2018 Wimbledon men’s SF: Djokovic v Nadal

[DarthFed]

But, if you're going to complain about Novak's level: Didn't Rafa have several set points in the 3rd set TB? He could have walked out on Friday night 2 sets to the good, and finished on Sat in an hour. That is not a huge leap of faith.

Or Nole may have come out desperate on Saturday and won set 4 if he was down 2-1 instead of up 2-1. I think Rafa had 2 set points but Nole really saved them. Also if we want to go back to lamenting what if's it has to be said that Novak was destroying him up until missing routine returns on break points the first game of the 2nd set. After that Nole was never the same that match though overall his play wasn't bad in the 3rd set.

Bottom line is they both stunk on the 2nd day, it was kind of expected for Djoker who was playing his first huge match in nearly two years. It just was very unexpected from Nadal.

 

[Moxie]

Or Nole may have come out desperate on Saturday and won set 4 if he was down 2-1 instead of up 2-1. I think Rafa had 2 set points but Nole really saved them. Also if we want to go back to lamenting what if's it has to be said that Novak was destroying him up until missing routine returns on break points the first game of the 2nd set. After that Nole was never the same that match though overall his play wasn't bad in the 3rd set.

Bottom line is they both stunk on the 2nd day, it was kind of expected for Djoker who was playing his first huge match in nearly two years. It just was very unexpected from Nadal.

Agreed that we can slice and dice options up, but, after Nadal came out strong on Sat., the fifth set became a war of attrition, and it was rather shocking that Rafa lost it.

 

[Fiero425]

faker will never be back to his 2015 level, let alone his 2011 level. He's basically at the same stage as Fed was in 2011-2012.

Coincidently winning a Wimbledon title in 2012 "out of the blue!" Does this mean Nole will be in the wilderness for 5 years waiting for the next gen. to age out, then take over again in 2023 like Roger did in 2017? :whistle:

 

[monfed]

Coincidently winning a Wimbledon title in 2012 "out of the blue!" Does this mean Nole will be in the wilderness for 5 years waiting for the next gen. to age out, then take over again in 2023 like Roger did in 2017? :whistle:

haha interesting question buddy

 

[Front242]

Coincidently winning a Wimbledon title in 2012 "out of the blue!" Does this mean Nole will be in the wilderness for 5 years waiting for the next gen. to age out, then take over again in 2023 like Roger did in 2017? :whistle:

Tbh he needs to do his best to clean up right now in this weak era rather than do nothing for 5 years and potentially have some decent young player emerge. I realize your post wasn't serious but just saying Men's tennis is currently the weakest it's been for years. All the top guys know this and need to act fast.

 

[DarthFed]

Tbh he needs to do his best to clean up right now in this weak era rather than do nothing for 5 years and potentially have some decent young player emerge. I realize your post wasn't serious but just saying Men's tennis is currently the weakest it's been for years. All the top guys know this and need to act fast.

Bingo! That's why I've pounded the table on the whole "next 7-8 months are most important" starting with this past Wimbledon. My thinking is that the current field will be terrible for at least that amount of time but eventually one or more young guns will become great. I would think next year is when Zverev and potentially a couple others become legit contenders at majors. But you never know, I thought there'd be threats by now. Maybe it will be 2020 or even later and that would mean another 8-9 slams with an incredibly weak field for the geriatrics to mop up.

 

[the AntiPusher]

I'm not sure what match you were watching, A-P, but Saturday was dreck. Are you trying to posit that Nadal lost because Novak was so good? I don't even know if that works in your favor. But, realistically, I think Nadal had that match in the bag more than one way, and he duffed it. And it was purely psychological. He never should have lost that match. And it was far from classic or enjoyable to watch.

Moxie..I don’t get your point, however mine is very clear. Novak's and Rafa’s Tennis level was good and The Closed Freakin Roof made Novak’s server better than Rafa’s. I agree with Tignor’s and Henman assessment that it was a great match. Rafa didn’t loose because he was some mental midget but because he was able to win the big points but that’s tennis. Open that F # #king roof and Rafa bagging that title. This time you are completely Wrong.. I don’t blame Rafa for not being able to convert those break point opportunities,that’s great defense by Novak and the game of tennis.Rafa had 73 winners 42 unforced errors..He played the almost the equivalent of almost 6 sets of tennis ..that’s an average of 7 unforced error per Set. So will someone explain How The Fuck did he play poor tennis. Guess what geniuses Novak had the same number of Winners and unforced errors.72/42...so tell me how the Fuck did he play poorly.. What in the Hell did you expect, 3 unforced errors per set against two of the greatest baseliners in the game EVER? Let’s be honest for once or go peddle this bull crap to someone else who Never played the game of tennis. Novak served 23 aces to Rafa’s 8. Now genius tell me that the fuckin Close Roof wasn’t the deciding factor. Sorry B.B. and KS for my language but these morons Are overly critical when they Have No clue of the real game of tennis. I value Henman’s opinion a lot more than a poster with an axe to grind because their player loss.

 

[Fiero425]

Moxie..I don’t get your point, however mine is very clear. Novak's and Rafa’s Tennis level was good and The Closed Freakin Roof made Novak’s server better than Rafa’s. I agree with Tignor’s and Henman assessment that it was a great match. Rafa didn’t lose because he was some mental midget, but because he was able to win the big points; that’s tennis. Open that F # #king roof and Rafa bagging that title. This time you are completely Wrong.. I don’t blame Rafa for not being able to convert those break point opportunities, that's great defense by Novak and the game of tennis. Rafa had 73 winners 42 unforced errors..He played the almost the equivalent of almost 6 sets of tennis ..that’s an average of 7 unforced error per Set. So will someone explain How The Fuck did he play poor tennis. Guess what geniuses Novak had the same number of Winners and unforced errors.72/42...so tell me how the Fuck did he play poorly.. What in the Hell did you expect, 3 unforced errors per set against two of the greatest baseliners in the game EVER? Let’s be honest for once or go peddle this bull crap to someone else who Never played the game of tennis. Novak served 23 aces to Rafa’s 8. Now genius tell me that the fuckin Close Roof wasn’t the deciding factor. Sorry B.B. and KS for my language but these morons Are overly critical when they Have No clue of the real game of tennis. I value Henman’s opinion a lot more than a poster with an axe to grind because their player loss.

Nole was on the other side of the net! That should mean he was a lit'l better & actually won the match instead of Nadal losing it! :whistle:

 

[britbox]

Nothing wrong with a bit of passion @the AntiPusher . I missed the first two sets. I thought Nadal started the third like a steam train. He was playing great tennis, putting Novak under lots of pressure and taking his time away. I don't think he retained that level of intensity later though. Even so, from what I saw, I'd say Nadal was playing the better tennis for large periods... but Novak played when he really needed to and won the big points at the end.

Agree that people look at the scoreboard sometimes without taking into account how the points played out. I mean you can have a guy with 3 BPs get criticised for choking even if the server is banging down aces or unreturnable serves... which doesn't make sense.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

If you compare this match to the long history of Nadovic matches, it would definitely rank below average. I had never seen Novak push this much in a match. I agree that Rafa played better for the most part of the match and Novak won because he played big points better.

 

[Fiero425]

If you compare this match to the long history of Nadovic matches, it would definitely rank below average. I had never seen Novak push this much in a match. I agree that Rafa played better for the most part of the match and Novak won because he played big points better.

It's not always easy to have all that confidence to "tomahawk" his shots in critical situations! I'm just thrilled Nole took the match and the tournament! I didn't dare even hope; truly thinking making the SF would be great at this point! Dropping that final at Queens may have done something to force Nole to hang in there and finish! :whistle:

 

[Chris Koziarz]

Bingo! That's why I've pounded the table on the whole "next 7-8 months are most important" starting with this past Wimbledon. My thinking is that the current field will be terrible for at least that amount of time but eventually one or more young guns will become great. I would think next year is when Zverev and potentially a couple others become legit contenders at majors. But you never know, I thought there'd be threats by now. Maybe it will be 2020 or even later and that would mean another 8-9 slams with an incredibly weak field for the geriatrics to mop up.

I like your word play Darth. But contents-wise, I already said that advances in sport medicine have shifted the tennis player optimal age from about 18-30 last century, to say 25-36 now. That's why geriatrics past their 30s are still mopping up the field. I think this is going to be a permanent state from now on. In 12 or so years (around 2030), when current "next generation" become geriatrics, they'll be fully in mopping business and denying Fed children to break through, for few more years at least.

 

[DarthFed]

I like your word play Darth. But contents-wise, I already said that advances in sport medicine have shifted the tennis player optimal age from about 18-30 last century, to say 25-36 now. That's why geriatrics past their 30s are still mopping up the field. I think this is going to be a permanent state from now on. In 12 or so years (around 2030), when current "next generation" become geriatrics, they'll be fully in mopping business and denying Fed children to break through, for few more years at least.

I think it's still too early to say definitively what a player's prime is now. What we can say for sure is that players today have far longer careers on average and can play good tennis well into their 30's. But looking at the top guys I wouldn't say they are playing as well as they did when they were in their early to mid 20's.

 

[DarthFed]

Moxie..I don’t get your point, however mine is very clear. Novak's and Rafa’s Tennis level was good and The Closed Freakin Roof made Novak’s server better than Rafa’s. I agree with Tignor’s and Henman assessment that it was a great match. Rafa didn’t loose because he was some mental midget but because he was able to win the big points but that’s tennis. Open that F # #king roof and Rafa bagging that title. This time you are completely Wrong.. I don’t blame Rafa for not being able to convert those break point opportunities,that’s great defense by Novak and the game of tennis.Rafa had 73 winners 42 unforced errors..He played the almost the equivalent of almost 6 sets of tennis ..that’s an average of 7 unforced error per Set. So will someone explain How The Fuck did he play poor tennis. Guess what geniuses Novak had the same number of Winners and unforced errors.72/42...so tell me how the Fuck did he play poorly.. What in the Hell did you expect, 3 unforced errors per set against two of the greatest baseliners in the game EVER? Let’s be honest for once or go peddle this bull crap to someone else who Never played the game of tennis. Novak served 23 aces to Rafa’s 8. Now genius tell me that the fuckin Close Roof wasn’t the deciding factor. Sorry B.B. and KS for my language but these morons Are overly critical when they Have No clue of the real game of tennis. I value Henman’s opinion a lot more than a poster with an axe to grind because their player loss.

Remember that they are playing with Wimbledon scoring. Those UE totals are very very high for their standards. I thought Nadal was the more steady of the two because Djokovic's level dropped off in a big way after the first set and then fell again on the 2nd day. Nadal was able to control most rallies on an indoor grass court the last 4 sets which simply would not happen with Djokovic at full tilt (see set 1). Rafa should have won, it felt like an all-time steal.