Novak Djokovic Hiatus

[Moxie]

I think we've seen plenty of that for one lifetime.

I'm surprised if you mean that. You'd prefer never to see Roger and Rafa play each other again?

 

[Andy22]

I think we've seen plenty of that for one lifetime.

You can never get enough of nadal vs. Federer man.

 

[El Dude]

I'm surprised if you mean that. You'd prefer never to see Roger and Rafa play each other again?

My humor doesn't translate to text all that well. I was responding to his phrase "great Nadal" - partially being facetious because the version of Rafa that Roger faced last year wasn't able to bring his greatness forward as much. But also self-deprecatingly butthurt, because Rafa owns Roger on the dirt, and not really wanting to see that reclaimed. On the other hand, I'm not entirely sure Rafa would beat Roger now, even on clay.

 

[Moxie]

My humor doesn't translate to text all that well. I was responding to his phrase "great Nadal" - partially being facetious because the version of Rafa that Roger faced last year wasn't able to bring his greatness forward as much. But also self-deprecatingly butthurt, because Rafa owns Roger on the dirt, and not really wanting to see that reclaimed. On the other hand, I'm not entirely sure Rafa would beat Roger now, even on clay.

OK, I guess I get the joke. I'm amused by the Fed fans' sudden resurgence of faith, though. On clay? Good luck with that. Suddenly an attacking game and a more confident bh is going to beat Rafa at RG? Only if he's gimpy, let's be honest. I actually do think Rafa will also beat Roger at the USO, should that happen.

 

[El Dude]

We shall see, Moxie.

You know, I didn't realize what a Fedal Warrior you were until lately!

 

[Moxie]

We shall see, Moxie.

You know, I didn't realize what a Fedal Warrior you were until lately!

That's funny. I've always been a big Rafa fan. I think you're noticing because there's such a Roger contingent here, and Fed fans are gaming for the absolute GOAT-ness. It's a bit rabid, atm. And who is left to defend the Nadal side? Me and a fanboy. Plus, seriously, when Darth calls my favorite an "asshole" and various other derogatory terms, what am I to do, but stand and fight? @brokenshoelace - absent; Kieran - absent; AntiPusher - absent; even @Carol - absent. And all the Djokovic fans are absent, too. You can have a Fed Love Fest, or you get me, to mix it up, amongst the reasonable people. Call me a Fedal Warrior, if you like. Or a dedicated Nadal fan. But also a tennis fan.

 

[El Dude]

I know you are tennis fan, Moxie, and you love Rafa. I was merely remarking that you are more...vociferous than I remembered (By "Fedal Warrior" I mean someone who is actively interested in constantly waging war with the "opposition"). Maybe you feel you need to wave the flag more strongly, or are more defensive because the the APs and Carols aren't around much these days.

But yeah, Darth...come on, boy. At least be creative and accurate. Is Rafa really an "asshole?"

 

[Moxie]

I know you are tennis fan, Moxie, and you love Rafa. I was merely remarking that you are more...vociferous than I remembered (By "Fedal Warrior" I mean someone who is actively interested in constantly waging war with the "opposition"). Maybe you feel you need to wave the flag more strongly, or are more defensive because the the APs and Carols aren't around much these days.

But yeah, Darth...come on, boy. At least be creative and accurate. Is Rafa really an "asshole?"

Please don't urge Darth on to be creative with his denigrating adjectives. He'll surely take the bait, and, tbh, "asshole" is his least creative, already.

You're right. I do feel like I need to hold up the standard in opposition. Otherwise the ATP forums would be falling into a puddle of drool over Roger atm. That would be unsightly and frankly, boring. (The Tennis Channel commentators are hard enough to take.) I do it in the spirit of fun, and keeping the debate lively. I hope everyone knows that. I was sure you all did. There is nothing better for tennis or for a tennis forum than a good old Fedal War.

 

[El Dude]

I agree with most of that except the "good old Fedal War" part. I tend to find them tedious, at least 90% of the time. 10% of the time I'll roll up my sleeves and dive in.

 

[Moxie]

I agree with most of that except the "good old Fedal War" part. I tend to find them tedious, at least 90% of the time. 10% of the time I'll roll up my sleeves and dive in.

I guess that's a matter of taste and interest. But you do understand that they're considered the greatest rivalry in men's tennis history. The debate will go on long past both of their sell-by dates. Personally, I'm in for the long slog.

 

[El Dude]

Yeah, of course - although I think Borg-McEnroe was more colorful, interesting, and overall the greatest men's tennis rivalry of all time.

Roger and Rafa are more about individual greatness, in my opinion. Actually, you could argue that Rafa-Novak is a greater rivalry, at least in terms of on-court, because their ages are much closer, not to mention records.

There's also a subtle psychology to the Fedal war...veiled skirmishes that don't seem to be part of it, but are in a subtle, hidden way. For instance, lately you've been trying to ostracize Novak from the discussion, as if he's suddenly closer to Andy than Fedal. I think this is a subtle--whether subconscious or openly intentional--way for you to prop up Rafa's greatness. Better to be in a duo with Roger than a trio with Novak as well, presumably.

 

[Moxie]

Yeah, of course - although I think Borg-McEnroe was more colorful, interesting, and overall the greatest men's tennis rivalry of all time.

Roger and Rafa are more about individual greatness, in my opinion. Actually, you could argue that Rafa-Novak is a greater rivalry, at least in terms of on-court, because their ages are much closer, not to mention records.

There's also a subtle psychology to the Fedal war...veiled skirmishes that don't seem to be part of it, but are in a subtle, hidden way. For instance, lately you've been trying to ostracize Novak from the discussion, as if he's suddenly closer to Andy than Fedal. I think this is a subtle--whether subconscious or openly intentional--way for you to prop up Rafa's greatness. Better to be in a duo with Roger than a trio with Novak as well, presumably.

Wow, there's a lot in there, Dude. Not least of which you being my armchair psychologist. Borg/McEnroe is a great rivalry. In many ways for the same reasons that Federer/Nadal is: study in contrasts. But it bears remembering they only played 14 times, and split 7-7, iirc. Rafa/Novak is a very great rivalry, but you discount if it doesn't capture the public imagination in the same way. A rivalry isn't merely between two players or teams, but how it is perceived and embraced in the public imagination.

Interesting that you think I'm trying to "ostracize" Novak from the conversation. IMO, he's ostracizing himself, atm. I'm very curious as to what goes on with him, as are we all. Obviously, the Fedal Wars are full of coded jabs. I know you like your notion of the "Holy Trinity" of tennis, but Djokovic has his work cut out for him to catch up. You seem to be saying to me that it is in my interest as a Nadal fan to exclude Novak from the conversation. I will counter to you that it is in your interest as a Federer fan to keep him in. So, we're even, right?

 

[Obsi]

Wow, there's a lot in there, Dude. Not least of which you being my armchair psychologist. Borg/McEnroe is a great rivalry. In many ways for the same reasons that Federer/Nadal is: study in contrasts. But it bears remembering they only played 14 times, and split 7-7, iirc. Rafa/Novak is a very great rivalry, but you discount if it doesn't capture the public imagination in the same way. A rivalry isn't merely between two players or teams, but how it is perceived and embraced in the public imagination.

There is no match between Federer and Nadal that captured public imagination like Borg-McEnroe at 1980 Wimbledon.

 

[Moxie]

No match between Federer and Nadal captured public imagination like Borg-McEnroe at 1980 Wimbledon.

Except for the 2008 Wimbledon final.

 

[Obsi]

Except for the 2008 Wimbledon final.

You’re wrong.

 

[Moxie]

You’re wrong.

By what measure? I watched both of those matches live, and I'm telling you that the more thrilling one was the 2008.

 

[Obsi]

By what measure? I watched both of those matches live, and I'm telling you that the more thrilling one was the 2008.

How old are you?

 

[Moxie]

How old are you?

Mind your own business and address the question. However, if you're young enough to ask, I'm guessing you only judge the 1980 final by what you've heard, or watched on youtube. But look at the score line: 1–6, 7–5, 6–3, 6–7(16–18), 8–6. Compare that to the 2008: 6–4, 6–4, 6–7(5), 6–7(8), 9–7.

 

[El Dude]

Wow, there's a lot in there, Dude. Not least of which you being my armchair psychologist. Borg/McEnroe is a great rivalry. In many ways for the same reasons that Federer/Nadal is: study in contrasts. But it bears remembering they only played 14 times, and split 7-7, iirc. Rafa/Novak is a very great rivalry, but you discount if it doesn't capture the public imagination in the same way. A rivalry isn't merely between two players or teams, but how it is perceived and embraced in the public imagination.

Interesting that you think I'm trying to "ostracize" Novak from the conversation. IMO, he's ostracizing himself, atm. I'm very curious as to what goes on with him, as are we all. Obviously, the Fedal Wars are full of coded jabs. I know you like your notion of the "Holy Trinity" of tennis, but Djokovic has his work cut out for him to catch up. You seem to be saying to me that it is in my interest as a Nadal fan to exclude Novak from the conversation. I will counter to you that it is in your interest as a Federer fan to keep him in. So, we're even, right?

You can counter that, but that doesn't make it true ;-). It isn't, actually. Roger's record stands without my support! I just think people have been writing Novak off too easily of late. Even if he's done, he's still one of the very greatest players of all time, arguably on par with Pistol Pete - and not so far behind Rafa.

If I'm wrong about the Novak bit, I stand corrected. And yeah, definitely lots of coded jabs! I don't mean to psychoanalyze you (sorry, habitual due to my line of work), but you somewhat agree with it by acknowledging the coded jabs. And mind you, I don't claim to be immune to partaking. I do try to minimize it, though.

As for the Holy Trinity, again, it isn't about them having to be on exactly even footing. None of them are. But they're in the same general conversation, especially when we focus on dominance and less on total numbers.

And I agree about the public imagination and why Fedal is "sexier" than Rafa-Novak. I still think Borg-Mac stands out as more intense, more vivid. 7-7 is right. I think they were 7-7 at exhibitions, too! Incredible.

 

[Obsi]

Mind your own business and address the question. However, if you're young enough to ask, I'm guessing you only judge the 1980 final by what you've heard, or watched on youtube. But look at the score line: 1–6, 7–5, 6–3, 6–7(16–18), 8–6. Compare that to the 2008: 6–4, 6–4, 6–7(5), 6–7(8), 9–7.

You got offended by my question. What a sad, insecure individual you are.

I’m old enough to remember that the 1980 match was more anticipated than the 2008. It tells us a lot how the rivalries have been perceived by public.