How will Djokovic perform against the young generation in 2023?

[Front242]

We both know that Best of 5 and best of 3 are very different...best of 5 favoring the top player. We also know the difference between a player at 27 and a player at 35. The comparison means essentially nothing, and you know that.

What age was Federer when he lost to Nadal at the AO 2009 and what age was he when he beat Nadal at the AO 2017?

 

[Moxie]

Moxie, his back wasnt 100% before he started the final to be fair, he went off the court quickly when practicing his serve

It doesn't matter and is beside the point. Point is, healthy, Rafa had a solid chance of winning that final.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

It doesn't matter and is beside the point. Point is, healthy, Rafa had a solid chance of winning that final.

Of course he had a chance of winning the final, healthy,I am just looking for the link, which stated Rafa did strain his back in the warm up and it got worse as his match progressed in the final against Stan, as I was there in person watching him warm up

 

[Moxie]

What age was Federer when he lost to Nadal at the AO 2009 and what age was he when he beat Nadal at the AO 2017?

Well, at least that's an apples to apples comparison, or closer, isn't it? But we're talking about 2 long-term warriors v. each other, and both with extreme numbers of Majors. The comparison to a young Nadal v. a less young first-timer Wawrinka is vastly different. And the more germane comparison is the one I make to Medvedev in last year's AO final, a much older Nadal, a much younger opponent, who wasn't even a first timer, and also was already a Major winner. Point is that Nadal withstood the onslaught from Medvedev, even at 35, and beat him. There is every chance he'd have gotten past the initial flurry from Wawrinka, if his back had held up. That's a decent comparison, which you ignore.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Of course he had a chance of winning the final, healthy,I am just looking for the link, which stated Rafa did strain his back in the warm up and it got worse as his match progressed in the final against Stan, as I was there in person watching him warm up

This is from Matt Cronin from Tennis.Com. on January 26th 2014..,

Rafael Nadal says he suffered a back injury during his warm up for the AO final that gradually grew worse throughout the four set loss to Wawrinka.Nadal took a medical time out at the start of the 2nd set. He returned to play, but could not move quickly and his service speed dropped measurably.

 

[Moxie]

This is from Matt Cronin from Tennis.Com. on January 26th 2014..,

Rafael Nadal says he suffered a back injury during his warm up for the AO final that gradually grew worse throughout the four set loss to Wawrinka.Nadal took a medical time out at the start of the 2nd set. He returned to play, but could not move quickly and his service speed dropped measurably.

You miss the point. It's not when he hurt his back but that he did. Better to leave the point to the doubters as to when they could see it happen, and they DID see it...we watched on the live chat. Point is whether or not, if uninjured, Rafa had a serious chance of winning that match, and I believe he did.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

You miss the point. It's not when he hurt his back but that he did. Better to leave the point to the doubters as to when they could see it happen, and they DID see it...we watched on the live chat. Point is whether or not, if uninjured, Rafa had a serious chance of winning that match, and I believe he did.

I agree Rafa did have a good chance of winning the match, if you remember in that year of the AO Rafa played well to get to the final., Wawrinka had never take a set off Rafa in their 12 previous meetings, it was unfortunate what happened,to Rafa, the AO has not been good for him injury wise, sad to say.

 

[Moxie]

I agree Rafa did have a good chance of winning the match, if you remember in that year of the AO Rafa played well to get to the final., it was unfortunate what happened,to Rafa, the AO has not been good for him injury wise, sad to say.

Definitely he did. It was a shame. At least it could have been a fair fight. My point is more to the one that El Dude is making, and that Kieran was debating with him, especially, which is whether it is such a sure thing that Novak would have been #1 but for geo-politics, vs. Rafa getting another Major or two, if not for injury. The Dude calls the latter much less likely, and my point is that the AO final of 2014 is at least one example of you merely need to change one thing for Rafa to have had a MUCH better chance of winning at least one more Major, but for injury. And this injury we all agree upon, because we saw it. It's not as far-fetched as El Dude claims, and not nearly so much would have had to change. Is my point.

 

[Kieran]

Looked terribly injured alright up to 0-2 in set 2.

Would you be able to tell the difference? And why would he suddenly freeze up and say he was injured at that particular stage in the match?

 

[Front242]

Well, at least that's an apples to apples comparison, or closer, isn't it? But we're talking about 2 long-term warriors v. each other, and both with extreme numbers of Majors. The comparison to a young Nadal v. a less young first-timer Wawrinka is vastly different. And the more germane comparison is the one I make to Medvedev in last year's AO final, a much older Nadal, a much younger opponent, who wasn't even a first timer, and also was already a Major winner. Point is that Nadal withstood the onslaught from Medvedev, even at 35, and beat him. There is every chance he'd have gotten past the initial flurry from Wawrinka, if his back had held up. That's a decent comparison, which you ignore.

If it was so black and white with sports then bettors would all be rich but it's not. No one can possibly say he'd have beaten Wawrinka and we all know the AO win against Medvedev was a massive choke by Medvedev and not some 35 year old warrior comeback.

 

[Front242]

Would you be able to tell the difference? And why would he suddenly freeze up and say he was injured at that particular stage in the match?

He hunched over at 2-0 down in set 2 and began serving much slower and by set 3 wasn't running after much at all. Till then he looked fine.

 

[Kieran]

He hunched over at 2-0 down in set 2 and began serving much slower and by set 3 wasn't running after much at all. Till then he looked fine.

So you agree he was injured?

 

[Moxie]

If it was so black and white with sports then bettors would all be rich but it's not. No one can possibly say he'd have beaten Wawrinka

Did I say it was black-and-white? I have never ever said he "would" have won that match. Be fair. What I've always said is that, had Rafa not gotten injured, he was well-favored to win it, and signs tell us that there was a good chance he would have. You're not blind to trends, as a betting man

. and we all know the AO win against Medvedev was a massive choke by Medvedev and not some 35 year old warrior comeback.

I'm guessing you watched that match, then. No one denies that Medvedev was pretty untouchable in the first set. But you can't pretend that he served or played at that level for the other 4. If you're being completely fair, you'd admit that the one who choked the 2nd set was Nadal, having break leads and mini-break leads, and blowing them. It's a set Nadal should have won, which would have evened the match. He served for that set at 5-3, and he held 5-3 in the TB. THAT is a choke. I don't think Medevdev much led for the rest of the match, only that he stayed close and held his own, even breaking back in the 5th. But that's not what anyone would call a "massive choke" on Medvedev's part. You wish he would have won one more set, but it isn't like he really led, going forward. He had one moment in the 3rd when he might have had a break to lead midway through the 3rd, but there's no guarantee he wouldn't have gotten broken back, since he had been so many times by Rafa, on the day, and before.

My point being, given Nadal's competitiveness, and history, had he not broken his back, tell me what percentage chance Wawrinka had at beating him on that day. Less than 50% for sure. Nadal was a much younger man, and Wawrinka was at least as delicate, mentally, as Medvedev.

 

[Fiero425]

So you agree he was injured?

Wow; so pathetic! Whenever Nadal's in a match, & he's not playing great, running down every shot, & hitting spectacular winners, he's injured!

 

[Moxie]

Wow; so pathetic! Whenever Nadal's in a match, & he's not playing great, running down every shot, & hitting spectacular winners, he's injured!

If you saw that match, everyone agrees he got injured. Even Front.

 

[Fiero425]

#If you saw that match, everyone agrees he got injured. Even Front.

But who TF cares? This is just part of Nadal's MO! It's 1 of the many reasons I've disliked him from the very beginning of his career! He's an A-#ole!

 

[Moxie]

But who TF cares? This is just part of Nadal's MO! It's 1 of the many reasons I've disliked him from the very beginning of his career! He's an A-#ole!

You have a serious empathy gap for player injuries. You still blame Murray for his. Does it really make them an a-hole, or is it part of their "MO" to get hurt? Is del Potro a jerk for his inability to play healthy? Let's face it, you don't like Nadal or Murray, and any excuse to slag them and you're in there...even things they cannot control.

 

[Fiero425]

You have a serious empathy gap for player injuries. You still blame Murray for his. Does it really make them a-holes, or is it part of their "MO" to get hurt? Is del Potro a jerk for his inability to play healthy? Let's face it, you don't like Nadal or Murray, and any excuse to slag them and you're in there...even things they cannot control.

It's just an overall farce TALKING about Nadal's injuries year in and year out! There's no shame in players who are seriously hampered with injuries like a Haas or Del Po, but when it concerns Nadal it's seems more of an excuse if he loses a match! His opponents are given little to no credit many times! Nadal says 'he's not injured, but a player w/ an injury!' WTF does that mean? I understand his foot defect, but if he's running like a deer, I don't ever want to hear about his defect after a loss! When you play as hard as Nadal has to as he continues playing a game of attrition, he's only breaking himself down and I just say "cry me a river!" Novak works hard to keep in tip top shape, but the few times he is injured, it's overlooked! The hypocrisy can be mind blowing at times on this site and others! Nadal has a record 22 majors, of which 14 are FO's! At times I find him to be a total drama queen out there; esp. when it seemed he would retire from that Fritz match at Wimbledon! I've heard the same about Novak from his detractors, assuming he's running game on his opponent! Heaven knows I think the same of Rafa! All top players have stolen a few matches w/ tactics you'd think would be below the dignity of a top flight player! Too much fame and fortune to be made! It's all out warfare and I doubt a true friendship w/the Big 3! Novak's jealous of Fedal Fandom and Fedal can't stand that Djokovic has taken over just about every meaniningful record on the books w/ no chance of them preventing the records to be extended! I have this thing with underdogs! I felt the same way about Lendl when he had to contend w/ the elites of his time, BORG, McEnroe, & Connors! He had just as much to overcome as Novak and I marvel w/ the similarities as they stole the show at the end of their respective careers; sans Borg of course!

 

[Nadalfan2013]

After watching Djokovic lose 5 games to has-been pusher Lestienne today, I am sad to say that his decline this year will be worse than I initially had thought. Oh dear...

 

[Front242]

So you agree he was injured?

Yeah of course that's what I said above but nothing indicating restricted movement before 2-0 in set 2.