Novak Djokovic Beats Roger Federer To Win Third Wimbledon
by Sean Randall | July 12th, 2015, 2:39 pm

What a performance by Novak Djokovic. After ripping through the Wimbledon draw, no one had looked better than Roger Federer who blew out Andy Murray on Friday. But then the 7-time champion ran into the world No. 1, and Djokovic played like his ranking beating Federer 7-6(1), 6-7(10), 6-4, 6-2 to collect this Boris Becker-tying third Wimbledon title and a 9th Grand Slam overall.

The two played a tight first set, trading breaks with Roger grabbing an early 4-2 lead before Novak broke right back. It wasn’t memorable tennis per se, but what we saw was what we thought we would. A few long rallies with Federer always looking to attack.

Djokovic was just stronger on the return of serve. He got up early in the breaker and sailed away with it 7-1.

In the second set, I felt the play picked up as Fed began serving better, hitting more aces. Federer saved a set point at 4-5. Then Djokovic saved breakpoints serving at 5-5. The two fought to the breaker which turned out to be one of the better ones we’ve seen in quite a while.

Behind some incredible tennis, Federer saved six set points to somehow steal the set with a 12-10 win.

But Djokovic didn’t sulk. He broke Federer in the third game to lead 3-2 before a brief rain delay. With the roof still open, the two returned to the court but Federer had lost the edge as Djokovic’s relentless pressure did in the Swiss. And it was over. Djokovic defends his Wimbledon title.

In the end, Djokovic showed why he is No. 1. He’s simply the best player in the planet. The surface doesn’t matter because even today, aside from the slips and falls we saw from him, Djokovic played like he was on a clay or a hardcourt. And he’ll win a lot more Slams as long as he can stay healthy and stay motivated.

Yes, he can have a blip where Stan Wawrinka can get him or even Roger, but Roger came in hot and on his favorite surface and just couldn’t keep up with the Serb.

“It’s a great privilege to play against Roger, who is a great champion,” Djokovic told the BBC. “He has done so much for our sport on and off the court. It’s a great honour to play him again. I was aware coming onto the court, that Roger would play his best when it matters the most. He pushes you to limits.”

For Federer, he had a fantastic run at Wimbledon, beating Andy Murray. But at 33, it’s just becoming that much tougher for him to beat his Big 4 mates in a best-of-5 situation.

“Novak not only played great today, but also this year, last year and the year before that,” Federer said. “Well done, Novak, you deserved it. At the end he was rock solid. I didn’t play bad myself, so I can be very happy. That’s the way it goes. Once more, it has been a privilege to play here.”

The 28-year-old Djokovic will now be the big favorite heading into the hardcourt season and as we go into the fall. And the way Novak’s playing, with the confidence despite his French Open loss, he’s not going to be slowing down.

In men’s tennis, he’s the best. There’s no one close.

You Might Like:
Spaniards Nadal, Ferrer Reach Tennis Masters Semis; Federer v. Roddick Today
Milos Raonic: Grass Comes More Naturally To Me Than Other Surfaces
Clijsters Beats Schnyder; How Weak is WTA Tour?
Tennis-X Funk/Trunk: Murray Funky, Federer Not
Henin, Sharapova Face Serbian Challenge at French Open

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

232 Comments for Novak Djokovic Beats Roger Federer To Win Third Wimbledon

Patson Says:

“In men’s tennis, he’s the best. There’s no one close.”

So true Sean ! So true ! And it’s also not that the field is full of Roddicks, and Gonzalezes, and Nalbandians etc. This is a tough men’s tennis field (probably the toughest in the last 15 odd years or so). Novak’s dominance is a testament to the fact that he’s probably the most complete and legitimate number 1 we’ve seen.

Vami Says:

I was surprised by the polls that had Roger as a clear favourite (on this site). People here seem to have a short memory and very few have played competitively any sport at all. You can’t base your opinion on the last match played.
Although Novak won the last 8 against Andy I felt that Andy’s chances were stronger to beat him in the final.
I’ve never seen Novak as confident against Roger as last time when he won Rome, I felt that somehow the momentum shifted in his favour. Today he still chocked a few crucial points on Roger’s 2nd serve but those were exceptions in a solid performance.
Roger is clearly No. 2 in the world but Novak’s greatest nemesis right now is Andy, he can’t keep beating him forever. The rest of the season will be interesting, draws will be very important. I think right now that Roger has an edge over Andy, Novak over Roger and Novak vs Andy (when he shows up) is 50:50. And Nadal is a big question mark, I don’t think he played as poorly as his latest results are suggesting.

Jeez Says:

Yeah !!

The field is FULL of Berdych,Tsonga,Raonic,Dimitrov,

& of course

Murray Wawrinka Cilic Nishikori



Wawrinka & Nishikori[ie:HEALTHY]

in RECENT times


Colin Says:

Some people have suggested it might be a good thing for men’s slam matches to be best of three except for the semis and the final. Well, I reckon this year’s Wimbledon results have knocked that idea on the head. Nole, the world No 1, wouldn’t even have got to the semis!

Tom Says:

His other nemisis is Stan. I’m still mad at Stan about the French. I still think playing that extra day cost him in Paris. Ecstatic as a Djokovic fan, but he needs another US Open (that 1-4 record in the final looks bad, although I’m still upset at US Open folks for making him play first in that heat in the SF last year and then the weather changed for Roger and it still didn’t help him) and he has to win the French. He could get to 15 and people will dog him for not winning the French. However, Bravo No1e!

brando Says:

“There’s no one close.”: That’s not because of him. Time for some truth to be spoken: the REALITY is in tennis there are ONLY 3 top tier players. The 2 who used to dominating, collecting all the majors etc ahead of Novak are now done. Federer? 34 next month. ONLY a clown would call him at his best. Nadal? 29, career worst season, looking washed up. Now when that is the REALITY of the 2 players better than Novak: WHY the hell should Novak not dominate? I mean who is there to stop him? 30 year old wawrinka? Lol. Andy Murray? Someone who hasn’t won a major in 2 years, is 2/8 in finals and 0-8 v novak. Come on Now. And who else is out there? Next in line is choker grigor, limited milos, and injury prone Kei. It’s just a joke of a field. I said it earlier this season and ill say it again: the field is pathetic right now and I expect Novak to dominate. Since he’d be a tool not to with such a opportunity. It’s him, Murray and wawrinka. A quick examination of their pedigree, trophies and h2h say: he’s got it at the same level as Federer in 2003-2007 when he had ONLY Hewitt, safin as 2 major winners. He’s got it made, and he’s cashing in like he ought to.

Jeez Says:


I thought NADAL would be called Roger’s NEMESIS for 10-22 H2H(in Nadal’s FAVOUR)

& not Federer be called the NEMESIS !!!

How come Murray be called the Novak’s NEMESIS
for his 8-19 H2H with 8 STAIGHT LOSES !!!

It really BEATS me


Jeez Says:


Its 23-10 in FAVOUR of NADAL..

Patson Says:

Haha at least you’ve got players like Wawrinka and Murray other than Fed and Nadal who are capable of winning majors. Wawrinka, Murray, Fed, and Nadal are orders-of-magnitude better than say Gonzalez, or Hewitt, or an old Agassi which was how the field looked like 10 years ago. My point ? It’s not Nole’s fault that he’s so damn good.

I’m just comparing the field of say 2005 to 2015, and the field we have today is MUCH stronger than it was back then.

chris ford1 Says:

The amazing Nole-Fed rivalry is notted up 20-20. A Wimbledon that only added to Roger’s legend and one that has likely moved Nole to join Roger and Rafa as an all-time Great of the sport. Both Roger and Nole have promoted the ATP globally like no others.
This Wimbledon, even if he didn’t win, had Roger display one of the greatest matches of his career in destroying Andy Murray. And make yet another huge final and play very well.

For Nole, it was a most consequential victory.
He equaled Becker’s 3, and 30 years after Boris won his 1st in 1985. He also moved past Boris into 10th place in most ATP titles achieved,
He did it on his wedding anniversary, and the couple shared some long loving hugs after the match was over. The closest and maybe most high quality rivalry the sport has seen, Djokovic-Federer, is now tied 20-20.
Djokovic now moves past Agassi, Lendl, and Jimmy Connors into 5th place in most “Slams” won in the Open Era. Only Borg(11), Sampras/Rafa (14), and Roger(17) have more. He is now tied in 4th place in most Wimbledon titles ever (3) with Becker, and MacEnroe. Only Borg, Sampras, and Fed have more wins there.
Nole is now , having defended his 2000 Wimbledon points, along with Roger’s shellacking of Murray, all but certain to move into 5th place in most weeks as #1 in early November.

And going forward, a chance to equal or exceed the mark for most Masters 1000 wins in a year. And to begin the chase to exceed Rafa as having the Most Masters.
The Djokovic assault on the record books is as relentless as his progress through most tournaments he enters.

Brando Says:


‘I’m just comparing the field of say 2005 to 2015’:

Oh be my guest. That was Federer era so if you want to mock that as weak, as a rafa fan all I can say is:

Be my guest! lol!

In all seriousness:

I have my opinion about this and I stated this clearly early this year. It doesn’t require repetition. Right now all I want to say is before I head out:

– Re Djokovic:

Congratulations to Novak Djokovic and his fans. Won’t name them all just call it the entire Nolefam.

He’s the best right now and he took care of business as he should. You beat what is infront of you however it maybe and he did that again, as he’s done virtually all year.

Props to the Serbinator for that, he’s a machine!

– Re Roger Federer:

Felt- very surprisingly- very bad and sorry for Roger Federer.

He seemed almost castrated of all confidence, self belief from point 1. It was apparent immediately that he would not win today like he did with Andy since I think it’s clear right now:

Novak is in Roger’s head no different from Rafa.

Why he did not go to baseline, hit his shots with the same power, verve like Friday- a performance many called career best- was clear to me:


I felt sorry for him since for me Roger Federer is all time no.1. A player with swagger. What I saw today was a player with no self belief.

And he did not like seeing RF like that.

Brando Says:

go to net, not baseline!

chris ford1 Says:

Slightly off-topic, props to 4 other players (besides Serena of course) who won titles.

Martina Hingis, looking fabulous at 34, returned to Wimbledon and won in doubles and mixed doubles.
With the help of her two awesome Indian team mates Sania Mirza and Leander Paes.
(I hope Roger or Stan consider mixed doubles and getting with Hingis or the other two excellent Swiss gals Bencic and Timea and working to get set for the Olympics. Peak dream would be Roger and Martina at 35 winning gold. And they are good enough to win, if the chemistry is right. They have won mixed doubles before. But if Roger can’t so he won’t get to tired, Stan can. And he might even get a bonus, being single again, with the Swiss vixen)
And props to American Reilly Opelka, who won the Wimbledon juniors title. Time to start a new, good generation of US tennis pros, and the Americans are showing some young players with talent.

Vami Says:

You don’t get it, do you. I don’t think that people who end their post with childish “LOL” deserve replies but I’ll make an exception only this time.
8-0 will mean nothing when they meet next time. Andy has no mental issues with Novak, they have been measuring each other since junior days. You’ll never understand that.

Wog Boy Says:

I would like to ask for permission his humbleness HR to declare No1e unofficially mini GOAT owner, though it is only 20:20 in H2H, more important is where and how No1e won his 20 matches, 14 plus one (WO) finals they played and Nole is 9 plus one (WO) against Roger’s 5. Yes, you can say No1e is in Roger’s head, he has been there since USO 2007.
For those who said Roger’s serve deserted him in the final, yes, his serve got s$it scared when it saw No1e on the other side of the net and ran away.
Just to finish, yes, Roger is the GOAT, he has #17, the rest is gravy;)

kjb Says:

@Patson I disagree that it is a stronger field now. Fed is ranked #2 in the world and he is 6 years past his prime, and still making slam finals. Hewitt, Roddick and Agassi were all slam winners, Nalbandian made a slam final and many slam semi’s and also won the WTF.

Wog Boy Says:

Agree with Vami, I was more scared of Andy in the final than Roger in the final…but still didn’t cheer Roger in the SF.

Wog Boy Says:

Since I am running late for work I would like to call upon most of the Roger fans and ask them to go and reread their posts after Roger beat Andy and before final …and tell me how do you feel now after the final reading your prefinal posts;)

RZ Says:

Congrats to Djokovic and his fans on his successful Wimbledon defense.

Commiserations to my fellow Fed fans. At least we had his vintage semifinal performance.

csl24 Says:

Anytime Roger loses a major final, I am depressed throughout the rest of the day. Coaches have said Federer takes losses in stride like no other, yet I burn like a crispy piece of bacon.

Skeezer Says:

@wog boy
I feel fine. I gravy baby since 17.

Congrats to Nole fans, he played like the world #1 he is.
Only 2 points on the match for me.
-Fed did not move nearly as well as against Andy.
-Nole’s serve has put him on another level. He was already winning titles without a dominant serve. Look out the next 2 years.
Great Wimbledon!

Wog Boy Says:

I think this time around the gravy has more wasabi than needed.

mat4 Says:

Sometimes, I have the impression of deja vu, when I read the same posts over and over again. E.g., the level of the field, the competition.

It becomes now clear that we have witnessed, in the last decade, the evolution of three among the top 5 players of the open era. Only Borg and Sampras are that high with the number of slams, while, in other compartments, they are clearly the number 1,2 and 3. Just look at the recap made on the wiki page of ATP WT records. It doesn’t have to be accurate, but the names of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are almost everywhere.

With a “normal” field, they would have had, anyone of the three of them, even more impressive results: Roger lost three WB finals against all time greats and multiple WB winners — at their peak. Without any doubt, Novak would have won the FO in 2012, 2013 and 2014 without Rafa on the other side of the net. Rafa’s career would have been easier, without so much injuries, had he not fought bitter battles against Novak since 2011 at least.

We just have witnessed how a 34 years old Federer dispatched the field in WB, where physicality isn’t that important in the last two years. How many slams would have Agassi won after 2000 if he had to play a Djokovic, or a Federer, or a Nadal? None.

But time is tennis runs fast. We better enjoy till we can, since those three will retire in just a few years, and the void will ensue. We had a champion winning 10 slams at least every 20 years until they arrived on the scene, and we will have another one in 20 years again. The new “legends” will be players like Dimitrov, or NK, or 4K, of KG, great players of their own, but far from the peaks attained by Federer, Nadal and Djokovic.

So… I hope they will play the longest they can, even if it means they would lose in the third round. Just to watch them a bit longer: Federer’s grace, Nadal’s grit, Djokovic’s versatility and perfection. And for Novak, I hope he will be finally lucky an win a few more slams, just in case. Although nothing is granted in sport, he simply deserves it.

Markus Says:

When Federer was number 1, he was dominant but had one clear nemesis, Nadal. When Nadal was number 1, well, he wasn’t really a dominating number one except on clay. With Djokovic, does he have a real nemesis? Wawrinka, maybe? But Stan is rather inconsistent to be a constant threat to Djokovic. Djokovic may well be the most dominating number 1 on all surfaces, notwithstanding his defeat at the FO, but remember also that he has beaten the greatest clay court player in many important tournaments. Djokovic may be 8 slams behind Roger and 5 behind Rafa but he has gained his way in in that circle of the greatest ever. I’m starting to move away from that GOAT concept. These 3, plus Laver, Borg, Sampras are/were so magnificent during their times that it seems unfair to anoint a single person as the best ever.

jane Says:

great posts mat4 and markus! :)

jane Says:

thanks skeezer & RZ. (i know your favourite didnt win but he still has 7 of these titles, so no worries or woe, really)

jalep Says:

Wog Boy

I picked an Andy v Nole final with Andy winning the title. Truly thought FO would be haunting Nole since, evidently, the loss haunts me more… also feared Andy more than Federer in the final.

Clearly I didn’t think Federer would play as he did vs Andy. Nor did I think Andy would lose to Federer. Federer vs Nole is a whole different dynamic than Federer vs Andy.

Guilty of underestimating Nole’s resilience is what I am. Guess the Anderson match gave me a scare that he might be in trouble. But he’s rock solid. Very happy day…really loved how he embraced Jelena in the hallway to the locker room…lovely and genuine – speaks to his character dedicating this win to her and his son.

Well played No1e!

skeezer Says:

Wog boy,
Thought you had to go and were running “late” to work?
Run Forrest Run!
Another great post, as usual.

Some are depressed about Feds loss, I am not. He lost to the better man today, that is all. To me Fed is the better man career wise, by far. Fed has made it to a Wimpy final 2 years in a row into his 30’s. A great feat, and the records will show it and continue to mount in in all time record career. Allez!

It should also be noted the Nole now has more Wimbledon titles in his career than anybody but Fed. Another great feat and yes, more titles than Rafa. Can’t see anyone competing with Nole on Grass for years to come, unless Murray improves his service games, which could happen. Nole has a bright couple of years coming up barring any unforeseen health issues.
Fed? Just glad you’re still playing and still showing the magic once in awhile that made you the all time great. The Murray/Fed match will stay on my DVR for the next year at least.

jalep Says:

Oh hello jane and HAPPY BIRTHDAY! :D

July 12. I’ll not forget. And I can be very annoying about remembering birthdays…skeezer should know ;)

yes, enjoyed the posts mat4 and Markus.

Wog Boy Says:


To be honest I am with jalep on this one, FO hurts, I didn’t get over it, I would swap this one for FO, but Nole probably wouldn’t:)
Yes I have seen that hugging in hallway, they are just who they are, great personalities and one happy family.
Haven’t slept (and not sorry) and I have to work, but I have dark sunglasses…though it is raining:)

django Says:

I just want Nole to win one more than that disgusting Tilden who was so distasteful that people barely mention him.

brando Says:

@Skeezer: serious question: do you envisage Federer winning another slam or not as he’s 34 in USO? For me personally: IF rafole in final, cannot see it. Anyone other than: absolutely on.

jalep Says:

That’s the spirit skeezer!

@ 8:05 pm

mat4 Says:

Jalep, jane, skeez, Wb:

Thank you all for the warm welcome! It is always a pleasure to be here with you.

I won’t post until the USO, but I hope I will be there with you again then.

The deception was huge when Novak lost at Roland Garros, and I didn’t expect he would recover for WB. Here, I have to repeat what Wb wrote already: thank you, Boris Becker. Little by little, you changed the physiognomy of Novak’s game, and I hope you will continue: I would like to watch an even more aggressive Novak, more federesque in attack.

J., happy birthday!

A final word about my previous post: Rafa needed three years to make a place under the sun for himself, confronted to Roger; Novak needed 4 years to win slams on a regular basis, with Rafa and Roger playing, Roger’s winning career was shortened by at least three years with Novak and Rafa, so… how do you think the Dimitrov, Raonic, Nishikori, and others do feel when they know that those three wait for them before the final step of a tournament? It can be heartbreaking.

Just look at Andy, who is a multiple slam winner, and extremely gifted: he lost against Fed, in the semi, being broken twice at 5-6, once at 4-5. The mental fortitude one has to have to conquer the big three is unworldly.

mat4 Says:

BTW… skeez and Wb — I like you both, and your fan war pains me. Does it have to be that way?

jane Says:

awww thanks jalep – sweet posts from a sweet lady and tennis fan.

wog boy – sad about FO but novak now joined elite company having 3 (or more) slams at 2 of them. only 5 other men can say that. plus, he’ll have another few shots to win the FO; he’s not retiring. i am more than content and thrilled and wouldn’t trade anything!

jalep Says:

Also, interesting post chris ford1 @ 4:57 pm

Saw that Reilly Opalka won, too. He’s extremely tall is what I know about him. As tall as Isner? He might be. US tennis has some fine prospects in the juniors – I like Taylor Fritz and Noah Rubin.

Mikeal Ymer (SWE) was the runner up – not sure if he’s related to Elias Ymer, who did rather well on grass this year too. Teenagers both of them.

On the girls side was a Russian v Russian. Sophya Zhuyk d. Anna Blinkova. Russian teens doing well – of course I like Andrey Rublev on clay. He didn’t get past 2nd round Wimbledon main draw qualifying. Was hoping he’d turn up in the boys draw, as he’s still just 17.

Hoping to see more from these kids in the next year.

Skeezer Says:

Re; wogboy
Yes because I have never accepted his drink offer :(, so I revolt shamefully.
Happy Bday Jane, may your future Bdays have more Nole wins :)

Skeezer Says:

Sorry I am not the one to ask. Thought Fed was done after 2012 Wimby. Go figure.

jane Says:

serena looks so pretty at the ball; what a lovely colour on her that dress is.

jane Says:

thanks skeezer!

Brando Says:


Yeah it’s kinda tough to figure that one. I think he’ll one more opportunity like this year Wimby, last year at Wimby and USO.

But as in life:

It’s all about taking opportunities, and that probably depends on alot of variables.

jalep Says:

mat4 – always like reading you here. But I know all about not having the time to post regularly. Probably will be posting less until August myself.

Taking some time off in July.

Wonderful Wimbledon and surprising clay season in tennis. Hope to see Rafa back to fighting form – 29 is too young these days to retire the tennis career. And Federer will like keep playing until 40, as Margot suggested. Serena too…can’t see her slowing down any time soon.

cheers all!

Skeezer Says:

Cheers jalep, have a great summer! ;-)

Wog Boy Says:

No it doesn’t, but you have to accept my offer (drink and whatever goes with that) and come to Belgrade Aug/Sep or Ireland July/Aug where I’ll be with my Dublin friends, Nole fans, who are killing me with viber messages from some drinking hole in Dublin when ever Nole plays, I can imagine how they cheer him after few Jameson’s and Guinness’s
It is your call now:)

Wog Boy Says:

^^ I upgraded you to mat5, hope you don’t mind..

Brando Says:

Checkout post:

I got alot going on at the moment so i’ll be checking out of here and tennis really till USO, so i’ll just to a quick Wimbledon summary and how I see it affecting things going forward.


This is my honest opinion and apologize to Novak fans if they find it ill timed, but to be honest: I rather say it when he’s on a high than a low. My 2 points:

1. Novak’s win for me was a case of good fortune making up for Paris Bad fortune:

Pre- Wimbledon consensus seemed to be that Novak would be depressed, naturally, post FO. Infact: Novak said the Paris loss is still in him and he does not know how long it will take to get out of his system. One can understand.

Many also felt his biggest rival, threat indeed was ANDY MURRAY for this title. Many of his fans even predicted Andy to win.

Yet, Novak had a pathaway that saw him get to the final with tennis that even ANDY RODDICK stated had him being passive, uninterested at times. Even WOG BOY- a firm Novak fan as any- stated he felt some of what Roddick was saying was correct, pre final.

The truth is: Kohls, Nimenien, Tomic, Anderson, Cilic and Gasquet were NEVER a real threat. Novak could get away with being passive against those guys since they don’t demand much from him. Even when he was down 0-2, I commented on here (see thread, interaction with COURBON) he’s going to win since Anderson is a known choker. And look what unfolded: exactly that.

And the final:

He got EXACTLY the opponent he wished for. Pre- event the 2 players Novak likely would not have wanted to face was Andy and Stanimal for obvious reasons. 34 year old Federer was DEFINITELY the one of the likely contenders he would pick for the final.

We saw why in the final: Now like RAFA NADAL it’s abundantly clear that Nole is in Fed’s head. Whatever Fed does prior to them meeting in a Slam, Novak- like Rafa- will be a completely different obstacle for Fed mentally.

So the route to the title worked out to be perfect for him. Honestly speaking:


KOHLS has neither serve, power, big shots. A tired 5 set ridden NIEMENEN? Rafa take that. TOMIC? He beat him at Stuggart- sure he’ll take that one.

ANDERSON? Rafa beat him in AO R16, and Ando is a Rafa fan: he’ll choke v Rafa out of politness. CILIC? In a QF that’s a dream matchup for Rafa. Especially considering Marin’s pre- event, then route to QF struggles.

And then GASQUET and a 34 year old who is intimidated by him: come on now.

I think many here if they are being HONEST would see Rafa winning that route: and that’s a Nadal who is having a horror season!

My point here is:

NO ASTERISK or saying lucky draw etc, but just pointing out the stars aligned here nicely for Novak and he fully deserved it. This was makeup for RG where he most have gone in thinking: I cannot win RG because of Rafa. Boom: he beats him. Surely he must have thought I got RG bagged. Then he had the extreme misfortune of having Wawrinka perform like that.


Why I say here he had the good fortune he lacked in Paris. I do not see what I state as unfair there to be honest, but IF a nole fan considers it as if i’m knocking his win: my sincere apologies since that is not my intention. I feel that luck, fortune plays a part in one’s outcome and that the bad luck Nole experienced in Paris, was replaced with good luck here.

2. Andy Murray will win USO:

This is my prediction. I think Novak was unlucky to face THAT wawrinka performance in RG cruely. Nole won here. Equally, Andy was unlucky to get THAT federer performance here. NO ONE-even Federer himself- saw that coming and poor Andy had to cop it when he seemed heading towards a final in many people’s opinion.

I think for many observers in Tennis:

Andy Murray is a special player, a Champion of 2 majors, this year has been brilliant consistently, has improved for sure and really:

He’s OVERDUE a major title. He’s too good to be a 2 title winner and he’s too good to be on the receiving end 0-8 v Novak. Not too long ago, once upon a time, was he the ONE may stated as Novak’s bad matchup ahead of others.

So I honestly think:

Andy is ready for a Slam win. He has the form. He just needs the LUCK. It’s a gut feeling but I think at USO he will get that overdue bit of good fortune and he will win there once again.

You heard it here first!

To end:

Apologies about the obviously long post. Apologies Nolefam IF you thought i was knocking Novak’s win. I’m not. Just being honest as to how I see it. Congrats once again on the win nonetheless: well deserved as I thought he warranted a Slam win after 26-0. (Thought RG was his, fate cruelly intervened in Wawa’s form so he warrants this win as compensation for sure).

I’ll see peeps hopefully September time and tell then as HR says:

Stay Humble no? p

Markus Says:

My take on this Wimbledon is that it highlighted how far behind the other 3 Murray really is. Djokovic is well established as number one. Federer remains a contender even past his prime years and if a door opens, he still has the ability to win a slam. One does not get into a major finals for nothing. Nadal happens to have a freaky bad year but he is so ensconced in his place in tennis history that it can not be tarnished no matter how he does from hereon. I still expect him to recover and get back into the thick of things. Yes, Murray deserves being in the Big 4 but there is no debate as ragards where he sits in that group.

Daniel Says:

I think right now Djoko’s 9 is closest to Nadal and Sapras 14 than Nadal 14 is closest to Fed’s 17 due to his current state of play plus age.

If Djoko wins USO this year and finish the year with 10 (having another year with 3 Slams as 2011), 14 is very reachable in next 2 years.

Fed most likely won/t beat Djoko in a Slam again, murray still a big question mark, only Wawa was bale to beat him twice in last 7 majors but he has to be there in the end to play Novak regularly, and at 30 don’t see it either. It’s Djoko’s time, 3 of the last 5 Slams.

mat4 Says:


While I am here… I don’t really agree with you on some points. While Novak indeed had a solid draw, a draw that unfolded in an optimal way for him, I don’t think that Stan would have been a very dangerous opponent on grass. Just compare here with RG: while Stan has a lot of power, he doesn’t move well. Every time he played Novak close, it was on surfaces with high rebound, or, like in Paris, on a slow court with high rebound and slow balls. At the WTF, Stan lost tamely. In Paris it was an easy match for Novak. Both of those surface are slow but the rebound is low.

My take here is that Novak would have been the favourite.

I agree that Novak probably wouldn’t have liked to play against Andy at WB. Andy puts a lot of balls in play, and his game is well suited to grass. But the way Andy crumbled under pressure against Fed was telling. He knew the key was not to lose his serve and win one of the two first sets to have a good chance of winning. He was broken twice at 5-6.

I read a lot about Fed’s impressive game in that match, but, since I watched it, I rather believe my own eyes: Fed indeed played well, but he played as well last year in the first and third sets of the final. I don’t even remember how many aces he made in that third set (just checked, 13), but he seemed untouchable. Murray failed to do the only thing he could and had to do: take the match into a TB, where anything is possible, and where the better player doesn’t always win. To win, he had to win one of the two first sets. He got tense the way Novak did at the USO 2008, a few feet from the desired goal.

Then, about the opponents: of course, Nieminen, Kohly, etc were not opponents who could beat Novak. But, frankly, how many players beat Novak this year? Despite this, he got dangerous servers in his quarter, the kind of players he doesn’t like, from Anderson — who served very well for three sets at least — to Cilic, a guy able to blow anybody away from the court with his serve.

He avoided Murray in the semi, and that’s the only positive in his draw. But it was a big one, indeed, since Novak — and we witnessed it many times — uses to get tense against players he doesn’t like to play against.

To finish: yes, Andy will be one of the favourite to win the USO this year. He’s simply that good. But there are a lot of excellent players comfortable on hard, and the road is long to the title.

jane Says:

mat4, great post. boris in on video at the wimbledon site and he says he’s seen murray play better and especially return better, and i agree. plus i do think he cracked a bit at the end of each set. obviously fed gave a vintage performance, but andy wasn’t as his best imo.

jane Says:

^ please excuse typos

muhammad nizam Says:

it’s okay roger federer.. hard luck but you away the legend and forever champion

Okiegal Says:

@Skeezer….My birthday is August 4th….are you going to wish me a happy birthday and more wins for Rafa?? I sure hope so………

Happy Birthday Jane!! Congratulations to you on Novak’s #9! I know you’re busting your buttons with excitement! I’m busting mine also, but with too much food….big Sunday dinner!!

It’s been a great two weeks of tennis!! On to HC and looking forward to USO!!

To all the loyal Fed fans out there, sorry he couldn’t win his 18th, I really thought this was the year he would get his 18th!

mat4 Says:


Seen Boris’ interview after the match. Then, Flink also wrote in his blog post that usually, just like Connors before, Roger come out of the starters all cylinders firing. Andy just didn’t manage to stay calm under the pressure.

Ruan wrote also an interesting post on the final at the Ultimate tennis blog (once “Ruan’s Federer’s blog”). He’s now a Novak fan, go figure. I like his bias and his warm subjectivity. He’s a tennis coach, btw.

He mentioned that Novak was mentally very fatigued in the final of the FO, something that could be true, but, in my opinion, had a lesser impact than the court and the conditions overall. I could be wrong there, obviously.

Something that is very interesting is an infograph on SI tennis. They compared the number of best servers and best returners in the top ten in 1991 and 2015. It was quite normal to see Novak among the best returners, but I was surprised to see him among the 5 top servers of the Tour!

It is something we don’t take enough in account. The key stat here is the % of service game won, and, indeed, Novak is number 5, with 91% in 2015 so far.

Then, here, before the match, Sean wrote that Fed has a better FH than Novak. Not on grass, where Novak time and time again won the FH CC rallies. While Fed has a better inside out FH, I believe that CC Novak’s FH is as good. Anyway, since 2011, whenever I could check that stat they were making the most FH winners in GS tournaments.

mat4 Says:


I hope I won’t forget to wish you a happy birthday, and I hope you will enjoy more Novak’s GS victories.

About Novak’s FH, here are stats from Craig O’Shannessy:

“Djokovic’s forehand was extremely impressive in the final, hitting 17 winners to Federer’s 15, while only committing seven (Federer 17) unforced errors. Djokovic hit it harder and flatter than normal against Federer’s primary baseline weapon.”

Emily Says:

Haven’t posted since the final, but big congrats to the Nole fans. Posters like jane, mat4, WogBoy and others have been a really positive collective, so to speak, and I’m glad you’re having a better 2nd Sunday at a slam than the last one.

I was impressed by Roger in his semi, but I didn’t think he was going to win the final. Novak is such a different opponent for him mentally as well as game wise than Murray, and it was clear that Nole was in his head from the offing. He was controlling the rallies and breaking down Federer’s backhand. However, credit to Roger for getting that 2nd set, and I wondered how Novak would handle that. He did a great job just to get back to work and then could go into that rain delay up a break. Federer looked defeated by the end of the 3rd, and just didn’t have the fight of last year. Still a great result for him.

The other observation I had was how this trophy presentation was like night and day compared to Paris. That had some really beautiful moments w/ Novak’s crowd ovation, the conversation b/w him and Stan, what they said in their speeches…maybe it’s Sue Barker’s fault?

jane Says:

thanks okie and emily. re: your point on the ceremony, i think it was too bad they closed the roof before starting it, because everyone had to wait around longer. seemed a bit flat.

Okiegal Says:


I will look forward to a birthday greeting from a loyal Novak fan!! I might even cheer for Novak if he should ever play Soderling!! :)

Michael Says:

Novak not only beat Roger Federer, but also the partisan crowd at London which was resisting his win.

It is understandable for the crowd to be enamoured, overwhelmed and fanatical about Roger who is a legend in his own right and he has earned this support and adulation through his spectacular achievements over the years that he has graced this sport. But that support cannot be so one sided to offend the opponent. The London crowd was extremely discourteous to Novak throughout the match who is also a Champion in his own right and deserves respect.

This unruly behavior of the crowd is most unsporting, disgusting and should be detested.

skeezer Says:

Nole when on, can create angles from the baseline that really open up the court from the baseline. This was what made him take over a lot of the rallys. Strictly shotmaking, Feds FH can be more dominating. The thing is, Nole can create more angles and DTL from both wings. Fed can too, but not as well.
Regardless, I think once you dissect the match it really was about Nole’s service games and his serve. It kept him In front, and saved him when he got in any trouble for the most part, which disrupted Fed from controlling the match on his own terms.
Final thought…Nole said ( more than once ) playing Fed has made him a better player on Tour. Fed continues to inspire not only his fans, but his fellow players as well.

Michael Says:

Now coming to the match, it was evident that for Roger to have a chance to win must reproduce the magic that he did against Andy. Especially against a player like Novak who was scratchy all through this Wimbledon only to reserve his best form for the finals, Roger needed some thing more. And that was not to be. His first serve percentage although clocking about 67% was just not enough. Also, Roger was making far too many UEs on the back hand wing much to his liking and his shot selection was mediocre. You can produce the magic only if your opponent allows you to do it.

The key to the match came when Roger broke Novak in the middle of the first set only to squander the lead in the succeeding service game with a misdirected volley which emanated with the result of him trying too much and some bad shot selection. Novak always found something special to produce at the right moments and he equalled and just breezed past Roger in the one sided tie break.

The second Set was a sea-saw battle where Novak must mostly in the front even in the tie break and Roger just played some scintillating Tennis at the right moments to squeeze out a win which left Novak pretty fazed and cursing himself. In the third set, Novak broke early and there was a break due to rain which many thought would help Roger halting Novak’s momentum. But ironically, it helped Novak who just was not the same player when he came back to the court and produced some of the outrageous shots that you can see only from him with impeccable length, close to the lines and completely deceiving the opponent. Roger had just no answers to Novak’s perseverance and consistency and I would dare to say he was completely outclassed. With the result, Roger’s dream of an unprecedented 8th title and 18th grand slam crown has to wait for another day. With the time catching up with him, Roger may well not win another slam.

For Novak, to produce some thing of this quality after his crashing defeat at Rolland Garros is incredulous. As Roger rightly said, he is a player who is unimpacted and uninfluenced by what is happening around him and indeed he is a man of steely resolve, mental fortitude and a physical freak with tremendous endurance. He might have developed these amazing qualities coming from a war ravaged Country. With no one presently in sight to challenge him, he might well go on to win the US open too and would be cursing himself for not winning Rolland Garros !!

Michael Says:

It is flummoxing. Isn’t it ? When Roger was winning everything before him, they claimed that he was helped by playing in a weak era. Now, it is Novak’s turn to face the heat and they say he is helped by the fact that there is no real competition.

Unfortunately, by such cranky and weird assessments, credit doesn’t go the player who deserve it for their domination !!

Margot Says:

Brando @9.14pm
You carry on with “long” posts like that :)
Here’s hoping you are right.

Wog Boy Says:


Boris Becker was laughing stock on TX last year, Sean even had a thread (if my memory is right) asking how long Boris is going to last with Nole. Somehow I believed all along that it was/is good move even I never was a fan of Boris as a player. Vajda made right move knowing how much Nole is connected with a people he works not cut all ties and leave but to stay around until Nole and Boris click, I would call him mentor for both of them, Boris and Nole. I am pretty sure transition period is over and chemistry was right. I’ll repeat what I said on other thread, in 18 months with Nole they won 3GS, 8 masters, WTF … At three things improved under Becker, Serve, Net game, volleys and most likely mental approach to the match…hang on a minute, that’s four things:)

peter Says:

No, this win doesnt make this year a good year for Nole. With the dominance he’s shown this year, anything less than 3 slams is underperformance.

After losimg to nadal six times, he finally beat him, only to lose to Stan who had two days extra rest overall and an easier draw.

RG still lingers and if he doesn’t win it at all, no matter how many slams he gets he is not in the same conversation as roger or Rafa. He will end up as Pete sampras at best, the one who just couldn’t win on clay.

I feel Andy has focused too much energy on clay this year, resulting in a poor grass showing. He took Nole to five sets and essentially gave the title to Stan. On his best surface he lost to federer in straights, the match wasn’t even close. And it wasn’t that federer just served well, he actually won more of the rallies against Andy, which doesn’t happen if Andy’s playing well. It is not coincidence when Andy won wimby 13 he skipped RG to prepare himsel)f for grass.

Nole remains the biggest underachiever in the big 3. He can get as many finals as he wants but the conversion rate is poor. He would have got a few more slams if he had joined the UK and get better crowd support in his matches.

Wog Boy Says:

Thanks once more to all people who congratulated me or Nole fans, I won’t named them since I might miss someone:)

Hippy Chick Says:

LOL Finding out alot of new stuff on this forum,when Janes birthday is,when Okies birthday is,and we all now know what Wogboy looks like,question Wogboy where did you get the monikor from?….

st4r5 Says:

Federer is old, yes he is the most talented, yes he may be still fresh running around the court, yes he still has the mental of the champion, but one thing for sure, his mind can longer sustain focus for a good 3 to 5 hours of a grueling match. There will be 3 to 4 minutes of lapse of concentration in patches along the way which is enough for him to lose to someone like Jokovic.

Wog Boy Says:


It was movie about first generation of Australian immigrants born here called “Wog Boy”, since I am Wog (person of Mediterranean or Eastern European backround) I took that moniker. This is movie trailer:

Colin Says:

Michael, I am amazed by your comments about the Wimbledon crowd. On the contrary, I thought they were remarkably disciplined, certainly compared to other crowds round the world. They shut up at a word from the umpire (who had an excellent match, I thought).

Another thing: wasn’t it you who, when I said the BBC might lose Wimbledon because the government and press are so biased against it, said the Beeb should not try to compete with other channels in trashy programmes but should stick to making quality stuff?

Your estimate of public taste is way too kind, I fear. Detailing his plans for emasculating the Beeb, the Chancellor, George Osborne, said BBC would still be able to produce great TV like – wait for it – Strictly Come Dancing! He, a typical senior Conservative cabinet figure, was educated at posh private schools, and took a degree at Oxford. One might reasonably expect him to be a man of some culture. Yet his idea of great TV is Strictly Come Dancing. RIP British culture. The Muslims may as well take over now. Or the Chinese. We’re done.

Jock-KatH Says:

Rain to Blame for SW19 Woe – Federer.

Rick Says:

I don’t know why Sean would think that Fed could wins in five sets. As I told Sean that, if Fed wants to make the final or to win a tournament. He has to gets off the court fast. Or if has difficult 5 sets, even if he prevails. It is very likely for him to win his next very easily. Because he will be dead tired!

Rick Says:

So it is very unlikely for Fed to ever win another Slam again.

sienna Says:

many of you believed Feds best and only chance to win slam was wimbly.
I always said US open was hos best shot.
Wimbly could be his when temperature was as in first week.

yesterday was to cold. he could only do it if he would taken 1 of the set points in set 1.

With Marin still not at required level Federer looks to be favorite on the US Open courts. Those are the type of HC he has actually beaten in prime Djokovic.

calmdownplease Says:

`I think right now that Roger has an edge over Andy, Novak over Roger and Novak vs Andy (when he shows up) is 50:50`

Most of you (as usual) are wrong.
Fed is NOT in Andy’s head, Andy was right there from the ground game matching Fed easily serving very well.
But ROGER pulled out the serving performance of his lifetime
Because he KNEW he would be up against it otherwise, so he blasted him off the court
If he could have done it against Novak he certainly would have but that might be the last time he pulls that one off, like ever.
Otherwise we would have got a competitive final (and i think it could well have been Andy’s third title)
Roger Federer is old, old, old
He looked every bit his age in that final.
He’s played nearly 1300 matches and 15 years on the tour, it’s not even just his age.
Good news is Andy will be back to his best in as matter of weeks!
And we learnt that he is actually now competitive for the FO too.
It’s all about Novak Andy and Wawa now
Stick a fork in Fedal’s a**es, they are DONE.

calmdownplease Says:

`I read a lot about Fed’s impressive game in that match, but, since I watched it, I rather believe my own eyes: Fed indeed played well, but he played as well last year in the first and third sets of the final.`

Fed played and more importantly SERVED far better in the semi
I can’t believe the revisionism has already begun on that one!

calmdownplease Says:

`My take on this Wimbledon is that it highlighted how far behind the other 3 Murray really is. Djokovic is well established as number one. Federer remains a contender even past his prime years and if a door opens, he still has the ability to win a slam..

And who is the other one of the 3 wawa or Nadal?!
Fed will NEVER get another slam
It’s common sense
At no point could he have been seen to be a problem for Novak accept briefly in the first (for about 5 minutes)
Fed will start to lose against Murray now as he did previously at masters level
And then we are back to normal service.

calmdownplease Says:

`Stick a fork in Fedal’s a**es, they are DONE`

Okay, Knowing what Andy came through I still think Rafa can come back
But I’ll have to see it first

calmdownplease Says:

Actually correction
Roger federer turned pro in 98 so that’s 17 years on the tour!

Michael Says:


I do not share your appreciation of the crowd behavior. It was blatantly partial, rude and unfair to Novak. Many times, he hit outstanding shots, there was reluctant appreciation or even worse was booed by the crowd. That is not certainly a sign of how a matured crowd would behave. Well, if you compare the crowd behavior to Italian or Argentinian variety, then may be you have a point on relativity !!

The second and third para that you have written, I wonder whether it was misdirected to me !?

Felipe Says:

This final was exactly like the one played last year, both spliting the first 2 sets in tie breaks, Djokovic winning the third 6/4 and taking a comanding 5/3 lead in the fourth. The difference was that, this year Djokovic is on a mission, and he would not let the french open loss and also the last year experience repeating again. So instead of losing 4 straight games and finally win a tight 5 setter, he went to the neck and broke Federer to win convincingly in 4 sets.
As i said once he got he Aussie Open, Djokovic badly wants to be the best player of his generation, and put his name ALONGSIDE Federer and be considered better than Nadal, since people still consider Nole as “the third wheel” of the FEDAL era.
His determination, mental strenght and discipline are top notch, but the most impressive thing is that he is hungry and willing to improve any aspect that he feels is important to be the best.
His backhand slice, his volleys, his forehand and his service have improved in quality and consistency, add that his speed, flexibility, return of service, endurance and his two handed backhand, you have a player “almost perfect”

Daniel Says:


He still got a long way to got to check Sampras and Nadal, but he is right there in contention:

– Most likely will end this year with a positive Huh over Fed and at least tie Nadal if they play a few times more. With Nadal lower rankings, even if he does~t go deep he can run in Novak early as R16 or Quarters, until he can clime back to Top 5-8.

– could get closer to the record of 27 Masters title this season if he wins 2 more and Nadal doesn’t win any this season (which is possible), we are entering fast HC period. Hope he wins Cincy in a couple of weeks to complete the Masters set, a feat only he would have, missing only RG next year for a big title. And Olympics next year will be on hard, so he will definitely have a shot of Olympic gold singles, although he already has a medal.

– can also be double digit Slam winner by the end of the year, all lies at the US Open. If he wins US Open I think 14 is reachable, if not, very hard. His results there can determine his future status. He will play counting US Open 6 more Slams before he turn 30 (during RG in 2017), so his gap is also decreasing. As much as he is pretty cabale of winning Slam post 30, we never knows when his level will drop and history has shown us that very few can 2 or more after that age. SO he has to take full advantage of is level and grab as much as he can.

– already is better than Nadal in 2 Slams, AO and Wimbledon, 1 more US Open and he surpass him there as well with more finals, more semis, more victories in that Slam (which he already have).

– already is a better #1, pretty safe to be Year End #1 for a 4 year and could tie Fed with 5 or Surpass him and tie Sampras with 6, will be in contention for top 5 stats in this category as well. Probably will be #1 for the whole calendar years, which will be another nice feat for his stellar resume

– He is now at 200 Grand Slam match victories and won 8 of the last 19 since 2011. If he grabs US Open it will be 9 out of 20, basically half the Slams in last 5 years.

All of this could be reach in next 2 years and some are almost certain, it all depends on his hunger, drive, injury free and keeping this level. Or somebody else stepping in and stopping him (Murray, best candidate now). Will see…

But is a joy to watch him play flawless tennis in almost all aspects of the game and his come of age.

sienna Says:

Roger establishing himself as #2 after manhandling Murray in straight sets.
atleast Federer can say he had serious win chances in final with first break and 2 setpoints first set / breakpoints second and winning breaker/ first breakpoints in third.
What did Murray had to show for? als single BP and couple of deuces in lobsided 3 set loss.
It was O2 all over again. Murphy has been delivered a deadblow. He will not recover untill US HC swing 2016 starts.

Daniel Says:

Oh, and I fogot total titles won, Djoko is at 54 now and Nadal at 65. By the pace Djoko is going he cna finish this season close to 58-60. He is going to play for sure 7 more tourneys: (USO, WTF, 4 Masters and Beijing). If he wins 3 or 4 he finishes with 57-58 titles if he wins 4 he will have another 10 titles per season year as he is at 6-2 for the year. Played 9 tornaments on only missed final in the most insignificant one, Doha, after that, 8 finals in a row.

mat4 Says:


There is no revisionism, and I advise you to watch again the first and third set of the 2014 final, probably the best sets played in ANY final in the last 15 years. I write this because I compared that match with the famed final of 2008, and Roger’s game was superior. I also have no doubts that, had Roger played the game plan of 2014 in 2008, he would have won, just like Novak would have beat Rafa on grass with last years game, and especially serve. (Of course, the corporate journalists who have written extensively that the 2008 final was the best ever can’t admit so soon that they were wrong.) Last year, Novak played two notches above Andy’s performance of this years semi, returning better, putting a lot more pressure on Roger’s serve and serving better. But what is more important is that he was steady in crisis, and kept his composure under pressure.

Andy had to know that he probably won’t be able to touch Roger on his service games in the two first sets, when Roger is still fresh and doesn’t miss the lines.

Then, like I said, I didn’t have to read the news to know what to think — when a player gets broken serving twice at 5-6, although I won’t write that he choked (the quality of his opponent’s game was also important, so one doesn’t have to choke to lose), I am sure he was too tense. He wasn’t aggressive in the rallies, waiting for an error from Fed. We should also check how many first serves he made in those games, but I guess it was under 50%.

I also don’t understand your vicious attacks on Federer, who, although past his PHYSICAL prime, still plays exquisite tennis. I’ll remind you that Andy was taken apart in the AO final in a similar fashion, only worse — although _in his prime_, he was bagelled in the fourth set. He also lost his last three matches against the Swiss, all convincingly.

Anyway, like usual you write nonsense.

Giles Says:

@ Daniel. Have you ever heard the expression ” don’t count your chickens before they are hatched”? That is exactly what you are doing now. What happens if joker suffers a serious injury? It is possible! 😜

Daniel Says:


Exclent post. I don’t get this going after Fed also.

Prior to semis cdp was saying Fed would hit a wall versus Murray and so on. Now that he will “never” win another Slam or start losing ti Murray in best if three.

Last I checked Fed won last 4 against Murray, and last 5 sets 7 sets played.

We jeep waiting Murray to come out but so far, as much as he is the #2 in race he is not deliveryng versus top guys. Only 1 versus Nadal who is on a slump.

But the positive for Murray is that he is beating the players he should beat and stop losing to nobodys.

Untill he beata Djoko or Fed again I still will favorite than, specially as we are enterig the part of the season where Fed and Djoko dominates for years now.

chris ford1 Says:

Peter – Have to say, you sound like a Fedal camp follower clinging to straws.
A disappointing year if he “fails to win” the USO?
He’s won 4 of the 5 Masters, passed Fed all-time and may eclipse Rafa next year. He presently holds 2 of 4 Slam titles, the WTC Masters, and 5 of 9 Masters 1000s. And is going into a stretch where 3 Masters he hasn’t won in a 1-year cycle are still to be played. Going for the record in Masters, going for being the only one to win 9 of 9 Masters titles plus the WTF.

“RG still lingers and if he doesn’t win it at all, no matter how many slams he gets he is not in the same conversation as roger or Rafa. He will end up as Pete sampras at best, the one who just couldn’t win on clay.”

LOL!! The only player to have beaten Rafa at all 4 major clay events. The only current player besides Rafa in the Top ten in clay winning percent. Multiple wins at the other clay events besides RG. At RG, 3 Finals and one brilliant semi. And Nole would be happy just to be in the conversation with Pete Sampras when things are all wrapped up, despite Pete not having Novak’s clay achievements.

” Nole remains the biggest underachiever in the big 3. He can get as many finals as he wants but the conversion rate is poor.”

LOL! The reason Nole is in the Top 10 in winning percent on all surfaces, and indoors/outdoors….the only Open Era player with that stat though Roger was once in that position…is he is a true all court player who almost always goes deep. And would have many more Finals but for 4 years as the #3 rated player when young who almost always seemed to meet Fed or Nadal in the semis of major events…
Djokovic an underachiever? No. Only Borg, Pete, and Fedal have more Slams than the dude.

calmdownplease Says:

`Prior to semis cdp was saying Fed would hit a wall versus Murray`

No I didn’t
I said he would hit a wall at some point
And he did
It was about his ability to compete for a full 7 matches
I knew Fed would (probably) not be up to the task
And so it proved!

calmdownplease Says:

`We jeep waiting Murray to come out but so far, as much as he is the #2 in race he is not deliveryng versus top guys. Only 1 versus Nadal who is on a slump…`

And who else was on a slump, eh?
Who had surgery and rehab and had to find a way back onto a tour which had moved on.
No way would Fed be number 2 without these circumstances
But just hold onto your britches, it’s coming

Daniel Says:

Reagardign underachiever, sometimea I thibk of overachieving.

I know I mat be bias towards Nadal but Inaleays thought he is a clasic case of overachiever. When he burat the scene noone thought he would be after 10 Slams. Its his credit he develops an all around game and was able tomtranslate to grass and later HC. But mainly his mentalmfortitude got him through.

Fed and Djoko otho where always praise since a young age. Afer 2004 everybody saw Fed’s potential and him reaching Smapras after 2006-2007 was just a question of time. All tennso experts predict he woul end his career with sinethinn around 18 majors and he is right up there. Djoko was the other young prodgy reaching all semisnas a teen and with a complete game to be an all time great. He may have lost a few finals that would change the bigger picture now but he still has time to revert that and this Multiple Slam year already proves that henis here to stay and he will take the most he can.

His records are shapping up more like Federers every day. If you look at his Slam results he has 8 or better Quarter Finals of beyind in all 4 Slams played with only 2 or 3 before QF performances in the 4 Slams. He is consistanf deep and i think most agree it will last a while still.

So I don’t thibk he us underachieving, people thought he should be a doible digit Slam winner, which he pretty soon will be and also predict around 12 Slams.

Right now we don’t know for sure, you never know in tennis whje the drop will come.
Fed had a first blip in 2011 where he went 4 majors with no final, than Final in RG 2011, 4 more Slams with no final before his win in Wimby 2012. 2013 was his second crisis without any finals and now he has last 2 Wimng finalz but no title in 12 Slams.
Nadal is entering a period similar to Fed’s first blip: there is 5 Slams played with no finals and 2 HC Slams to be played before clay again. We don’t know if he will be able to rebound or when.

With Djoko will happen in the same way, suddenly he will not be making finals anymore but right now this is his 5th straight years winning majors and reaching minimum 2 Slam finals per year. Actually is his 4th out of 5 years with at least 3 Slam finals (2011, 2012, 2013 and 2015). And this year he can reach all 4 for the first time, something only Federer was able to do in don’t know how many years. Having won 3 of the last 5 we may be vert well enrering his dominat period. As tennis age has change a bit maybe 28-30 is the new 25-27 peak years in tennis.

calmdownplease Says:

`Last year, Novak played two notches above Andy’s performance of this years semi, returning better, putting a lot more pressure on Roger’s serve and serving better. But what is more important is that he was steady in crisis, and kept his composure under pressure…`

Last year’s Wimbledon was nothing special.
The only reason it went to 5 is that Novak choked having lost his fair share of finals . Up till then some were wondering if the AO was all he had in him.

Have you ever heard of a philosopher called David Hume?
He said that `Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them`
Confirmation of this statement comes from many posts here including your’s above.

RZ Says:

Little late on this, but I liked this article on the men’s semis.

Daniel Says:

Sorry for the many typos, iPhone type in a boring class. Need to pass time😜

calmdownplease Says:

`Anyway, like usual you write nonsense..`

I absolutely can confirm the feeling is mutual.
Your reasoning skills are lousy
I called on Fed when everyone here was going bananas and saying he was the favourite against Novak when common sense would indicate he most certainly was not.

Gee Says:

Bitter people cry over draws. They were still in denial 8 years after novak scared the crap out of fred. Fred loves rafa because he believes he suffered more than any player with match up issues and that rafa was just “fighter on slow courts”.
He despises novak since no one destroys multislam players except novak. It’s not because novak’s parents cheered during the year when clowns like roddick bended over for fred. Novak’s parents had to let him train in italy without his family nearby. They are the reason he became the greatest player.

sienna Says:

last 4 meetings/ 0 and 1/ straight setted…. the race is insigmificant with matchup like that. Murphy has got zero chance for #2.

Daniel Says:


I agree he laot while 2014 due to srugery and recovery, but he should be winning by now. Ig he is not is because deep down he is not that strong mentally versus top players as he should. He is the same age as Novak, year younger than Nadal. On paper he should have beaten Federer but agree, that vintage performance happen but even so, he couldn’t even force a tiebreak in first two sets. Why, vecause he felt the pressure, it wa shis serve on grass and he shoudl agve force the breaker as Djoko did yesterday in set one. He saved set points and voila, won tiebreak. Had Murray force a tiebreak versis Fed amybe Fed woudl get tense and out of hos confort zone but he didn’t becaus he is not Novak Djokovic.

All aspects of Murray’s great play are there, he is fit, serving better, moving great, steady but when it really matters he falters mentally because he knwos the pther guys don’t fear him the same way.

He has a huge mountain to break because everytine he plays agaisnt Djoko or Fed this year of he loses worst it gets.

Agaisnt Fed, eventually he will get a win, Fed in 34 in a month, and we don’t know how long he can maitian this level. But agaisnt Djoko I am not so sure. Imagine if Murray loses next 2 to Djoko, that would be 10 staright matches and the question will start rasing, will he ever beat him again?!

Speaking of underachiever, right now as you posted a while back when there in the who would ein more Slams out of Wawaand Murray thread, i agree. If Murray ends with less it will be really bad because he should be 5+ Slam winner in the end of his career, minumum.

The sane thing I said for Novak applies for him, maybe 28-30 is the new peak years and he still has time, but he HAS to start winning, asap.

calmdownplease Says:

`He also lost his last three matches against the Swiss, all convincingly…`

And were was Fed in `13 barely in the top ten
No mention of it from T*rds like yourself
He had a bad back of course and that can’t be ignored.
But I don’t bring up stats from players when clearly they were in compromised positions
Unlike creatures like yourself.
Let’s see how everything plays out in the period when `Fed and Novak dominate` shall we?

Daniel Says:

Also, I said here I thought Djoko would win the final, regardless of Fed’s semis play. Actaully picked him for the title from beggining and voted for him in all threads as well.

calmdownplease Says:

`The sane thing I said for Novak applies for him, maybe 28-30 is the new peak years and he still has time, but he HAS to start winning, asap..`

Well, quite
But he took Novak to 5 on his worst surface
And unfortunately didn’t have a crack at him on his best
Although we have to hand it to Novak and say that he is the best GC player out there right now
Murray has definitely been improving however
If he is to beat fedole I think its reasonable to start over 3 rather than 5 however
And yes it is rather urgent.

Daniel Says:

But that is the thing, this stats matter as well. Being fit is part of sport, preparation and so on. Of course there js the elemnt of luck, how your body parts are built, luck, but also how you play. DelPo caused his injuris, Safin has a very bend serve as well.

Just because they underwent surgery or take time out or are playing bad they can’t have a free pass forever. Fed was playing bad in 2013, conprimised by a bad back but still fit to play. Period!

If Djoko os the one with least injury issoe sis because he is lighter, eork harder in strecthing and conditioning to be the better player he can be. We cna easily see that Murray is at least 10-15 pounds heavier than Djoko and they are the same size, Murray’s legs are huge. Maybe that cost him endurence in long matches. There is a bunch of factors to evaluate.

And just for the record, no need for insults on here. You need to get a grip on your moniker and be able to discuss like a proper adult.

calmdownplease Says:

`Just because they underwent surgery or take time out or are playing bad they can’t have a free pass forever..`

No they cannot but coming back from surgery/injury is a difficult one.
I have never gone on about Muzz victory against
Nadal in Madrid for example although he did play well Nadal was clearly very underpar
History will probably not take note of any of this but it doesn’t change the fact that there are a number of variables that can mean one victory is a better one than some others.

`You need to get a grip on your moniker and be able to discuss like a proper adult…`

I’m always an adult, and I always have `a grip`
Whatever, such flowers we have on this site.
I only make of people that irritate me anyway.
And unfortunately that’s quite a few here.
You’re all just butt hurt because I state the obvious about fed.
its not about `viciously` attacking him (?)
It’s just acknowledging the elephant in the room.

calmdownplease Says:

make fun of lol ;-)

Pamela Says:

Well said Skeezer. I, too, still have the federer/Murray match on my DVD!

Margot Says:

To put some perspective on Andy’s operation, Michael Stich said he was amazed Andy was able to play any tennis after it, leave alone get back into top 4.

Daniel Says:


I am not ‘butt hurt’, I am very cool guy and don’t get irritare in a tennis blog. Come here to practice english, chat, see other people point of view and discuss tennis. Just don’t see the need for you to call me ‘creature’ or ‘tard’. You is the one who seems butt hurt.

Never get why people need to this in internet. One thing is to use subtle and imply some thing, more a fan of sarcasm myslef rather than explicit trying to offend or attack someboy. But that is just me and you are you, who needs to revert to name calling. I shouldn’t bother thinking you would act differently😜.

Althought I still like to read what most people wirte in here.

Daniel Says:

Ref Fed, he is in delcine for years now. The fun is that the possibility of a win still looms (as long as he is top 8), even if Slim one. And occasionally he can have one of those performances that worth watching, just amazing.

I am a fan of tennis and the sport it’s bigger than the players, they are just wheels in the truck.

Daniel Says:


That is not that surprising considering they are pro athletes. One of this days just having a massage after a workout and I was a complete different person. They also have all access to laest in med treatment, exams and recovery that some of us don’t even gave a glimpse of.

calmdwonplease Says:

crossed wires
those insults were meant for mat4
(but I didn’t REALLY mean them either)

Giles Says:

And Daniel you are the big horn in the truck! 😎😉

mat4 Says:


My reasoning skills are not lousy, far from that. I answer concrete claims with the appropriate facts, I don’t distort what other posters have written, and I don’t offend other posters.

What does Fed’s 2013 got with anything? We know now that his back hurt then, and it was the year he changed racquet. Then, when I mentioned Murray’s last results against Federer, I was careful to include only the last three, when Andy started playing much better and when we can assume he had mostly recovered from his back surgery.

About last year final: it was a great match, whatever you may write. Did Novak choke? No, because he won! But they played almost four hours. It’s a long time, and a lot of things happened in that match. The level was exceptionally high in the first three sets, then dropped a bit, then rose again, then dropped again.

But, anyway, I won’t bother to answer you again. I just waste my timr. I’ll finish with a quote of Euripides: “Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.”

Daniel Says:

My bad than, read after my post so tohught it was towards me.

Keep the quotes coming you 2, love when tennis-x gets philosophical;-)

calmdwonplease Says:

No, you interpret facts or situations according to your feelings about them
That’s called having an opinion.
You said that fed played amazing last year?
Well, that is definitely debatable my view. Novak choked (slightly) and let Roger back in, but it never looked like he was going to lose, my opinion.
It could have been in straights (as Roger himself said after the match)
It’s not that difficult to work out what I meant.
So you were `careful` to include the last 3 were you?
There were only 4!
All influenced by his issues
I can tell you for a fact that 0 & 1 would never have happened otherwise.
I mean honestly?!
And I can explain why it had because if you follow Murray you would know just how difficult it was for him to gain the points needed to qualify for the O2 last year.
But you don’t, so there you go.

SG1 Says:

I thought Federer was the better player in last years final and he lost. Novak was clearly the better player yesterday.

Federer seemed a little too impatient in certain situations. Attacking the net with today’s racket and string technology is a real balancing act. Then again, Novak was pasting his 2nd serves to within inches of the baseline.

Novak is definitely one of the all time greats and his return of the serve is such a remarkable weapon.

calmdownplease Says:

`All influenced by his issues..`

Apart from the Wimbledon semi of course
My view is without that incredible serve Roger would have had a very hard time of it.
As Andy’s stats were much improved and he was playing well.

calmdownplease Says:

`I thought Federer was the better player in last years final and he lost..`

How did he lose then?

mat4 Says:


It’s not the number of matches that counts, but when they were played. I mentioned the last free matches against Roger because Andy had played enough tournaments beforehand and he had good results at the FO, WB, and the Canadian Open. He lost twice to eventual winners.

About the 0 and 1 he got at the WTF, sorry, but being tired is not an excuse, something I learned myself from Andy’s fans in 2012, when I was arguing the opposite.

Then, I don’t write this answer to explain anything to you, but for the sakes of others, since I don’t want you to twist my words again and again.

I don’t understand your intention to insult me: it is a fact that you write nonsense. Let me just quote:

And who is the other one of the 3 wawa or Nadal?!”

Very mature and sensible, no doubts.

calmdownplease Says:

Oh we’re all being very mature here..
Oh alright then!
But why on earth bring up something that wasn’t even in response to you as a `nonsense` when you are obviously clueless about it’s context/meaning?
Perhaps your `maturity` comes with a dose of alzheimers for good measure?

calmdownplease Says:

And no it wasn’t about being tired after having to play a a 4 and a half hour match before facing Andy in the Olympics
But a HUGE amount of Tennis done before getting to the O2
Whatever, you keep banging that 01 chicken if it makes you feel better.

mat4 Says:

I understand that you are disappointed by Andy’s loss. It’s normal. And it is normal that you feel frustrated that your fav has been badly beaten by a veteran who will never win a slam any more and who should retire.

That’s why I understand your behaviour and feel a lot of compassion because of your bad fortune as a fan. I also understand your jealousy toward Federer who has won only 17 slams, been only 302 weeks at the top of the rankings, although it is common sense he will never win a slam any more and he is years from his prime.

I also understand that you think that Andy would have won the final, had he played it. It’s not that Andy fared so bad against Novak lately, and he has won the Queens a few times, something Novak never achieved.

mat4 Says:

BTW, since I read your predictions for the future I start thinking that you are in fact Jamie, our dear astrologist. Could it be really you?

calmdownplease Says:

Your overdrawn sarcasm is CRINGEWORTHY, lumpen and altogether bush league, but thanks for that all the same.
It really does confirm my instincts about you

Hippy Chick Says:

After every GS,we always have carnge on this forum….

Skeezer Says:

Cdp. Take a break.

calmdownplease Says:

Oh I’m done with this thread now

Vami Says:

I’ll finish with a quote of Euripides: “Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.”
This is golden.
I tend to read posts of only a few posters, the reasonable ones regardless of who they support as I often learn something.
When someone posts zillion times in a row or keeps providing stupid tweeter links there’s nothing to learn there, I know those are people with unhealthy agendas. Why bother to read? Ignorance is your friend.

mat4 Says:

At last!

Skeezer Says:

It worked! Yes!

Okiegal Says:

Hip hip hooray!!!

Hippy Chick Says:


madmax Says:

Cdp you are talking but murray again. Roger has earned his place at number 2.

He beat murray, many times. Yes, that’s right, an ageing federer, beat a superfit murray.

Get over it Cdp.

Federer has fought hard. He is number 2.

End of your silly argument.

madmax Says:

And guess what?

Novak is better than both federer and murray!

madmax Says:

There is a wonderful article in the new York times online, but the keep breaking here, may be more successful if y’all try it?

About the fact
That it’s disappointing, but not devastating that federer lost wimbledon.

He is so much more chilled these days about his tennis.

He has hunger and motivation, we are proud of you roger, and CDP, take a leaf out of Rogers book, chill out.

You really can be aggressive you know. Still liking your wounds over the fact that an ageing federer beat a murray in his prime. And, quite convincingly at that.

In murray own words, “Roger played fantastic”.

He sure did.

Patson Says:

While you guys are quibbling over Nole, Fed , Murray, and Nadal — the ifs, the buts, the might’ve been, the could’ve been, the should’ve been, the would’ve been ; he’s better, no he’s better, no he was better, no he will be better, etc. — Dr. Ivo has his own thing going on.

Happiness is to serve aces at will, remain a top 20 player and not have to work on any other aspect of your game. Karlovic is somebody who’ll be serving unreturnable aces even when he’s 50. Imagine a grandslam where Ivo just serves at 100% and every serve is an ace. Just imagine ! Possibly the greatest feat since the dawn of time; I so wish it happens.

Just look at the happiness on Ivo’s face. Hah ! And here, you quibble over petty things making your susceptible to a rage-induced heart attack.

MMT Says:

It seems pretty clear to me that the key success factor was Djokovic’s return as compared to Federer’s – whereas Federer was broken just once in his previous 11 matches, he was broken 4 times in the final, and I don’t think anyone would suggest that Djokovic’s serve is superior to Federer’s, so it’s clear to me the key was the return.

Ironic for grass court tennis, but there are actually a lot of examples in history of players with so-so serves, but outstanding returns, beating a number of players with much better serves on their way to the title.

Wog Boy Says:

These people know tennis, I like what Steve Flink said about Nole wearing Roger down by moving him around and forcing to hit FH on the run time and time again until he started to shank or net his FH and what the other one said that Nole kept Roger one meter behind base line with his deep shots so court became smaller and net higher for Roger, have look:

jane Says:

yes, i saw that too wog boy. i like those 2 together. interesting study in contrasts. :) and yes, their analysis makes sense. novak’s depth of shot didn’t seem to allow roger to come in maybe as much as he’d’ve liked to. also, he ran further than novak in the match according to statistics.

skeezer Says:

^you 2 are astute observers. The 2 points I mentioned in the other thread, 1 of them was exactly that ( Feds Movement ). The other was Nole’s service games. Outstanding.

Wog Boy Says:

yes jane, with Andy Roger was able to hit from the base line or inside the court, with Nole he was ore often than not outside the court running for the balls particulary with Nole’s out wide serves and out wide FH or BH. If that was Nole team plan, and I believe it was, it was well executed and work, since Nole had no business of losing second set.

Tennis Vagabond Says:

I missed the match canoeing- and my rotten 6 year old spoiled the surprise before I could watch my recording.

I just finished watching it. Even knowing who won it, it was a lot of fun, and pretty intense, at least for the first half.

I agree with Skeeze that Novak’s serve was a huge factor. I think for the first two sets he was out-acing Roger, and higher 1st serve percentage. We expect Novak to be a better returner; if he’s serving better, Roger will lose.

Couple things I noticed.: I’ll start with the loser. I love watching Roger, and I really enjoyed his net game here. Very fun to watch. I didn’t see the final stats, but he was dominant at the net for the first couple sets. He showed great mental toughness coming back in the 2nd tiebreak. That was great to watch (at least for a Roger fan). Which is why I don’t get why so many people say Novak is in Roger’s head.
I don’t see it that way. I think Novak is better than ROger. Sure, Roger looked great against Andy- but first of all, that’s Andy, and there is a 7 slam gap between those contemporaries. Second, how often can Roger replicate that form? Its not just against Novak alone that Roger could not do the same. Roger NEVER serves as well (or returns as well) as he did in the semis, not for years. The Andy match was great, but that certainly hasn’t been Roger’s form for the last year. Today was more like it. He played great- good enough to probably beat just about anyone except Novak. Novak was awesome. His serve was amazing, his resilience and fight, I think he’s come a long way mentally. I loved watching his intensity.

I also did not believe there would be a French Open hangover, and I said so on the blog. I think Novak has become mentally stronger than that kind of problem. I think he’s at the point where a loss is fuel to the fire.

To Brando’s and some other points that Novak really has no competition: on the one hand, I agree. World #2 is Federer, undeniably years past his prime. Rafa is in a year+ funk. Novak has owned Murray for the last couple years. So Novak has no single contender pushing him.

On the other hand, the level of competition looks to my eyes incredibly high. The quality of this match, of the French finals, of the Novak/Murray French, have been great. So… Novak is certainly being tested, and he’s pretty much dominating against every challenge. (except maybe on his lob. that was kind of comic at a point tonight)

So, as a Fed fan, I had a very enjoyable Wimbledon. Wouldn’t have picked Fed to win a Slam for some years now, and I really love seeing him make a finals. I think we’re watching a new history being made, someone who will be said in the same breath as Sampras, Fed, Rafa, Laver and Borg.

Comgrats to Novak fans. He played an absolutely amazing match, and I don’t know that I’ve ever seen him serve so well.

Moving on…

One thing I see consensus on here that I just can’t believe, given that we all just watched Wimbledon actually play out, in real life, that despite all evidence to the contrary, Murray, 0-8 against Novak, dismantled by Federer, would have been a tougher out for Novak. Look, you’re free to believe what ever you want. But, and I said the same thing for lunatics who believed Andy was favourite against Novak at the French: we have actual evidence. We have a record. We don’t have to just follow invisible deities!

And until actually proven otherwise, Roger is #2. He’s got a lot of points to defend over the summer, I believe, but, no disrespect to Andy Murray, I think he needs to win a big match to leapfrog Roger. It;s all good for me though: whether I’ve changed or he has, I’ve finally started enjoying Murray’s game.

That is all. Sorry for the many words- I watched the finals over two days and had a lot of thoughts to catch up on.

Skeezer Says:

“Nole had no business of losing second set.”
Just like Fed had no business of losing the first set.

Tennis Vagabond Says:

Did I miss any good fights?

Daniel Says:


Great post, agree with everything.
Indeed we are about to witness Djoko enter in the same conversation with the other greats, how quickly he turned RG around, move on and now let´s see his assault on HC once again.

Last year I think Wimbledon and getting married shifted his focus a bit and he underperformed in Canada and Cincy, but this year pretty sure he will keep the same level of other Masters played. And he has the challenge of winning Cincy to motivate him further and get a greta preparation for US Open. So I think he will want badly to win one of the 2 masters pre USO and be in peak form once again. He knows there is the most dangerous Slam and he is full of confidence right now.

As for Murray not being in finals, hope we got to see they play on grass next year, either in finals or in the same side of the draw (which I think will not happen as I firmly believe Murray will be solid #2 by this time next year).

If Murray will finish this year as #2 remains to be seen, a lot will depend on next results, but looks like it will be a fight between him and Fed, way more interesting than #1, which I think is pretty much settle now, unless injury plague Novak (not jinxing). Maybe Wawa will raise to the occasion and make the top 4 battle more interesting, And Nadal climb back to establish himself in top 8 and closer to top 4.

Michael Says:

I think going forward, Novak has definitely got the potential to overcome Rafa and Sampras count of grand slams. The only caveat here is the resurrection and resurgence of Rafa who adds more to his accumulation or Novak being physically challenged. Both are distinct possibilities and atleast the first one is most probable. Rafa is not a player who will not lie low for long and he is sure to bounce back. The question is only when and not if.

All said and done, Novak has already empanelled his name in the legion of Greats and he is destined for greater glory. He has the inspiration, perseverance, motivation and the unquenching thrist to attain more success !!

Margot Says:

Well of course TV, it does take some longer than others to learn to appreciate the Murray magic…;)

sienna Says:

Never will he be a Peoples champion like fedal. His fanbase is isolated to his own countrymen and those with the roots to follow.
and mostly the ones who are narrow minded, slow witted, homofoob. Novak himself seems to be intelligent enough but doesnt know how to get next stage.

So he keeps appealing to same people.

Rick Says:

If Fed plays Rafa anywhere these days. Fed would thumps Rafa so badly.

Hippy Chick Says:

Michael first of all congratulations,your the nicest fairest poster here,you enjoy your favorites wins without the need to trash their rivals,which is so rare to see here,and as so many here like to gleefully point out,with the state of Rafas play at the moment its probable Novak could surpass Rafa,to be honest although i hate to say it but Rafa looks closer to retirement than he is to getting back to the top,having said that saying a player will win another six GS at the click of ones fingers is easier said than done,Andy seems to be getting back to his best,Stan plays very well on HCs and matches up well with Novak,to add we had a surprise winner at the USO,i dont hate Novak but id like to see another player win the last GS of the year,i dont necassarily want to see the same player winning everything sorry….

Tennis Vagabond Says:

Margot, like Scotch, the Scott is an acquired taste.

sienna Says:

Rafa is being tipped for a strong yearending even a possible super run at US Open. He is quit capable of winning US Open. Rafa won it more then Novak.

Markus Says:

We’ve been looking for the next Federer when all along, he has been there yet we failed to notice it: Djokovic. He has been winning everything now, collecting slam titles and hungrily aiming for an elusive one, the French. Like Federer, Nadal was the stumbling block on several occasions.

Hippy Chick Says:

Sienna Rafa has won the USO more than Novak,and id love you to be right,but unfortunatly the omens dont look good at the moment,ones having the time of his life,where the skys the limit,the others having the season from hell….

mat4 Says:

I watched the summary made by Ubaldo Scaganatta and Steve Flink before. Ubitennis is a great site, especially the italian part, and I go there from time to time.

I’ll try tu summarize what I thought before the match, and what I have seen.

I knew that Roger would serve perfectly for at least two sets, and, if Novak doesn’t make enough returns, perhaps three, since he wouldn’t be tired. Skeezer here quoted:

“Nole said (more than once) playing Fed has made him a better player on Tour. Fed continues to inspire not only his fans, but his fellow players as well.”

But there is another truth behind this one: Federer was not only a cause of inspiration, but a real example to follow, and Novak modelled his game after him where he could, and thinking about it, I believe that Federer’s game was what motivated Vajda to chose Becker to replace him as Novak’s coach.

The similarity is expanding to the serve — although Novak is not a natural server, he worked on the things that made Fed’s serve so efficient – precision and a sleek motion that makes his serve so difficult to read.

But both have a weakness: the longer the match goes, their serve is less precise, less efficient. So, I tended to think that, just like last year, Novak had to win one of the first two sets to extend the match, and the only way was to play a TB. I couldn’t imagine he would be able to break Fed soon.

In finals, since we’re at it, although they look quite different, they are both nervous playing one against the other. For years, this nervousness affected Novak’s serve, and one of Boris’ biggest impact is that he made Novak improved his serve, but he improved it in tense situations — in previous rounds, Novak almost always served a first serve on BP, e.g., and while he wasn’t that good in the finale, it wasn’t Cincy a few years ago, when Roger bagelled him before he find his groove on serve.

Next post.

Hippy Chick Says:

Markus except Stan was the stumbling block for Novak at the FO instead,many including me thought that Rafa losing meant that the FO was a foregone conclusion for Novak,i guess theres no such thing….

Hippy Chick Says:

Wogboy many thanks for that video,i will have to see about renting it on DVD,also thanks for explaining where your name originated from ;)….

mat4 Says:

So, Novak had to win at least one of the first two sets, to be able to put real pressure on Fed’s serve from the third set, when Fed would be tired.

But watching Roger against Andy in the semi, when he served like a god, I thought that it would be very hard, and just like for Andy, I found that Novak’s only chances were in TBs, at least in the first two, perhaps first three sets.

It was the case last year. Novak played exceptional defence, lofty passing shots at unbelievable angles, lobs, but to no avail. He couldn’t break. But Fed missed routine FHs in the TB at key moments, when all was on the line, and Novak grabbed his chance in the third set.

It was something Andy — at least, I guess so — planned to do, and that’s the reason why he was so tense serving at 5-6 (not at 4-5!) in the first two sets. He knew he was one step on his goal.

But to make it to the TB you have to serve very well. While the combo serve/return is very important on grass, in the first part of matches the serve is more important.

Novak, last year, managed to win his service games for three sets, without dropping one. This year, he started nervously and was broken immediately. He was lucky Roger was nervous too, so he managed to break back.

After that, the plan worked — two TBs ensued in the first two sets, and Novak won one. Roger played already two hours, it was 1-1, and Novak’s ability to put great pressure on the second serve became the key factor of the rest of the match.

mat4 Says:

Some posters believe that Roger doesn’t return well. I don’t agree, nor the stats agree with this. Roger’s problem is that he is not aggressive enough on second serves. In the semi, he did something he used to do more often years ago — to move toward his left and play offensive FH returns on second balls. He did it once, if I remember well, in the final, and got the point. But he had problems reading Novak’s serve and didn’t go often enough for broke.

Lately, he tried to develop an aggressive backhand return — something easy to do with a two hander, difficult when playing the backhand with one hand. It wasn’t successful enough, and he missed to many of those returns.

Now, the rallies.

Let’s just say another thing about the backhand played with one hand: on grass, it is a good shot, but your position has to be perfect to hit it well, and Novak made of this point the main element of his strategy against Fed.

Novak has an excellent CC FH, he uses it to displace Roger, and then attack his BH. In the later part of the match, whenever he returned Roger’s serve, he tried to revert to this pattern: attack Roger’s FH with deep shots, then switch and play to Roger’s BH. That’s something he plays for years already.

Roger has just two chances to avoid this pattern: to serve well, and to go to the net. Last year, he went to the net after a BH slice return. Novak switched the direction of his serve and started to target Roger’s FH, or served body serves. This year too, he avoided Roger BH on the deuce side whenever he could too. I think that Roger’s strategy was the good one, and it kept the result balanced.

But, ultimately, what made the difference was Novak second serve return. He played it very deep, with a lot of risk, and it allowed him to be in charge of the rallies. At 30-30 and on BP, he returned several times on the line. It was the drop that turned the match around.

mat4 Says:

A few words about Fed’s FH. It is an exceptional shot, but against Novak, Roger rarely can play it from an optimal position. Every time he did, it was an outright point.

Usually, he has to play it from the deuce side, and since Novak’s ball is played at a very acute angle, it’s difficult to attack it. The best option is to return it CC, but Novak hits it back with even more angle. When Roger tried to play it down the line, Novak immediately attacked his BH.

That’s why Roger played with so many risk from that side, and made too many errors.

Tennis Vagabond Says:

mat, I don’t think anyone is saying Roger doesn’t return well. I think most just agree that Novak is the best returner in the game, and ROger’s level normally is not THAT high.

On your point about Novak’s serve and nerves: There were one or two serves in the match where I saw nerves. I was noticing how high Novak was tossing the ball, and there were two serves at key moments where Novak tossed significantly lower and had a kind of abrupt, scrunched up service motion right into the net, two feet below the cord. Aside from those two hiccups, his serve was fantastic and he served aces and big ones under pressure.

Hippy Chick Says:

Hi Mat4,have to ask and please dont hate me,but i watched that final,and dont get me wrong although it was high quality tennis,i have to say and even my hubby said it that the match had a strange atmopshere and seemed very flat,bearing in mind he hates tennis and has no axe to grind,his words to me were the crowd seemed very pro Federer even Michael said it,what did you think?….

mat4 Says:


Yes, the public was pro Fed. But it is a known fact, and there were more than one article (both in English and French) asking why Novak doesn’t get the respect and love he deserves. I think that Michael went to far with his assessment, and that the public showed respect for Novak. You don’t have to love somebody, but you have to respect him.


Yes, that’s I guess Boris main effect on Novak’s game: he not only serves better, but he serves better in clutch situations. That made the difference between the outcomes of WB 2013 and 2014 and 2015.

Vajda spoke about that in a video. He thought that Novak had improved his precision a lot, but that he still could improve the speed of his serve in the following months. But we see that the work on the serve was effective in all areas: first serve, second serve, serve in tense situations. He improved tremendously this part of his game, and it is a foundation for an even more aggressive game, I hope.

mat4 Says:

BTW, HC, why would I hate you? It was quite a normal question.

I am really sorry for my indecent behaviour and my trolling from yesterday, but I was insulted repeatedly.

Tennis Vagabond Says:

We’ve heard before how hard Roger’s serve is to read, and now the same being said of Novak’s. I wonder if their high ball tosses are necessary for that ‘sameness’ of motion for all service varieties.

I will leave that for our resident techies: skeeze? MMT?

Michael Says:


I would not agree it is high quality tennis from Roger. He is capable of playing much better. May be, that he peaked too early in the tournament and couldn’t sustain that momentum in the finals. Of course Novak is made of a different mettle and he just didn’t give Roger enough freedom to impose his aggressive game. All credit to Novak for playing a very solid match. But a magical Roger would certainly pushed the match to at least fifth set, if not extract a win !!

Michael Says:

The only player who can unsettle Novak today is Wawarinka at his very best !!

Giles Says:

mat4. ” asking why Novak doesn’t get the respect and love he deserves….”. Lol. Need you ask? Did you see him ripping his shirt and screaming after he lost the 2nd set? There’s a thread on that subject if you care to look. I’ve already called him a barbarian so I will refrain from repeating myself.Do you think this is apt behaviour from the #1 player? Ok no need to answer that. 🙈😏😡

Daniel Says:

Yes Michael, Wawa can do that in a slow courts. He was able to push Novak once in US Open so I am curious to see if he will be able to still push Novak this part of the season. Draws will be nive because Murray and Wawa will be shifting sides to Novak’d or Fed’s side and all this match ups are nice now that Wawa doesn’t “fear” Roger anymore. Plus they can drawn Nadal early of R16 in one of the next Masters if Nadal doesn’t jmprove his rankings and the other guys from to 8 can pose some threats as well. I guess now the weak link is Ferrer, he is the least dangerous out of Berdy, Raonic and Kei and probably will go to the lower end of top 10 or even out of if.

calmdownplease Says:


Yes Yay!

Or not?


Oh I’ll be back, when the tennis starts up again

Margot Says:

For CDP and his fans:
“Darling you gotta let me know
Should I stay or should I go?
If you say you’ll be mine
I’ll be here till the end of time.
So you gotta say
Should I go, or should I stay.”
Courtesy of one of my favourite bands ever, “The Clash.”

mat4 Says:

@Giles, Giles… why? are you twisting my words, misquoting the sentence just to have a fight? Don’t you have nothing else to do?

And he didn’t rip his shirt, btw, it’s UNIQLO, Japanese extra quality, not a mere Nike or Sergio Tacchini…

jane Says:

margot quoting the clash = A++

jane Says:

mat4, novak has millions of fans the world over. and, to use a musical analogy, if more people don’t love him, it’s because he’s indie/alternative, not mainstream (i.e., uniqlo, not nike ;-)), and that makes me love him even more. ignore all the posts and articles about that crap. novak will keep winning titles, and fans, and those of us who’ve loved him all along can just enjoy the spoils-cum-spoiler.

jane Says:

i thought fed returned very well versus both andy and nole. especially first serves. and the other thing, while i thought andy could’ve returned a little better in the semis (take more advantage of second serves), and held on more effectively to force tiebreaks, fed had one of his best serving days EVER statistically. i think you have to go back to something like 2009 to find his first serve percentage so high in a SF or F. just like nole ran into a zoning stan in the FO final, andy ran into a zoning fed in the semis. it happens? what can you do but carry on.

and the resilience of these top guys is amazing. they can put not only bad losses behind them but bad YEARS behind them as well!

novak struggled a lot in 09-10 but came back to rule in 11; andy had surgery @ the end of 13 and has risen right back to the top in 15; rafa has had several injuries and has come back, perhaps never more amazingly than in 2013 (and i believe he’ll do it again); fed had a tough 08 but came back to win 2 slams in 09, or his bad back in 13 but came back to #2 in 2014.

this group is astonishing in how consistent & resilient they’ve been. we should appreciate them all.

Margot Says:

I think the problem is more that for years Fedal have been built up by the mass media and the advertising companies into such a world wide phenomenum, that there almost isn’t room for anyone else on the stage.

jane Says:

indeed margot, their fanbases and stories have been built up for years, and people had effectively chosen sides. even tennis journalists – who should at least try to remain objective, imo – had chosen sides and made it clear in their work. i could list most tennis writers and which of fedal is their fave, for example, bodo = fed; tignor = rafa. so for casual tennis fans, they would’ve heard mainly about these two for years. so to me, they’re both “mainstream”. you could find them on the AM dial whereas for most of the others, you have to go to FM or even college radio. :)

Daniel Says:

It would alwasy be tuff for Djoko to get mainstream love, Nadal break into Fed’s and got his share but some still are agaisnt him, now Djoko is “breaking” territory of two legends so he gets resistence from both sides.

The only thing he can do is win and remain on top, the longer he stays there and the more he increases on his already stellar resume the more fan bases and acolades he will get. Until a point that eventually he will be similar to them.

Even Fed got some resustence from old Sanpras fans. I have a 70+ uncle that doesn’t like Fed due to Sampras.

But Djoko is on his path and in time and the more time passea the more “love” he will get.

SG1 Says:

calmdownplease Says:
`I thought Federer was the better player in last years final and he lost..`

How did he lose then?


Fair question. In terms of points won, it was 186 for Novak and 180 for Roger. In other words, the difference between the players was about 3 points over five sets. Essentially a meaningless difference. From my perspective, Roger was clearly the aggressor and I am always willing to give the aggressor the benefit of the doubt. Roger had 9 more winners (78 to 69) and only two more unforced errors (29 to Novak’s 27). I think it’s remarkable that as the more aggressive player, he only made 2 more UE’s than Novak. It’s actually mind boggling. If anything, I think Roger came up a little short in the winners department. If he’d had 5 or 6 more winners, he likely would have won that match. But, that’s tennis. Being the aggressor means having to hit winners and I think Roger came up just short in that department. But, once again, it was Roger who set the tone for the match.

I remember watching Michael Stich beat Stefan Edberg in ’93 at Wimbledon and Edberg had the only break in the entire match. It is possible to play better than your opponent over the course of a match and ultimately lose. It is rare but it does happen.

Margot Says:

My point demonstrated on the other thread…;)

chris ford1 Says:

Both years Fed played good enough to win Wimbledon but for Djokovic.
The way Djokovic bettered Fed was the same.

“At Wimbledon in 2014, Federer won 88 of 89 service games through the semifinals, then was broken four times by Djokovic during the five-set final.

This 2015 Wimbledon, Federer won 89 of 90 service games entering the final, then again was broken four times.”

And both times, Fed was unable to get much off the improved Djokovic serve. Which is still getting better and better.

jane Says:

“9 more winners” – this isn’t such a striking difference over 5 sets SG-1. i’d say they both played fairly aggressive tennis.

compare that to the 2008 wimbledon final that nadal won. there, fed hit 89 winners to nadal’s 60, nearly 30 more winners! but in that case, roger made way more errors too (52, to rafa’s 27). in 2008 rafa and fed’s style contrasted more drastically, with fed clearly being the aggressive one there. do you think fed should have won that match too then?

as your stats show, novak and fed played a more similar style of game in 2014’s final; hence not a huge difference in winners, errors, first serve % or even points. it was quite close. the difference was second serve points won: 65% for nole versus 44% for fed. what was it that sampras said?

jalep Says:

To kind of back-up what SG1 is saying about someone appearing to play better from an aggressive perspective, which to lots of tennis fans beats a defensive, yet many times more effective or the winning strategy, the example that comes to my mind is Rafa vs Verdasco, 2009 semifinal AO.

Had to look stats up because it’s worth posting for the subject.

Look at the winners that Verdasco tallied up. It’s easy for an observer to say Verdasco was the more aggressive and better player. Total points won …the link does not break it down by set but in the end, Rafa won that 5 set battle by one measly point.

To me that loss altered Verdasco’s career – never was the same player after.

jane Says:

^ jalep, wow, yeah. that was a tremendous match. i felt so sorry for hotsauce, for all those ill-timed double faults! but as we can see there, again the difference between winners of verdasco and nadal is big – something like 40 more winners for fernando, which is more like nadal/fed 2008 wimbledon. the difference of 9 winners between novak/fed 2014 is so small by comparison.

jane Says:

this is for novak’s fans re: this year –

jalep Says:

To me, there is not really a comparison as to which match was closer: Wimbledon Final 2014 or 2015.

What is illusive is that Federer played so stunningly well vs Andy Murray in the semifinal. Nole raised his level imo, from what we’d seen from his play vs anyone else – raised it and was able to execute his plan when he needed to. He knows how to beat Federer in a GS Final and got part of the template from studying Rafa, the other part – mind over matter in the moment and all Novak Djokovic tennis, finely tuned, prime of his life, 2015.

Margot is right about Mass Media and Fedal though.

jalep Says:

Impressive stats, Jane!


I don’t want to think too deeply about that though. It cuts into my enjoyment of watching tennis if I keep my focus on such a lofty performance by one player. Learned that from getting all ogled by Federer tennis back in the day.

It’s enough for me that Nole is such a stellar #1. He’s an all-time great already. But I also don’t have a thing about GOAT – so no need to see Nole tally up double digit GS numbers…you know what I hope most for Nole in his career. Alright, I’ll add in beating Stanimal again in a match that matters. That’s a new one, lol…

He’s conquered Rafa and Roger and all comers – that’s worth about 10 GS’s imo.

jane Says:

agree jalep. that’d be awesome (that unnamed thing. ;))

chris ford1 Says:

Jalep – Maybe more in ‘adjustment’ for the Slam-counters to get more fully get and appreciate what Djokovic has done so far.

1. How come Djokovic soared up to #3 as a teen, then ‘failed to advance’ in various semis and Finals?
ANS – Because for 4 years when he was young, he was thwarted by 2 all-time greats and to a lesser extent, Andy.

2. How did he get to be #1?
ANS – Simple. All he had to do was get better than 2 all-time Greats in their prime, back in 2011? Easy stuff.

3. How come Rafa did not equal Fed in “Slam Count” when Rafa proved he could beat anyone anywhere in 2010 and was in great form 2011-2014?
ANS – Novak Djokovic. The only man to have beaten Rafa in all 4 Slams. The only man to have beaten Rafa in all 4 major clay events. Add 2009 was when Rafa looked to add to 2008’s being #1 player and ran into Djokovic at the 2009 Madrid semi that left both player’s 2009 season in tatters from injury and self-doubt..

Giles Says:

cf1. Still FOS and still barking!

muhammad nizam Says:

hard luck.. its okay fed..1st runner-up much better than nothing.. you are still the legend! Forever!

Rich Says:

Chris Ford:

I have somewhat different answers to the questions you pose:

1. How come Djokovic soared up to #3 as a teen, then ‘failed to advance’ in various semis and Finals?

Because prior to 2011, (i) Novak had significant breathing issues, which he attributes to gluten intolerance, and I speculate involves some low level of asthma, and (ii) Novak significantly improved his toss consistency and his serve.

2. How did he get to be #1?

See #1, above, plus he improved his mental fortitude, Nadal got hurt and Federer got old.

3. How come Rafa did not equal Fed in “Slam Count” when Rafa proved he could beat anyone anywhere in 2010 and was in great form 2011-2014?

I agree that Djokovic played a part, but I think the principal reason is that Nadal’s body continued to break down, including his knees, his back and his wrist.

Thanks for your post and its questions!!!

Markus Says:

That’s just the way it is. Take away Djokovic and Nadal would have surpassed Federer by now. By the same token, take away Nadal and Federer would have had more slams than Serena and with a calendar grand slam at that. Take away Murray and Djokovic would have had double digit slams already. Those three plus Andy tend to cancel each other out.

Wog Boy Says:

“..1st runner-up much better than nothing.. ”

I didn’t know there is a 2nd runner-up?

MMT Says:

Tennis Vagabond Says:
We’ve heard before how hard Roger’s serve is to read, and now the same being said of Novak’s. I wonder if their high ball tosses are necessary for that ‘sameness’ of motion for all service varieties.

Funny you should mention that – Jason Goodall did an interesting hawkeye analysis of Federer’s toss, and he concluded that with at most 12 inches of variation in the point of contact, Federer can hit about 16 different types of serves (if you include spin, pace and location as variables). The same is not the case for most players, where the variation is closer to 24 inches, and more easily perceptible in the millisecond that you have to read the serve from the toss.

John McEnroe was even better at this – his coach, Tony Palafox, did a drill with him where he would shout the direction of the serve AFTER he tossed it, meaning McEnroe could not use variation of the toss location to adjust his placement of the serve…and consequently his serve was impossible to read. That is the extreme case, as McEnroe is extremely talented in his hands – moreso than any player in history in my opinion, but I digress.

I should also point out that neither Federer nor Djokovic have particularly high tosses, and this is one of the reasons why their serves are so effective and consistent. Both of their points of contact are very close to the apex of the toss and as such, the speed of the ball at the point of contact is at its slowest, and thus easiest to consistently hit flush on the strings, or however they choose to serve it. The players with inconsistent serves are typically the ones with the highest toss. It’s one of the reasons why serving in the women’s game is so bad – they all model their serves after Steffi Graf who had a very high toss, but was exceptionally talented.

Most players do not have her talent and thus their serves are inconsistent precisely because of the high toss. I should also point out that the kinetics of the serve are interrupted with a high toss, and is one of the reasons why Serena’s serve is so much better than Venus’. Venus is taller, but Serena’s kinetics are better – no hitches, or tosses too far to the left and behind her head, for example. You can particularly see this on the second serve, but it’s symptomatic on both of her serves.

mat4 Says:


Great post on your blog! Enjoyed it, as usual. Makes me so envious…

Rich Says:

MMT: Terrific serve toss analysis!!! You’re so dead on regarding Venus’ service and especially second serve hitches. She has a similar issue on her forehand. Thanks!!!

Tennis Vagabond Says:

Fed and Novak’s tosses are not low. Watch the videos. They are tossing at least a racquet-length, or racquet and a half above their impact point. Not as high as some of the women, but certainly not compact

Margot Says:

So interesting about MecEnroe’s serve and I compleyely agree with you about his so talented hands.
My 2nd favourite player.

Margot Says:

Saw Berdych serve at Queens one year. His toss is in the clouds, as was Soderling’s. Makes them very vulnerable in windy conditions of course.
And as for Scharapover’s…… :0

Wog Boy Says:

To answer MMT question from his blog which was:

“…it is Djokovic’s viability that I begin to question – after all, how long can he expect to remain as nimble and pliable as he is now?”

According to person who knows Nole’s body (and mind) better than Nole, Miljan Amanovic (good friend of Andy Roddick), Nole has minimum 3-5 top notch years left in his body. So I am afraid that you will have to put up with this and better Nole for another 3-5 years:)

Michael Says:

Agree Daniel !!

Hippy Chick Says:

Michael just curious,but what are you agreeing with?….

Markus Says:

Some posts here are very informative and good to read. MMT’s at 7:48 pm is one.

Markus Says:

Some posts here are very informative and good to read. MMT’s at 7:48 pm is one.

Hippy Chick Says:

Markus New York,New York so good they named it twice,twice lol,lol….

Hippy Chick Says:

Skeezer @July 14th 3.03pm,yeah fair enough,but is there really any need to kick a great champion when hes down?….

Okiegal Says:

@calmdownplease 11:16

I knew it was too good to be true!! He he

What does Bartoli know? She’s won one GS…..and that makes her an authority?? You can put that link where the sun don’t shine!! Lol

Hippy Chick Says:

Okie exactly….

SG1 Says:

jane Says:
“9 more winners” – this isn’t such a striking difference over 5 sets SG-1. i’d say they both played fairly aggressive tennis.


Novak is the best defender in the game. This is the only reason that winner differential is so close. Against any other player, Roger likely hits 9 to 10 more winners (perhaps a lot more) over the course of 5 sets. I guess what I’m trying to say is that you can’t look at the winners tallied by Novak and say that they were both equally aggressive because it’s tougher for Roger to hit a winner against Novak than vice versa. This is true both from the stand point of return of serve (harder for Roger to ace Novak) and points involving rallies as Novak is more consistent off the ground. The fact that Roger, as the aggressor, hit more winners with basically the same number errors is a real testament to how well he played last year.

As I said, it is only my opinion that Roger was better than Novak last year. Many people believe the Novak was better. I always prefer to see a player press the issue rather than defend.
I guess I’m biased by growing watching tennis in the 80’s and 90’s.

MMT Says:

“Tennis Vagabond Says:
Fed and Novak’s tosses are not low. Watch the videos. They are tossing at least a racquet-length, or racquet and a half above their impact point. Not as high as some of the women, but certainly not compact”

My apologies – it was not my intent to imply that they had particularly low tosses, just not relatively high tosses, compared to the highest tosses in the game. And there are many serves (both current and historical) where the point of contact is much closer to the apex of the toss than Federer and Djokovic’s (Dustin Brown, Goran Ivanisevic, Henri Leconte, Roscoe Tanner, etc. come to mind).

But to address your question, I don’t believe the height of the toss affects their ability to conceal the direction/location of the serve. I think it is more the consistent point of contact regardless of where they hit the serve. The more common variation in the point of contact is a tell that allows returners to get a beat on other serves more easily than these two.

By the way – I’ve received press credentials to the Citi Open in Washington DC, this year and I’ll be posting to my blog in the lead up to the tournament for the next 2 & 1/2 weeks – can’t wait for it. Murray, Nishikori and Dimitrov are all in the draw – should be a lot of fun.

jane Says:

sg-1, thanks for my reply, but you circumvented my question about the rafa/ fed wimbledon 2008 match. would love to hear your thoughts on that differential. many have called rafa “the best defender”; some have said murray is. personally, i see novak as someone who is, yes, a great defender but who is quick to turn defense to offense. note that roger ran more in this past final than novak. isn’t it generally the one doing more defending who runs more? that’s a sincere question – i don’t know.

jane Says:

*sorry, that should read either, thanks for replying to my post, or thanks for *your* reply. :)

Okiegal Says:

Novak is the stud of tennis atm. Suck it up buttercups, it is what it is!! Joker fans are on a high and who can blame them! I was on a Rafa/high in 2013, so I know exactly how they feel!! Rafa arose out of the ashes and boom baby, did amazing things! Oh I hope he could do it again, but looks dismal atm, but I can still wish and hope. My tennis is pretty sucky lately……sigh… :(

Gypsy Gal Says:

Okie i completely agree with your post….

SG1 Says:

jane Says:
sg-1, thanks for my reply, but you circumvented my question about the rafa/ fed wimbledon 2008 match. would love to hear your thoughts on that differential. many have called rafa “the best defender”; some have said murray is. personally, i see novak as someone who is, yes, a great defender but who is quick to turn defense to offense. note that roger ran more in this past final than novak. isn’t it generally the one doing more defending who runs more? that’s a sincere question – i don’t know.


Sorry Jane. Didn’t mean to circumvent your question. I just didn’t see it. In 2008, it was 209 points for Rafa and 204 for Federer. Over five sets, a difference of 2.5 points. Pretty much inconsequential. Was the Roger better or was Rafa? This is a tougher call. In 2008, Federer was much more inclined to stay back and rally with Nadal. So in essence, he was trying to beat Nadal at Nadal’s game wit Federer’s only advantage being the grass surface. I have no issue with saying that Rafa was the slightly better player as they both dueled from the baseline for much of the match. Of the 413 points played, Federer was only at net 75 times and of those 75 times, he only won 57% of his net points (42 points). So, when he did decide to play aggressively, he wasn’t all that effective doing it.

I don’t know if today’s iteration of Roger could beat the 2008 version on grass. Hard to say. But I do know that today’s Roger is better at net and more willing to take it to his opponent on grass than in ’08. Those are tactics I tend appreciate more. I prefer to watch a player try and win a match by playing aggressively rather than playing more passively so as to not lose it.

jane Says:

but clearly, sg-1, nadal was the more defensive player in 2008, hitting 30 less winners than fed, yet you say he deserved to win. but about 2014, you said the aggressor should win as the reasoning for why you say fed should’ve won.

here’s some pertinent #s

2014 wimbledon

(novak ran 3.7 km to roger’s 4.1)

Stats RF ——-> ND

w/e 75/29 68/27

points 180 186

net — 44/67 26/35

(this year, 42/58 and 20/34 respectively – so novak was actually more successful at net last year and fed more successful this year percentage-wise. very similar numbers overall)

this year, during the full two weeks at wimbledon, fed came to net 199 times, winning 145, for 73%. novak came to net 166 times, winning 116, for 70%.

2008 wimbledon

Stats RF ——-> RN

w/e 89/52 60/27

points 204 209

net 42/75 22/31

personally i don’t see much difference (both matches were lost by just a few points) **except that novak actually has a more similar differential in winners/errors to federer than rafa** did in their match.

both fed and novak hit lots of winners in 2014 (only 9 different) whereas fed hit 30 more winners than rafa in 2008.

moreover, you’re mistaken that fed was content to stay back versus rafa and rally – indeed he came to net *more* in that 2008 final than he did in either final 2014/15 versus novak.

by that logic, i.e., the aggressor should win, then fed should’ve won 2008 too.

SG1 Says:


You have, albeit inadvertently, proved my case regarding where grass tennis has gone in the last 10-15 years. There is just no way that either Rafa or Novak, as great as they are, have any business beating Federer on grass.

Grass is supposed to be the surface that rewards the attacking player, the more gifted athlete. Clay is the surface that rewards the most patient player and perhaps the most the most physical one. Hard court tennis is a balance of both. Low and behold…here we are. A great attacking player like Federer is losing to baseliners. It’s an indictment of the game itself. Federer is the better athlete and in my opinion, more gifted than either Nadal of Novak. Grass is supposed to reward this style and for some unfortunate reasons, it isn’t.

There are plenty of tournaments out there where a player can stay back and grind it out until the other player wears down (or drops dead from exhaustion). Wimbledon is not that tournament. It’s definitely time to speed up the balls and the courts at Wimbledon so that the aggressor is once again rewarded.

As for the 2008 final…in a match like that, both players actually deserved to win even though only one can. It’s a point here or a point there that can go either way. Rafa won and deserved to. If Federer had won, my opinion would be the same.

SG1 Says:

Sad to think that players like Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg would be ineffective and irrelevant in today’s game.

Tennis Vagabond Says:

SG1 and Jane, I’m enjoying your conversation.

jane Says:

“the attacking player, the more gifted athlete.”

are these mutual? i think not necessarily. some might argue the more gifted “athlete” is the greater defender. some have even said novak is one of the greatest “athletes” in tennis.

but to go elsewhere for a minute – what about agassi (92)? or even borg (76-80)? they both won wimbledon and you could easily argue both tended to be more “aggressive baseliners,” (kinda like novak?)

people were amazed back in the day that borg was so successful on BOTH clay and grass, and yet he was. it’s not anathema to be great on both – or even all – surfaces.

it’s arguable, indeed, that federer was the one who ushered in the all court game that has helped players expand their repertoires so they aren’t one-surface specialists anymore but can have success across the different surfaces. we all know that both fed and novak would have more than one FO were it not for a certain king of clay. even j-mac – and extremely successful “aggressor” – should’ve won one FO were it not for a rather large hiccup – choke!

novak’s serve has improved exponentially; are you giving him credit for this, i wonder? it was a weapon in 2014 and 2015, in particular, his second serve – something sampras (your fave i think?? ;)) deemed so important. perhaps you need to watch novak more closely, i don’t know. but he “deserved” to win in both 2014 and 2015. of that, i have no doubt.

jane Says:

how long was the 2014 final (fedole)? 3 hours 56 minutes.
how long was the 2008 final (fedal)? 4 hours 48 minutes
how long was the 2001 final (ivanisevic/rafter)? 3 hours
how long was the 1990 final (edberg/becker)? 3 hours
how long was the 1980 final (borg/j-mac)? 3 hours 53 minutes.

as you can see, the longest match by a full hour is the fed vs rafa one in 2008.

novak vs fed in 2014 was the same length as j-mac and borg’s 1980 final. novak doesn’t really “grind” at wimbledon. he comes in and he looks for winners. if you look at the brain game stats of this year’s final you will see that most points were 0-4 shots, which novak won the most of. the middle length rallies fed came out on top. and there were only a few long rallies. fed and novak don’t tend to play really long grinding rallies when they play each other.

Wog Boy Says:

You dissected it really nicely, I am glad we have you on Nole’s side, I wouldn’t like to have you as an opponent across the table, that’s for sure, good on ya:)

Tennis Vagabond Says:

Jane, great posts. I agree with two main points: 1) more aggressive player does not necessarily mean more athletic, and in any case, the definition of athleticism is missing. Speed? Coordination? Mindset?

2) Although defensive players are always baseliners, not all baselines are defensive players. Rafa in 2010 (?) was FAR more aggressive as a baseliner. Soderling, Del Potro and Berdych were all aggressive baseliners.

Personally, I think Novak has been a defensive player for much of his career, this is his natural territory, but I think his game has evolved over the years: his “standard” game is more aggressive than, say 5 years ago, and he is now very comfortable amping up the offence against certain players: he’s obviously been playing more aggressively against Fed than against Rafa or Murray for some years.

Okiegal Says:

@Gypsy Gal 3:13

Once in a great while I will get an “agreed”
reply, but not often! Thanks!

Tennis Vagabond Says:

MMT, thanks for that, sorry I missed your explanation earlier. Congrats on the press credentials! Have a blast.

jane Says:

cheers tennis vagabond; it was fun to chat and do a little research too. i ended up watching bits of old matches so had a trip down memory lane in the process.

wog boy, just a friendly discussion really. it’s only sports after all. politics, now that’s much more dangerous! ;)

Top story: WTA Palermo Re-Opens Pro Tennis Tour With All-European Field