Jump to content

Tennis thread 10: Federer's emotional goodbye


Calibandar
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

This is why I always argue Nadal is the best ever. He was stuck between Feds and Joker. The former ate off lesser players on the front end and the latter did the same after they were pretty spent. He had to truly take both of their primes without a period of ease. He also has a winning record against Feds and Joker only has one more win over him, but a lot of those wins came after his body broke down. He had a large lead over them when he was in his prime. 

You could be right but a lot of people (myself included) prefer Federer because of the way he played. Nadal was a tank and Federer was an artist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Darryk said:

You could be right but a lot of people (myself included) prefer Federer because of the way he played. Nadal was a tank and Federer was an artist.

I get why people say Feds had the most enjoyable style of play, but Nadal did conquer him in the end. It was really nice to see how they became friends after all their battles.

Novak is the oddball of the three. He's going to go down as the best statistically, but outside of 2011 he never could beat them in their primes consistently. And like I said, since that next dude really never happened he just beat up lesser talents. Alcaraz and Sinner both seem like guys who could win several slams, but it won't be anything like the golden era that was Feds, Nadal, Joker and Serena. I really like Iga and Coco, but I wouldn't assume either makes it to 10. Osaka looked like the second coming of Serena and we've seen how that's gone. 

Edited by Mr. Chatywin et al.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

This is why I always argue Nadal is the best ever. He was stuck between Feds and Joker. The former ate off lesser players on the front end and the latter did the same after they were pretty spent. He had to truly take both of their primes without a period of ease. He also has a winning record against Feds and Joker only has one more win over him, but a lot of those wins came after his body broke down. He had a large lead over them when he was in his prime. 

Nadal is just one year older than Djokovic. It's not as if Djokovic caught him in his 30s when his career was on the decline.

And why would anyone take Nadal's injuries as a reason to diminish his losses? It's his playing style that contributed significantly to those injuries, and it's his own fault for not taking care of his body the way Federer did or Djokovic does.

17 hours ago, Darryk said:

You could be right but a lot of people (myself included) prefer Federer because of the way he played. Nadal was a tank and Federer was an artist.

We need to differentiate between "my favourite" and "the best". If we're talking favourite, Djokovic is nowhere near the other two. If we're talking about who is the best and make the criteria about who is the most successful, then all the data points to Djokovic being the best, despite him being the least popular by far.

17 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

I get why people say Feds had the most enjoyable style of play, but Nadal did conquer him in the end. It was really nice to see how they became friends after all their battles.

Novak is the oddball of the three. He's going to go down as the best statistically, but outside of 2011 he never could beat them in their primes consistently. And like I said, since that next dude really never happened he just beat up lesser talents. Alcaraz and Sinner both seem like guys who could win several slams, but it won't be anything like the golden era that was Feds, Nadal, Joker and Serena. I really like Iga and Coco, but I wouldn't assume either makes it to 10. Osaka looked like the second coming of Serena and we've seen how that's gone. 

Why are we not putting an asterisk on Federer's success before Nadal and Djokovic came along (and got to the top level) and are putting it on Djokovic success after the two of them declined? It's a bit of a double standard, really. Why are Alcaraz and Sinner seen as "lesser talents" than Roddick, Hewitt and that lot?

Btw, I googled and found that Nadal didn't beat Djokovic at all in 7 matches in 2015 and 2016. I'd call that consistent, wouldn't you? And I'd say that if Nadal was no longer in his prime at the age of 28-30, then that is his problem.

 

P.S. Screw you guys for making me side with Djokovic in this argument. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I hate Djokovic, I have to go with @baxus on this one. He clearly is the most resilient of the bunch, and therefore his achievements overtake theirs by far. Doesn't matter who fought who in whose prime and so on, there's always too many variables like that.

My heart is always with Fed though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, 3CityApache said:

As much as I hate Djokovic, I have to go with @baxus on this one. He clearly is the most resilient of the bunch, and therefore his achievements overtake theirs by far. Doesn't matter who fought who in whose prime and so on, there's always too many variables like that.

My heart is always with Fed though.

TBF to Federer, a lot of his injury issues were in his late 30's.  He was very resilient in his younger days and not surprising, he moved very lightly, Djokovic should have loads more injuries the way he plays (it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if he was a ped user, the way he went from weak and flaky to a terminator was 'not normal' in cycling parlance). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't compare anti-doping in tennis and cycling. Cycling is willing and ready to take out their biggest stars, while tennis is obviously not. The list of star cyclists suspended and stripped of their trophies is a mile long but the only high profile tennis player to be suspended for doping was Sharapova who tested positive for a heart medication some 3 weeks after it was banned.

Btw, I don't think Nadal's proper and valid doping test results would make any less interesting reading material than Djokovic's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's true though, that every so often it looked like Djokovic was taking shots in-between sets or even games, so abruptly his physical condition was improving.

Edited by 3CityApache
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, baxus said:

Don't compare anti-doping in tennis and cycling. Cycling is willing and ready to take out their biggest stars, while tennis is obviously not. The list of star cyclists suspended and stripped of their trophies is a mile long but the only high profile tennis player to be suspended for doping was Sharapova who tested positive for a heart medication some 3 weeks after it was banned.

Btw, I don't think Nadal's proper and valid doping test results would make any less interesting reading material than Djokovic's.

I agree with both your points, but doesn't change the fact that Djokovic is highly suspicious, he became and iron man pretty much overnight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

I agree with both your points, but doesn't change the fact that Djokovic is highly suspicious, he became and iron man pretty much overnight. 

I can't even begin to count all the times I've had that argument with my friends. For some reason, they actually believe that Djokovic transformed from a player that was a walking medical timeout in a five setter into a Superman who played Murray for 5 hours in AO semifinal and Nadal for 6 hours in AO final (and it only took him a couple of months) by dropping gluten.

52 minutes ago, 3CityApache said:

It's true though, that every so often it looked like Djokovic was taking shots in-between sets or even games, so abruptly his physical condition was improving.

That's not the way doping works, though. ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, baxus said:

Nadal is just one year older than Djokovic. It's not as if Djokovic caught him in his 30s when his career was on the decline.

But he took a lot longer to rise, which we'll get to.

Quote

And why would anyone take Nadal's injuries as a reason to diminish his losses? It's his playing style that contributed significantly to those injuries, and it's his own fault for not taking care of his body the way Federer did or Djokovic does.

Certainly, but you can't discount that his injuries have been a significant issue. Of the three he's the one I really fear to see 20-30 years down the road. 

Quote

P.S. Screw you guys for making me side with Djokovic in this argument. :lol:

This is your burden. :P

4 hours ago, BigFatCoward said:

Djokovic should have loads more injuries the way he plays (it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if he was a ped user, the way he went from weak and flaky to a terminator was 'not normal' in cycling parlance). 

I think the comparison is fair Baxus. I've always assumed the big three and Serena did something. Joker of the four actually seems like the most likely candidate. His story about a change in diet sounds like complete BS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sad to see Murray bounced out, pleased to see Gauff go through comfortably. Kinda happy to see Raducanu back in the game but dont expect her to go far

I think Djokovic's wrist injury is a bit more serious than he is letting on, and I suspect he may lose earlier than expected this Open (just based on his relatively heavy going in the 1st round).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I think Djokovic's wrist injury is a bit more serious than he is letting on, and I suspect he may lose earlier than expected this Open

You mean like, earlier than not lose at all?

Because I for one don’t expect him to lose this Open. AFAIR last year he also lost his only set in the first round. 

Edited by 3CityApache
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Certainly, but you can't discount that his injuries have been a significant issue. Of the three he's the one I really fear to see 20-30 years down the road.

So? Nadal was not injured by some opponent sliding in studs up and tearing his ankle ligaments in the third round of a Grand Slam or by playing on substandard courts or anything like that. And don't forget that Djokovic also had a serious elbow injury, supposedly the reason why Del Potro bitchslapped him in Rio Olympics

Speaking of Del Potro, there's a player whose career was ravaged by injuries. Not Nadal.

19 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

I think the comparison is fair Baxus. I've always assumed the big three and Serena did something. Joker of the four actually seems like the most likely candidate. His story about a change in diet sounds like complete BS.

I'll never say Djokovic transformation is not suspicious, but why is Nadal any less suspicious? 

Regarding Serena, if a male player was as physically dominant over his competition as she was over hers everyone would scream their lungs out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using 2023 as a benchmark, he's already dropped an extra set. There was some talk of him having a cold, which is why he may seem lethargic on the court. 

Regarding doping....I'm not sure if a person who wouldnt take a vaccine would try potentially risky methods to maintain his physique/health. Thats just my opinion though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...