Australian Open 2012: Discussion Thread

CountryJoe

Fantastic match. Unreal effort from Nadal but it just was'nt enough to beat Djokovic. One of the best Aussie Open matches ever.

NickDrake

Fantastic match. Novak deserved it in the end.

Scanlas The 2nd

_Bella_ wrote: »

What an absolutely fantastic match. Unbelievable strength from Djokovic to win that last set. Best match of Novak's career!

Semi final against Federer at us open was better.

rjp123

hayfever nasal inhaler apparently suffering big time with pollen all week

rjp123

rjp123 wrote: »

hayfever nasal inhaler apparently suffering big time with pollen all week

in reply to the youtube clips of him under towel

Lyanna

Amazing match; can't praise Djokovic's mental strength enough.

mike65 wrote: »

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

Didn't some game last about 19 games for the final set at Wimbledon last year?

More like 138, actually.

Scanlas The 2nd

That was probably rafa's best chance to beat Novak along with maybe Indian wells and Miami. I expect Novak to go on and win the French open now and beat nadal in the final in straight sets. Only way nadal wins French open is if Federer meets djokovic and pulls out an incredible performance like last year.

walshb

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

That was probably rafa's best chance to beat Novak along with maybe Indian wells and Miami. I expect Novak to go on and win the French open now and beat nadal in the final in straight sets. Only way nadal wins French open is if Federer meets djokovic and pulls out an incredible performance like last year.

I agree. Nadal strugges against Novak, and even though the match score was close, it was obvious to me that Novak was stronger. Nadal spent a lot more time defending, scrambling and hanging in. Novak was consistently stronger and in charge of the rallies. He is simply the boss when they trade at the baseline.

Nadal being seeded two and Federer 4, is it? means that Fed probably won't meet Novak at semi stage, hence Nadal is left with having to beat Fed and then struggle hard to beat Novak.

Previously it was Nadal and Fed who met in finals, now they could be meeting in more semis. Fed has the game and style to beat Novak more so than Nadal.

Bobo78

I m absolutely delighted for Djokovic he is amazing and number 1 with good reason.
God bless you Djokovic.

Johnmb

walshb wrote: »

Nadal being seeded two and Federer 4, is it? means that Fed probably won't meet Novak at semi stage, hence Nadal is left with having to beat Fed and then struggle hard to beat Novak.

Being seeded number 4 has no more bearing on which side of the draw you'll be in than being seeded number 24. The top two seeds are placed at the top and bottom of the draw, then the number 3 & 4 seeds are drawn to decide which one is in which of the other two quarters. Then 5-8 are drawn to decide who is in which of the remaining eights, and so on. It'll be the luck of the draw, not the seedings, that will decide who gets Federer in the semis.

adamski8

Why are the matches being played so late local time?
Why did they take so long to close the roof, I was sure I saw drizzle mins before they stopped?
Anyone else feel they were challenging calls way too much even though they knew it was the right call?

deisedave

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

That was probably rafa's best chance to beat Novak along with maybe Indian wells and Miami. I expect Novak to go on and win the French open now and beat nadal in the final in straight sets. Only way nadal wins French open is if Federer meets djokovic and pulls out an incredible performance like last year.

I think your wrong there even tho Novak has won alot over the last year does not mean Nadal wont win the French Open. Nadal is the best clay court player in the World and I think even against Novak he would edge it, Nadal will win the French open imo.

btw for anyone that fancies a flutter Federer is 15/1 to win the french open which is worth a punt.

Plowman

This post has been deleted.

Scanlas The 2nd

deisedave wrote: »

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

That was probably rafa's best chance to beat Novak along with maybe Indian wells and Miami. I expect Novak to go on and win the French open now and beat nadal in the final in straight sets. Only way nadal wins French open is if Federer meets djokovic and pulls out an incredible performance like last year.

I think your wrong there even tho Novak has won alot over the last year does not mean Nadal wont win the French Open. Nadal is the best clay court player in the World and I think even against Novak he would edge it, Nadal will win the French open imo.

btw for anyone that fancies a flutter Federer is 15/1 to win the french open which is worth a punt.

The two times they met on clay last year Novak dominated nadal beating him in straight sets twice. Novak is simply a better clay court player than nadal now.

_Bella_

The match raised a few questions about the challenge system. I feel Djokovic came off quite badly 3 or 4 times when fantastic returns he hit were called out when they were actually in. I know there is no way to really stop this but I thought he was quite unlucky.

Another slightly controversial one has to be when Nadal's serve was called in and Djokovic hit a clean winner off it. Nadal then challenged, but it does raise the question whether you should be allowed to challenge your own shots when they are called in.

Repolho

_Bella_ wrote: »

Another slightly controversial one has to be when Nadal's serve was called in and Djokovic hit a clean winner off it. Nadal then challenged, but it does raise the question whether you should be allowed to challenge your own shots when they are called in.

I think he should he must be allowed challenge it. If the server thinks the serve was out then he's not goiing to move for the return.

walshb

_Bella_ wrote: »

Another slightly controversial one has to be when Nadal's serve was called in and Djokovic hit a clean winner off it. Nadal then challenged, but it does raise the question whether you should be allowed to challenge your own shots when they are called in.

That I did not know. That is odd, and seems unfair. Challenging your own serve because a winner was hit off it.

Edit: Above post makes a good point. I guess they are just allowing for all the permuations.

Separtae point. Anyone ever notice tht some of the best ever returns, bullets, come off serves that are called out, or are faults.
You feel like saying to the players "do that when the serve is good, and IN."

StephenHendry

brilliant game. great comeback from rafa as he looked dead and buried after the 3rd set. one of the greatest game of tennis i've ever seen. not quite as good as the wimbledon final of 08 but imo i would put it in 2nd place

vgv

I feel this is one of the best times in a long time to be a tennis fan.These guys just keep upping the bar if not in terms of quality of tennis but in terms of sheer will to win and physical endurance.A few years ago Federer was thought almost unbeatable,but Nadal came along and figured out how to beat him,and picked up 10 slams in the process.Now here comes Djokovic and he has started doing to Nadal what Nadal has been doing to Federer.He now has 5 slams of his own and I am starting to wonder at the rate he is going if he poses a bigger threat to Federers mark of 16 than Nadal.Great stuff indeed and long may it continue.Looking forward to Roland Garros.

MisterAnarchy

Enjoyable final but the length of these matches is becoming a farce.

The modern courts are far too slow,its become a joke at this stage.

It seems like you can't win a Grand Slam these days without killing your own body. It's interesting to watch, because it's kind of painful and jaw-dropping watching the players have to push through that physical barrier, but even if they can get through this match, it's not good for their career or life after tennis. They've really got to make the courts faster. Rallies that are over 30 shots are crazy, and shouldn't be able to happen.

Tennis has always been ridiculously tough on the body. The amount of ex-pros who have needed major hip surgery after their careers is ridiculous(even serve volleyers from the 80s and 90s).
Hewitt and Nalbandian have already had major hip surgeries in their 20s.

The game has also become very one dimensional since it focuses so much on the baseline game, hard hitting , and changes in racquet technology and court surfaces.
The slower courts reduce reward for aggressive attacking players with outrageous shot making and instead reward consistent grinders prepared to run marathons to win.

This match was a clear example of how points have to be won 3-4 times during each rally. It's entertaining for a while, but it gets boring. There were so many points where Djokovic and Nadal could have followed their shots to the net. But they didn't because they can't volley and the passing shots are so fast and accurate even when hit from nearly impossible places. That's not tennis.

Moderate speed courts (i.e faster courts than now but not as fast as mid 90s) would be a healthier balance between the two.

walshb

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

There were so many points where Djokovic and Nadal could have followed their shots to the net. But they didn't because they can't volley and the passing shots are so fast and accurate even when hit from nearly impossible places. That's not tennis.

That is a bit OTT. Maybe they can't volley as effortlessly as a Stefan Edberg or McEnroe, but I saw plenty of good volley's, particularly from Novak.

RosyLily

Incredible match from both players!! Shame there can only be one winner. Really impressed with the standard of tennis at the Australian Open this year, especially the SFs & Fs. Hope this is the start of an amazing year in tennis.

Anyone reckon Djokovic could possibly win a Calendar Grand Slam?

token56

I'm a big Nadal fan so was disappointed that he lost but it was a great match by two fantastic players. I'm actually surprised it was so close, in all truth I was expecting Djokovic to have an easier win given what happened over the course of last year. It was also far from the best we've seem Nadal play I think, that is by in large because Djokovic didn't let him play his best and bossed the rallies. But I think its obvious Nadal's confidence is not fully back against Djokovic. Nadal should have been bossing a lot more rallies especially when it was his serve. Djokovic being such a great returner of the ball doesn't help but I think Nadal could definitely have done better in this respect. Thing is I think Djokovic could probably step his game up even further to match it if and hopefully when Nadal gets his full confidence back.

Hopefully this does give Nadal some confidence and he can push on at the French Open. I still think overall he has a better game on Clay than Djokovic, I'm just not sure about Nadal's mentally if were to play Djokovic in that final. But I dont think Nadal will like having lost to Djokovic on clay last year in the manner he did. Nadal is still the king of clay and he'll be out for revenge.

walshb

On clay Novak has beaten him several times, albeit 3 sets. He simply has his number. 5 sets I believe he will still beat him. Nadal is competitive, but always struggling to be competitive; Novak is simply competitive vs. Nadal.

Da Shins Kelly

deisedave wrote: »

btw for anyone that fancies a flutter Federer is 15/1 to win the french open which is worth a punt.

That could be worth a small bet. I wouldn't be confident about him winning, but for some reason I feel like if he ended up meeting Djokovic in the final, he'd have a better chance of beating him than beating Nadal. I might throw a small bit of money on it for the craic anyway!

_Bella_

Repolho wrote: »

I think he should he must be allowed challenge it. If the server thinks the serve was out then he's not goiing to move for the return.

Well it this situation he was never going to get to it. Side note, what an unbelievable return!

Pighead

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Enjoyable final but the length of these matches is becoming a farce.

The modern courts are far too slow,its become a joke at this stage.

It seems like you can't win a Grand Slam these days without killing your own body. It's interesting to watch, because it's kind of painful and jaw-dropping watching the players have to push through that physical barrier, but even if they can get through this match, it's not good for their career or life after tennis. They've really got to make the courts faster. Rallies that are over 30 shots are crazy, and shouldn't be able to happen.

Tennis has always been ridiculously tough on the body. The amount of ex-pros who have needed major hip surgery after their careers is ridiculous(even serve volleyers from the 80s and 90s).
Hewitt and Nalbandian have already had major hip surgeries in their 20s.

The game has also become very one dimensional since it focuses so much on the baseline game, hard hitting , and changes in racquet technology and court surfaces.
The slower courts reduce reward for aggressive attacking players with outrageous shot making and instead reward consistent grinders prepared to run marathons to win.

This match was a clear example of how points have to be won 3-4 times during each rally. It's entertaining for a while, but it gets boring. There were so many points where Djokovic and Nadal could have followed their shots to the net. But they didn't because they can't volley and the passing shots are so fast and accurate even when hit from nearly impossible places. That's not tennis.

Moderate speed courts (i.e faster courts than now but not as fast as mid 90s) would be a healthier balance between the two.

Totally disagree with all of that. I cannot believe that you would use the words 'farce' and 'boring' in the wake of that epic match yesterday morning. For me we are privileged to be watching what is an absolute golden age for mens tennis. We have four men who are playing ridiculously good tennis all at the same time.

Not only have we had a magnificent final in Australia, we also had two cracking semi finals. I also find it strange when you say 'Rallies that are over 30 shots are crazy, and shouldn't be able to happen'. Firstly there was only one rally that went over 30 shots in the final and secondly it was a hell of a point and I can't fathom why you found no enjoyment out of it.

To you, baseline bashing may seem boring but to me it's exciting seeing two extremely skillful athletes hit the lines with brilliant shots as well as their ability to return 'un-returnable' shots.

By common consent two of the greatest finals in history are the final of Wimbledon in 2008 and the final of the Aussie Open yesterday. To me this is no coincidence. And as an aside I don't really think the speed of the courts is making as much of a difference as you are making out. Speed the courts up to their 2001 levels and you'll still see the top four dominating the slams and therefore you would still have the same style of tennis as you see today.