|
|
Post by karan on Sept 13, 2015 1:21:42 GMT -8
Federer vs Djokovic in the final. Amazing achievement for Federer to be making the final at his age. I like both players so I'm happy with whoever wins.
|
|
|
|
Post by gangsta on Sept 14, 2015 5:45:46 GMT -8
The match went exactly as expected. I thought Federer would do well to even win a set, and he did pretty well actually. But two other things stood out - move over Pascal Maria and the likes, the chair umpiring for this match was just hall-of-fame stuff. And then there was the crowd - this was as ridiculous a crowd as a Davis Cup encounter. For Djokovic to battle Federer PLUS that insane crowd and yet win so convincingly was amazing. I gained a lot more respect for every one of Nadal's French Open victories. Djokovic did not acknowledge the crowd much in the presentation but I actually wish he had not even bothered to mention them. They didn't deserve it.
|
|
|
|
Post by riverpanthera on Sept 14, 2015 22:43:35 GMT -8
Truly amazing performance by Federer to reach two grand slam finals in a row at his age. And some were saying he should retire!
Djokovic has been playing fantastic too of course and I had a feeling he would win before the match. I think he will remain no. 1 for a long time to come, I just don't see any of the other younger guys right now improving fast enough to take him on. Stan & Murray can do it on occasion but are inconsistent. And Rafa seems to have lost it for some reason, though I do think he can make a come back.
Unfortunately couldn't watch the match due to work but my parents watched it and actually said Federer actually played better overall but made mistakes at crucial points which cost him not so much Djokovic doing better. So gangsta not really sure why you say Djokovic won convincingly, everything i've heard is the opposite!
|
|
|
|
Post by AbhiSRKfan on Sept 15, 2015 8:54:53 GMT -8
Heartbreak ... want to see FedEx win two majors(Grand Slam) next year and then retire
|
|
|
|
Post by gangsta on Sept 16, 2015 6:07:53 GMT -8
Unfortunately couldn't watch the match due to work but my parents watched it and actually said Federer actually played better overall but made mistakes at crucial points which cost him not so much Djokovic doing better. So gangsta not really sure why you say Djokovic won convincingly, everything i've heard is the opposite! I think it is just the whole carried-away-by-how-surprisingly-good-Federer-was factor. Federer did miss crucial points, but Djokovic really did play better and more consistent throughout the match. Plus, if this was a five-set thriller, those kind of sentiments may make sense. But all Federer won was ONE set, so if you think about it, what everyone else is saying does not really make much sense. FWIW, they used to say the same things when Federer used to lose to Nadal. Just because he failed to convert 25 breakpoints does not mean he made a lot of mistakes, it may as well mean the other guy did well to save them. Honestly, if it was any other player that missed 25 break opportunities against Federer, all talk would be about how well Federer played to save those. |
|
|
|
Post by riverpanthera on Sept 17, 2015 2:24:27 GMT -8
Just cause it wasn't 5 sets doesn't mean it wasn't a thriller or.not closely fought. This was imo better than most 5 set matches ivee seen.
And the fact that federer had all yhose break points shows that he did give djokovic a lot of trouble on his serve so it certainly cant be said to be a convincing win for novak. Even if he did save all those points.
Plus not just break points..even overall stats they are very close. In yje end only two points separated them. And now that ive seen highlights i totally agree with my parents. .Especially third set really was federers to win..totally gave it away. Now not saying novak didn't deserve it. He played amazing too and sure deserved a win..but so did federer. The match was only decided by a couple of points here and there and could easily have gone tje other way. All im saying is it wasn't an easy win like you're suggesting. But.i guess.im not really surprised to hear this from you..youve alway been anti federer
|
|
|
|
Post by palacerani on Sept 19, 2015 12:27:31 GMT -8
At least Federer was there for the finals. Where was Nadal?
|
|
|
|
Post by karan on Sept 26, 2015 2:33:00 GMT -8
^ He's the greatest of all time for me but a losing head to head record against Djokovic & Nadal (and he's only 3 wins head of Murray) could damage his legacy. Though a lot of the matches he's played against them were after his peak.
|
|
|
|
Post by riverpanthera on Sept 26, 2015 13:50:44 GMT -8
Head to Heads don't mean much though, especially when you consider that players reach their peaks at different times and so will be better at different times. Like I think Djokovic and Federer H2H is perfect example of this, when Federer was at his peak, he was winning far more often, but at the time Djokovic was not at his peak. On the other hand, now djokovic wins more often as he is at his peak but Federer definitely isn't.
With Nadal, yes Federer did definitely have a weak point against him as the head to head is very strongly tilted in Nadal's favour. But that alone should not contra out all the rest of Federer's impressive career and stats which others don't even come close to matching.
And here too, there are certain things to consider, like the fact that pretty much most games are played on clay, and hardly any are played on grass between the two. Then there's the fact that there was a large time period where Federer would consistently get to finals of grandslams and Nadal wouldn't, he only was getting to French open final. So Federer would be better than Nadal in that respect as he was the more consistent guy, but this doesn't show in head to head as Nadal would lose to other people instead of Federer.
Because of their rankings, Federer and Nadal only really met when Nadal was in form enough to reach the finals. Federer on the other hand would get to finals all the time and face Nadal even when he wasn't in total form, that's how great a player he is, that his out of form game is better than most players. Nadal was the only player who could beat him for a very long time. Can't say same about Nadal (even at his peak).
Frankly, I don't see how anyone at this stage can say Federer isn't the greatest. Sure he might not stay that way forever (I definitely used to think Nadal had a shot at this and Djokovic could too if he continues), but at the moment, there is no doubt.
|
|
