Tennis 2021
- Thread starter jon abbey
- Start date
Well done to Ash. She's such a likeable character that it's good to see her earning some serious hardware. Think this is only her 2nd major along with the French?
The women's doubles final (which I watched off and all seemingly all afternoon) was pretty amazing. Kudermetova/Vesnina served for it at 5-4 in the second and had two match points - they lost the set 7-5. Hsieh/Mertens served for the match at 5-3 in the third and were broken. Kudermetova/Vesnina served for it at 7-6 in the third and were broken. Hsieh/Mertens finally broke through to win 9-7 in the third.
Men's doubles final just started (under the roof) not too long ago as well, if you're into that sort of thing.
Men's doubles final just started (under the roof) not too long ago as well, if you're into that sort of thing.
Novak not playing well at all and is up 4-1.
Berrettini had a few chances the first couple games but is clearly feeling the pressure. Hope he can turn it around or this is going to be over before 11.
Berrettini had a few chances the first couple games but is clearly feeling the pressure. Hope he can turn it around or this is going to be over before 11.
Does Berrettini normally have more game than this? He is playing like he is a plodding Isner.
Shapo looks to have a higher ceiling.
Shapo looks to have a higher ceiling.
I'll be honest. I saw it 5-3 and just assumed the entire match was over.
Now I'm back. It would be really nice to get some new blood in tennis. Hoping Italy has an epic sports day today, that's for sure.
Honestly, even after Novak was down two sets against Tsitsipas in the French Open, I wasn't really worried about him losing. He usually gets his act together and wins.
Stamina for days. It really is impressive how long Djok can play while also getting better.
Berretini stole the first set. Now it's going to be 1-1 and Djok in control.
They put the arrow on who is serving. I think that is less confusing that continually flipping the names.
holy shit what a wonderful point-the touch both these guys have.
But Joker is a special kind of brilliant
But Joker is a special kind of brilliant
Congrats to Novak. It wouldn't be a Wimbledon victory for him if he didn't eat some of the grass.
I agree. And to think he’s only 34. With the shape he is in he has many more majors in him. What an era of tennis we have witnessed with Fed, Nadal and Novak.
It's so remarkable that he managed to catch up to those other two:
Sampras 14, Federer 0, Nadal 0, Djokovic 0 (after 2002)
Sampras 14, Federer 9, Nadal 2, Djokovic 0 (after 2006)
Federer 16, Sampras 14, Nadal 9, Djokovic 1 (after 2010)
Federer 17, Sampras 14, Nadal 14, Djokovic 7 (after 2014)
Federer 19, Nadal 16, Sampras 14, Djokovic 12 (after 2017)
Djokovic 20, Federer 20, Nadal 20, Sampras 14 (now)
Sampras 14, Federer 0, Nadal 0, Djokovic 0 (after 2002)
Sampras 14, Federer 9, Nadal 2, Djokovic 0 (after 2006)
Federer 16, Sampras 14, Nadal 9, Djokovic 1 (after 2010)
Federer 17, Sampras 14, Nadal 14, Djokovic 7 (after 2014)
Federer 19, Nadal 16, Sampras 14, Djokovic 12 (after 2017)
Djokovic 20, Federer 20, Nadal 20, Sampras 14 (now)
To think it would probably be 4 Slams in a row already if he didn't get DQ'd at the US Open last year.
He's already done that so, I mean, it's a special achievement but not for him. Hah. That's how incredible he's been. The potential calendar (and golden) slam is really exciting.
I wonder if the crowd in New York is going to be rooting for history or rooting for the upset. My guess is the latter.
Incredible for Djokovic. At some point in the next 3-6 years this era of mens tennis will be over, and historically it's just unreal. Since the French Open in 2005, there has been just 3 Grand Slams in which none of the Big 3 made the finals (US Open last year, Wimbledon in 2016 and US Open in 2014).
I think a lot about whether or not the fact that all 3 have played at the same time has made them more or less successful. I hate to simplify it to GS finals only, but here are their records in GS finals against the other Big 3:
Federer: 4-10
Nadal: 11-7
Djokovic: 8-6
Here are their records in GS finals against all others:
Federer: 16-1
Nadal: 10-1
Djokovic: 12-4
Federer in particular was so dominant against everyone else and so mediocre against Nadal/Djokovic. In a world without the others, does he win 25+ majors and go down as the runaway GOAT? Or would the lack of competition cause him to get complacent and retire far earlier?
Federer: 4-10
Nadal: 11-7
Djokovic: 8-6
Here are their records in GS finals against all others:
Federer: 16-1
Nadal: 10-1
Djokovic: 12-4
Federer in particular was so dominant against everyone else and so mediocre against Nadal/Djokovic. In a world without the others, does he win 25+ majors and go down as the runaway GOAT? Or would the lack of competition cause him to get complacent and retire far earlier?
It's like if three separate Tiger Woods played golf at the same time in the late 90s. And only those three Tigers won for 16 years.
That's the exact metaphor I've been thinking of myself recently. It really is incredible. (Not least because very good players have really struggled to play their best tennis when they've come up against the Big Three, just as so many good golfers kept falling at Tiger's feet for so many years.)
Big Fed homer here, so take this with that in mind...
But Roger's record vs Rafa in the French final is 0-4. So at times I feel like this stats punishes Roger for being the second best clay player of that time period. If Roger had lost in the 2nd or 3rd round, Roger's final record would be much better.
Also, Roger is the oldest of them and was just out of his peak right when Novak was peaking too.
Again, huge Roger fan here but I think the head to head isn't exactly a great comparison.
However, with all that said, when all is said and done, Novak will go down as the greatest of all time.
Since 2003 only four men have won Wimbledon. Roger, Rafa, Novak and Murray. That’s pretty incredible.
This is a fair post, I thought I'd look up all of their head to heads against each other, just for the sake of info.
Novak 27, Fed 23
Rafa 24, Fed 16
Novak 30, Rafa 28
All true, but it has me wondering the reverse: Maybe his head to head would be better, but how much did Federer benefit from hitting the scene a few years before Nadal and Djokovic? Nadal started winning titles really early, but he was seen as something of a clay specialist. He won his first non French Open GS in 2008, the same year that Djokovic won his first major. Before 2008, Federer already had a ridiculous 12 GS wins. If he'd come along a few years later, it's reasonable to think that number would dip a bit with the increased competition.
I love Federer along with the other big 3 as I enjoy watching the greatness of this era. Nothing will ever come close. But Federer did load up on majors early in his career against some weaker opponents in Mark Philippoussis, Marcos Baghdatis, Fernando Gonzalez (who), and Robin Soderling. He beat Lleyton Hewitt and Marat Safin early in his career for titles and both were former number 1's along with another former number 1 in Andy Roddick who he was 4-0 in majors against. He also beat a pretty washed up Andre Agassi in the 2005 US Open as well. Hell even Rogers last two major wins came against Marin Cilic a good but not great player whose only major win came against Nishikori. Its definitely a shame that the primes of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic didn't overlap at once because that would have been fun to see.
The issue with any H2H with Nadal is that he’s just too dominant on clay. It’s obviously to his credit but it really skews thing. For what it’s worth, Nadal hasn’t beaten Djokovic on a non-clay court in 8 years. It’s a ridiculous statistic. He also hasn’t beaten Federer on a non-clay court in 7 years, although they haven’t played too many matches. Still, Rafa’s dominance on clay warps a statistic like H2H. Diving deeper, you can see that Novak is clearly the better player. Or at least has been for the last 10 years.
I think Federer’s age is what skews this. He’s four years older than Nadal and five years older than Djokovic. So yes Fed was winning titles before those guys came on the scene. But also...when those guys hit their primes, Federer was past his. That he still remained competitive with them while being five years older - and competing at a world class level late in his 30s - is a testament to his greatness.
Also it seems clear that Djokovic is the best all around player of the three. He’s great on any surface. I mean they all are - even Federer, who could have won several French Opens if not for Nadal - but Djokovic seems particularly well-rounded.
Also it seems clear that Djokovic is the best all around player of the three. He’s great on any surface. I mean they all are - even Federer, who could have won several French Opens if not for Nadal - but Djokovic seems particularly well-rounded.
Isn't it an issue here too that the courts have slowed down a lot, making it easier for one player with a single style to win slams on different services?
I am not sure about the grass and clay courts but the hard courts today are different than they were in the 80s and 90s. However just read that the grass courts have been cut to 8 mm since 1995 so there have been changes there as well.