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

Who wins?

  • Djokovic in three sets

    Votes: 4 22.2%
  • Djokovic in four sets

    Votes: 6 33.3%
  • Djokovic in five sets

    Votes: 3 16.7%
  • Federer in three sets

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Federer in four sets

    Votes: 4 22.2%
  • Federer in five sets

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • Total voters
    18
  • Poll closed .

monfed

Major Winner
Joined
Apr 28, 2018
Messages
2,112
Reactions
506
Points
113
Novak has learned to play Federer to perfection. Aside from tactic of going to Roger's fh often, where Roger isn't that good defending, it's his mental approach.

Federer is the type of player that can go on a 4-5 game stretch where he makes an opponent feel inadequate. He will hit aces, come to net behind strong serves, fire bh/fh winners and even humiliate with a little dropper out of nowhere. The mistake some of Federer's past opponents have made is to panic and try to do too much. This results in gifting Federer points at precisely the wrong time, when already down 1-4 in a set. This exacerbates the problem. What Novak has learned to do is to accept these patches where Federer seems unbeatable and just stay calm... wait for a dip in level. The dip in level ALWAYS comes, here, Novak takes advantage. Over the course of a match, Novak banks on Roger not been able to be at top gear all the time and keeping it close. Eventually, something marvelous happens, Roger starts doubting himself and given he has the more risky game, makes more UFEs than Novak when it counts the most. Sometimes Novak gets into beast mode, like he did in AO last time they met but most of the time, Novak is just not panicking, forcing Roger to maintain his top gear all match, Roger can't.

Novak has also learned to play Nadal to perfection, that's another story.

LOL so much mental masturbation to describe a 38 YO who is making slam final after slam final without dropping a set and only losing to baseline bots on steriods only because Fed swatted aside all of Pete's records. Fed should be sitting in a commentary box at his age, btw your idol couldn't get past Bastl after they changed the grass. Atleast Fed makes slam finals on tampered surfaces. Beat it loser, noone cares about your butthurt pseudoanalysis.
 

MikeOne

Masters Champion
Joined
Sep 29, 2015
Messages
658
Reactions
484
Points
63
LOL so much mental masturbation to describe a 38 YO who is making slam final after slam final without dropping a set and only losing to baseline bots on steriods only because Fed swatted aside all of Pete's records. Fed should be sitting in a commentary box at his age, btw your idol couldn't get past Bastl after they changed the grass. Atleast Fed makes slam finals on tampered surfaces. Beat it loser, noone cares about your butthurt pseudoanalysis.
yadadadadada
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
I need to post a video for you? you can't do it yourself?

When you claim it wasn't an easy shot, please support it with evidence. Everybody else acknowledges it was a poor approach and a routine pass. Burden of proof is on you.
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,724
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
Novak has learned to play Federer to perfection. Aside from tactic of going to Roger's fh often, where Roger isn't that good defending, it's his mental approach.

Federer is the type of player that can go on a 4-5 game stretch where he makes an opponent feel inadequate. He will hit aces, come to net behind strong serves, fire bh/fh winners and even humiliate with a little dropper out of nowhere. The mistake some of Federer's past opponents have made is to panic and try to do too much. This results in gifting Federer points at precisely the wrong time, when already down 1-4 in a set. This exacerbates the problem. What Novak has learned to do is to accept these patches where Federer seems unbeatable and just stay calm... wait for a dip in level. The dip in level ALWAYS comes, here, Novak takes advantage. Over the course of a match, Novak banks on Roger not been able to be at top gear all the time and keeping it close. Eventually, something marvelous happens, Roger starts doubting himself and given he has the more risky game, makes more UFEs than Novak when it counts the most. Sometimes Novak gets into beast mode, like he did in AO last time they met but most of the time, Novak is just not panicking, forcing Roger to maintain his top gear all match, Roger can't.

Novak has also learned to play Nadal to perfection, that's another story.

Or he waited for Roger to age out. Fed can't move well anymore and that makes life a lot easier for Djokovic. Roger is forced to go for more and early in points because he is a lot easier to get out of position and he can't rally all day without getting tired.

Anyways the matchup only became easy for Djokovic after 2014, it should've been cake before then.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
When you claim it wasn't an easy shot, please support it with evidence. Everybody else acknowledges it was a poor approach and a routine pass. Burden of proof is on you.

Okay, look at where it landed. It landed on the line of the service box, maybe 2-3 inches from going wide. Djokovic did not have to hit that shot as perfectly as he did with as much whip on it as there was. It dove like a dolphin.

Was it the hardest shot in the world? No.

Was Federer's approach ideal? Absolutely not.

But was Djokovic's shot perfectly placed where Federer could not get a racquet on it? Yes.

And was that shot outstanding under the circumstances? Without a doubt.

On a scale from 1 to 10, factoring in degree of difficulty and the moment (match point down to Federer in a Wimbledon final), I give it an 8.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Or he waited for Roger to age out. Fed can't move well anymore and that makes life a lot easier for Djokovic. Roger is forced to go for more and early in points because he is a lot easier to get out of position and he can't rally all day without getting tired.

Anyways the matchup only became easy for Djokovic after 2014, it should've been cake before then.

Oh please, you just won't admit that the one-handed backhand has always been a problem and always will be. Did you watch Federer's losses to Nadal in Dubai 2006 or Murray in Cincinnati 2006 or Djokovic in Montreal 2007? How about the Cañas losses in 2007 at Indian Wells and Miami? How about the Simon loss in Canada in 2008? That was a preview of what was to come.

The way that you describe young Federer as a perfect unbeatable tennis player is such BS. That was why I was so happy when Nadal beat him at 2008 Wimbledon.....the arrogance of Federer fans became much like the arrogance of Nadal fans later.

Here's a newsflash for you: winning does not mean perfection or being flawless. It means being better than your peers.

The Warriors were the best team in the NBA in recent season but they had numerous clear flaws. Maybe you Darth should accept that Federer has been a terrific player but has also had some flaws his entire career. Stop acting like he was absolutely perfect when he was younger because he clearly wasn't.
 

MikeOne

Masters Champion
Joined
Sep 29, 2015
Messages
658
Reactions
484
Points
63
Okay, look at where it landed. It landed on the line of the service box, maybe 2-3 inches from going wide. Djokovic did not have to hit that shot as perfectly as he did with as much whip on it as there was. It dove like a dolphin.

Was it the hardest shot in the world? No.

Was Federer's approach ideal? Absolutely not.

But was Djokovic's shot perfectly placed where Federer could not get a racquet on it? Yes.

And was that shot outstanding under the circumstances? Without a doubt.

On a scale from 1 to 10, factoring in degree of difficulty and the moment (match point down to Federer in a Wimbledon final), I give it an 8.

I have to say, the lengths djokovic haters go to to diminish his wins. The fed fans here are bad but broken is as bad, he hates djokovic, with a passion.
 

DarthFed

The GOAT
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
17,724
Reactions
3,477
Points
113
Yeah, as if Djokovic has never hit an unforced error in his life. How dare Federer make him come up with something.

Just an idiotic way of thinking. An underhanded 2nd serve makes Djokovic "come up with something"
 

MikeOne

Masters Champion
Joined
Sep 29, 2015
Messages
658
Reactions
484
Points
63
Oh please, you just won't admit that the one-handed backhand has always been a problem and always will be. Did you watch Federer's losses to Nadal in Dubai 2006 or Murray in Cincinnati 2006 or Djokovic in Montreal 2007? How about the Cañas losses in 2007 at Indian Wells and Miami? How about the Simon loss in Canada in 2008? That was a preview of what was to come.

The way that you describe young Federer as a perfect unbeatable tennis player is such BS. That was why I was so happy when Nadal beat him at 2008 Wimbledon.....the arrogance of Federer fans became much like the arrogance of Nadal fans later.

Here's a newsflash for you: winning does not mean perfection or being flawless. It means being better than your peers.

The Warriors were the best team in the NBA in recent season but they had numerous clear flaws. Maybe you Darth should accept that Federer has been a terrific player but has also had some flaws his entire career. Stop acting like he was absolutely perfect when he was younger because he clearly wasn't.

Federer was for sure more consistent back then but some fed fanboys think he was unbeatable.

Baby novak started to beat federer in his prime, back in 07!

Baby, 18 yr old nadal started beating fed in 04-05.

So if in diapers djokovic and nadal were starting to give 04-07 federer probs it is an absolute myth that 04-07 fed would for sure best them as they claim. Who knows...
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Just an idiotic way of thinking. An underhanded 2nd serve makes Djokovic "come up with something"

And what Federer did was nowhere near that bad, don't be ridiculous.

Why don't you just admit you are looking at this with a meathead mentality of who won and who lost? I have asked you about 5 times now what you would have preferred that Federer do in that situation and you have zero answers. I also laid out an array of possibilities of what could have gone wrong if he was more aggressive and you were silent about that. If he had been aggressive and missed, you would have said he was too jumpy and impatient. If he had worked a long rally and missed a BH, you would have said he was too much of a chicken to pull the trigger.

Why don't you just admit that you have no idea what he should have done in that scenario and are just mad that he lost? The closest thing I have gotten from anyone as a strategic alternative to what he actually did is Ricardo saying he should have gone for an ace, which I agree with. But none of you Monday morning quarterbacks have offered a single suggestion for how he could have constructed a point in a way that would have definitively and surely won it.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
Federer was for sure more consistent back then but some fed fanboys think he was unbeatable.

Baby novak started to beat federer in his prime, back in 07!

Baby, 18 yr old nadal started beating fed in 04-05.

So if in diapers djokovic and nadal were starting to give 04-07 federer probs it is an absolute myth that 04-07 fed would for sure best them as they claim. Who knows...


My issue is not with Darth saying that a younger Federer may have gotten the better of Djokovic and Nadal the majority of the time. My issue is with him defining Federer from 2004-2007 as absolutely perfect and unbeatable. That is nonsense. He won a lot of close matches and even when he won the problems with the backhand were evident.

Darth is whining about this loss.....how about when Federer saved multiple match points against Roddick at the 2006 Masters Cup and won in the third set? How about when he barely beat Nalbandian in a 3rd set tiebreak in Rome 2006?

Darth talks as though Federer won every single match 6-1, 6-1 and no one had a chance to win a set against him. That is total BS.
 

MikeOne

Masters Champion
Joined
Sep 29, 2015
Messages
658
Reactions
484
Points
63
Or he waited for Roger to age out. Fed can't move well anymore and that makes life a lot easier for Djokovic. Roger is forced to go for more and early in points because he is a lot easier to get out of position and he can't rally all day without getting tired.

Anyways the matchup only became easy for Djokovic after 2014, it should've been cake before then.

Baby, in diapers djokovic started beating fed in 07, fed in his prime

Baby, 18 year old, who yet couldn’t buy a beer, in diapers nadal started to beat federer back in 04-05, even on hard courts.

Maybe 04-07 federer would best prime rafa and djoker or maybe not, i mean, if when they were babies they were already beating fed, what’s your evidence that 04-07 fed would dominate them? May even be the opposite. They were little babies back then, couldn’t even go to store and buy a beer.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Okay, look at where it landed. It landed on the line of the service box, maybe 2-3 inches from going wide. Djokovic did not have to hit that shot as perfectly as he did with as much whip on it as there was. It dove like a dolphin.

Was it the hardest shot in the world? No.

Was Federer's approach ideal? Absolutely not.

But was Djokovic's shot perfectly placed where Federer could not get a racquet on it? Yes.

And was that shot outstanding under the circumstances? Without a doubt.

On a scale from 1 to 10, factoring in degree of difficulty and the moment (match point down to Federer in a Wimbledon final), I give it an 8.

The approach was terrible and that's the point. It was a bad decision, bad execution, and visibly nervous (as evidenced by Roger falling apart quickly afterwards and getting broken).
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
And the way to do that is going full Andy Roddick?


Andy Roddick went 5-4 against Djokovic including a 4-match winning streak. We all know that Djokovic is not perfect. We have all seen him miss routine shots before and he very well could have on that point.

If Djokovic was perfect he would not have lost 4 times in a row to Roddick like he did.
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
The approach was terrible and that's the point. It was a bad decision, bad execution, and visibly nervous (as evidenced by Roger falling apart quickly afterwards and getting broken).

If Djokovic's shot placement had not been that perfect, Federer may have very well gotten a racquet on it and finished the point.

But let me try for the 100th time: if you had been able to tell Federer what to do on that 40-30 point (other than go for an ace), what do you think he should have done that would have definitively won it?