2019 Men’s Wimbledon Final: Novak Djokovic vs. Roger Federer

Who wins?

  • Djokovic in three sets

    Votes: 4 22.2%
  • Djokovic in four sets

    Votes: 6 33.3%
  • Djokovic in five sets

    Votes: 3 16.7%
  • Federer in three sets

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Federer in four sets

    Votes: 4 22.2%
  • Federer in five sets

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • Total voters
    18
  • Poll closed .

britbox

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
27,403
Reactions
6,211
Points
113
Location
Gold Coast, Australia
I am giving Djokovic credit for two things here:

Djokovic very easily could have netted it or shanked it or put extra air under it that would have allowed Federer to get a racquet on it. But he didn't.

No shit sherlock. You could apply that kind of logic to pretty much every shot ever hit.
 

mrzz

Hater
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
6,167
Reactions
2,989
Points
113
I am sick of reading people writing that the two handed back hand this, two handed back hand that, as it was impossible to Federer to beat Djokovic with his 1 handed back handed. Last time I checked he got to double match point with that shot -- and that was not the issue in losing them both. So if he aces it than his back hand is good enough? The argument makes zero sense.

Also, people put as either Federer aces Djokovic, or both points are lost... have you cared to check what was happening in the match until them? It is not like Djokovic was winning 90% of the long rallies. Far away from it. It was a bad approach... people would call it a bad approach in all other possible situations. The TV commentator I had even said "hmm... he is rushing it" AS he was approaching (and I was already cursing).

It was obviously merit Djokovic to first connect a great return at 15-40 and then execute perfectly the pass down match point. Obviously, given context, it is a tough shot. But -- and that is what I cannot believe people who supposedly know tennis don't get, Djokovic had that match point IN HIS RACQUET (and he connected it). The whole point of being on serve is to have the points in your racquet and not the other way around.

Federer gave him the opening, he took it. Credit to him, deserving winner.
 

MikeOne

Masters Champion
Joined
Sep 29, 2015
Messages
658
Reactions
484
Points
63
Was a Safin fan back in the early days when we were on tennis.com forums. Many moons ago!

And if i were a fed fanboy i would be arguing fed choked in that safin match, faded away in 5th set... overrated match, federer was mentally weak.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
No it’s not, a passing shot is a passing shot and an approach shot is an approach shot, doesn’t matter who is producing the shots, silly boy.

Ah. I see. A serve is a serve. It does not matter who is producing it.

Fantastic logic.

Or to dumb it up even more, a Nadal passing shot and an Isner passing shot are the same. It does not matter who is producing them.

It's insane that Monfed is in this thread yet you're coming off like the biggest idiot. Truly impressive.
 

MikeOne

Masters Champion
Joined
Sep 29, 2015
Messages
658
Reactions
484
Points
63
Ah. I see. A serve is a serve. It does not matter who is producing it.

Fantastic logic.

Or to dumb it up even more, a Nadal passing shot and an Isner passing shot are the same. It does not matter who is producing them.

It's insane that Monfed is in this thread yet you're coming off like the biggest idiot. Truly impressive.
Reading your posts, you are a damn good candidate yourself.
 

brokenshoelace

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
9,380
Reactions
1,334
Points
113
Reading your posts, you are a damn good candidate yourself.

Dude, you literally just said it doesn't matter who's hitting a shot. A shot is a shot. That's honestly the dumbest statement in this 90 page thread. Like seriously, do you stand by that comment, or admit that you're a moron?
 

calitennis127

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
4,947
Reactions
459
Points
83
No shit sherlock. You could apply that kind of logic to pretty much every shot ever hit.


And how many of those shots were hit down match point in the 5th set of a 5-hour Wimbledon final? You are trying to treat this like a statistics spreadsheet. Sometimes emotions play a role in human affairs. Not everything is a matter of stick figures and physical movements. You do know that, right?
 

Sundaymorningguy

Grand Slam Champion
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
6,384
Reactions
1,759
Points
113
Location
Norfolk, VA
Clearly, both sides are going to have different opinions, and that is fine. It still won’t change the outcome, so I don’t know why anyone would continue to argue about the match as if it would.
 

Vince Evert

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
3,900
Reactions
1,867
Points
113
As a diehard Federer fan i have to give credit to Novak Djokovic on his incredible 5th Wimbledon win. An old cliche but the standard of the final by both players , their battle of wills on almost 5 hours , a shame that one of the players had to loose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shawnbm and mrzz

MikeOne

Masters Champion
Joined
Sep 29, 2015
Messages
658
Reactions
484
Points
63
Dude, you literally just said it doesn't matter who's hitting a shot. A shot is a shot. That's honestly the dumbest statement in this 90 page thread. Like seriously, do you stand by that comment, or admit that you're a moron?

an ace is an ace, a good passing shot is a good passing shot, a good approach is a good approach. What is the difference between an ace hit by Fed or ace hit by Nadal? they are aces, unreturnable serves, same thing. Is there a difference? What is the difference between a good approach shot into the corner, struck at 95mph if Roddick or fed hit it, tell me.

not only are you a moron, you are also suffering from trauma, and totally incoherent. What is it? Nadal loss in semis? or me and cali exposing you for who you are? keep your wits about you man, don't have these mental episodes, they are concerning.
 

Vince Evert

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
3,900
Reactions
1,867
Points
113
However I cannot agree with a championship final being decided on a final set tiebreak. To me the ending it seemed surreal. Particularly as Wimbledon prides itself on it's heritage including preserving most of it's traditions such as no play on the middle sunday. Even so, i expect djokovic would still have prevailed and eventually would go on to break Federer's serve to win the title.
 

Vince Evert

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
3,900
Reactions
1,867
Points
113
i hope i never see another GS final ending on a tie-break. If it ever happens i'll just wont bother to watch. Full stop.
 

MikeOne

Masters Champion
Joined
Sep 29, 2015
Messages
658
Reactions
484
Points
63
Clearly, both sides are going to have different opinions, and that is fine. It still won’t change the outcome, so I don’t know why anyone would continue to argue about the match as if it would.

it's about rationalization, people need to somehow make themselves feel better. So Federer lost, but in their mind, fed fanboys will feel better by rationalizing that Federer should've won, he just let it go... somehow they feel better about this even though it doesn't change result.

The thing here is that the game of hypotheticals is a no win game. Hypotheticals are interesting. I could come up with many hypotheticals where Nadal or Djokovic never lost big matches, i stay way from that. One thing that differentiates me from many here is that even though i'm biased towards a player, i never discredit opponents or diminish matches when my player lost. No-one saw me post endless posts about how Nadal played horribly in semis and what bad match that was, no, i didn't say a single world. That was a great match. Same when Federer beat Nadal in finals of AO, i said nothing. Same when Novak started thrashing Nadal, nothing. Same when Stan humiliated Novak at French, nothing.

The way some cry babies here claim classics like 08 Wimbledon and 19 wimbledon are overrated, not great, is just classic sore loser syndrome.
 

Vince Evert

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
3,900
Reactions
1,867
Points
113
Full match here and NO COMMENTARY too.

As far as i'm concerned Wimbledon 2019 was saved/ignited by the big three Djokovic, Federer and Nadal from an otherwise mediocre tournament lacking in any epic , memorable games mens and womens competition. You wonder who or when the next great champions are going to be or take over.
 
Last edited:

don_fabio

Multiple Major Winner
Joined
May 2, 2019
Messages
4,366
Reactions
4,803
Points
113
Baby, 18 year old, who yet couldn’t buy a beer, in diapers nadal started to beat federer back in 04-05, even on hard courts.

I have to intervene here. Alcohol is legal in eastern Europe from 18y old so technically Novak could go to a store and buy a Jack Daniels.

Alcohol drinking around our area is often encouraged by the male parent who tells you to be a man when you are about 7 years old and pours some wine to your orange juice. Buying a liquor was never a problem for us at any age, as long as it sells doesn't matter who buys, you just say it is for my old man or we have some guests if it's more than usual.

So they would send you to the local supermarket to which you walk like 100 meters and you buy some salami and cheese and usually the beer. You would bring the old and empty 0.5 liter glass bottles and you would state you presence to the cashier lady like look I am putting here 6 bottles and she would later still ask you did you bring the bottles, because bottles were important and you could get a good credit for just an empty bottle and if you didn't bring the bottle the beer was like 30% more expensive. Sometimes we would cheat, we brought 3 bottles but bought 5.

Do you know that we now have people living off just collecting the plastic and can bottles? You also get credit for those, but much less than the glass bottles before. People always drink outside in certain areas around the town, nevermind summer or winter and there are these folks just going around and asking you is your bottle empty. You look at you bottle and say sorry man come back in 10 minutes, then another guy picks it up because the other one couldn't wait, there was more to collect. Sometimes they stay just to get that bottle and stare at you until you pass it to them. It's bizarre.

Point is, Novak made a long way to become a hero. This is not Switzerland nor Spain. People really struggle and his wins make people so proud and it is something to cheer for, something bright and positive, not corrupt. It is hard to describe, but just imagine if people struggle with money all the time and live on the edge of providing for their loved ones and some guy like Novak comes and wins what he won so far. It puts smile on people face, they become so proud and see part of them in him and they live for that moment of happiness when he beats another guy in the major final. It gets very emotional.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bonaca and mrzz