|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31995
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 09, 2023 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^
Yes, he started cramping early in the 3rd. Had been a war for 2+ hours before that, and it was looking like one of those 5-hour 5-setters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
focus
Star Player
Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2530
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 09, 2023 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChickenStu wrote: | ^
Yes, he started cramping early in the 3rd. Had been a war for 2+ hours before that, and it was looking like one of those 5-hour 5-setters. |
This match was all about the cramping, most likely.
Zverev got bageled. Is Ruud that good?
Swiatek Muchova final probably tomorrow AM. Should be good one to watch with a lot of style and intelligence from both players. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16185
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 09, 2023 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| focus wrote: | | ChickenStu wrote: | ^
Yes, he started cramping early in the 3rd. Had been a war for 2+ hours before that, and it was looking like one of those 5-hour 5-setters. |
This match was all about the cramping, most likely.
Zverev got bageled. Is Ruud that good?
Swiatek Muchova final probably tomorrow AM. Should be good one to watch with a lot of style and intelligence from both players. |
Yeah, I don't remember a player suffering from cramping by the 3rd set before. Not in a major. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16185
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2023 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | A couple of breadsticks. Damn!
Now he needs to keep it up in the finals and not have a letdown like the year he beat Nadal in the semis then lost to Wawrinka. |
No letdown
Straight sets winner.
23rd grand slam
Going to be interesting how many he finishes with. He’s still on top of his game.
Dude should be a big favorite to take Wimbledon, with anothet shot at the calendar slam at the US Open.
Look at this stat:
By the end of 2010, here’s the grand slam count for the big 3:
| Quote: | Federer (age 29): 16
Nadal (age 24): 9
Djokovic (age 23): 1
|
Here’s what they’ve done in the last 13 years:
| Quote: | Djokovic (age 36): 22
Nadal (age 37): 13
Federer (age 42): 4
|
Here’s some stats I didn’t expect:
- Nadal has won more US Opens (4) than Djokovic (3). Does the US Open play like a clay court?
- Djokovic has won as many French Opens (3) as US Opens (3). He hasn’t won a US Open since 2018. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17255
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2023 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Great win and like you said he should be the overwhelming favorite for Wimbledon.
The USO stat is pretty crazy. He has a pretty mixed finals record there. It’s one of the slowest hard courts (conversely AO is the fastest major, which favors his game), but I think it’s just the pressure and end of a long season which makes that tourney so random. Lot of upsets there.
Crazy that this guy should have like 26 majors right now if it wasn’t for the USO ball issue, cancelled Wimbledon and missed AO / Covid. Absolutely the GOAT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 17255
Location: In a no-ship
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2023 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh and he returned to number 1 today. Has no points to defend at Wimbledon or USO.
0 unforced errors during tiebreaks this tournament. I don’t know if there’s ever been a more clutch player in tiebreaks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16185
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2023 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DuncanIdaho wrote: | | Crazy that this guy should have like 26 majors right now if it wasn’t for the USO ball issue, cancelled Wimbledon and missed AO / Covid. Absolutely the GOAT. |
Also, missed the US Open last yr due to covid restrictions when Alcaraz won.
And the 2 years when he went into a funk and Federer won like 3 titles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31995
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2023 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The US Open court is fine for Djoker, but as DI pointed out, I think it's more about the end of a grueling summer hard court season. Plus, he was disqualified from one USO as the clear favorite, and couldn't play last year when he probably would have been the favorite.
He's taken back the mantle as the unquestioned GOAT for now, as he's ahead in the major count. Nadal had an argument when he took the lead there, but I don't see how he has one at the moment. And it's likely that Djoker will add to his count, although it's not a foregone conclusion.
He's the current -130 favorite to win Wimbledon, with Alcaraz at +300 and Medvedev at +700. At the USO, he's the +140 favorite, with Alcaraz and Medvedev close behind at +250 and +300, respectively. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16185
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2023 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Not verified, but I found this comment on reddit:
| Quote: | | since the start of 2021 djokovic is 52-2 in slams , winning 6 out of 8 he played in |
Looks legit checking his wikipedia page:
| Quote: | 2021: (27-1)
Australian Open: W
French Open: W
Wimbledon: W
US Open: Lost Finals
2022: (21-1)
Australian Open: Didn't play
French Open: Lost Quarter-finals
Wimbledon: W
US Open: Didn't play
2023: (14-0)
Australian Open: W
French Open: W
Wimbledon:
US Open:
|
...................................
Here's some more stats:
- He's 23-11 in Grand Slam finals.
- He started out his career 8-8
- He's been 15-3 since (starting with Wimbledon 2015).
- Here are his 3 losses in a Grand Slam final since:
| Quote: | 1) 2016 US Open: Lost to Wawrinka
2) 2020 French Open: Lost to Nadal
3) 2021 US Open: Lost to Medvedev (while trying to complete the calendar slam) |
................................
- I was also surprised to see how spread out his last 15 wins have been. I thought it'd be littered with defeats over Federer and Nadal, but they're not. Here's who he's beaten for his last 15 grand slam titles:
| Quote: | Federer - 3
Murray - 2
Tsitsipas - 2
Kevin Anderson - 1
Del Potro - 1
Nadal - 1
Thiem - 1
Medvedev - 1
Berritini - 1
Kygios - 1
Ruud - 1 |
I'm surprised he's only beaten Nadal once in the finals since 2015.
And here's the makeup of his first 8 Grand Slam wins:
| Quote: | Murray - 3
Nadal - 3
Federer - 1
Tsonga - 1 |
And adding them all together for his 23 Grand Slams:
| Quote: | Murray - 5
Federer - 4
Nadal - 4
Tsitsipas - 2
Kevin Anderson - 1
Del Potro - 1
Thiem - 1
Medvedev - 1
Berritini - 1
Kygios - 1
Ruud - 1
Tsonga - 1 |
Last edited by LongBeachPoly on Sun Jun 11, 2023 5:39 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
focus
Star Player
Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2530
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2023 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like Djokovic the least of the Big 3 overall, but he was already the GOAT to me even with one less Slam than Rafa because of the near-calendar year Grand Slam, having held four consecutive Slams at once another time, and some other unique to him stats. With one more Slam, I think the argument is largely done for many others too that he's the GOAT. I hope that Rafa has one final healthy clay run next year before he retires and gets the French, but even if he does (and Djokovic held slam-less for the rest of his life), Djokovic is the GOAT.
Wimbledon awaits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jonnybravo
Retired Number
Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 30749
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
focus
Star Player
Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2530
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
focus
Star Player
Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2530
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2023 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
I thought Ruud was pretty good this time and that Djokovic was not in beast mode, though he is a beast. Ruud getting to Finals repeatedly has to mean something physically at least.
Women's three set final was pretty dramatic, and semis too. Swiatek back at the top with some good resiliency. Usually she destroys opponents in a Slam final. I am sure Rybakina is looking forward to the grass to defend Wimbledon title, and get some points out of it this time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31995
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2023 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| focus wrote: | I thought Ruud was pretty good this time and that Djokovic was not in beast mode, though he is a beast. Ruud getting to Finals repeatedly has to mean something physically at least.
Women's three set final was pretty dramatic, and semis too. Swiatek back at the top with some good resiliency. Usually she destroys opponents in a Slam final. I am sure Rybakina is looking forward to the grass to defend Wimbledon title, and get some points out of it this time. |
As a (mostly) doubles player these days, I enjoyed the women's doubles final also, as Su-Wei Hseih and Taylor Townsend are two of my favorites. One of them was guaranteed to win, and as it turned out, Hseih's team came from a set down to claim the title. It's her 5th Slam in doubles, which is pretty darned impressive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
focus
Star Player
Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2530
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 12, 2023 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChickenStu wrote: | | focus wrote: | I thought Ruud was pretty good this time and that Djokovic was not in beast mode, though he is a beast. Ruud getting to Finals repeatedly has to mean something physically at least.
Women's three set final was pretty dramatic, and semis too. Swiatek back at the top with some good resiliency. Usually she destroys opponents in a Slam final. I am sure Rybakina is looking forward to the grass to defend Wimbledon title, and get some points out of it this time. |
As a (mostly) doubles player these days, I enjoyed the women's doubles final also, as Su-Wei Hseih and Taylor Townsend are two of my favorites. One of them was guaranteed to win, and as it turned out, Hseih's team came from a set down to claim the title. It's her 5th Slam in doubles, which is pretty darned impressive. |
Hsieh is always a lot of fun with her unusual game. Townsend too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31995
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2023 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| focus wrote: | | ChickenStu wrote: | | focus wrote: | I thought Ruud was pretty good this time and that Djokovic was not in beast mode, though he is a beast. Ruud getting to Finals repeatedly has to mean something physically at least.
Women's three set final was pretty dramatic, and semis too. Swiatek back at the top with some good resiliency. Usually she destroys opponents in a Slam final. I am sure Rybakina is looking forward to the grass to defend Wimbledon title, and get some points out of it this time. |
As a (mostly) doubles player these days, I enjoyed the women's doubles final also, as Su-Wei Hseih and Taylor Townsend are two of my favorites. One of them was guaranteed to win, and as it turned out, Hseih's team came from a set down to claim the title. It's her 5th Slam in doubles, which is pretty darned impressive. |
Hsieh is always a lot of fun with her unusual game. Townsend too. |
Her funky game has even flummoxed some in singles, but take it from me, it especially works in doubles. You do not have to hit the ball hard or textbook at all to win in doubles. Her creativity is just so fun to watch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58380
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2023 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Stastically he is the best/GOAT undisputed now, but I don't feel his prime he beats Nadal on clay in Nadal's prime, and on Federer's prime, he doesn't beat Federer on grass, nearly as much they would beat him on hard court.
But the longevity of Novak's winning and prime is what is so incredible. He won his first slam 15 years ago. His most dominant year was 2011 (I think). That's 12 years ago. Yet, he's still dominating now.
Federer and Nadal just couldn't hold up physically the way Novak has. I also think Novak based on info I've heard does insanely committed things with his diet, off the court regime (breathing chambers, etc) that Nadal and Federer never were willing to commit to. In the end, that little extra work he put in ala Kobe, made the difference. No wonder Kobe loved Novak, the discipline Novak has off the court with his diet and work ethic is insane. Just google Novak's diet. Not easy to eat the way he does.
Mad respect for Novak. He really deserves this, even though he is easily the least likeable for me of the 3 in terms of his game and personality, but he is the undisputed GOAT now statistically. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31995
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2023 1:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | Stastically he is the best/GOAT undisputed now, but I don't feel his prime he beats Nadal on clay in Nadal's prime, and on Federer's prime, he doesn't beat Federer on grass, nearly as much they would beat him on hard court.
But the longevity of Novak's winning and prime is what is so incredible. He won his first slam 15 years ago. His most dominant year was 2011 (I think). That's 12 years ago. Yet, he's still dominating now.
Federer and Nadal just couldn't hold up physically the way Novak has. I also think Novak based on info I've heard does insanely committed things with his diet, off the court regime (breathing chambers, etc) that Nadal and Federer never were willing to commit to. In the end, that little extra work he put in ala Kobe, made the difference. No wonder Kobe loved Novak, the discipline Novak has off the court with his diet and work ethic is insane. Just google Novak's diet. Not easy to eat the way he does.
Mad respect for Novak. He really deserves this, even though he is easily the least likeable for me of the 3 in terms of his game and personality, but he is the undisputed GOAT now statistically. |
Obviously, no one can touch Nadal on clay. That's the most dominant any player has ever been on any surface, male or female. Having said that, Djokovic is easily the second-best clay court guy of this era. As far as the grass, I'll disagree with you. Tennis is a head-to-head sport, and Djokovic defeated Federer in all 3 Wimbledon finals in which they met. And he's only 1 behind him with his 7 Wimbledon titles, so he may tie Federer's 8 here shortly. But even if he doesn't, the fact that he beat him in 3 finals tips the scales for me, especially because Federer racked up a lot of his majors when there was less competition. One might think of Federer's exquisite net play and so I think it's easy to envision him as more suited for grass court tennis, but as racket technology changed and even as the balls and the grass court itself became a little slower, you saw even Federer stop serving and volleying all the time on the grass because it just wasn't a winning strategy against a lot of players. Whatever the case, the fact that Djoker beat him in all 3 of their finals actually gives him the edge on grass, at least for me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16185
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2023 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChickenStu wrote: | | wolfpaclaker wrote: | Stastically he is the best/GOAT undisputed now, but I don't feel his prime he beats Nadal on clay in Nadal's prime, and on Federer's prime, he doesn't beat Federer on grass, nearly as much they would beat him on hard court.
But the longevity of Novak's winning and prime is what is so incredible. He won his first slam 15 years ago. His most dominant year was 2011 (I think). That's 12 years ago. Yet, he's still dominating now.
Federer and Nadal just couldn't hold up physically the way Novak has. I also think Novak based on info I've heard does insanely committed things with his diet, off the court regime (breathing chambers, etc) that Nadal and Federer never were willing to commit to. In the end, that little extra work he put in ala Kobe, made the difference. No wonder Kobe loved Novak, the discipline Novak has off the court with his diet and work ethic is insane. Just google Novak's diet. Not easy to eat the way he does.
Mad respect for Novak. He really deserves this, even though he is easily the least likeable for me of the 3 in terms of his game and personality, but he is the undisputed GOAT now statistically. |
Obviously, no one can touch Nadal on clay. That's the most dominant any player has ever been on any surface, male or female. Having said that, Djokovic is easily the second-best clay court guy of this era. As far as the grass, I'll disagree with you. Tennis is a head-to-head sport, and Djokovic defeated Federer in all 3 Wimbledon finals in which they met. And he's only 1 behind him with his 7 Wimbledon titles, so he may tie Federer's 8 here shortly. But even if he doesn't, the fact that he beat him in 3 finals tips the scales for me, especially because Federer racked up a lot of his majors when there was less competition. One might think of Federer's exquisite net play and so I think it's easy to envision him as more suited for grass court tennis, but as racket technology changed and even as the balls and the grass court itself became a little slower, you saw even Federer stop serving and volleying all the time on the grass because it just wasn't a winning strategy against a lot of players. Whatever the case, the fact that Djoker beat him in all 3 of their finals actually gives him the edge on grass, at least for me. |
One thing about Federer is his peak didn't last long. After 2009 (age 28) he wasn't the same.
Here are his results at Wimbledon (since Wimbledon is basically 1 month before Federer's birthday, and 1 month after Djokovic's bday, I'm just going to rd Federer's age up 1 yr to make the comparisons more even).
| Quote: | 2003 (age 22): W
2004 (age 23): W
2005 (age 24): W
2006 (age 25): W
2007 (age 26): W
2008 (age 27): L (Finals)
2009 (age 28): W
2010 (age 29): L - (Quarterfinals)
2011 (age 30): L - (Quarterfinals)
2012 (age 31): W
2013 (age 32): L - (2nd Rd)
2014 (age 33): L - (Finals) - Djokovic (age 27)
2015 (age 34): L - (Finals) - Djokovic (age 28)
2016 (age 35): L - (Semifinals)
2017 (age 36): W
2018 (age 37): L - (Quarterfinals)
2019 (age 38): L - (Finals) - Djokovic (age 32)
2020 (age 39):
2021 (age 40): L - (Quarterfinals)
|
After 2009, Djokovic wasn't the only one beating him. Everyone was.
Yeah, all the head to head matchups between Djoker and Federer have to be taken with a grain of salt to me. Federer was well past his prime (33+) and the 6 year age gap is just too much of an advantage for Djoker.
I always say, in any head to head one on one competition, it's generally better to be younger than older.
Look at Canelo vs. GGG
If Djokovic's peak began in 2011, then Federer had to face Djokovic at his peak and was always 6 yrs older.
And if Federer's peak was between 2003-2010, then Djoker never had to face Federer at his peak (he only made 3 GS finals while Federer made 22. They only met in the finals once, at the 2007 US Open).
Djoker never had to play Federer when he was at the peak of his game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58380
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2023 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Federer didn't adjust his rackets to the time quick enough. In his prime, he played with 90 sized frames. He then eventually went to 97. What he ended his career with. From the moment Nadal had him shanking backhands in 2005, he needed to adjust. He knew it even, he was just stubborn about. The change came after his athletic prime. And then post-prime he beat Nadal a few times on hard courts in the Aussie/etc.
So I do believe Federer's prime was 2004-2009. That Federer vs prime Nadal vs prime Djoker. I think prime Nadal and Federer win more slams/dominate than prime Djoker. That's just my opinion, based on having seen all 3 of their primes. What we've seen is a young generation come in that isn't al that good, and these older guys past prime can still win. This shouldn't be happening. This is happening because in large part the new generations that came in never had the whole package (particular mental). Other than Murray, no one has even put up a real fight from these other generations. Some are hoping Alcaraz will be the next great.
Clearly statistically this isn't even a debate. Djoker is running away with it. He'll end up the GOAT, with his carerer longevity and slam total.
Last edited by wolfpaclaker on Thu Jun 15, 2023 10:28 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16185
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2023 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | Federer didn't adjust his rackets to the time quick enough. In his prime, he played with 90 sized frames. He then eventually went to 97. What he ended his career with. From the moment Nadal had his shanking backhands in 2005, he needed to adjust. He knew it even, he was just stubborn about. The change came after his prime. And then post-prime he beat Nadal a few times on hard courts in the Aussies.
So I do believe Federer's prime was 2004-2009. That Federer vs prime Nadal vs prime Djoker. I think prime Nadal and Federer are win more than prime Djoker. That's just my opinion, based on having seen all 3 of their primes. What we've seen is a young generation come in that isn't al that good, and these older guys past prime can still win. This shouldn't be happening. This is happening because in large part the new generations that came in never had the whole package (particular mental). Other than Murray, no one has even put up a real fight from these other generations.
Clearly statistically this isn't even a debate. Djoker is running away with it. He'll end up the GOAT, with his carerer longevity and slam total. |
Agreed. It'd be interesting to see.
Nadal did face prime/peak Federer (because he developed faster than Djoker did).
Djoker never did.
And it's true Federer hurt himself by sticking to his old rackets.
I'd also add that Federer had a weaker body than the other 2 and didn't seem to do any type of weight training (assumption) to get his body stronger. Especially his legs.
Physically, the other 2 stayed stronger into their 30s than Federer did. Federer probably should have devoted more time in the weight room.
Federer relied too much on his shot making abilities and not enough on his physical abilities.
For comparisons sake, a 36 yr old Djokovic is able to hang with a 20 yr old Alcaraz right now, movement wise.
A 36 yr old Federer moved like an old man compared to a 30 yr old Djokovic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
focus
Star Player
Joined: 23 May 2012
Posts: 2530
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2023 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Green grass tennis is fun to watch by players that know how to play it. Such variety. I missed it.
Chiming in on prime big3 discussion in general - really do not have to say prime, more about matchup. Rafa just matched up well strengths to weaknesses. Federer one hand backhand could not generally handle Rafa's crosscourt forehand, as one example. So Rafa would generally beat Federer including "prime" Federer at Wimbledon. Djokovic meanwhile, using what he learned losing to both, just matched up well with both. Djokovic the most complete game could generally absorb the strengths of both and find their weak points over time. Took him a while because his game took a while unlike Rafa (Federer's game took some time to hone) and plus losing to the other dominant two at the time hits hard at the psyche. Then finetuning his game took time, always in comparison match after match with them. In my opinion, Djokovic had way less margin for error than those two and so had to fine tune a lot of game dials and knobs to come up with the right mix, over time with experience of facing them time and again. I don't know how he lives in that thin margin which must be nervewracking, but he lives and thrives in it in late Slams.
In other words, whatever Rafa's prime was, I think Djokovic's best or near best takes him, whether 2011 Djokovic, 2015, whatever. I think Rafa like 2012 was pretty awesome, and others I don't remember right now. But I think Djokovic takes him. Same for Roger. Peak Roger was so dominant because well the field did not have Rafa or Djokovic (or let's say Alcaraz or Kyrgios on grass). And you can only beat (or in Fed's case, destroy) who is in front of you, and before Rafa no one could come make a dent. I think peak and less than peak just matches up well vs Federer.
It's a shame there has been no great power player during the Big 3,4 era. Del Potro woulda, but you know the story there. Alcaraz might have, not sure if he's got power on the level I mean, but he's at least close (plus all the other game he has).
Edit to add - 2014 US Open semis and finals, Marin Cilic takes out Federer in sf with precision power serving and strokes in three easy sets. Cilic couldn't reproduce that consistently, but Federer vulnerable to the power, just like Del Potro with all the Big 3 if he was healthy and playing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16185
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2023 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| focus wrote: | Green grass tennis is fun to watch by players that know how to play it. Such variety. I missed it.
Chiming in on prime big3 discussion in general - really do not have to say prime, more about matchup. Rafa just matched up well strengths to weaknesses. Federer one hand backhand could not generally handle Rafa's crosscourt forehand, as one example. So Rafa would generally beat Federer including "prime" Federer at Wimbledon. Djokovic meanwhile, using what he learned losing to both, just matched up well with both. Djokovic the most complete game could generally absorb the strengths of both and find their weak points over time. Took him a while because his game took a while unlike Rafa (Federer's game took some time to hone) and plus losing to the other dominant two at the time hits hard at the psyche. Then finetuning his game took time, always in comparison match after match with them. In my opinion, Djokovic had way less margin for error than those two and so had to fine tune a lot of game dials and knobs to come up with the right mix, over time with experience of facing them time and again. I don't know how he lives in that thin margin which must be nervewracking, but he lives and thrives in it in late Slams.
In other words, whatever Rafa's prime was, I think Djokovic's best or near best takes him, whether 2011 Djokovic, 2015, whatever. I think Rafa like 2012 was pretty awesome, and others I don't remember right now. But I think Djokovic takes him. Same for Roger. Peak Roger was so dominant because well the field did not have Rafa or Djokovic (or let's say Alcaraz or Kyrgios on grass). And you can only beat (or in Fed's case, destroy) who is in front of you, and before Rafa no one could come make a dent. I think peak and less than peak just matches up well vs Federer.
It's a shame there has been no great power player during the Big 3,4 era. Del Potro woulda, but you know the story there. Alcaraz might have, not sure if he's got power on the level I mean, but he's at least close (plus all the other game he has).
Edit to add - 2014 US Open semis and finals, Marin Cilic takes out Federer in sf with precision power serving and strokes in three easy sets. Cilic couldn't reproduce that consistently, but Federer vulnerable to the power, just like Del Potro with all the Big 3 if he was healthy and playing. |
Yeah, I wonder if the grand slam count would be different if the ages were reversed.
Let's say:
| Quote: | Djokovic: 27
Nadal: 22
Federer: 21 |
Since Djokovic was a late bloomer, how many would he have by 27 when Federer hits the ground running.
I don't know how many FOs Djokovic would be able to win vs. a younger Nadal. I think Nadal won his first FO at 18. Djokovic would have been 23. Yeah, he might not have any FOs in his career if the ages were reversed.
Federer and Nadal being at the same age probably wouldn't change the outcome much since Nadal would win all of the FOs and Federer would win most of the others (heads up).
It'd be interesting to see them compete at the same age though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jodeke
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67825
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Is anyone watching 2023 Wimbledon?
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31995
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 03, 2023 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jodeke wrote: | | Is anyone watching 2023 Wimbledon? |
Venus losing was not surprising, but Coco Gauff getting upset by Kenin, who has not been in form lately, was a shocker. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
