Time to crown Novak the GOAT?

[Fiero425]

McEnroe shone so brightly from 1979-1984--he was the gatekeeper for the hard and grass court majors, with 1984 being the apex for him.

Overall you're probably right, but I marveled at how an artisan like ivan Lendl actually tamed McEnroe for a couple seasons beating him like a drum in '81! He got some advise from a past great, I'm thinking Don Budge who told him to relentlessly attack the net and not allow Ivan to run him around like a chicken w/ its head cut off! That got him thru '83 & of course a very successful '84, but after that "John was done!" I can still see him rolling around on the grass of Wimbledon looking "out of it" in the '85 QF going down to Kevin Curren! McEnroe took one more WCT Final title in 1989 & then turned into another Jimmy Connors just "hanging on" thru the early 90's!

 

[Kieran]

Overall you're probably right, but I marveled at how an artisan like ivan Lendl actually tamed McEnroe for a couple seasons beating him like a drum in '81! He got some advise from a past great, I'm thinking Don Budge who told him to relentlessly attack the net and not allow Ivan to run him around like a chicken w/ its head cut off! That got him thru '83 & of course a very successful '84, but after that "John was done!" I can still see him rolling around on the grass of Wimbledon looking "out of it" in the QF going down to Kevin Curren! McEnroe took one more WCT Final title in 1989 & then turned into another Jimmy Connors just "hanging on" thru the early 90's!

McEnroe’s demise was brutally sudden, wasn’t it? In 1985 he still looked like a top player but he was beaten in straights by Lendl in the US Open final that year and that surprised me. Without looking it up, I think he’d have been favourite going into that match. He says he was wary of new technologies and the power game, he tried to change to cope, then years later realised he shouldn’t have tried to change. Whatever it was, he probably went fastest from hero to zero, among the greats - until Mats lights blinked out in 1989…

 

[Jelenafan]

McEnroe’s demise was brutally sudden, wasn’t it? In 1985 he still looked like a top player but he was beaten in straights by Lendl in the US Open final that year and that surprised me. Without looking it up, I think he’d have been favourite going into that match. He says he was wary of new technologies and the power game, he tried to change to cope, then years later realised he shouldn’t have tried to change. Whatever it was, he probably went fastest from hero to zero, among the greats - until Mats lights blinked out in 1989…

That’s one of those endless debates in tennis: why Johnny Mac went from arguably the greatest singles year in the Open era to only reaching one more Major Finals ( which he lost decisively) for the rest of his career.

He was the last of the great ATP “touch”/wood racket tennis players, incredibly naturally gifted, and also the last of the champs who didn't put a premium on conditioning/weight training/physio.

So the answer could have been the emerging power game simply passed him by, but I do think he had a self destructive streak that also finally caught up to him. Even his greatest year ‘84, was marred by that meltdown in the French Open final when victory was within his grasp.

Unbearably entitled and whining about the burdens of being the top male player, Mac mentally burned out by 25 (ironic when you compare thats what happened to Borg at a similar age) , later admitted to drug use, lack of training, etc.

I really thought that because the game of tennis had always been easy for him, he thought he could recapture the magic & return to the top, but it was irretreivably lost. Some flashes would pop up, but nothing sustained.

Must have galled him how Lendl, a hard working conditioned “mechanical” player owned him for the rest of Mac’s career.

 

[Front242]

I dunno...the 5-1 up and serving for it v. Nadal at the YEC in 2019 would surely be up there. I'd have voted for that one.

If you saw that AO final, Medvedev was immaculate in the first set, but he never found that level again. You can call that a "choke" if you're inclined, but I'd say you're not taking into account that Nadal choked the 2nd set. And that Nadal had Medvedev on his back foot much of the rest of that match. Didn't he even fail to serve it out in the 5th? There is a difference between a guy having a real chance, and a guy "choking it." It was a great battle, after the first set, and Nadal won it. With game and will. No real surprise there. You can't judge Bo5 matches by the quality of 1 set. I know you know that.

That WTF match wasn't a slam final so there's no comparison in terms of the magnitude of choke involved though it was obviously another awful loss. Even though only one match was played at the WTF both were WTF matches for poor Med.

 

[Moxie]

That WTF match wasn't a slam final so there's no comparison in terms of the magnitude of choke involved though it was obviously another awful loss. Even though only one match was played at the WTF both were WTF matches for poor Med.

Well, you didn't qualify "worst choke." But you're deflecting from the real point: Medvedev didn't "choke" that AO final. It was Nadal that almost did, by choking the 2nd, when he had a break lead, which he lost, then mini-break leads in the TB, which he also lost. From there, I'd like you to tell me how Medvedev "choked" that match. Yes, he had break points in the 3rd, but Nadal is a break-back master. That was no guarantee of winning, given that his level had dropped. I won't say he didn't have Rafa on the ropes, but he'd also given him hope. That's why they play 5 sets.

 

[Fiero425]

Well, you didn't qualify "worst choke." But you're deflecting from the real point: Medvedev didn't "choke" that AO final. It was Nadal that almost did, by choking the 2nd, when he had a break lead, which he lost, then mini-break leads in the TB, which he also lost. From there, I'd like you to tell me how Medvedev "choked" that match. Yes, he had break points in the 3rd, but Nadal is a break-back master. That was no guarantee of winning, given that his level had dropped. I won't say he didn't have Rafa on the ropes, but he'd also given him hope. That's why they play 5 sets.

Medvedev has been such a disappointment! He seems to be only a threat to Novak, extending him to the limit, but still succumbing! He's now dropped out of the top 10 after getting to #1 for about 5 min. last season! Novak took it back briefly w/o even being able to play during "Sunshine Double!" IDK, the pressure got to him? He's still scary good, but inexplicably has been some kind of "head case!"

 

[britbox]

Medvedev has been such a disappointment! He seems to be only a threat to Novak, extending him to the limit, but still succumbing! He's now dropped out of the top 10 after getting to #1 for about 5 min. last season! Novak took it back briefly w/o even being able to play during "Sunshine Double!" IDK, the pressure got to him? He's still scary good, but inexplicably has been some kind of "head case!"

I don't think it's that inexplicable. His country is at war and he's been treated like some kind of leper by the tennis authorities. I'd imagine that it's bound to have had an impact.

 

[Front242]

Well, you didn't qualify "worst choke." But you're deflecting from the real point: Medvedev didn't "choke" that AO final. It was Nadal that almost did, by choking the 2nd, when he had a break lead, which he lost, then mini-break leads in the TB, which he also lost. From there, I'd like you to tell me how Medvedev "choked" that match. Yes, he had break points in the 3rd, but Nadal is a break-back master. That was no guarantee of winning, given that his level had dropped. I won't say he didn't have Rafa on the ropes, but he'd also given him hope. That's why they play 5 sets.

Of course a hardcore Nadal fan would claim that but anyone else knows he choked the hell out of both that and the WEF match.

 

[Kieran]

Of course a hardcore Nadal would claim that but anyone else knows he choked the hell out of both that and the WEF match.

Come on brother, watch the whole five set match again!

Fact is though, @Moxie is correct. Rafa’s also choked, in the second set, and in the fifth when he was serving for the match. He’d served out sets 3 and 4 to love, then he’d chump-changed his serve at 5-4 in the fifth. What was most impressive was how he rebooted immediately to break in the eleventh game. You can visibly see him buck himself up and pull himself together to settle his nerves in that game. Tremendous stuff!

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Come on brother, watch the whole five set match again!

Fact is though, @Moxie is correct. Rafa’s also choked, in the second set, and in the fifth when he was serving for the match. He’d served out sets 3 and 4 to love, then he’d chump-changed his serve at 5-4 in the fifth. What was most impressive was how he rebooted immediately to break in the eleventh game. You can visibly see him buck himself up and pull himself together to settle his nerves in that game. Tremendous stuff!

I remember telling Moxie, we were all on the live chat during that match at TF, there is no way Rafa can win after losing that 2nd set, which he should have won ( choked)....then serving for the match? Tented and I had a break down, though being Rafa fans we are use to suffering .....after all that he won Vamos!

 

[El Dude]

People often characterize McEnroe's big drop-off from 1984 to 85, but I think this understates how good he still was in 1985 and that his big drop off really came after, most notably after he took a six-month break in 1986 within which he married Tatum O'Neal. When he came back, he was never the same.

1984: 82-3 (96.5%), 13 titles, #1
1985: 71-9 (88.8%), 8 titles, #2
1986: 22-5 (81.5%), 3 titles, #14

Meaning, he was still an elite player in 1985, but was losing big matches - but still managed to win a handful of big titles (or their equivalent). I'm guessing that his head wasn't in the game by that point and coupled with Lendl upping it a notch and the emergence of a new generation, and perhaps an ongoing shift in the game itself and how it was played, by 1987 he was like a flashback to an older era.

 

[Kieran]

People often characterize McEnroe's big drop-off from 1984 to 85, but I think this understates how good he still was in 1985 and that his big drop off really came after, most notably after he took a six-month break in 1986 within which he married Tatum O'Neal. When he came back, he was never the same.

1984: 82-3 (96.5%), 13 titles, #1
1985: 71-9 (88.8%), 8 titles, #2
1986: 22-5 (81.5%), 3 titles, #14

Meaning, he was still an elite player in 1985, but was losing big matches - but still managed to win a handful of big titles (or their equivalent). I'm guessing that his head wasn't in the game by that point and coupled with Lendl upping it a notch and the emergence of a new generation, and perhaps an ongoing shift in the game itself and how it was played, by 1987 he was like a flashback to an older era.

Going into the 1985 US Open final McEnroe was the hot favourite. Lendl hasn’t backed up his 1984 FO victory with another slam, and McEnroe beat him up a little on the US hards going into Flushing Meadows. It was a big shock that Lendl not only won the final, but also that he won in straights…

 

[Fiero425]

Going into the 1985 US Open final McEnroe was the hot favourite. Lendl hasn’t backed up his 1984 FO victory with another slam, and McEnroe beat him up a little on the US hards going into Flushing Meadows. It was a big shock that Lendl not only won the final, but also that he won in straights…

I recall McEnroe was up a break in that 1st set (5-2) w/ Lendl serving! Lendl held, then broke, inevitably forcing a TB which he won, then finished him off in straights! I was about to say John & Ivan had played 2 HC events before the USO and defeated The Czech convincingly! What a turnaround! John may have defeated Ivan once since Canadian, in the last WCT Final in Dallas in the 1989 SF before beating Brad Gilbert!

 

[Moxie]

Come on brother, watch the whole five set match again!

Fact is though, @Moxie is correct. Rafa’s also choked, in the second set, and in the fifth when he was serving for the match. He’d served out sets 3 and 4 to love, then he’d chump-changed his serve at 5-4 in the fifth. What was most impressive was how he rebooted immediately to break in the eleventh game. You can visibly see him buck himself up and pull himself together to settle his nerves in that game. Tremendous stuff!

@Front242 doesn't have to watch the whole 5+ hour match again. Let me help.

He could just read this Guardian recap:

Rafael Nadal beats Medvedev in epic Australian Open final for 21st slam title

Rafael Nadal has claimed a men’s record 21st grand slam title after beating Daniil Medvedev 2-6, 6-7 (5), 6-4, 6-4, 7-5 in an epic final

www.theguardian.com

Or he could look at these stats:

Medvedev never got to the serving heights that he reached in the first set, and, in fact, his 1st serve percentage dropped steadily, mostly, rebounding only a bit in the 5th. Overall, the numbers are pretty close, but it was Nadal steadily improving, Medvedev falling off. Which doesn't imply a "choke."

Front doesn't provide any back-up for why he calls it a "choke," only to re-up and say that only Nadal fans would say it wasn't. I'd argue that anyone would say it wasn't, by a sports definition of one. The specific moment that everyone cites is when Nadal, now 2 sets down to love, is also down 2-3, 0-40. Surely, that was having Nadal on the ropes, but Nadal saved all of those break points. It ignores that Nadal was the one to choke the 2nd, and it also ignores that Nadal is the break-back king of men's tennis. It's undeniable that Medvedev squandered an opportunity there. As I said in an earlier post, Medvedev had chances, but that's not the same as "choking." That argument reminds me of an old poster, now gone, who tried to argue that Medvedev had a terrific "collapse" in the 5th set of the USO final in 2019. Not only was Medvedev lucky that that match wasn't over in 3, he didn't "collapse" at all in the 5th. He fought Rafa for it. He just came up short, as he did at the AO in 2022. That wasn't a "collapse," and the AO final wasn't a "choke." Both were well-fought, and I think the dispassionate media has verified that. It's disgruntled anti-Rafa people that see it otherwise. IMO. Still, I invite @Front242 to defend his charge that Medvedev "choked."

 

[Front242]

@Front242 doesn't have to watch the whole 5+ hour match again. Let me help.

He could just read this Guardian recap:

Rafael Nadal beats Medvedev in epic Australian Open final for 21st slam title

Rafael Nadal has claimed a men’s record 21st grand slam title after beating Daniil Medvedev 2-6, 6-7 (5), 6-4, 6-4, 7-5 in an epic final

www.theguardian.com

Or he could look at these stats:

View attachment 7719
Medvedev never got to the serving heights that he reached in the first set, and, in fact, his 1st serve percentage dropped steadily, mostly, rebounding only a bit in the 5th. Overall, the numbers are pretty close, but it was Nadal steadily improving, Medvedev falling off. Which doesn't imply a "choke."

Front doesn't provide any back-up for why he calls it a "choke," only to re-up and say that only Nadal fans would say it wasn't. I'd argue that anyone would say it wasn't, by a sports definition of one. The specific moment that everyone cites is when Nadal, now 2 sets down to love, is also down 2-3, 0-40. Surely, that was having Nadal on the ropes, but Nadal saved all of those break points. It ignores that Nadal was the one to choke the 2nd, and it also ignores that Nadal is the break-back king of men's tennis. It's undeniable that Medvedev squandered an opportunity there. As I said in an earlier post, Medvedev had chances, but that's not the same as "choking." That argument reminds me of an old poster, now gone, who tried to argue that Medvedev had a terrific "collapse" in the 5th set of the USO final in 2019. Not only was Medvedev lucky that that match wasn't over in 3, he didn't "collapse" at all in the 5th. He fought Rafa for it. He just came up short, as he did at the AO in 2022. That wasn't a "collapse," and the AO final wasn't a "choke." Both were well-fought, and I think the dispassionate media has verified that. It's disgruntled anti-Rafa people that see it otherwise. IMO. Still, I invite @Front242 to defend his charge that Medvedev "choked."

Medvedev never got to the serving heights that he reached in the first set, and, in fact, his 1st serve percentage dropped steadily, mostly, rebounding only a bit in the 5th. Overall, the numbers are pretty close, but it was Nadal steadily improving, Medvedev falling off. Which doesn't imply a "choke."

^ What the hell is that if it isn't a massive drop in level of play then?! When one gets worse, the other is made to look better. That's obvious. You go from serving extremely well to not well and you lose more often than not, especially when it's such a key stroke in his game. As above there, his serving was not good for 2.5 or so whole sets. I'm not changing my mind and you're not changing yours and that's fine.

 

[Moxie]

Medvedev never got to the serving heights that he reached in the first set, and, in fact, his 1st serve percentage dropped steadily, mostly, rebounding only a bit in the 5th. Overall, the numbers are pretty close, but it was Nadal steadily improving, Medvedev falling off. Which doesn't imply a "choke."

^ What the hell is that if it isn't a massive drop in level of play then?! When one gets worse, the other is made to look better. That's obvious. You go from serving extremely well to not well and you lose more often than not, especially when it's such a key stroke in his game. As above there, his serving was not good for 2.5 or so whole sets. I'm not changing my mind and you're not changing yours and that's fine.

It wasn't massive. Look at the stats. He just dropped from a really high level, and only incrementally. But also, if you drop your level, is that a "choke?" Even if you look at BP conversions, it's not Federer-levels of non-conversion. Nadal and Meddie were close there. You are free not to change your mind as to what you think, but now it's just stubbornness. Medvedev came down from a level that he couldn't sustain, and Nadal raised his. It went 5 sets. That's too long a road, with similar stats, to call it a "choke."

And let's just say, for grins, that he HAD fallen off massively after the first set. It's Bo5...one set does NOT a Major final make. It's still not a choke. I already said this: he played one immaculate set. After that, he was mostly out-played.

 

[Kieran]

Medvedev never got to the serving heights that he reached in the first set, and, in fact, his 1st serve percentage dropped steadily, mostly, rebounding only a bit in the 5th. Overall, the numbers are pretty close, but it was Nadal steadily improving, Medvedev falling off. Which doesn't imply a "choke."

^ What the hell is that if it isn't a massive drop in level of play then?! When one gets worse, the other is made to look better. That's obvious. You go from serving extremely well to not well and you lose more often than not, especially when it's such a key stroke in his game. As above there, his serving was not good for 2.5 or so whole sets. I'm not changing my mind and you're not changing yours and that's fine.

Could it be that you want it to be accepted that Medvedev choked - so that Rafa doesn’t get credit for the W?

 

[Kieran]

@Front242 doesn't have to watch the whole 5+ hour match again. Let me help.

He could just read this Guardian recap:

Rafael Nadal beats Medvedev in epic Australian Open final for 21st slam title

Rafael Nadal has claimed a men’s record 21st grand slam title after beating Daniil Medvedev 2-6, 6-7 (5), 6-4, 6-4, 7-5 in an epic final

www.theguardian.com

But he might want to watch the five sets again, he loves things of high quality!

Just reading that review reminds me of the quality of player Rafa has had to beat to win his last 3 GS titles. Novak twice, and world number 1 US Open champion Medvedev on his favourite type of surface. We wouldn’t mind a few easy ones - like Novaks last 3.

 

[Front242]

Could it be that you want it to be accepted that Medvedev choked - so that Rafa doesn’t get credit for the W?

No. What difference would that make ? He won either way and there are massive amounts of similar matches between other players. The manner in which they won doesn't negate the result but both that AO final and the WTF match were WTF losses and Medvedev hasn't been the same since the AO final loss. It's ruined him.

 

[Moxie]

No. What difference would that make ? He won either way and there are massive amounts of similar matches between other players. The manner in which they won doesn't negate the result but both that AO final and the WTF match were WTF losses and Medvedev hasn't been the same since the AO final loss. It's ruined him.

It seems a bit dramatic to say it has "ruined" him. He's 27. He won the USO beating Djokovic in the final, having recovered from a fairly comprehensive beat-down at his hands earlier in the year in Australia. For sure, the loss last year in the AO final would have been crushing, and it was clearly a setback for him. He's not the mentally toughest out there. It seemed to make him wobbly not to have held onto his #1 longer, too. However, I, for one, believe that rumors of his death are greatly exaggerated. If he never recovers from that one particular loss, that's on him.