2015 Wimbledon Semifinal: Federer v. Murray

[Busted]

Congrats to no one for voting for Fed in 3

I haven't seen the match yet, but maybe no one thought Murray would be lame enough to not win a set. Roger's been serving great - but Murray's one of the best returners in the game. I thought he'd break Roger at least 1 time and lose in 4 sets. He hadn't beat Roger in 2 years - and regarless of his "resurgence" I still didn't think he'd be able to beat him. At least he won more than 1 game like he did at the Tour Finals last year.

 

[Busted]

If Fed wins Number 18, he deserves it regardless of the draw and the *

It's not like Nole's draw was difficult. The second I saw the draw I knew he'd be in the final unless he broke a leg and couldn't play. The fact the he went 5 sets against the likes of Kevin Anderson amuses me to no end. I think he was still a little rattled by the drumming Stan gave him in the French final.

 

[mrzz]

Of course Federer gets a *. He didn't had to face Dustin Brown...

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Maybe for you GSM

What is the context? I was not Murray bashing, at least not today. In fact in #519, I said this is probably the best match between them. This is a match where both played well, which usually does not happen in their match-ups.

 

[TennisFanatic7]

Re: RE: 2015 Wimbledon Semifinal: Federer v. Murray

Maybe for you GSM

What is the context? I was not Murray bashing, at least not today. In fact in #519, I said this is probably the best match between them. This is a match where both played well, which usually does not happen in their match-ups.

You said this is one of their best matches to watch or something

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Maybe for you GSM

What is the context? I was not Murray bashing, at least not today. In fact in #519, I said this is probably the best match between them. This is a match where both played well, which usually does not happen in their match-ups.

You said this is one of their best matches to watch or something

Typically in an Andy-Fed match, it is rarely the case that both player play well. For example, in last year's WTF, Andy did not show up as he was exhausted trying to make it there. As another example, Fed did not show up for the Olympics finals, as he was emotionally exhausted due to his 19-17 matching against JMDP in SF. A tennis match is good, only when both players play well. I thought this is a match in which both played well (BTW that is a positive comment on Andy in particular).

But, I understand where you are coming from. When your guy loses, you never want to call that match a great match, even if it really is.

Also, see my post #45 (made before the match begun) and responses to it by others.

 

[Moxie]

What is the context? I was not Murray bashing, at least not today. In fact in #519, I said this is probably the best match between them. This is a match where both played well, which usually does not happen in their match-ups.

You said this is one of their best matches to watch or something

Typically in an Andy-Fed match, it is rarely the case that both player play well. For example, in last year's WTF, Andy did not show up as he was exhausted trying to make it there. As another example, Fed did not show up for the Olympics finals, as he was emotionally exhausted due to his 19-17 matching against JMDP in SF. A tennis match is good, only when both players play well. I thought this is a match in which both played well (BTW that is a positive comment on Andy in particular).

But, I understand where you are coming from. When your guy loses, you never want to call that match a great match, even if it really is.

Also, see my post #45 (made before the match begun) and responses to it by others.

I thought it was their best match, too, and I was rooting for Andy. Murray was very good, and there was some very exciting tennis. But Federer was fairly untouchable today. Vintage performance.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

When Andy was serving at 4-5 in the second set, the game lasted for 15 minutes and had multiple deuces. Andy save many break points (which are actually set points) and managed to finally hold. When this happens to a run of the mill player, usually they tend to lose their own serve in the very next game, unable to overcome the disappointment of not breaking. But, Fed being a champion, finished his game in 1minute and 14 seconds (I think a love game) and put the pressure back on Andy immediately. That is the mind of a champion.

p.s. Serena did this too against Vika in the second set of their match. There was a long game which lasted about 15 minutes and Vika eventually held. But, Serena got the ball finished her game quickly and broke Vika in the next game.

 

[August]

When Andy was serving at 4-5 in the second set, the game lasted for 15 minutes and had multiple deuces. Andy save many break points (which are actually set points) and managed to finally hold. When this happens to a run of the mill player, usually they tend to lose their own serve in the very next game, unable to overcome the disappointment of not breaking. But, Fed being a champion, finished his game in 1minute and 14 seconds (I think a love game) and put the pressure back on Andy immediately. That is the mind of a champion.

That game reminded me of the long game in the 4th set of the 2012 final, so many game points & break points, always returning to deuce. Except that Roger broke then, which felt quite final then, and obviously was.

 

[Kieran]

When Andy was serving at 4-5 in the second set, the game lasted for 15 minutes and had multiple deuces. Andy save many break points (which are actually set points) and managed to finally hold. When this happens to a run of the mill player, usually they tend to lose their own serve in the very next game, unable to overcome the disappointment of not breaking. But, Fed being a champion, finished his game in 1minute and 14 seconds (I think a love game) and put the pressure back on Andy immediately. That is the mind of a champion.

p.s. Serena did this too against Vika in the second set of their match. There was a long game which lasted about 15 minutes and Vika eventually held. But, Serena got the ball finished her game quickly and broke Vika in the next game.

No, Serena actually faced break point in that game, held like a trouper, then broke.

In all the big moments in the match today, Andy came up short. In the hustle and jive of the sets, he held his own, but where it mattered at the end of each set, he allowed himself to be bossed. It's happened to him in his slam defeats this year, just when he needs to increase intensity and pressure the opponent, he lets them dictate. He began the match stronger and Federer showed him how it's done. It took Roger about three service games to settle - but he settled. After this, Andy looked second best.

Actually, just the idea of whether this is their best match, I don't know if it is, but their rivalry hasn't given us any really great matches. I'm trying to remember one and can't. All the other rivalries between the "3" have given us many classics, across the surfaces...

 

[Backhand_DTL]

When Andy was serving at 4-5 in the second set, the game lasted for 15 minutes and had multiple deuces. Andy save many break points (which are actually set points) and managed to finally hold. When this happens to a run of the mill player, usually they tend to lose their own serve in the very next game, unable to overcome the disappointment of not breaking. But, Fed being a champion, finished his game in 1minute and 14 seconds (I think a love game) and put the pressure back on Andy immediately. That is the mind of a champion.

p.s. Serena did this too against Vika in the second set of their match. There was a long game which lasted about 15 minutes and Vika eventually held. But, Serena got the ball finished her game quickly and broke Vika in the next game.

It also reminded me of the fifth set between Wawrinka and Djokovic in the US Open Semi Final 2013, where Wawrinka held after 20 minutes to make it 2:1 or 3:2 or something like that, then Djokovic won his service game easily and scored the decisive break afterwards. So it seems that when a player has to work that hard to hold and has to serve again quickly afterwards he might probably be quite vulnerable.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

This one reminded me a bit of the AO match between Nole and Roger where Roger did nothing wrong but lost in 3.

 

[TennisFanatic7]

Re: RE: 2015 Wimbledon Semifinal: Federer v. Murray

When Andy was serving at 4-5 in the second set, the game lasted for 15 minutes and had multiple deuces. Andy save many break points (which are actually set points) and managed to finally hold. When this happens to a run of the mill player, usually they tend to lose their own serve in the very next game, unable to overcome the disappointment of not breaking. But, Fed being a champion, finished his game in 1minute and 14 seconds (I think a love game) and put the pressure back on Andy immediately. That is the mind of a champion.

p.s. Serena did this too against Vika in the second set of their match. There was a long game which lasted about 15 minutes and Vika eventually held. But, Serena got the ball finished her game quickly and broke Vika in the next game.

I didn't say you were Murray bashing or anything, I just interpreted what you said at the time as it being a great match to watch between them, I agree it was a great match, which you wouldn't tend to say about a straight setter between the big four, but it was very entertaining, I was just saying, half in jest, that I didn't enjoy watching it as much as you probably did

P.S. Looks like I've quoted the wrong post but can't be bothered going back to change it after typing this out on my kindle, I'm sure you can see which one I was replying to

 

[Carol]

Of course Federer gets a *. He didn't had to face Dustin Brown...

Nope, and he didn't had to face Stakhovsky......

 

[calitennis127]

Mouthwatering match. I'm playing it in my head over and over with a different result each time.

You have always given Murray too much credit. He doesn't have the explosiveness in his game to contend with Federer if Federer is at his best, especially not on grass.

 

[tented]

Of course Federer gets a *. He didn't had to face Dustin Brown...

Nope, and he didn't had to face Stakhovsky......

[That was a joke, Carol. ]

 

[Carol]

Of course Federer gets a *. He didn't had to face Dustin Brown...

Nope, and he didn't had to face Stakhovsky......

[That was a joke, Carol. ]

As well as mine

 

[BIG3]

i watched both semi after work from ESPN3 replay. fortunately watched Novak first. when watching the 2nd semi, i keep wondering if the first semi was junior match
Though it was straight set, what a quality match. I voted it the best between these two. Murray didn't tank, Fed was just too good. Fed finished this match faster than 1st semi, are you kidding?
By today's form, I don't think Novak can beat Murray. Fed played scarely well.

 

[brokenshoelace]

When Andy was serving at 4-5 in the second set, the game lasted for 15 minutes and had multiple deuces. Andy save many break points (which are actually set points) and managed to finally hold. When this happens to a run of the mill player, usually they tend to lose their own serve in the very next game, unable to overcome the disappointment of not breaking. But, Fed being a champion, finished his game in 1minute and 14 seconds (I think a love game) and put the pressure back on Andy immediately. That is the mind of a champion.

p.s. Serena did this too against Vika in the second set of their match. There was a long game which lasted about 15 minutes and Vika eventually held. But, Serena got the ball finished her game quickly and broke Vika in the next game.

No, Serena actually faced break point in that game, held like a trouper, then broke.

In all the big moments in the match today, Andy came up short. In the hustle and jive of the sets, he held his own, but where it mattered at the end of each set, he allowed himself to be bossed. It's happened to him in his slam defeats this year, just when he needs to increase intensity and pressure the opponent, he lets them dictate. He began the match stronger and Federer showed him how it's done. It took Roger about three service games to settle - but he settled. After this, Andy looked second best.

Actually, just the idea of whether this is their best match, I don't know if it is, but their rivalry hasn't given us any really great matches. I'm trying to remember one and can't. All the other rivalries between the "3" have given us many classics, across the surfaces...

He didn't "allow himself" to be bossed. He was just bossed. Federer's game tends to find it far easier to do just that since he can take the ball earlier, hit with bigger margins, play with aggression, etc...without being too risky. Meanwhile, when Murray gets aggressive, you can see him trying to unload on every forehand with huge cuts and you know it's not his game and he's going to falter or struggle to put the ball away.

That's the main difference between Murray and the other 3 and that's why the key points between them unfold as they do so often. It's not all mental. They're flat out better players. I thought it was pretty telling how Murray played a perfectly fine match, at a level that ostensibly should have been enough to give him a set, and yet it was a relatively straight forward straight set affair.

Not much he can do against Federer when he's hitting that cleanly.

 

[isabelle]

Poor Andy, Judy, Kim and Ioana !!