Australian Open 2017

rafa is losing his hair

MisterAnarchy

From 3-1 down in the final set Federer won 5 games in a row, that's some feat.

vienne86

glasso wrote: »

rafa is losing his hair

Excellent speach.

MisterAnarchy

glasso wrote: »

rafa is losing his hair

He reportedly had a hair transplant in November.
It takes 6 months for it to show results.

vienne86

Well that was one of the best Sunday mornings I have had for a long time. It was a real 'where were you when Federer won in Melbourne' occasion.

nice speeches but they didn't really mean everything they said!
Nadal was gritting his teeth when he said that mabye Fed deserved it a "little" bit more than him today.
And Fed saying that he'd be happy to take a draw on that match. Easy to say when you've just WON it!!
These guys want to win these thing more than anything - that's why they are in the final.
Epic match. up there with the best.

RosyLily

Championship point for Federer aaannnd....my stream and Wi-Fi die!:eek::mad: Cue a mad dash to the nearest tv.:p

I can't believe he's done it!!! I was shaking when the final shot was called in. What a morning!!!

yerwanthere123

vienne86 wrote: »

Well that was one of the best Sunday mornings I have had for a long time. It was a real 'where were you when Federer won in Melbourne' occasion.

Wow, really? He has won it before you know :pac:

Anyway, I thought it was a pretty poor tournament overall, not many great matches.

qwabercd

vienne86 wrote: »

Well that was one of the best Sunday mornings I have had for a long time. It was a real 'where were you when Federer won in Melbourne' occasion.

In bed streaming mobdro.

walshb

Rooted for Rafa but happy for Fed. Result. Good match. Not great.

Alfred Borden

vienne86 wrote: »

Poor you!

Haha it went straight back on for the next game. Truly deserving victory for the GOAT.

EagererBeaver

walshb wrote: »

Rooted for Rafa but happy for Fed. Result. Good match. Not great.

The quality of the tennis was never going to live up to 8 years ago or Rafa-Djokovic in 2012 but the drama and excitement was just as good in my book.

Really, really hope Rafa can turn this into a kick-start for the clay season rather than it be a last gasp.

mickmackey1

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

From 3-1 down in the final set Federer won 5 games in a row, that's some feat.

I'd actually overlooked that in the excitement. Incredible feat when it seemed like Nadal wouldn't make an UE in the fifth.

There's really no doubt that Fed has the greater shots, but Nadal has got inside his head sufficiently to provoke plenty of UEs over the years. Remember him winning a 6-1 set in the French final and could have prevailed there also if he'd had the belief. Anyway truly a day for the history books.

EagererBeaver

EagererBeaver wrote: »

The quality of the tennis was never going to live up to 8 years ago or Rafa-Djokovic in 2012 but the drama and excitement was just as good in my book..

Yep. We never thought that we'd see this again. then it's on and it goes to 5 sets with lots of swings from one set to another and then a swing within the fifth set itself. Couldn't have asked for any more really.

EagererBeaver

Read an article yesterday (The Ringer I think) that pointed out that Federer's true peers should have been Satin, Hewitt and Roddick rather than Nadal, Djokovic and Murray. Really makes you realise what an achievement it is to still be winning slams 12 years after the last of those three last won one.

John.Icy

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Wow, really? He has won it before you know :pac:

Anyway, I thought it was a pretty poor tournament overall, not many great matches.

The misery in some of your posts is just beyond belief this AO! Respect that you're a Murray fan so naturally are disappointed but come on.

He's won it before? Sure, 10 years ago.

To win it again at 35, after 6 months off tour, against someone who has dominated their rivalry and in 5 sets.

Phenomenal. Tennis fans will remember the day.
(Unless he wins a couple more but unlikely!).

RosyLily

EagererBeaver wrote: »

The quality of the tennis was never going to live up to 8 years ago or Rafa-Djokovic in 2012 but the drama and excitement was just as good in my book.

Drama and excitement was better in this match imo. I enjoyed Rafa-Nole but I thought it was meh, for want of a better word.

Maybe I'm just more invested in the Federer and Nadal rivalry.

The Golden Miller

Alfred Borden wrote: »

Truly deserving victory for the GOAT.

Didnt know Rod Laver was playing today? Anyone able to clarify this?

walshb

Fed's key(s) to victory today were his key(s) to slam losses to Nadal previously. One main area was Fed hanging with and at times beating Nadal on the long points. Also, his serve saved him many times. His ace count. Finally, his shot delivery and direction and accuracy had Nadal all over the court..

His BH today was his weapon.

yerwanthere123

John.Icy wrote: »

The misery in some of your posts is just beyond belief this AO! Respect that you're a Murray fan so naturally are disappointed but come on.

He's won it before? Sure, 10 years ago.

To win it again at 35, after 6 months off tour, against someone who has dominated their rivalry and in 5 sets.

Phenomenal. Tennis fans will remember the day.
(Unless he wins a couple more but unlikely!).

I'm not trying to be miserable, but I just refuse to partake in the mass media circlejerk that happens every time Federer and Nadal play each other. I just try to be realistic, it's like when someone expressed incredulity a couple of pages back as to why anyone would criticise poor Nadal, and I highlighted the many reasons why he gets criticised.

Sure I am disappointed with how this tournament transpired, but I can respect the fact that for most others it's not the case. I stand by what I said about the poor quality of matches, I can't think of many good ones off hand. Dimitrov-Nadal was good, the final we just saw was good enough but more for the drama and not the quality. I can't think of any match on the WTA side that I'd like to see again.

And yes, whilst Federer winning again is a great story and testament to his greatness, I doubt many could disagree that it would be much better for tennis if a younger, slamless player with potential had won rather than a player in the twilight of his career

The Golden Miller

Fair play Federer, played some sublime tennis in patches. Wasnt the best match they ever played but still good. It will be hard for Rafa to catch his slam count now. Then again, this defeat could push Nadal to greater heights if he continues his upward trajectory to get back to where he once was, similar to his Wimbledon defeat in 07. Hard to know if he has a few years left in him or if this was the last kick from both players. On a side note, I've never seen Federer break second in a deciding set.

Royale with Cheese

Lost my €8, but fùcking delighted :-)

I thought when he won Wimbledon 2012 that might be the last time we see him win a slam. Now? French Open highly unlikely but after that this season?

walshb

The world number 1 had he made it to the final would not have lived with Roger today.

NoviGlitzko

Chivito550

Incredible. One poster said it will be one of those "where were you" moments. I saw the first 2 and a half sets at home then had to head off to the National Indoor arena for a low key race and then volunteer at juvenile pentathlon. Got on the wifi out there and had it on during my warm up. I turned it off at Federer a break down in the 5th (1-0) to go run my race and had given up the ghost on it. I turn it on 30 mins later and he's 4-3 up. Watched the end of the match shouting, roaring and cursing with kids and parents everywhere hearing me. Not even remotely sorry!

A stat that hasn't been mentioned. Federer is now the only man ever to win 3 different slams at least 5 times.

Chivito550

Pat Cash made fair point saying that Rod Laver with 11 slams, a calendar year grand slam in 62 and 69, but from 63-67 he couldn't play in slams as he turned pro and couldn't play until the open era started and ban on pros ended. He said if he won one each of those years he'd be right up there with Roger. To be fair though the depth in the sport is far deeper now

mickmackey1

Yeah the history of tennis is unfortunate in that it was basically 2 different sports until 1968. So Laver e.g. might not have won the calendar slam in '62 if the professionals had been involved. An unanswerable question really.

Stheno

What male player has won the most slams?

Is it Bjorn Borg?

MisterAnarchy

walshb wrote: »

His BH today was his weapon.

I never thought we'd see that.
That was Nadal's primary target point in previous encounters,hit it high with topspin to the backhand .
I wonder did Stan give him some tactical advice on the backhand ?

It's refreshing to have a 5 set match played in 3 hours 37 minutes too .
A nice change from the boring baseline slugfests that take over 5 hours .

What male player has won the most slams?

Is it Bjorn Borg?

Federer ,18
Sampras and Nadal have 14 each

yerwanthere123

Stheno wrote: »

What male player has won the most slams?

Is it Bjorn Borg?

No, a Swiss player that goes by the name of 'Roger Federer'.

walshb

All the H2H talk and GOAT talk aside, I think it's fair to say that Roger is the greatest tennis talent in history. Aesthetically and skill with a racquet there is nobody his equal. The best comparison would be that he's the Ronnie O'Sullivan of tennis.

walshb

Stheno wrote: »

What male player has won the most slams?

Is it Bjorn Borg?

You would' happen to be that blonde chick from game, set and Matts?😄

Stheno

walshb wrote: »

You would' happen to be that blonde chick from game, set and Matts?😄

Nope I just don't pay much attention to the overall stats :pac:

Chivito550

I like John McEnroe a lot as a commentator and analyst, but is it just me who thinks this "Self appointed commissioner of tennis" on Eurosport is a load of boll0x.

NoviGlitzko

Ah I like Mac and that cameo stuff tbh. He's kinda like the Eamon Dunphy of the tennis world - great entertainment but no one really takes what he says seriously.

Chivito550

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

Ah I like Mac and that cameo stuff tbh. He's kinda like the Eamon Dunphy of the tennis world - great entertainment but no one really takes what he says seriously.

True that. All a bit of harmless fun. I like the Game Set and Mats stuff in general.

NoviGlitzko

Chivito550 wrote: »

True that. All a bit of harmless fun. I like the Game Set and Mats stuff in general.

Love it! Mats gets a bit of stick but I like his input a lot and the show in general.

Chivito550

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

Love it! Mats gets a bit of stick but I like his input a lot and the show in general.

What events will Eurosport have between now and RG? Miami? Indian Wells?

Floppybits

Chivito550 wrote: »

What events will Eurosport have between now and RG? Miami? Indian Wells?

Sky sports usually has the atp tour events

ziggyman17

Chivito550 wrote: »

What events will Eurosport have between now and RG? Miami? Indian Wells?

All the big ATP events will be on Sky,

walshb

ziggyman17 wrote: »

All the big ATP events will be on Sky,

Like always. Eurosport get the slams!

RosyLily

Eurosport usually have Davis Cup as well. And they show the majority of grass court tournaments in the summer.

The Golden Miller

mickmackey1 wrote: »

Yeah the history of tennis is unfortunate in that it was basically 2 different sports until 1968. So Laver e.g. might not have won the calendar slam in '62 if the professionals had been involved. An unanswerable question really.

Why not? He went on and won a calendar pro slam and dominated the pro circuit. He's won 19 slams altogether, Federer is one short. Laver would have won more had there been 4 pro slams a year as opposed to 3. As for who's the best ever, no one will really know. Federer's 18 slams flatter him imo, when you factor in the competition until Nadal became a top all court player circa 08 and the 3 slams Federer won in Nadal's absense. I think these days we're too quick to call the top modern athletes and teams in their respective sport the best ever when no one will really know

The Golden Miller

Why are posts getting deleted all over the place on this thread and forum?

RosyLily

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Why are posts getting deleted all over the place on this thread and forum?

Banned poster trying to bypass their ban so they create different accounts to post. Particularly prevalent this year.

Sorry for any inconvenience.

The Golden Miller

RosyLily wrote: »

Banned poster trying to bypass their ban so they create different accounts to post. Particularly prevalent this year.

Sorry for any inconvenience.

No worries. Thanks

Dirty Dingus McGee

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Why not? He went on and won a calendar pro slam and dominated the pro circuit. He's won 19 slams altogether, Federer is one short. Laver would have won more had there been 4 pro slams a year as opposed to 3. As for who's the best ever, no one will really know. Federer's 18 slams flatter him imo, when you factor in the competition until Nadal became a top all court player circa 08 and the 3 slams Federer won in Nadal's absense. I think these days we're too quick to call the top modern athletes and teams in their respective sport the best ever when no one will really know

But all the best players weren't playing in all the tournaments back then, also in the past players seemed to miss an awful lot more grand slams than they do now.The Australian Open is a much bigger tournament now than it was in the past.

Chivito550

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

But all the best players weren't playing in all the tournaments back then, also in the past players seemed to miss an awful lot more grand slams than they do now.The Australian Open is a much bigger tournament now than it was in the past.

+1

Borg never bother with Australia and Agassi only started going in the mid 90s.

Jan_de_Bakker

Well Well Well ....


Wow ... couldn't watch it, kept an eye on things on the phone.

Just watched the highlights, amazing comeback from Federer in the 5th set - doing what Nadal usually does best - fighting back and turning it around !
18 slams, he truly is the GOAT .

Also was happy Nadal didn't get that double career slam stat ...

Rikand

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

Ah I like Mac and that cameo stuff tbh. He's kinda like the Eamon Dunphy of the tennis world - great entertainment but no one really takes what he says seriously.

You cannot be serious!