Tennis 2022
- Thread starter saivet
- Start date
- Status
Nick had a golden opportunity when 40-0 up in 9th game of third set, totally gutting just thinking about it and he won't forget that for a while.
They used to travel around all summer in their motor home. Was incredibly posh at the time I think he was some big shot lawyer.
I always prefer Federer's game to the other two. He was what I call MAGIC but that doesn't mean Nadal or djokovic are any less good. We are truly lucky to witness three genius at work.
Federer's time is up. Nadal and djock if fit can go upto 25 each. Doesn't mean Federer should looked any less. As I said some days ago this is the weakest era in tennis I can recall in my memory.
Federer's time is up. Nadal and djock if fit can go upto 25 each. Doesn't mean Federer should looked any less. As I said some days ago this is the weakest era in tennis I can recall in my memory.
Broadly agree. I have to say that it's very disappointing that talents have not emerged in the younger generation to challenge the big three (or big two now, as I'm sure Fed is close to the end). It is certainly a poor era.
Once he lost that, it was over.
Up 40-0 and then losing every single point after that to lose the game.
If he went up 5-4 in the 3rd set, it would have been huge.
Yeah that's the worst part, Andy showed the blueprint for keeping him out of the final in 2013. Mind you it took him a lot of heartbreak for that moment of ecstasy.
I think this is the most level headed approach to it.
(and if given the choice, I’d rather watch Federer)
Only takes one...
It's hard to deny Djokovic claim to greatest but Federer's dominance class and precision was something else.
Fecking hell
This djokovic fella is damn good.
I don't like Djokovic, but well done to him for yet another Wimbledon / grand slam title.
It's crazy to think when he won his 2nd grand slam title (the 2011 Australian Open) at the age of 23 years and 8 months, that was considered to be quite a late at the time, certainly in terms of potentially gong on to be one of the greatest players of all time. Nowadays in men's tennis, a player winning their 1st slam before their 25th birthday would probably be a miracle. Based on that, plus the fact that he lost in so many grand slam finals from 2012-2014 plus that titanic RG semi-final against Nadal in 2013 and his US Open semi-final against Nishikori in 2014 when he was the overwhelming favourite to win the tournament, I thought he'd struggle to put himself in the same bracket as Federer and Nadal. I think that his win over Federer in the 2014 Wimbledon final (at that point he had a habit of losing grand slam finals away from Melbourne) was crucial in terms of him become one of the very greatest.
I've always thought that it makes zero sense just to only judge players' careers based on how many grand slam titles they won. From what I gather, due to the masters series set-up, plus the insane consistency of the big 3 in the big tournaments for a long period, the big 3 (plus Murray) have actually played each other more times away from the grand slams than previous open era legends did. I read that they've played each other 100 times away from the grand slams, including 68 times in masters series events and 16 times in the YEC / ATP Finals. So it would be crazy to discount records in those events.
It's crazy to think when he won his 2nd grand slam title (the 2011 Australian Open) at the age of 23 years and 8 months, that was considered to be quite a late at the time, certainly in terms of potentially gong on to be one of the greatest players of all time. Nowadays in men's tennis, a player winning their 1st slam before their 25th birthday would probably be a miracle. Based on that, plus the fact that he lost in so many grand slam finals from 2012-2014 plus that titanic RG semi-final against Nadal in 2013 and his US Open semi-final against Nishikori in 2014 when he was the overwhelming favourite to win the tournament, I thought he'd struggle to put himself in the same bracket as Federer and Nadal. I think that his win over Federer in the 2014 Wimbledon final (at that point he had a habit of losing grand slam finals away from Melbourne) was crucial in terms of him become one of the very greatest.
I've always thought that it makes zero sense just to only judge players' careers based on how many grand slam titles they won. From what I gather, due to the masters series set-up, plus the insane consistency of the big 3 in the big tournaments for a long period, the big 3 (plus Murray) have actually played each other more times away from the grand slams than previous open era legends did. I read that they've played each other 100 times away from the grand slams, including 68 times in masters series events and 16 times in the YEC / ATP Finals. So it would be crazy to discount records in those events.
Djokovic's 10 year stretch between 2011-2021 should arguably be the best tennis anyone has produced in the modern era given it took place side-by-side the two other GOAT candidates. The Nole Slam, weeks as No. 1, year as No. 1, number of GS won, number of Masters series won, all records broken. Turned around the H2H against his best two rivals, has won more matches against top 10 than any other players, won on clay against Nadal, just astonishing really.
In terms of achievement perhaps, but not to watch.
Agree.
Never thought I'd see another player surpass the likes of Federer and Nadal, but in my opinion Djokovic has taken tennis to another level. His all-round game is just phenomenal and when he's at it, it's hard to see who could possibly compete.
Phenomenal tennis player and deserving of a fourth Wimbledon on the trot.
Phenomenal tennis player and deserving of a fourth Wimbledon on the trot.
Why is Djokovic so disliked? Is it because of the austrailan open incident?
Being an anti-vaxxer generally makes you a massive cnut so that's at the top of most people's list.
What's there in aesthetics without achievement though? Gasquet's backhand is visually superior to anyone else's. Doesn't mean its better than Djokovic's.
The achievement is there, though, isn't it? He has 20 slams and played a good chunk of his career with an age disadvantage compared to the other 2.
I don't necessarily think he's the greatest ever, but I understand that focusing exclusively on the slam count does him a disservice because it lacks nuance, in his case.
He's never been particularly likable if you ask me. He always tried to hard, with his dumb impressions of others and Joker persona in general.
Most important factor is the hair though. Buy some hair gel, twat.
I think you missed my earlier post. I wasn't talking about Fed or GOAT argument at all though. I have no horse in this race. No doubt Fed is amazing and the way he dominated the circuit between 2004-2008 is also probably unmatched. My original argument was that the decade of 2011-2021 has seen Djokovic produce probably the best tennis amidst very high quality of opposition. He might not be visually as pleasing as few others (including Fed), but it is achievements that count.
I'm not sure the age disadvantage is much of an argument in favour of Federer given he also had an age advantage for a significant period of his career too. By 2008 Djokovic and Nadal had made SF's in all four majors in their career. By the end of the year Djokovic was 21, Nadal 22 and Federer 27. Federer had 13, Nadal 5 and Djokovic only 1 by the end of 2008.
Which is why there's a third option of aesthetics and achievement.
The period when Fed was building his numbers early on had better players than this period now.
And with that metric you'd argue that Federer was better than Djokovic during 2011-2021?
No I'd argue that Federer is the greatest tennis player of all time. But it's my personal opinion.
It's funny that both Tennis and F1 seem to be a more tribal subject than football on Redcafe.
Either that or I just don't spend enough time in the football forum.
Either that or I just don't spend enough time in the football forum.
Djokovic and Nadal still have each other though. I can't claim to be an expert on the guys competing around 2003-2007 but I do know Hewitt and Roddick were two of the main guys and I think some of the younger guys competing now would have had real chances to beat them to a point I don't think the standard could have been significantly higher.
That was not my claim at all though. I have no issues with your belief that Fed is probably the GOAT. My original post was specific to the 2011-2021 period where I thought Djokovic has had a historically unparalleled decade. If you asked me about Federer, I would say that Fed also had an unprecedented five years between 2004-2008. But you seem to disagree with my Djokovic claim and I am trying to understand why.
I don't know about the Formula 1 debates on here, how do they break down?
Go read the F1 thread and weep
It's not as bad now because Hamilton is no longer relevant, but I don't even watch the race itself, I just look at the thread.
Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, Mark Phil, Agassi was still knocking around. Yes Nadal and Joker have each other but that's just one guy and if something happens to them like injury or Djoker being an anti vax nutter, it's essentially a free slam. I'm exaggerating but you know what I mean, the younger guys are not regularly challenging them like you'd expect them to, especially with all the mileage they both have on their bodies.
peak Waw and Murray were obviously better than Hewitt and Roddick were. especially Murray who fared much, much better against Fed even at his younger age than Roddick ever did. if they were to play in recent years, they would've just become what Berdych/Nishikori/Tsonga were most of time. very good and consistent players and that's it.
I actually rated Nalbandian more than both. I saw him as an 18 year old vs Moya in our country's only atp tournament (Umag) and he looked great. he beat Fed 5 times in row after that, but he was even less dedicated than Safin. his win in that tour final vs Fed is still better than everything I saw from Hewitt and Roddick, but man, what a waste he was. he even injured a linesman once and got disqualified for that. I never saw him after that again.
I actually rated Nalbandian more than both. I saw him as an 18 year old vs Moya in our country's only atp tournament (Umag) and he looked great. he beat Fed 5 times in row after that, but he was even less dedicated than Safin. his win in that tour final vs Fed is still better than everything I saw from Hewitt and Roddick, but man, what a waste he was. he even injured a linesman once and got disqualified for that. I never saw him after that again.
I'd agree that Murray and Wawrinka were probably better than Hewitt and Roddick, although Wawrinka on his rare days was probably a match for most players. Hewitt's peak was very short but he was very good between 2001 and 2005.
I think the thing now is Nadal and Djokovic are well past their best and still competing with the best youngsters, I don't think they would have competed nearly as well if Roddick and Hewitt were around rather than the players of today. Murray and Wawrinka during their peaks would destroy them now.(I'm going to ignore Nadal on clay!)
I hadn't seen Novak play for a while and was actually a bit shocked at how much he had fallen as a player. Comparing him now to 2 years ago is like night and day. He was ruthless, calm and assured but physically he didn't seem to have much in the tank and he was nowhere near as relentless as a few years ago. That's expected, and he's still better than the rest but the standard of tennis has fallen a huge amount in the last few years. The level is lower than in a long time for me and it's quite sad to see after the decade of fantastic tennis we've had.
Because he's a third wheel essentially, a third wheel that's comfortably overtaken the other two massively beloved players that he was never supposed to truly actually get near, as he rubs it in fans faces at times, as he should, given how badly he's been treated at times prior to even his covid meltdowns.
No, it's definitely the hair.
No it's definitely his breadist rants.
Maybe true but not relevant to the point I was making, because both Stan and Murray were at their best way before this period of the last few years that I was referencing. When Fed, Novak, Rafa, Murray and Stan were all firing, that was a tough period. It's not tough now, relatively speaking.
Djoker has won the last 4 Wimbledons and is now solidly in his mid 30s. Where were Murray and Stan W? Long gone. At the moment, the only person who can beat Novak is Rafa, and vice versa. As soon as Rafa pulled out of Wimby, we all knew that Novak had another title in the bag if we're being honest. We all knew that Kyrgios would have a screaming meltdown at some point and lose focus. This is not real competition.
The point is that the younger players, the Medvedevs, Zverevs, Ruuds, Rublevs etc.. are not challenging the legends enough at the moment.
Breadism
A religion that believes that bread is the ultimate source of life, and that everything began with bread.
Pat: What's your religion?
Eric: Breadism
Pat: What's Breadism?
Eric: BREAD IS LIFE MAN
Ah wait you mean breadist as in racist, because Novak pussy little digestion system can't handle bread.
No offense to the gluten intolerant contingent of the caf
- Status