2020 French Open Final: Novak Djokovic vs. Rafael Nadal

[Front242]

Of course he will, he is a better player than Roger.
Not a very intelligent question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

38 year old Federer won 9 games in last year's RG semi and it was extremely windy. Indoors today with no wind (obviously) your supposedly better player won 7 games.

 

[Kieran]

I’m not the only one who doubt Federer or Bull would have been treated like that.
Of course after knowing what happened it would be smarter for him to play us open he would have smashed the diva and today pass Federer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He's won the US Open 4 times, you know? Beaten Novak twice there? So it would have been a good idea to go there, even if Novak hadn't gone AWOL and clobbered the line judge. I know you're not the only person who think Novak was treated unfairly by being correctly disqualified, but that only means that you're not the only person who's wrong...

 

[calitennis127]

Here's Novak supporting what you said, not. He's very honest and gracious and he gives all the credit to Rafa, who "played perfect in the first two sets." You're missing the big picture here, brother, by thinking there are other reasons than himself for why Rafa won the way he did, today...

You must have missed the part where he said he wasn’t happy with how he played in the first two sets. But, again, you are one of the only people who would somehow credit Nadal for the number 1 player in the world only making 40% of his first serves in a first set. It would be one thing if that happened in the 3rd set after two long, grueling sets with Djokovic’s legs being shot. But the first set of a Grand Slam final? And you are going to blame that on Nadal’s greatness? Please.

At any rate, Djokovic is in image-control mode after what happened at the US Open, so of course he didn’t want to come off as someone who is whining. He is being advised to say the cautious thing at every turn now.

 

[calitennis127]

Nadal now leads Djokovic

13-1 RG titles
7-1 RG h2h

And our local expert Cali is still arguing that Djokovic should have won the match and Nadal didn’t do anything special?

He served 40% in the first set. If he did anything special, it was be exceptionally poor in that regard.

 

[Kieran]

You must have missed the part where he said he wasn’t happy with how he played in the first two sets. But, again, you are one of the only people who would somehow credit Nadal for the number 1 player in the world only making 40% of his first serves in a first set. It would be one thing if that happened in the 3rd set after two long, grueling sets with Djokovic’s legs being shot. But the first set of a Grand Slam final? And you are going to blame that on Nadal’s greatness? Please.

At any rate, Djokovic is in image-control mode after what happened at the US Open, so of course he didn’t want to come off as someone who is whining. He is being advised to say the cautious thing at every turn now.

I didn't miss that bit - it came just before he acknowledged that Rafa played perfect.

To you, Rafa is the donkey coming back from the well, grunting and laden down with pails of water, eager to please pappy, sweating with his tongue lashing off the ground, sturdy and unwilling to stop, but he's actually quite a player too. Watch the highlight, if you don't have the stomach to watch the match again. He truly dominated in every area, and spilt hardly a drop of water from them overburdened pails...

 

[calitennis127]

38 year old Federer won 9 games in last year's RG semi and it was extremely windy. Indoors today with no wind (obviously) your supposedly better player won 7 games.

That speaks to how inexcusable Djokovic’s first set start was. He has played Nadal in far more difficult conditions with sun and wind and done far better than today.

I think a lot of people are missing the point here.....yes, Djokovic has had a great season, but his great all-around game has covered up the shaky serving. It finally caught up with him against Tsitsipas in the 3rd set, and regardless of what Djokovic says now, those extra 2 hours on court with Tsitsipas did not help him in starting the match well today. There is a reason all the top players talk about getting matches before the big ones over with ASAP.....that’s because it helps.

 

[calitennis127]

I didn't miss that bit - it came just before he acknowledged that Rafa played perfect.

To you, Rafa is the donkey coming back from the well, grunting and laden down with pails of water, eager to please pappy, sweating with his tongue lashing off the ground, sturdy and unwilling to stop, but he's actually quite a player too. Watch the highlight, if you don't have the stomach to watch the match again. He truly dominated in every area, and spilt hardly a drop of water from them overburdened pails...

Kieran, simple question: are you willing to acknowledge that, irrespective of Nadal’s level, Djokovic could have and should have served better than 40% in the first set, especially given his level of experience in such matches?

 

[MikeOne]

I disagree. Federer should have beaten him in both 2007 and 2011. In 2007, I think Federer failed to convert on 15 break points. In 2011, Federer was dominating Nadal for most of the first set and had set point up 5-2.

but he lost

In 2014, Djokovic won the first set and had Nadal on the ropes at the end of the second but let up.

but he lost

I agree that you have to play at a very high level but I don't think you need to be perfect. The fact is, Djokovic did not give himself a chance to get into the match today in sets 1 and 2 because his serving was so poor. Being the #1 player in the world he should do better than serve at 40% in the first set. He's not 19 years old anymore.

13-0 confirms you almost need to be perfect to play a player who has unparralled movement on clay, unparalleled combination of power/spin, a player who can destroy you if you don't redline and take a lot of risks and a player that can defend and hit winners off defensive positions.

Yes, it was the first time in the match that he was playing like he needed to. And he was in control of most of the points. But it should not have taken him 2 hours to finally get to that point.

He did not have to play that well to beat Tsitsipas or anyone else, Nadal forced him to play that well and even then, still lost the set. Had he started this well, he could've still lost like 4,5,6.. Again, i slightly favored Djokovic... I think Djokovic has the most complete game but today when i woke up and saw first set was 6-0 i was like 'geez, even i get Nadal wrong'. Nadal makes you play at such high intensity and error free risky error free tennis for 3-5 hours.. when he's at his very best. Sometimes, when is is below his best, he can be beat but in RG finals, 13-0. 13-0 cali, think about that.

Djokovic wasn't even halfway near his best in the first two sets, and the main reason for that was his low first-serve percentage. I am not asking Djokovic to be other-worldly. I am just asking him to be reasonably normal in a big match. Serving at 40% in the first set is inexcusable.

and that's why it was 0,2... Djokovic serving at 40% beats most players and even top players... not against Nadal

Some good points there, but if Nadal's offensive game was as good as you say, it wouldn't have taken him until 2010 to win the US Open. He became #2 in the world in 2005 and won his first French Open that year. The reason it took him so long after that to win his first hardcourt Slams is that his offensive game was limited on the other surfaces.

3 USOs and 2 finals, 1 AO and 3 finals, 2 Wimbledons and 3 finals. How does this compare to Del Potro, Nalbandian, Isner, Hewitt, Roddick, Wawrinka etc...? So just because Nadal has less success than Federer or Djokovic on grass and hardcourt, that's it? If so, then Nalbandian was horrible offensive player, so was roddick, so is working, so everyone else except joker and fed. Think of what you are saying... Take the 13 Fosses from Nadal and he still is a 6 slam winner...... that's better than every other player except fed, joker..... Nadal has pretty good offensive skills on grass and hardcourt but on clay, he is just crazy good because he has a bit more time to uncoil and release all that energy on his forehand. On other sufaces, it's not that he lacks the power it's that flat hitters take his time away... you need to understand this subtle difference.

Yes, I saw him get straight-setted by Djokovic at Cincinatti in 2008. He lost the first set 6-1. That was one of the matches that caused me to really sour on his offensive abilities on hardcourts.

did you also see him win Cincinatti in 13? did you also see him win the 3 USOs or AO? and have you seen him on clay, at RG? What i saw that day on philip chartrie was a beast, his opponent was helpless...

 

[Moxie]

I share your sentiments but you should be venting your frustration more on Djokovic for failing to close out Tsitsipas in 3 and serving like crap for so much of this tournament. That cost him this match.

He was barely in this match. We're talking about Djokovic. I know you're a great fantasist when it comes to rewriting results you don't like, but to lay it on Novak's serve, or to even put the words together "cost him this match" is a bit much, even for you. Maybe he was fatigued from the SF, maybe his neck and arm were actually bothering him, and he did serve really poorly in the first. But the other thing that happened to him, and the main thing, was that Rafa was playing great. He's never beaten Rafa at RG when Nadal was playing even passably well.

 

[Front242]

That speaks to how inexcusable Djokovic’s first set start was. He has played Nadal in far more difficult conditions with sun and wind and done far better than today.

I think a lot of people are missing the point here.....yes, Djokovic has had a great season, but his great all-around game has covered up the shaky serving. It finally caught up with him against Tsitsipas in the 3rd set, and regardless of what Djokovic says now, those extra 2 hours on court with Tsitsipas did not help him in starting the match well today. There is a reason all the top players talk about getting matches before the big ones over with ASAP.....that’s because it helps.

His serving in set 1 was poor admittedly but tbh with how far back Nadal stands he's returning most serves either way. I'm mostly of the opinion that Djokovic's game plan was just flat out crap. Way too many drop shots when they clearly weren't working most of the time for him and he kept on doing them and losing key points. Would he have fared better if his serving wasn't so bad? Definitely, but he was still going to lose. He tried absolutely no wide serve, approach the net to cut off the cross court return and putaway volley combos that I recall.

 

[Kieran]

Kieran, simple question: are you willing to acknowledge that, irrespective of Nadal’s level, Djokovic could have and should have served better than 40% in the first set, especially given his level of experience in such matches?

No, I'm not willing to acknowledge that. You might as well ask me, should he have played fewer drop shots. He plays as well as he could, actually. He was being bombarded and he face very swift choices and made mistakes. He was under tremendous pressure.

In set 2, he served 77% and Rafa served only 67% - what was the score of the second set?

In the third set, Novak served 74% and Rafa only 57% - what was the score of the third set?

Overall, Novak served 67% of first serves, and Rafa 65% - what was the score of the match?

You've always had the absolutely wrong way of reading stats. A player may serve 100% of first serves, and lose every service game, because his opponent outplays him.

 

[rafanoy1992]

No, I'm not willing to acknowledge that. You might as well ask me, should he have played fewer drop shots. He plays as well as he could, actually. He was being bombarded and he face very swift choices and made mistakes. He was under tremendous pressure.

In set 2, he served 77% and Rafa served only 67% - what was the score of the second set?

In the third set, Novak served 74% and Rafa only 57% - what was the score of the third set?

Overall, Novak served 67% of first serves, and Rafa 65% - what was the score of the match?

You've always had the absolutely wrong way of reading stats. A player may serve 100% of first serves, and lose every service game, because his opponent outplays him.

Welcome back, Kieran! We missed you here!

 

[Kieran]

Welcome back, Kieran! We missed you here!

Thanks buddy! Dunno how long I'll be around but I came back because I just needed to chat some tennis with old pals, and it's great to see everybody...

 

[calitennis127]

No, I'm not willing to acknowledge that. You might as well ask me, should he have played fewer drop shots. He plays as well as he could, actually. He was being bombarded and he face very swift choices and made mistakes. He was under tremendous pressure.

Right, so in other words, you think that Djokovic serving only 40% in the first set was the result of what Nadal was doing. Why don’t you just come right out and say it directly, instead of evading and ducking?

But since we have now established what your argument is (which you don’t have the courage to bluntly say on your own, leaving me to say it for you), let’s address it. I don’t doubt that Nadal came out very sharp in the first set. He certainly did. But that was all the more reason that Djokovic had to play some faster-paced service games and win some cheap points with his own serve. He did none of that.

It would be one thing if Djokovic was very young and had never been in this position before, or even never played Nadal at a major. But obviously he had done each of those things many times. Yes, Nadal was testing him, but that’s no excuse to not make 60-70% of your first serves to set the tone for the match. In that regard, Federer handles those situations better than Djokovic.

In set 2, he served 77% and Rafa served only 67% - what was the score of the second set?

Never said serving was the only factor in the match. But obviously by set 2 the cat was out of the bag and Nadal was in a rhythm. That’s why starting well was important.

In the third set, Novak served 74% and Rafa only 57% - what was the score of the third set?

5-4 Djokovic until Djokovic flopped with some unforced errors. Thanks for proving my point.

You've always had the absolutely wrong way of reading stats. A player may serve 100% of first serves, and lose every service game, because his opponent outplays him.

Then I wonder why Uncle Toni and Nadal himself place such an emphasis on high first-serve percentage. They must not have gotten the memo from you that it’s not that a big deal.

 

[calitennis127]

He was barely in this match. We're talking about Djokovic. I know you're a great fantasist when it comes to rewriting results you don't like, but to lay it on Novak's serve, or to even put the words together "cost him this match" is a bit much, even for you.

Yes, I will give Nadal credit for that: I will concede that beating him at Roland Garros while serving at 40% is very difficult (as hard as MikeOne asserts). It’s generally a good idea to serve better than that in the first set of a Roland Garros final.

He's never beaten Rafa at RG when Nadal was playing even passably well.

He was much closer to his normal self in 2015 than you will ever admit. I was the only one on this board saying that Nadal was fine while everyone else said he was finished. Who turned out being right?

Yes, the same individual who has said repeatedly that age is less important than talent and that the Big 3 would be able to carry their success into their 30’s.

Let’s not forget that since you were ecstatic about Tsitsipas beating Djokovic in Shanghai supposedly because he was “younger,” Djokovic is now 3-0 against him, with each win being in straights except one that should have been in straights too.

 

[imjimmy]

It's GREAT to see Kieran and MikeOne and so many other old posters back.

Maybe the best display of tennis by Rafa I Ever seen..Even better than his RG 08 defeat of the great Federer..

Nobody could have lived with Old Ralph today - not even Young Ralph, and that's the highest compliment I can pay him...

As much as I admire all the posts here, I have to take issue with the above. RG 2008 Nadal was a different beast. I have many of his RG matches archived and watched them during the downtime. There is NOT even a comparison. For instance between RG 2008 SF for Nadal vs Djokovic and RG 2020 Final.

What is impressive about today's match is how Nadal managed to raise his level in the final. But again Novak was not at his best, and Nadal/Novak have produced better level of tennis in Roland Garros before. Nadal could have likely gone even higher if Novak had pushed him more. We are all guilty of a recency bias, but even a casual watch of Nadal in RG 2008 would plainly show the difference in tennis quality.

 

[imjimmy]

Djokovic’s poor serving had something to do with the outcome today. Actually, it also cost Djokovic a 3-set win on Friday as well. It wasn’t all about Nadal.

There are 2 sides to every coin. Yes, Novak mugged up and did not beat Stefanos in straight sets. But the Greek played CRAP in the first 2 sets. His breakpoint conversion was 0 off 11. He himself admitted in the post match presser than in the beginning he was trying to be conservative and it took him more than 2 sets to figure out that wasn't the right strategy vs Novak. Once he let his tennis flow - he was able to make a match out it until he ran out of gas. Another inexcusable thing when you are panting vs a guy who is 11 years older to you.

And that's the story of Tsitsipas' career. Lot of talent - lot of options - but does NOT have a clear game plan. The father son coaching duo doesn't work. He needs more guidance and strategy to get to the next level. Anyway, just as Novak could have won the match in straights, so too could Stefanos have made this a more competitive match by not playing brainless tennis for half of the match.

 

[Kieran]

Right, so in other words, you think that Djokovic serving only 40% in the first set was the result of what Nadal was doing. Why don’t you just come right out and say it directly, instead of evading and ducking?

Now, buddy, you might as well dream here as in bed. I said Novak was under immense pressure because of what Rafa was doing. How he served was up to him, he was trying his best. But see, I already established - by looking at sets 2 and 3, and the overall % of first serves each man got in for the match, that the 40% myth you're creating is nonsense. In the first set, he may have served at 77% (like he did in set 2) or 74% (set 3) and he'd still have lost heavily.

In fact, if we look closely, Novak served better in set 2 than he served in set 3, but he played better in set 3. Scratch me blimmin' head. What the blazes, how could that ever be? Surely first serve % is all that counts, gubnor?

It would be one thing if Djokovic was very young and had never been in this position before, or even never played Nadal at a major. But obviously he had done each of those things many times. Yes, Nadal was testing him, but that’s no excuse to not make 60-70% of your first serves to set the tone for the match. In that regard, Federer handles those situations better than Djokovic.

You do understand tennis scoring, no? After you lose the first set, you begin again at zero in the second set. So you kind of demolished your own argument here, because although he served at 77% in set 2, it only got him 2 games in that set, where he was similarly outplayed to the first set. Don't go blaming his loss in set 2 on his poor serving in set one. That's not how this game happens. From the very beginning of the match, "the cat was out of the bag and Nadal was in a rhythm". That's why Novak was shellshocked.

You want it to be about Novak and his lousy first serve % in the first set, and you ask, shouldn't an experienced player do better than that. Then, in sets 2 and 3 he does better than that, and you say, too late! Cali has proven his point! Only the stats Cali shall quote matter! All the stats that contradict Cali are wrong!

 

[calitennis127]

There are 2 sides to every coin. Yes, Novak mugged up and did not beat Stefanos in straight sets. But the Greek played CRAP in the first 2 sets. His breakpoint conversion was 0 off 11.

Did you read this Kieran? Thank you, imjimmy, for reinforcing my point that Djokovic has not been serving well of late and his 40% mark in the first set wasn’t solely about Nadal’s awesomeness, as Kieran’s narcissistic Nadal-centered perspective would have us believe.

You are right, imjimmy, that Djokovic has been routinely shaky on serve lately against opponents other than Nadal.

 

[imjimmy]

The one thing you can never take away from Nadal is that he maximizes his opportunities. He always brings his best and that is more than can be said of almost everyone.

So Djokovic does NOT maximize his opportunities? Have you seen the stats? He's dominated tennis for decade after 2011.
He's beaten Nadal and Fed in most of the important slam finals in this decade. Djokovic is 4-1 vs Federer in slam finals with the loss being in his early days. He's also beaten Nadal everywhere except at RG and in slam finals too. After his hiatus in 2017, Novak won Wimb 2018, UsOpen 2018, Australian Open 2019, Wimbledon 2019 and AO 2020.
Djokovic looked down and out vs Federer in Wimb 2019 - but won the match. Ditto vs Thiem in AO 2020.
He was 37-1 before the RG final with the only loss being disqualification.

Why is it that you always project as Nadal maximizing his opportunities. You don't think Djokovic and Federer do? How did they get to 20 and 17 slams plus all the weeks at #1? All of these top guys are great at maximizing their opportunities. It's a great slam race, let's just sit back and enjoy it.