2019 Men’s Wimbledon Final: Novak Djokovic vs. Roger Federer

[Bonaca]

Beat him at 33, 34, and 38. Should we wait to see how Novak is playing at that age? It's kind of sad he has problems with someone literally a decade past his prime.

Maestro is one of the Goats , dont Talk BAD about your guy. He is one of a kind.
If Novak keeps beating Bull , Rogers Record in slams will never be broken.

 

[DarthFed]

Maestro is one of the Goats , dont Talk BAD about your guy. He is one of a kind.
If Novak keeps beating Bull , Rogers Record in slams will never be broken.

I'm not talking bad about him in that context. He still plays very well for his age. The only aging part I didn't like was his early 30's. Looking back he struggled way too much and gave away too many opportunities. But Jelenafan never misses an opportunity to rub in losses and pretend that a 38 year old is on equal footing as a 32 year old.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Beat him at 33, 34, and 38. Should we wait to see how Novak is playing at that age? It's kind of sad he has problems with someone literally a decade past his prime.

Darth..now you can say that Roger had no reason to loose that match to .....

 

[Bonaca]

I'm not talking bad about him in that context. He still plays very well for his age. The only aging part I didn't like was his early 30's. Looking back he struggled way too much and gave away too many opportunities. But Jelenafan never misses an opportunity to rub in losses and pretend that a 38 year old is on equal footing as a 32 year old.

Sorry I got that wrong.
Beside Novak, Roger is my second best player, and was my favourite before Novak turned pro.

Because of that I always wish they can avoid playing each other, at least on the big stages.

 

[shawnbm]

Novak has won 15, Rafa 9 and Federer 4--since 2011 according to something I saw somewhere. That pretty much sums it up and is consistent with what you would expect vis-a-vis one to the other--Rafa won most before 2013 consistent with his prime from 2008 to 2013; Federer won the fewest since he was long past his prime years of 2003-2007/9; and Novak is now in his prime years and gobbling up more than the other two. Father Time always wins. Roger was two services away from doing something unbelievable, like Tom Watson ten years ago at the Open Championship. Those serves did not go in and Nole came up with a great return and a passing shot under immense pressure to save the match and continue on another hour and so. He deserved it, even if Federer did too at that moment.

 

[MikeOne]

Also for all the talk about Nadal failing to beat a sub-par Djokovic at Wimbledon last year, I'd say Novak played considerably better in than fifth set that he did yesterday in the fifth. To be honest, neither guy played especially well. For a classic, the level of tennis was not high at all, and Roger's ground game looked way off. Any backhand that was not a slice had essentially 50/50 chances of landing in, and even less so of causing any damage, and his forehand was as pedestrian as I've seen in a while. The big difference is that grass allows him to construct points with craftiness and the slice is more effective so he can throw Novak off. But if they were to play on hards I really think Roger gets clobbered as he just doesn't hit cleanly enough vs. Novak and hasn't in years (which is weird considering how much better he hits the ball vs. Nadal nowadays).

Jesus i’m getting tired of you federer and nadal fans who talk so much BS. We have darth saying what a crap match this was as fed lost and now we have mr. Nadal fanboy (the guy who said nadal was past his prime in 2011 and mentally weak to explain losses vs djokovic) claiming match was crap just to make it appear nadal vs djokovic was a better match.

Bruh, this was way better than nadal vs djokovic last year, these are the two best grass courters since 2010... the quality of the first set was out of this world... appreciate tennis and stop diminishing great matches in order to fit your narratives about nadal or federer. This was a higher quality match than nadal vs djokovic last year or even nadal vs djokovic 2012 AO. Only novak vs nadal match that rivals this was 2013 djokovic vs nadal FO.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Jesus i’m getting tired of you federer and nadal fans who talk so much BS. We have darth saying what a crap match this was as fed lost and now we have mr. Nadal fanboy (the guy who said nadal was past his prime in 2011 and mentally weak to explain losses vs djokovic) claiming match was crap just to make it appear nadal vs djokovic was a better match.

Bruh, this was way better than nadal vs djokovic last year, these are the two best grass courters since 2010... the quality of the first set was out of this world... appreciate tennis and stop diminishing great matches in order to fit your narratives about nadal or federer. This was a higher quality match than nadal vs djokovic last year or even nadal vs djokovic 2012 AO. Only novak vs nadal match that rivals this was 2013 djokovic vs nadal FO.

Great. Didn't argue a single point I made, made assumption about a potential agenda, brought up shit I never even mentioned (whether this was a better match than Nadal/Novak from last year. I just brought up Novak's level in the fifth) and falsely accused me of saying something in 2011 (I never said Nadal was mentally weak WTF?).

Buuuuuuuuuuut, if you do want to take a trip down memory lane, then I'm sure we can have lots of fun bringing up all those old tennis.com discussions about Federer vs. Sampras, weak competition, how many majors Roger will end up with, etc... You were right about all that stuff, I'm sure.

So yeah, please stfu.

 

[MikeOne]

I really don't see how anyone could have watched that fifth set and not notice Fed being visibly nervous, shaky and safe with his shot selection and extremely panicky with his decision making (bad drop shots, net approaches, etc...). This was obvious, especially behind his own serve (he played a little more freely on return games). On those match points you could tell he was really hoping his serve wouldn't come back. But yeah, this was not a choke? Give me a break.

Hey mr. Djokovic hater, let’s play a game of hypotheticals. ‘Had roger aced novak, had roger hit the perfect approach’. Want to continue?

At 40-15 in that infamous game, Djokovic hit a solid return which flat footed federer, who tried to run around his bh. Then, federer forced djokovic to hit a great passing shot, under enormous pressure and djokovix did it, the shot hit the line!

Anyone who calls this a choke is just angry, either cause they can’t accept federer losing or they hate djokovic, as in your case. As a nadal fanboy, you have always detested djokovic.

You can tell me federer could’ve played those points better, all points could be played better. A choke is a different story, like a double fault, missed easy volley etc... To not recognize that djokovic came up with quality shots under pressure shows the true colors of fed fanboys and djoker haters. You guys only see it one way...

 

[brokenshoelace]

Hey mr. Djokovic hater, let’s play a game of hypotheticals. ‘Had roger aced novak, had roger hit the perfect approach’. Want to continue?

At 40-15 in that infamous game, Djokovic hit a solid return which flat footed federer, who tried to run around his bh. Then, federer forced djokovic to hit a great passing shot, under enormous pressure and djokovix did it, the shot hit the line!

Anyone who calls this a choke is just angry, either cause they can’t accept federer losing or they hate djokovic, as in your case. As a nadal fanboy, you have always detested djokovic.

You can tell me federer could’ve played those points better, all points could be played better. A choke is a different story, like a double fault, missed easy volley etc... To not recognize that djokovic came up with quality shots under pressure shows the true colors of fed fanboys and djoker haters. You guys only see it one way...

Roger forcing Djokovic to hit a great passing shot is the most disingenuous full of take shit I've seen in a while. Alternatively, "Federer hit a suicidal, Roddick-esque approach because he panicked and followed it to the net." A great passing shot? This is a routine cross court forehand pass. Seriously, dude, get the fuck out of here with your bullshit.

 

[MikeOne]

Darth sets unrealistic expectations on poor Roger..I am glad a non Rafa person has finally been able to challenge Darth's distorted view

Darth is very predictable. There isn’t a federer loss which can’t be explained away as fed playing horribly, choking or being ill.

Darth really thinks that fed in his prime was unbeatable but facts show otherwise. Baby djokovic starting beating prime fed in 2007! And baby nadal, at 18, beat federer in 05 (or was it 04) on hardcourts. If baby nadal and baby novak were already starting to beat prime fed, who thinks prime nadal and prime djoker would be at prine fed’s mercy? I’m not sure this makes any sense, i mean prime fed was already losing to these guys way before they reached their primes.

So darth has this thing where he truly believes that prime fed would own nadal and djokovic... i don’t see the evidence. If baby djoker and baby nadal were giving prime fed trouble between 04-07, their prime versions would give prime fed HELL.

 

[DarthFed]

Darth is very predictable. There isn’t a federer loss which can’t be explained away as fed playing horribly, choking or being ill.

Darth really thinks that fed in his prime was unbeatable but facts show otherwise. Baby djokovic starting beating prime fed in 2007! And baby nadal, at 18, beat federer in 05 (or was it 04) on hardcourts. If baby nadal and baby novak were already starting to beat prime fed, who thinks prime nadal and prime djoker would be at prine fed’s mercy? I’m not sure this makes any sense, i mean prime fed was already losing to these guys way before they reached their primes.

So darth has this thing where he truly believes that prime fed would own nadal and djokovic... i don’t see the evidence. If baby djoker and baby nadal were giving prime fed trouble between 04-07, their prime versions would give prime fed HELL.

Old, senile, and stupid is no way to go through life son. Find me one post where I blame mono for Roger's losses for 2008. It never happened.

Did I ever say Rafa and Djokovic would have had no chance vs Prime Fed? Of course not, especially since Nadal obviously gave him a ton of problems in his prime. Djokovic case is funny though, you bring up 1 fucking win in 2007, the H2H was something like 14-7 through 2010 and predictably has turned around, especially since the vast majority of the matches have come with Fed 30 and over. It's actually a bit pathetic that Fed can come this close at 38 to beating Djokovic. It's pathetic for Nadal to be losing to this guy too, the man has 4 kids and is 10years past his prime. Pathetic!

 

[britbox]

I must have been watching a different match to many. Federer played well.

The gameplan was perfect - he served well, mixed up spin and pace to prevent Djoker developing any real rhythm. Djokovic admitted as much in the presser, Roger was dictating, he was on the back foot, had his time taken away and it was the most mentally exhausting match he's played in his entire career.

Roger just got the tighter when it mattered and paid the price. Djokovic knows the Swiss blinks first in their personal battle. Call it scars from past encounters or whatever...

The perception that everyone's playing their A game at the same time never really resonates with me. It's a zero-sum sport.

 

[Federberg]

The perception that everyone's playing their A game at the same time never really resonates with me. It's a zero-sum sport.

I pretty much agree with this. There are rare exceptions where it's fair to say that both players (generic) execute at an elevated level at the same time. But even in these circumstances it's usually the case that within specific points it's actually zero sum. Most of the time....

 

[britbox]

I pretty much agree with this. There are rare exceptions where it's fair to say that both players (generic) execute at an elevated level at the same time. But even in these circumstances it's usually the case that within specific points it's actually zero sum. Most of the time....

Yep, that might be the case on occasion - but it will never be "perceived" that way by the casual fan because their guy should win every point!

 

[Bonaca]

I must have been watching a different match to many. Federer played well.

The gameplan was perfect - he served well, mixed up spin and pace to prevent Djoker developing any real rhythm. Djokovic admitted as much in the presser, Roger was dictating, he was on the back foot, had his time taken away and it was the most mentally exhausting match he's played in his entire career.

Roger just got the tighter when it mattered and paid the price. Djokovic knows the Swiss blinks first in their personal battle. Call it scars from past encounters or whatever...

The perception that everyone's playing their A game at the same time never really resonates with me. It's a zero-sum sport.

Yeah , for me it was clearly visible that roger was the one who dictates and played better during the service games overall, Novak survived and played the better TB. I thought till the end roger will make it, and that would have really been the unbelievable , beat both of them back-to- back. He was damn close, closer not possible. I feel a bit for him.
Another truth is that Novak was a good step or two from his best. So everything is relative.

Another interesting fact from roger: he said for him the grass is played as it should, no word about bouncing and speed.

 

[Federberg]

Yep, that might be the case on occasion - but it will never be "perceived" that way by the casual fan because their guy should win every point!

agreed

 

[DarthFed]

I must have been watching a different match to many. Federer played well.

The gameplan was perfect - he served well, mixed up spin and pace to prevent Djoker developing any real rhythm. Djokovic admitted as much in the presser, Roger was dictating, he was on the back foot, had his time taken away and it was the most mentally exhausting match he's played in his entire career.

Roger just got the tighter when it mattered and paid the price. Djokovic knows the Swiss blinks first in their personal battle. Call it scars from past encounters or whatever...

The perception that everyone's playing their A game at the same time never really resonates with me. It's a zero-sum sport.

It's point of view IMO. If you play terrible in the pressure moments it's tough to say you played a great or even good match. That's just how I personally see it. Roger was great for the majority of the match, no denying that.

 

[calitennis127]

I really don't see how anyone could have watched that fifth set and not notice Fed being visibly nervous, shaky and safe with his shot selection and extremely panicky with his decision making (bad drop shots, net approaches, etc...). This was obvious, especially behind his own serve (he played a little more freely on return games). On those match points you could tell he was really hoping his serve wouldn't come back. But yeah, this was not a choke? Give me a break.

The truth lies somewhere in the middle of what you/Darth and Mike are saying. I would not call this a "choke" in the sense that Federer simply gifted away the match points. But I also would say that Federer could have been better on match points.

 

[calitennis127]

This was nowhere near as good as the 2008 match. Nowhere near. Both guys played better in that match (if Fed plays as aggressively and as cleanly in the fifth set yesterday as he did in the fifth set of the 2008 final, and plays the big points as well, he wins, no questions asked). The level of play in the final 3 sets of the 2008 final are much higher than anything displayed last night. Fed's forehand actually caught fire, which at no point happened yesterday. Now, he's 11 years older, so it makes sense, but it's a terrible comparison. The match yesterday was good. Lots of drama and relatively good quality. But that's about it.

Totally disagree. I think the quality was excellent yesterday. What the 2008 match had that this one did not was more glamour and buzz about it because everyone mistakenly viewed Federer as invincible at Wimbledon - just as you mistakenly view Nadal as invincible at Roland Garros. Those people were wrong just as you are.

 

[MikeOne]

I must have been watching a different match to many. Federer played well.

The gameplan was perfect - he served well, mixed up spin and pace to prevent Djoker developing any real rhythm. Djokovic admitted as much in the presser, Roger was dictating, he was on the back foot, had his time taken away and it was the most mentally exhausting match he's played in his entire career.

Roger just got the tighter when it mattered and paid the price. Djokovic knows the Swiss blinks first in their personal battle. Call it scars from past encounters or whatever...

The perception that everyone's playing their A game at the same time never really resonates with me. It's a zero-sum sport.

Federer played excellent tennis, even in those tiebreakers, he didn't exactly choke or played horrible, he just didn't play his best. There is a difference. Federer fans expect Federer to play perfectly in crucial moments, anything less, it's horrible.

I have a simpler explanation for why Djokovic is better in crucial moments, it is not mental scars for Fed or mental weakness, it's their types of games. Djokovic is the cleaner ball striker who makes less UFEs and takes less risks, Federer is the streakier ball striker and one who takes the most risks. In tiebreakers, you expect Federer to be more shaky, hit some great winners (he hit a couple of exceptional winners in breakers) but also miss more. Federer's riskier, less tight game will be prone to more errors in these pressure moments but sometimes pays off. The key, again, is the serve, Federer has to serve really well in the breakers, this is where i think he missed the mark...