've had some absolute stinkers. The Rome semi you mentioned is seriously underrated. It was phenomenal. 2011 was the year. Their AO semi in 2012 was nothing short of a classic that was overshadowed by the final. They also had an incredible final at a masters tournament later that year (maybe Shanghai, if I'm not mistaken). But they've also had some really underwhelming matches.

 

[TennisFanatic7]

Surprised at the pro-Federer confidence to be honest. Neither guy has been tested properly since the beginning of the grass court swing in which they both won a 500 tournament and got to the Wimbledon semi-finals pretty easily.

If you just look at the results such as Murray taking four sets to bear Karlovic and having close sets with Pospisil, then yeah, it seems that Andy hasn't been on fire as much as Roger seems to have been, but actually when you factor in how well Ivo and Vasek played above their level, you must say Andy is playing very well.

If Federer turns up and plays his best tennis, and keeps it up, then the match is mostly on his racket, but even then, if Murray can buckle down and get one of the first two sets, and they're on a level pegging after an hour and a half, he can tough it out in four or five.

I dunno, I think it'll be Murray in four, or Federer in four? Maybe Murray in five or Roger could smoke him in straights even?

Voting Andy in four - got to back my guy.

Also, re: discussion on who the crowd will support, they'll be behind Murray, just not as partisan as usual and I wouldn't be surprised if they got behind Roger in the unlikely scenario that he needs a boost to make a match of it.

 

[tented]

And were back!

 

[crystalfire]

first

 

[tented]

OK, any last minute predictions for Fed/Murray?

 

[Kirijax]

Murray in four!

 

[tented]

In the poll, I voted Fed in 4, but this could be any outcome, really.

 

[crystalfire]

fed in 5