Dubai Championship ATP 500

[brokenshoelace]

Exactly. Nole is not going to jeopardise next weekend's DC tie, he already fell awkwardly in his semi final. He always looks at the big picture. If he wins 3 other big tournaments and loses every other, I would be OK with that.

Nole is already in Belgrade with his family and is going to Kraljevo tomorrow where they will start preparing for the DC tie vs Croatia.

Nadal fans are such excuse makers.

You are right, they are. I am just saying that this loss doesn't mean that much to Nole in the big picture, that's all. And he wasn't very upset. That might be subjective, I agree, but that is how I felt after seeing the match. Federer was better in crucial moments yesterday, but we've seen Nole save 4 match points against him in bigger tournaments. I just didn't feel like he gave it his all yesterday. But I might be completely wrong, I will admit to that.

I also don't think losing in the finals of a 500 tournament means much to an 8 time Grand Slam champion who's looking at bigger and greater things. But that does not mean he didn't try hard, or hard enough.

 

[Front242]

You can bet he was trying his best to make it 19-18 instead of 20-17 and to say otherwise is just delusional.

 

[Fiero425]

You can bet he was trying his best to make it 19-18 instead of 20-17 and to say otherwise is just delusional.

:cover :nono uzzled :angel: I can't believe this debate! It's so selective! Much is made about Federer and his many wins over Nole, but what about Nadal and his dominance over Roger? If you didn't look at the cold, hard record, most think Roger owned him as well; nothing could be further from the truth which is why some are making more of a big deal of Roger holding his own against NOLE who's the current #1! :cover :nono uzzled I prefer to think this is a GOLDEN AGE in tennis and we've all been fortunate to see history made with all 3 of these great players! They're showing dominance I didn't think quite possible until recently! Doesn't say much about the rest of the tour's players to allow these 3 to dominate so supremely; almost incredible if 1 of them doesn't take all titles! :eyepop :blush:

 

[Federberg]

^I don't think anyone is trying to make a big deal about this result. There's a Novak fan on here who is suggesting Novak didn't care about the result because of a DC tie. Utter garbage..

 

[brokenshoelace]

You can bet he was trying his best to make it 19-18 instead of 20-17 and to say otherwise is just delusional.

:cover :nono uzzled :angel: I can't believe this debate! It's so selective! Much is made about Federer and his many wins over Nole, but what about Nadal and his dominance over Roger?

Uhhh, much is made of Nadal's dominance over Roger too. We have like, weekly debates about that around these parts.

 

[Front242]

Of course there's no big deal about it as it's just a 500 event, however you can be sure the current world number 1 with a losing record to an old man would like to have won and reduced the deficit in the h2h so to say he didn't try very hard is plain dense to put it mildly. They play for titles, domination, fame and having winning records over their rivals and that means you obviously try to win every final you play.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

mr action man hairdo was wasted in straights..and he hates it.

all that smug guff about djokovic winning bwahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

 

[Billie]

Agreed. It has always been an uphill battle for Nole against Roger on fast surfaces. He's managed to barely scrape out 3 wins at majors on them otherwise the H2H would be ugly and both player's resume could be way different. I wouldn't favor Nole on grass against Roger at this point but he's certainly the favorite at the other 3 slams including the USO.

I wonder how Nole managed to beat Roger 17 times. Must have been all in Australia or some really slow surfaces.:snicker

Interesting, this made me review their head to head:

Djokovic's wins:

1st win: Montreal. Medium hard court.
2nd win: Australian Open. Medium hard court.
3rd win: Miami. Slow hard court.
4th win: Rome. Clay.
5th win: Basel. Fast indoor hard court.
6th win: US Open. Fast hard court.
7th win: Australian Open. Medium hard court.
8th win: Dubai. Fast hard court.
9th win: Indian Wells. Slow hard court.
10th win: US Open. Fast hard court.
11th win: Rome. Clay.
12th win: French Open. Clay
13th win: World Tour Finals. Slow indoor hard courts.
14th win: Paris. Fast indoor hard courts.
15th win: World Tour Finals. Slow indoor hard courts.
16th win: Indian Wells. Slow hard courts.
17th win: Wimbledon. Grass (fast, obviously).

Out of Djokovic's 17 wins, 6 were on fast surfaces. Out of those 6, three were extremely close 5 setters in which he had to save match-points in two of them (the two US Open matches), and a virtual match point in the Wimbledon final (a break point that would have allowed Roger to serve for the match). So in at least three of those 6 wins (and I'm not counting 2 wins that went to three sets in a best of 3 match), Djokovic indeed faced an uphill battle.

By contrast, out of Roger's 20 victories over Djokovic, 13 came on fast surfaces. I mean, that stats tells you all you need to know.

Darth's assessment was extremely fair. No need to get defensive.

Out of those 13 victories on fast hard courts how many were 2011 to now? 5? If it is 1 a year, I would consider that a remarkable achievement. We are talking about Roger Federer here after all.

I am sorry I don't have a simplistic view on tennis like some here, while Roger might have a slight edge on very fast courts, that is so minimal now, compared to what it used to be before 2011 that I don't even consider it that relevant. That is just my opinion.

Just so I am perfectly clear and there is no confusion, each guy winning their matches absolutely deserved it. When it comes to matches between these two, most of the time it comes down to who is able to assert himself in the most crucial moments in a match, or who has a metal edge if you'd like, not some sort of magical tennis supremacy.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

djokovic lost because he was having a bad hair day.

if only he had his 2011 hairdo on then he woulda coulda shoulda won.

 

[Billie]

You can bet he was trying his best to make it 19-18 instead of 20-17 and to say otherwise is just delusional.

Ha ha.....well from some of these posts it is clear who has problems with H2H records. I am very confident that Nole will better it against his rivals, if they show up for every tournament and make it to face him regularly. Call me crazy, but I think Nole would have had a big chance at adding 1 more victory in London at the WTF but alas, it didn't happen.

You should worry about his h2h vs Nadal, frankly the excuse "it is a match up issue" is just plain and simple cop out. He lost to him even on surfaces he had no business losing. :nono

 

[Billie]

djokovic lost because he was having a bad hair day.

if only he had his 2011 hairdo on then he woulda coulda shoulda won.

He lost, at the end of the day that is the outcome. Surely he would have liked to add another title to his resume, but I don't think he will lose sleep over it.

Forget about Nole, I won't be losing sleep over it

 

[Billie]

^I don't think anyone is trying to make a big deal about this result. There's a Novak fan on here who is suggesting Novak didn't care about the result because of a DC tie. Utter garbage..

Don't misinterpret my words. I just said he didn't give his all. That's all. Surely he would have like to win here, everybody wants to win, I never said he didn't care. I just said that it didn't seem like he was upset at losing here and frankly I didn't see a big fight in him like he shows in the big matches.

BTW, Marian Vajda gave an interview to the Serbian media in 2010 after the DC win. He said that they had a hard time of focussing Nole on Paris and WTF that year. He really sucked there and it turns out that he was saving himself for DC. Look at Federer, he didn't even show up to play the finals last year, all because of DC. It is not easy to manipulate and go through the whole season full throttle. I thought that should be clear by now.uzzled

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

^I don't think anyone is trying to make a big deal about this result. There's a Novak fan on here who is suggesting Novak didn't care about the result because of a DC tie. Utter garbage..

Don't misinterpret my words. I just said he didn't give his all. That's all. Surely he would have like to win here, everybody wants to win, I never said he didn't care. I just said that it didn't seem like he was upset at losing here and frankly I didn't see a big fight in him like he shows in the big matches.

BTW, Marian Vajda gave an interview to the Serbian media in 2010 after the DC win. He said that they had a hard time of focussing Nole on Paris and WTF that year. He really sucked there and it turns out that he was saving himself for DC. Look at Federer, he didn't even show up to play the finals last year, all because of DC. It is not easy to manipulate and go through the whole season full throttle. I thought that should be clear by now.uzzled

loads of big matches he didn't seem upset or put up a big fight. nothing new yeaterday.

 

[Billie]

^I don't think anyone is trying to make a big deal about this result. There's a Novak fan on here who is suggesting Novak didn't care about the result because of a DC tie. Utter garbage..

Don't misinterpret my words. I just said he didn't give his all. That's all. Surely he would have like to win here, everybody wants to win, I never said he didn't care. I just said that it didn't seem like he was upset at losing here and frankly I didn't see a big fight in him like he shows in the big matches.

BTW, Marian Vajda gave an interview to the Serbian media in 2010 after the DC win. He said that they had a hard time of focussing Nole on Paris and WTF that year. He really sucked there and it turns out that he was saving himself for DC. Look at Federer, he didn't even show up to play the finals last year, all because of DC. It is not easy to manipulate and go through the whole season full throttle. I thought that should be clear by now.uzzled

loads of big matches he didn't seem upset or put up a big fight. nothing new yeaterday.

Exactly, because there is always the next opportunity of winning another match, another tournament. When you don't have it on a certain day, you don't have it. No need to force things like some other players and get injured all the time. I surely would like to see a player who goes all out every single match of his career. Everybody has a survival mode, it might differ from player to player, but ultimately everybody has it.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Out of those 13 victories on fast hard courts how many were 2011 to now? 5? If it is 1 a year, I would consider that a remarkable achievement. We are talking about Roger Federer here after all.

Oh, so we put more value on the matches played from 2011 and after because that's when Novak improved but also ignore that that's when Federer hit father time. Makes perfect sense.

I am sorry I don't have a simplistic view on tennis like some here

No, you're right, you really don't, especially in light of the above narrow minded/double-standard filled argument.

Actually your views are quite simple/simplistic:

Is it about Novak? If yes, go into defense/praise mode.

 

[Federberg]

^I don't think anyone is trying to make a big deal about this result. There's a Novak fan on here who is suggesting Novak didn't care about the result because of a DC tie. Utter garbage..

Don't misinterpret my words. I just said he didn't give his all. That's all. Surely he would have like to win here, everybody wants to win, I never said he didn't care. I just said that it didn't seem like he was upset at losing here and frankly I didn't see a big fight in him like he shows in the big matches.

BTW, Marian Vajda gave an interview to the Serbian media in 2010 after the DC win. He said that they had a hard time of focussing Nole on Paris and WTF that year. He really sucked there and it turns out that he was saving himself for DC. Look at Federer, he didn't even show up to play the finals last year, all because of DC. It is not easy to manipulate and go through the whole season full throttle. I thought that should be clear by now.uzzled

I repeat... garbage. It's one thing to focus on DC when you're facing a semi or final. Don't bring that up as an excuse here, it simple doesn't wash. Nor does the idea that he didn't give his all. These guys are winners, they're not like you or me. Winning is a part of their dna. Yes we can all agree that he can move from this easily, but don't conflate that with not making an effort. Frankly it's a bit sad that your ego is so closely tied up with the success or lack of.. of the player you support :blush:

 

[DarthFed]

It's another title for Fed and well earned but I wouldn't read too much into the result. Not much has changed. I'd still favour Novak to win the 5 setters at majors, still favour Novak on clay, slow hardcourts... The match was decided on a handful of key points as is often the case when these two draw swords.

Fed's net game has definitely improved over the last 18 months though - as Murat said, that's going to be a large component of his game from here on in.

Agreed. It has always been an uphill battle for Nole against Roger on fast surfaces. He's managed to barely scrape out 3 wins at majors on them otherwise the H2H would be ugly and both player's resume could be way different. I wouldn't favor Nole on grass against Roger at this point but he's certainly the favorite at the other 3 slams including the USO.

I wonder how Nole managed to beat Roger 17 times. Must have been all in Australia or some really slow surfaces.:snicker Even when he was younger and half the player he is now, he managed to get to semis where he would routinely lose to Federer and Nadal, especially on their favourite surfaces. He had a long way to go, but he is closing the gap. Too bad they can't make all the semis everywhere now as the H2H would have probably been different. But as it stands, Nole is doing just fine against the two of them.

I didn't mean to sound harsh with the above post, just how I see it. In this matchup Nole has the clear edge on slower courts so it is an uphill battle for Roger there. On fast courts, even 2011 and after, it is a struggle for Novak vs. Roger.

He's done well to beat Roger 2 times at the USO and once at Wimbledon. From Roger's perspective those USO losses are among the worst of his career as they featured complete meltdowns and at Wimbledon last year, going on age 33, he damn near beat Novak playing the best we've ever seen him play on grass.

 

[Billie]

Agreed. It has always been an uphill battle for Nole against Roger on fast surfaces. He's managed to barely scrape out 3 wins at majors on them otherwise the H2H would be ugly and both player's resume could be way different. I wouldn't favor Nole on grass against Roger at this point but he's certainly the favorite at the other 3 slams including the USO.

I wonder how Nole managed to beat Roger 17 times. Must have been all in Australia or some really slow surfaces.:snicker Even when he was younger and half the player he is now, he managed to get to semis where he would routinely lose to Federer and Nadal, especially on their favourite surfaces. He had a long way to go, but he is closing the gap. Too bad they can't make all the semis everywhere now as the H2H would have probably been different. But as it stands, Nole is doing just fine against the two of them.

I didn't mean to sound harsh with the above post, just how I see it. In this matchup Nole has the clear edge on slower courts so it is an uphill battle for Roger there. On fast courts, even 2011 and after, it is a struggle for Novak vs. Roger.

He's done well to beat Roger 2 times at the USO and once at Wimbledon. From Roger's perspective those USO losses are among the worst of his career as they featured complete meltdowns and at Wimbledon last year, going on age 33, he damn near beat Novak playing the best we've ever seen him play on grass.

I didn't think you needed an attorney to counter my post.

Darth, I can handle different opinions, I know everybody is different, but when other posters start getting personal, I lose any interest in proceeding, just for that reason, not that I get offended. From that moment on I ignore them.

Frankly a lot of everybody's posts were proved wrong so many times before, including mine and "the experts". I never mean any disrespect nor I get personal (very rarely and only when provoked). I give credit to all players and think they do the best they can in any single match. I guess my fault is that I have a slightly higher opinion of Nole than some here, I admit I am guilty of that.

As far as tennis goes, I'll give you that there are certain advantages for some players at some surfaces, but honestly those are really minor that I don't consider that something major and the deciding factor.

Can you explain and tell me the status of Roger and Nole at MC, for example? Roger beat him twice (at least) yet Nole won a title beating Rafa in the final to boot. So who is better there? How about those slow courts in Australia? In 2009 and 2010 Nole did much worse at his best major, yet did better in NY during those years. Let's look at Roger's record in AO and USO from 2010 until this year (not including this year): he did much better in Melbourne than in NY every single year. Heck he even did better in Paris than NY during these years. How do you explain that?

I am sorry that I don't get upset about Nole's losses, it doesn't mean disrespect to other players who beat them, I just think these days it is very hard to go full speed all the time. My guy won 2 of the last 3 majors played, I should be upset about a Dubai loss? And I just don't get the whole H2H conversation, isn't it logical that when Federer was better and in prime he was winning more matches over Nole and now Nole wins more against him when Nole is in physical prime? But anybody can beat anybody on any given day, didn't we learn that already? What's delusional about that?

If they want me to say that Roger is always better, on all surfaces at all times, then sorry I won't say that because I don't think it is true, not because of some ego.:lolz: But I understand that some think that way and I won't call them any other names except his fans.

 

[DarthFed]

I wonder how Nole managed to beat Roger 17 times. Must have been all in Australia or some really slow surfaces.:snicker Even when he was younger and half the player he is now, he managed to get to semis where he would routinely lose to Federer and Nadal, especially on their favourite surfaces. He had a long way to go, but he is closing the gap. Too bad they can't make all the semis everywhere now as the H2H would have probably been different. But as it stands, Nole is doing just fine against the two of them.

I didn't mean to sound harsh with the above post, just how I see it. In this matchup Nole has the clear edge on slower courts so it is an uphill battle for Roger there. On fast courts, even 2011 and after, it is a struggle for Novak vs. Roger.

He's done well to beat Roger 2 times at the USO and once at Wimbledon. From Roger's perspective those USO losses are among the worst of his career as they featured complete meltdowns and at Wimbledon last year, going on age 33, he damn near beat Novak playing the best we've ever seen him play on grass.

I didn't think you needed an attorney to counter my post.

Darth, I can handle different opinions, I know everybody is different, but when other posters start getting personal, I lose any interest in proceeding, just for that reason, not that I get offended. From that moment on I ignore them.

Frankly a lot of everybody's posts were proved wrong so many times before, including mine and "the experts". I never mean any disrespect nor I get personal (very rarely and only when provoked). I give credit to all players and think they do the best they can in any single match. I guess my fault is that I have a slightly higher opinion of Nole than some here, I admit I am guilty of that.

As far as tennis goes, I'll give you that there are certain advantages for some players at some surfaces, but honestly those are really minor that I don't consider that something major and the deciding factor.

Can you explain and tell me the status of Roger and Nole at MC, for example? Roger beat him twice (at least) yet Nole won a title beating Rafa in the final to boot. So who is better there? How about those slow courts in Australia? In 2009 and 2010 Nole did much worse at his best major, yet did better in NY during those years. Let's look at Roger's record in AO and USO from 2010 until this year (not including this year): he did much better in Melbourne than in NY every single year. Heck he even did better in Paris than NY during these years. How do you explain that?

I am sorry that I don't get upset about Nole's losses, it doesn't mean disrespect to other players who beat them, I just think these days it is very hard to go full speed all the time. My guy won 2 of the last 3 majors played, I should be upset about a Dubai loss? And I just don't get the whole H2H conversation, isn't it logical that when Federer was better and in prime he was winning more matches over Nole and now Nole wins more against him when Nole is in physical prime? But anybody can beat anybody on any given day, didn't we learn that already? What's delusional about that?

If they want me to say that Roger is always better, on all surfaces at all times, then sorry I won't say that because I don't think it is true, not because of some ego.:lolz: But I understand that some think that way and I won't call them any other names except his fans.

I know what you're saying; guys like Roger, Nole and Rafa can play fantastic on all surfaces and have many times in the past. But to me surface matters...a lot. Roger doing better at AO than USO the past 5 years is just a statistical anomaly. Now and for however long Roger plays he has a better chance at USO than AO, doesn't mean the results will play to that of course. Similarly in this head to head matchup Roger has a much better chance at places like Cincy, Dubai, Winbledon than he does at AO, Miami, the clay courts, etc.

 

[Billie]

I don't know Darth, you forgot that Roger beat Nole in MC last year, yet lost in the Wimbledon final (that should have ended in 4 save for Nole's nerves and Roger's extreme fight-back). I wouldn't be surprised at seeing any one of these great players win anywhere, including Roger's win over Rafa on clay, no matter how crazy that sounds to some. When it's their day, they can play well anywhere really. The only question mark is Roland Garros, until proven otherwise, Rafa is still the king there.