Nadal Shocked, Djokovic Delayed in Monday Wimbledon R16 Matches
by Staff | July 10th, 2017, 8:53 pm

Luxembourg’s favorite son and No. 16 seed Gilles Muller stunned No. 4 seed Rafael Nadal for the biggest upset at Wimbledon on Monday, outlasting the Spaniard in a five-hour battle 6-3, 6-4, 3-6, 4-6, 15-13.
“Definitely the biggest win,” said Muller, who beat a teenaged Nadal 12 years ago at Wimbledon. “Playing one of the guys who is dominating tennis again this year.”

Muller will next face No. 7 Marin Cilic, who served past No. 18 Roberto Bautista Agut 6-2, 6-2, 6-2.

“I guess he’s pretty confident at the moment,” said Muller, who will rise into the Top 25 for the first time, and is 0-2 career against Cilic. “I’m pretty confident I will be in good shape for Wednesday.”

No. 6 seed Milos Raonic stopped one of the hottest young players on tour, defeating No. 10 Alexander Zverev 4-6, 7-5, 4-6, 7-5, 6-1. Raonic’s reward is a meeting with tournament favorite and No. 3 seed Roger Federer, who subdued No. 13 Grigor Dimitrov 6-4, 6-2, 6-4.

“I feel like I’m rested enough,” Federer said. “I can look at this quarterfinal in a totally relaxed fashion.”

Another upset five-set winner was No. 11 Tomas Berdych who topped No. 8 Dominic Thiem 6-3, 6-7(1), 6-3, 3-6, 6-3.

“I think I showed pretty good tennis,” said the 31-year-old 2010 Wimbledon finalist Berdych. “I think I had it pretty much under control the whole time, which was the most important thing, and I was just dictating the game.”

Berdych’s next opponent is the winner of No. 2 Novak Djokovic and unseeded Frenchman Adrian Mannarino, which will be contested Tuesday, pushed back after the Muller-Nadal five-hour epic.

With Nadal eliminated, now Djokovic is the lone player that can unseat world No. 1 Andy Murray during this Wimbledon fortnight.

Not to be left out, Murray defeated Benoit Paire in straight sets 7-6(1), 6-4, 6-4.

It was the 10th consecutive quarterfinal for the two-time winner. He has also reached the quarters or better in 24 of his last 26 Grand Slam events. While the score was straight sets, Murray was not at his sharpest, dropping two of his first three service games.

“I was able to track down a lot of his shots,” Murray said. “That’s a big part of my game. If I’m struggling and not moving well, it affects my performance maybe more than other guys who don’t rely on their movement as much.”

The Brit will in the quarterfinals face No. 24 Sam Querrey, who won a serving duel with unseeded South African Kevin Anderson 5-7, 7-6(5), 6-3, 6-7(11), 6-3.

“Sam obviously likes the conditions here,” Murray said. “When he’s ahead he can serve well. He’s a good frontrunner. I’ll need to make sure I’m serving well and not letting him dictate too much.”

You Might Like:
Wozniacki Breezes to Rain-Delayed WTA Rogers Cup Title
Nadal, Mahut, Giorgi Win ATP/WTA Titles
Oudin Beats Jankovic, Wins 1st Career Title Monday at WTA Birmingham
Murray, Roddick, Hewitt, Haas Winners at Wimbledon
Rafael Nadal: Just Because Roger Lost Doesn’t Mean We Can’t Play At The US Open In The Future

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

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

57 Comments for Nadal Shocked, Djokovic Delayed in Monday Wimbledon R16 Matches

AndyMira Says:

Yeah!..Nadal shocked!Definitely..but there is no need for 2 thread about this on your Top stories staff!!…

Btw…Unfortunate for Nole has to play today when he could play at CC last nite!..Stupid organizer’s!!

Btw ii….Very possibly andy will meet with Cilic in semi…u better win this Andy!..I dedicated 1 Bracket for your win!!…U go and win it u hear??

P/S….Urgh!!Regret now…don’t have an opportunity to give 1 Bracket to Nole!..He’s got a good chance too!!

skeezer Says:

All credit to Muller, he had alot going against him. He remained calm, focused and had resolve and confidence to the end. All that @34.
Rafa? Will he ever have another chance @Wimbledon title? I say no way Jose.

Angel Says:

I think Rafa has one more slam in him at the most and his best chance is next year Roland Garros obviously but who knows for sure. If Federer wins this Wimbledon I think he assures his Goat status for a long long time maybe forever but again who knows for sure.

Michael Says:

The most decisive moment and the turning point of the match was in the second set when Rafa was serving to stay in the set at 4-5. The first point was gifted to Muller by an uncharacteristic Unforced and at 30-all, Miller’s netting of a Rafa serve breached the net and fell on Rafa’s side of the Court making it the most difficult or even impossible drop shot one can anticipate. In the next point at 30-40 a sliced backhand of Muller’s just skidded on and made Rafa to dig it out over the net but without much success. All credit to Muller, he stood focussed, determined and was a medium of composure right throughout the match. He stood unfazed and undaunted despite Rafa’s come back from two sets to down. He waited for his opportunity in the final set and was conscientiously aware that serving first held a huge advantage and was just hoping that Rafa would wilt under pressure at some point in the match and his confidence paid him dividends.

Tony N Says:

Too bad Federer does not get a chance to play Nadal again on grass. Federer may not get another opportunity to play Nadal again in a Grand Slam event if Federer and Djokovic keep getting drawn in the same half… or if Nadal takes an injury break from the tour for the hardcourt season until Monte Carlo 2018 in order to recover from the ‘head concussion’ before the Muller match.

Nadal and Federer at age 26 to 31:

– At age 31 today, Nadal has failed to reach the Wimbledon quarterfinal in the last six years (2012 R2, 2013 R1, 2014 R4, 2015 R2, 2016 DNP, 2017 R4).

– At age 31 in 2013, Federer reached 2 QF, 1 SF, 2 Finals and won 1 Title of the French Open during a similar six-year period (2008 F, 2009 W, 2010 QF, 2011 F, 2012 SF, 2013 QF, 2015 QF). [Federer arguably might have had a good shot at winning the 2011 French Open title had he not played with a groin injury and exhaustion after a grueling semifinal to stop Djokovic’s 41-match win streak since the start of the 2011 season (Rafa and Roger both had 15 breakpoints, with Rafa winning 10 BPs and Roger 8 BPs).]

Each time Nadal loses – against Muller in 384 points – the media sensationalize his lowly-ranked opponent as superhuman (e.g., Tennis Magazine’s Steve Tignor’s headline: “Rafa Wanted To Win So Badly That He Couldn’t: On Nadal’s Epic Loss To Gilles Muller. In Perhaps The Match Of The Year, the Go-For-Broke Underdog Outlasted Nadal…” Wow) or excuse his loss to an injury.

The truth (OR Truth) is that Federer could have also had an epic 5-setter against Dimitrov – had Federer been less competitive, played at a lower level, had less ability and versatility, and used weaker tactics. Federer tended to find ways to win even when he wasn’t at his best. Against a determined Andy Roddick at the 2009 Wimbledon final, Federer wasn’t at his best yet Roger simply refused to yield for 436 points until Roddick eventually caved at 16-14 in the fifth set. Yeah, the same Roddick who beat Nadal in 2008 and 2010 (both times when Nadal ended the year No. 1).

The simple truth (OR Truth) is that Federer may be toughest competitor on the overall tour, yet is underrated due to his calm and composed demeanor with minimal theatrics, fist pumping and head bumps.

Federer at age 36 would probably be closer to reaching a French Open final than Nadal at age 32 is to reaching a Wimbledon final – if only Roger would make winning the French Open a priority again. Unfortunately, since 2012, Federer seems to have been less motivated to compete for the French title in order to save his body for Halle (with which he has a lifetime contract) and now Stuttgart. The 2011 Halle organizers publicly expressed their unhappiness that Federer withdrew from Halle due to a groin injury suffered during the 2011 French Open – the third time he had withdrawn from Halle since 2007. Thereafter, Federer has never skipped Halle and his performances at the French Open has suffered in consequence.

At least Federer might get to play a revitalized Djokovic this Wimbledon, providing Novak gets through his cupcake draw (having faced players with a combined cupcake ranking of 823 — No. 47 Klizan, No. 136 Pavlasek, No. 589 Gulbis and No. 51 Mannarino)

skeezer Says:

Good post
Rafans should not feel too bad. He has had a great year so far, and this kind of form will serve him well ar USO. Expect him to go deep there, if he remains healthy….

Toilet Break Says:

“The simple truth (OR Truth) is that Federer may be toughest competitor on the overall tour, yet is underrated due to his calm and composed demeanor with minimal theatrics, fist pumping and head bumps.”

Truth has been spoken.Sums it up. @ TN

Okiegal Says:

I don’t feel bad over Rafa’s loss…….he just recently won his 10th French Open….its all good!! He is absolutely awesome in victory and defeat……….VAMOS!!

madmax Says:


This was a great match. A five setter thriller. I cannot believe the sheer tenacity of Rafa, 2 sets down, he fights and fights to claw, literally claw his way back and save 4 match points.

What a champion.

Absolutely right not to feel bad over his loss, shocked perhaps, but not feeling bad.

Giles Says:

Wimbledon has to be the most biased of all the slams! They with their stupid traditions and such like.
They only have eyes for two players – Andy Murray ( the local boy) and Roger Federer ( Wimbledon darling)! What happened yesterday with regards to the scheduling left a lot to be desired. In fact it was disgraceful! Two fingers up to wimbledon!
And thumbs down!

lylenubbins Says:

Tough loss for Rafa and his fans like me. Lost lots of break points in the 5th.

Oh well, for him and us it’s all about enjoying him and seeing what he can do until the next injury.

Margot Says:

Don’t think Nole fans need worry too much, don’t think he’s gonna be on court very long. Leads 3-1 at mo.

Berghain Says:

Djokovic up a break but already shouting like a mad man. :)

Rick Says:

Just like last year. Federina was leading 2 sets to 1 against Raonic. Then was beaten by Raonic in 5 sets. The same thing would happens to Federina again tomorrow. And Federina will be sending home by Raonic. If not Djokovic could definitely have another win against the vet in the semi.

Rick Says:

Raonic to upsets Federina again. All Federina’s nemesis are in his draw. His fans could dreams of have winning Wimbledon. But it would be difficult to win at Wimbledon. Not like the Aussie Open, when both Murray and Nole were upset early in the the tournament.

Rick Says:

Someone will be sending Federina home to rest for another 2 months. To prepare for the US Open .

Berghain Says:

Cant they make a ‘long drop’ thread next to ‘off topic’?

Berghain Says:

Apparently Nole took some pills from the doc just before the match – he is not looking very good atm.

Daniel Says:

Couldn’t watch Djoko´s match, but see he went through in straights.

Can’t see Berdych beating him. He has the tools, but as someone mentioned, Berdy is a has been at this point and he always had problems with Djoko. The most dangerous QF is Raonic, who proved last year he can beat Fed. Although he is not in the same level as last year and Fed is a level above.

skeezer Says:

As predicted, straight sets before the morning Jo. So unfair that he won with the scheduling issues.

RZ Says:

In the ATP racquet bracket, hcp1/Henry has taken a sizable lead over the field. Tied for 2nd place are Colin, Kimberly, and Vinod. The bracket hasn’t been updated yet to reflect Djokovic winning today, but I don’t see if making a difference in today’s standings.

joe strummer Says:

@skeezer: happy for that but still annoyed with the british scoundrels and their plotting and scheming.

RZ Says:

Margot, J-Kath, and other Andy fans: With yesterday’s win, Andy became one of only 3 men to have at least 10 consecutive appearances in the quarterfinals of the same grand slam tournament. The other are Jimmy Connors (13 consecutive US Open quarters and 11 consecutive Wimbledon quarters) and Fed (11 consecutive Australian Open quarters and 10 consecutive Wimbledon quarters).

Truth Says:

I know it rocked your boat when Nadal needed another cupcake draw but failed terribly in yet another marathon (so much for superiority).
Fed failure excuses are made by a fake fan.
Just don’t worry about a Fedal “rivalry” anymore…

Fed couldn’t win Wimbledon only because he had an aching belly after many beatdowns from Djoker
(not from Nadal. Nadal was busy losing to bad players.).
Once Fed was figured out in the strong tennis era, he had trouble reaching Wimbledon and U.S. Open finals (like Nadal).
Fed can’t laugh at his losses with Djoker because he knows Djoker’s so much more lethal (despite Djoker’s lack of priority to win),
plus there’s no match up problem excuse for Fed & Djoker.
Fed didn’t lose because he played Halle or faked another injury for 3 months. Fed had a habit of losing matches with 2 set leads or 5-3 leads.

Just like Nadal, Fed doesn’t deserve profuse praise for losing.
No one else gets that much praise for losing.
Well, at least Muller didn’t fluke a Slam.
He just won a 5 setter with great courage & class
(no fake calmness. No manbag or special embroidered jacket.
No cursing at opponent or verbal assault on his opponent in interviews).
Speaking of fluke, Roddick may deserve profuse praise for being a loser,
but most people don’t remember him. Awwww
Fed might feel relieved that Roddick is in the Hall of Fame.
This “induction” elevates Fed to glory as well.
After all, match up problems exist for glorified journeymen too.
When one has to insult/physically throw the GOAT Djoker against
the locker, we can reward Roddick with the Hall of Fame induction! Woo!

Margot Says:

😎🙆👍😍👋 RZ!

t4t Says:

Hope it will be a Djokovic-Murray final.

J-Kath Says:

Hope Andy gets that far.

madmax Says:

Keep up the great play tomorrow Fed. This is 2016 again, against Raonic, but this time, it’s revenge and going for the win!

Raonic is a super great player, really has improved. That serve is just way too fast, so Fed had better be on his guard!

I know he will come through if he plays as well as he had all tournament.

Looking forward.

Willow Says:

Michael @ July 11th 12.31am, actually those who saw that match know how it panned out ….

madmax Says:


“Fed (11 consecutive Australian Open quarters and 10 consecutive Wimbledon quarters)”.

Yes, but let’s go further:-

It is an overall 15 Wimbledon quarter finals. Then, to add to that – an overall 36 consecutive quarter finals if you count all of the slams to date – it’s pretty incredible and then, 8 consecutive years reaching all 4 Grand Slam quarter finals in 1 season.


RZ Says:

Madmax – yes, very impressive for sure. I think that Fed’s consecutive semifinals and quarterfinals streaks in grand slams is the most underrated stat out there.
But the purpose of my post was to point out that Andy is part of an exclusive group and achieved something that only 2 other guys had done before.

rognadfan Says:

Damn!These, Nolepanzies just keep barking about the so-called ‘cupcake draw’ being ‘granted (in their minds)’ to Federer and Nadal.
For them, the most difficult draw this years wimby, Of course Nole!.All of them, so far, totally dangerous, potential slam winner or likely to reach QF or Semis routinely; Like Manarino, who gives load of trouble to top players all the time; or Gulbis would have lost in the first round of a challenger until wimby came around and at Wimby the sun actually rose from west when he reached third round. So he is obviously the most difficult guy to beat of course.
Is there any other pathetic way to bring on your sick inferiority complexes? There are these special kind of Nolepanzies here at TX (obviously not all of them are like that, many Nole fans and supporters are insightful tennis fans) who have some kind of a traumatic syndrome born out of jealousy, hate and, of course, the abysmal inferiority complex.

chrisford1 Says:

RZ – streaks are nice but many can have origins in a weak era. The weak era lasted 2002-07 counting Hewitt’s 75 week reign as #1 before Feds’ start on his 234 weeks.
Then competition arrived in 2008, mainly in the form of Nadal and Djokovic taking a slew of Masters and Majors.
It is a tribute of course to Federer as a consistent, great player that he kept up many streaks after the Big 4 arrived, that he came very close to upsets ending his Wimbledon, AO and USO streaks to other hot players – but his stats are weak era padded.
Same with “Slamcounts”. They are like “medal counts” in the Olympics were the competition is weak in events that few countries participate in or support extensive programs. Or in sports that have a multitude of events one athlete can go for a medal in. Mike Phelps got 28 medals, Rafa got one. Russian gymnasts dominated 1952-1977 because no other team until the Romanians in Montreal 1976 had the resources, extensive training, selection of talent programs and ability to compete with them. The streaks the Russian female gymnasts oompiled in that sports weak era will never be matched. And stats and records do not mean Ludmilla and Co from 1960s have the stats that prove they are better than USA’s Biles&Co in 2016.

RZ Says:

@Chrisford1 – You are right that there is a lot of context that goes into these streaks. For example, arguably the only reason Rafa isn’t on the list of most consecutive quarterfinals at one slam is due to injuries; without them, he’d arguably be onto 15 consecutive French Open quarterfinals. And in terms of context, I could argue that makes Andy’s achievement all the more special considering the pressure from the British public, his back issues, his competition, etc.

But at some point we have to take these achievements for what they are without the outside factors, because otherwise we could spend all day adding subjective values to an objective metric. That’s why I don’t buy into the weak era argument. It’s not any particular player’s fault who his/her competition is at any point in time, and how do we measure whether an era is weak or strong? I could make the argument that some of the factors that other people consider to indicate a weak era (e.g., no dominant players over a certain number of years) could really be an indication of a strong era (e.g., the competition was too tough for players to dominate the field).

chrisford1 Says:

RZ – That said, I agree with you that streaks are important in that they demonstrate who in the sport are the ones with consistent excellence. Though it doesn’t mean a whole lot past that. Each of the Big 4 have streaks making it to QFs, semis, finals . All show consistent excellence. Rafa’s streaks ended on injuries and a few “bad years”, but consistent enough to be considered the toughest person to play, year in , year out. Djokovic’s streak was ended by Stan. No shame in that, then Novak had 2015/part 2016 as yet another show of his consistent excellence. Roger is a great, but had 5 years of being a big fish in a small pond full of smaller fish. And Andy as mentioned is also a player with consistent excellence. I have brought that up before, myself, as another huge reason Andy belongs in the same conversation as Rafa, Fed, Novak. Big because only those 4 in this generation have shown the consistent excellence putting themselves in a position to win. Tomas Berdych and David Ferrer are great players, true pro’s pros – but the difference in their level of consistent excellence is a few notches below The Four.

skeezer Says:

“That’s why I don’t buy into the weak era argument.”

And another one bites the dust for CF1’s Weak Era theory.
And here’s another jewel argument from the weak era man;
“Slamcounts”. They are like “medal counts” in the Olympics.”

Miles Says:

Chris Ford – still banging the weak era drum, I see! LOL! The weakest period of the last 40 years was 2013-15 when Nadal had lost his form through injuries, Murray was recovering from back surgery and Federer (in 2013) had a bad back and DelPotro had a succession of injuries. Djokovic took full advantage, but luckily for him he didn’t have to face players as good as Davydenko, Saffin, Nalbandian, Hewitt, Roddick and Soderling at their peak – all of whom would have challenged him.

During 2014-15 his nearest rival was 33 and then 34 years of age! That older player was still able to beat him on faster courts! If Federer hadn’t had glandular fever in 2008 and pneumonia in 2010, he’d have won even more majors – but those illnesses reduced his performances by about 5%.

Miles Says:

Chris Ford – the competition started in 2008, did it? Coincidently, the year that Roger had his mono!

chrisford1 Says:

RZ, fans may hate tearing down or mentioning flaws in “AMAZING RECORDS!!”, medal counting, or “UNBELIEVABLE STREAKS!” but it’s unavoidable if they make comparisons between their fave athletes vs. foes at present or across eras and throw out stats as the argument settler..And many points about context are not subjective. The courts are slower now, tennis is markedly different now than in the wood racket all 2 grass majors days of Borg. Rafa WAS injured a lot. But his time away does not mean he becomes lousier, while a healthy person playing while Rafa is out becomes a greater player and better able to beat Nadal.

Obviously, without Rafa’s injuries, he would have more Slams than Roger. That matters not in an argument on who has more trophies – but the more important (for fans) argument on who is likeliest to prevail in a match. Fed has more talent than Rafa or Novak, but not their gladiator mindset. Andy is almost as talented as Fed, has a close h2h with Roger. But not Nadal or Djokovic. And anyone that follows the ATP knows why. If talent was everything, Tomic would be a multiple time “reached QFS and above in Masters 1000 and above” player.

Rahul Says:

@CF1 so suppose a player came along in 2008 and thrashed the big 4 handily. Considering you would never get to see them have the prosperous careers they are enjoying now, would you still say the competition is weak?

Pitchaboy Says:

Novak and Rafa benefitted from the weakest era. How else could a 36 year old guy be driving them nuts? RF’s resurgence this year shows he is one for the ages. He would have won Wimby on the fast slick grass of 80s and 90s. Not these two guys.

J-Kath Says:


You have me confused – both Nole and Rafa have won Wimbledon when Federer was playing – but why waft them back to the Eighties and Nineties….were they even born then?

J-Kath Says:

Chrisford 1:

Ouch man – why did you spoil your latest commentary with a boost to Tomic. You’ve introduced Ant-hills.

As for Miles: If this hadn’t happened and that hadn’t happened and so on and so on………

PS: Am on a punch-bag tonight so take it bravely…

J-Kath Says:

As usual we have RZ who serves the ace. Let’s vote her to be the most practical, balanced, poster… (the fact that she is an Andy fan doesn’t count for me….haha – believe what you want.).

J-Kath Says:


Don’t let us forget that Federer’s stats include almost 6 years more than the current top competitors….he’s 36 in a few weeks.

As you can tell I’m in a punchy mood tonight so best to chuckle and not be dismissive……good-natured warning.

skeezer Says:

“Don’t let us forget that Federer’s stats include almost 6 years more than the current top competitors”
Yep, he has put up records past these guys current age( 6 years worth and counting ). They have to chase his age and records for the next 6 years. They will also have to deal with the up and comers, and they are a common’. Let’s see…………….I am pretty confident Fed will still hold most of the records he has now. But of course I am not biased, right J-Kath? ;)

J-Kath Says:

Skeezer: Wrong my dear – give yourself a wee bit more time to hit the point. Seeyah…!

Truth Says:

How did Roddick retire with a washed up career and an inability to play on indoor hardcourt, clay, hardcourt and grass??!
An amature guy can join the tour and lose 0-6 0-6 0-6 to Fed, then immediately calls Fed the GOAT, but we are measuring talent, not only a win statistic.
Surely, you don’t describe Nalbandian, Roddick and Davydenko as better than Djoker when they had no 5 set domination wins over Djoker.
Djoker proved to the world that he was a champ on different surfaces, in Slams and year end championship. He beat Fed when he couldn’t even move fast.
Even Safin beat Fed, but Fed excused himself by whining about injury.
When Nadal beat Fed, the insecure Fed cried repeatedly like he never won an Australian Open.
Yet, people insulted Djoker’s personality.

Roddick hid from clay Masters events and choked on every court.
In his biggest years, Fed was beaten on hardcourt by his washed up lapdog Roddick.
Illness didn’t cause Fed to lose to Djoker.
He was hammered by Canas in 2007 but no one complained about illness.
Fed and Nadal were beaten by Tsonga, Del Po and Berdych (great but not genius players).
Even Nalbandian had fluke wins over Fedal.
Just like when Djoker had real illness, not short term mono, couldn’t breathe on court &
had to give Roddick a much-needed prize win.

Hewitt & Nalbandian had plenty of wins over Fed.
Credit to Nadal for being superior to Hewitt.
I never thought anyone could supplant Hewitt. What a relief!

Djoker tried hard again & improved physically within 2010-2015 to be the best player ever.
Nalbandian and Roddick fell apart as soon as they reached Slam semis.
Roddick had trouble keeping his Taco Bell burrito in his stomach.
He had trouble buying nutritious food with his sponsor money.

rognadfan Says:

With all due respect, Saying that if Rafa was not injured he would have more majors than Roger is equivalent to saying if Nalbandian was not injured frequently he would have >5 majors; or if Delpo was not injured he would have denied Rafa all those majors (bar clay) Nadal won post 2009, and reach # 1 before Novak and Murray. It’s not so far fetched to think that several of those majors rafa won after 2009 (bar FO, again) would have gone to delpo had he remained healthy.
Such hypothetical scenarios and wishful thinkings don’t mean anything and don’t count towards anyone’s achievements.

That said, if you compare 2013-2016 period with 2004-2007, 2013-2016 had far less good players at the top than during 2004-2007. As someone said earlier, Novak’s closest rival during the last 3 years was Roger, and he was way past the typical retirement age of tennis. Everyone was pretty far behind. Because he’s been playing so well, people are taking the longevity of roger for granted.

chrisford1 Says:

J-Kath. I brought Tomic up because he is such a disgusting waste of talent. And worse, doesn’t care if he is. With Andy, when he does not go as far as his talent should take him in a year – he CARES. And is angry and abusive and negative towards himself for failing to play as he could..but of course still talented enough to make scads of QFs, Semis, Finals, and titles.

skeezer Says:

Re:7:33 post
Rack that post in the Tennis X archives! Shamoon.

Pitchaboy Says:

The games of Rafa and Novak would have had a rough time with the Wimby courts of 15 years ago. These days courts are homogenized enough that baseline blockers look great with their fancy racquets. When they speeded up AO a tad, you saw what happened.
RF is tennis royalty. There has not been one like him in tennis. He is to tennis what Jordan is to basketball. He made the Germans cheer for him against Zverev. Rafa and Novak are great players but there is only one King.

Truth Says:

Fed’s king of what? Overratedness? As soon as he missed a serve vs. an injured Djoker, he completely collapsed.
Djoker is not Roddick and Nalbandian.
You don’t win with imaginary perfect ballet & kingdoms. It’s ok, Fed floons.

If Fed was the best, why did he beat Murray but not Djoker the “unimpressive” player?
How come Roddick, Nalbandian, Hewitt and Safin were crushed forever, but Djoker kept dominating?
Roddick couldn’t take Djoker’s dominance and tried to destroy him mentally & physically.
The abusive clown admitted he had no idea that Djoker had real illness.
Roddick couldn’t handle Fed’s losses.

Daniel Says:

Unless an injury is like what happend to Selles, the players themselves are the cause to thir injuroies. DelPo caused his wrist injuries because he hit as hard as anyone. Nadal cuased his injuries because he likes to grind as much as possible and in order to “break his opponets spirits and will” he also broke his body in the process, hence he doesn’t have the “streaks” records, apart form the 10 Majors in 10 sgtaright years courtesy to 9 French Opens.

Part of the consistency, longevity and staying injury free is part of what creates those streaks and why they matter.

An exaqmple is Nadal´s major win loss ration. since he first won to now, how many majors did he skipped which bumped his final figures, at least 6. That would count as clear losses because he was not fit enough to play. He missed the most.

Had he not play the way he did, he wouldn´t injury himself much, but he would sacreficie a bunch of important victories that came as expense of his “gladiator” style of play.

Bottom line, it worked, 15 major shows it, but not eficiently as Federer, 18 majors prove it! The word here is efficiency, which way of playing is better and abbble to produce more great results? So far, Federer is leading the way, not only in achievements but with his longevity and ability to play at a high level for these numbers of years, even if in patches of greatness. His level is unmatched!

Truth Says:

Djoker was suddenly injured then hardly tried and flaked out, which led to Fedal success.
It wasn’t success and full schedules for Fedal. Fed was just lucky as well as beaten a lot with “the weakest draws”.

Brian Baker had a bad physique but he didn’t get injured because he had many matches and ball bashing.
Unlike Fed, Nadal and Djoker weren’t born with completely healthy bodies.
Nadal had bad tendons back in 2003. Djoker had to overcome breathing difficulties and severe food allergy.

Okiegal Says:

@Madmax……He did claw his way back……how he does it I don’t know. I’m so happy that I am still getting to watch him play, just like Fed fans still have the privilege to watch him. Two amazing athletes…….

RZ Says:

@J-Kath: thanks. I try to be reasonable when posting. Part of my job and training entails guarding against the misuse of data and knowing when to recognize the misuse – or even gentle bending/spinning – of data.

I am a little annoyed that a stat I posted as a prop to Andy’s consistency on grass got co-opted by the GOAT debate. Seems like it’s impossible to post anything related to the top guys without the GOAT debate popping up.

Top story: Devastated Andy Murray Won't Play The Australian Open