Wimbledon 2019

forumdedum

dominatinMC wrote: »

Nadal is definitely winning at least another two FO. As the old saying goes, there are three certainties in life; death, taxes and Nadal winning the French. On that count alone, he will equal, if not surpass Fed. Unfortunately for Fed fans, he is not the kind of guy who will give up until he gets the record. As for Djoker, I don't know, he's the great enigma of the Big3, can go AWOL at anytime, although appears extremely motivated now so who knows. I just have a sneaking suspicion that he won't catch Fed.

Yes perhaps 2. Apart from clay I never rated Nadal that highly. Yes he was successful but he had to injure himself trying to beat Federer in 08. It would be a pity for Federer's record to be broken by either Nadal or Djokovic in my opinion. Then again I never rated Sampras highly. Successful yes but incredibly boring.

Federer should retire. Can't see him recovering at his age now after gifting the prize today. It was simply shocking. Personally I can't understand how Djokovic would want that trophy. I guess that's just me.

Djokovic was once a joy to watch.

I won't be watching any more tennis until a new Federer appears on the scene and that may not happen for 30 years or so.

sxt

dominatinMC wrote: »

Nadal is definitely winning at least another two FO. As the old saying goes, there are three certainties in life; death, taxes and Nadal winning the French. On that count alone, he will equal, if not surpass Fed. Unfortunately for Fed fans, he is not the kind of guy who will give up until he gets the record. As for Djoker, I don't know, he's the great enigma of the Big3, can go AWOL at anytime, although appears extremely motivated now so who knows. I just have a sneaking suspicion that he won't catch Fed.

Djkovic has won 4 of the last 5 Slams. He will be at this level for at least 5 more years. Unless Federer hires a hit man, djokovic is winning 25+ Grand Slams

PressRun

forumdedum wrote: »

I won't be watching any more tennis until a new Federer appears on the scene and that may not happen for 30 years or so.

If that. The guy is an exceptional talent. He's the only reason I ever took an interest in tennis at all. He's an absolute artist. Can appreciate that Djokovic and Nadal are great athletes in their own right, and legends of the game I'm sure, but they're nowhere near as captivating as Federer at his best. There really is something thrilling about Federer. Just my opinion of course, and nowhere near a professional opinion :pac:

Christy42

Sheridan81 wrote: »

Halep only hit 13 winners against Serena who was barely moving. You can't seriously be suggesting she was hitting better angles than Novak today.

Why not. I am not sure Djokovic was even going for them for most of the match. At best he occasionally went for corners but most of what he did was return the ball until Fed made a mistake trying to get it past him. I mean she didn't have to deal with Feds power but she used her speed far more proactively to win points.


If both were playing next week I know which one I would watch. Djokovic carried out his plan well but no one will want to watch him do it too often.

forumdedum

PressRun wrote: »

If that. The guy is an exceptional talent. He's the only reason I ever took an interest in tennis at all. He's an absolute artist. Can appreciate that Djokovic and Nadal are great athletes in their own right, and legends of the game I'm sure, but they're nowhere near as captivating as Federer at his best. Just my opinion of course, and nowhere near a professional opinion :pac:

I grew up watching Borg. He was amazing. McEnroe was super talent. Becker incredible (I saw him gift at least 2 finals to Edberg who i didn't really rate).

Couldn't watch Sampras, too dull. Tennis got very boring for a good while. Agassi had an incredible return of serve.

Federer a joy to watch. Made the game beautiful. The fact he could play so well today dependent on shot placement is staggering.

I agree with you. Nadal & Djokovic great athletes but will never touch Federer. Only as Federer got older could Nadal beat him on grass.

forumdedum

sxt wrote: »

Djkovic has won 4 of the last 5 Slams. He will be at this level for at least 5 more years. Unless Federer hires a hit man, djokovic is winning 25+ Grand Slams

Maybe Djokovic will do a Serena and bottle it in every final as the record nears. I hope so.

Rob2D

God I can't even sleep now.

I've lost actual tournament finals that have bothered me less than this.....

yerwanthere123

Ok I know I said I wouldn't bite any more but..

glasso wrote: »

they can barely be compared as sports such is the gulf in skill and level of competition.

look at the match today - has there ever been a match in women's tennis that is even remotely talked of in terms of being a classic - pretty sure not.

two legends on the court today while the dominant player in the women's game for the last 15 years is only in that position because she could serve and hit a rally point more like a man than the other ones. No finesse or artistry of skill involved. And a nasty piece of work as a person to boot.

To dismiss Serena Williams career achievements in such a fashion, whilst at the same time having the brass neck to say that I'm the one making "no rational sense" is just... :pac::pac: But please, do carry on

Blinky Plebum

forumdedum wrote: »

Yes perhaps 2. Apart from clay I never rated Nadal that highly. Yes he was successful but he had to injure himself trying to beat Federer in 08. It would be a pity for Federer's record to be broken by either Nadal or Djokovic in my opinion. Then again I never rated Sampras highly. Successful yes but incredibly boring.

Federer should retire. Can't see him recovering at his age now after gifting the prize today. It was simply shocking. Personally I can't understand how Djokovic would want that trophy. I guess that's just me.

Djokovic was once a joy to watch.

I won't be watching any more tennis until a new Federer appears on the scene and that may not happen for 30 years or so.

So you don't rate highly a 14 time and 18 time Grand Slam champion?

You don't understand why Djokovic would want the trophy?

Would you stop talking such ****e in all fairness, Djokovic won the match, Tennis is played on a set basis not on how many points or games you win that's the way the sport has always been.

EagererBeaver

"Nadal could only beat Federer on grass as Federer got older"

Federer was 26 when he lost the '08 final. I didn't realise that was the athletic peak of a human being.

Blinky Plebum

I recorded the match on Sky plus but the recording switched off when it got to 10-10 in the 5th and even though I recorded 3 programmes after the tennis on BBC1 I still didn't get to see the finale to it all.Seems like there was a 30-45 minute period of dead zone of Sky plus that wasn't possible to record.It really really pissed me off.

Let that be a lesson to you all even If you are exhausted don't go for an afternoon nap when such a great match is in progress.

josip

forumdedum wrote: »

Yes perhaps 2. Apart from clay I never rated Nadal that highly. Yes he was successful but he had to injure himself trying to beat Federer in 08. It would be a pity for Federer's record to be broken by either Nadal or Djokovic in my opinion. Then again I never rated Sampras highly. Successful yes but incredibly boring.

Federer should retire. Can't see him recovering at his age now after gifting the prize today. It was simply shocking. Personally I can't understand how Djokovic would want that trophy. I guess that's just me.

Djokovic was once a joy to watch.

I won't be watching any more tennis until a new Federer appears on the scene and that may not happen for 30 years or so.

10 years ago you also said Federer would never win another slam and should retire.
Would you let the poor man decide himself when is the time to go.

forumdedum

EagererBeaver wrote: »

"Nadal could only beat Federer on grass as Federer got older"

Federer was 26 when he lost the '08 final. I didn't realise that was the athletic peak of a human being.

Thought he was older. Fair point but I know Nadal basically had to injure himself with excessive training just to stay with Fed.

forumdedum

josip wrote: »

10 years ago you also said Federer would never win another slam and should retire.
Would you let the poor man decide himself when is the time to go.

I agree and he surprised me and many others, perhaps himself.

Ok, I won't contact Roger and suggest he retires.

forumdedum

Blinky Plebum wrote: »

So you don't rate highly a 14 time and 18 time Grand Slam champion?

You don't understand why Djokovic would want the trophy?

Would you stop talking such ****e in all fairness, Djokovic won the match, Tennis is played on a set basis not on how many points or games you win that's the way the sport has always been.

I used to rate him. Today's prize was gifted to him. Sadly there appears to be no up and coming quality to take on this top 3.

A lot of people I know stopped watching tennis a long time ago because it has become dull. Djokovic is dull in my opinion. I guess you're not allowed express and opinion on a forum. I'll google the word "forum" to clarify.

I know how the game is played thank you. I didn't count the points or games.

josip

Interesting graph in this BBC article today.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/48981819

Chivito550

I feel utterly sick. Got way too invested in the match and was utterly deflated after Federer didn’t convert the 2 match points on his serve. Slept terribly last night as mind was racing thinking about the tennis.

I can’t wait til all 3 retire and I can just watch tennis as a neutral. It’s a truly horrible sport to get overly invested in, as it’s 5 hours of putting yourself through turmoil. At least with rugby and football you get a 15 minute breather, with athletics and many other Olympic sports, the races are short. It’s the long drawn out agony that’s not good for the health.

I need to stop caring who finishes with the most grand slams. It’s definitely spoiling my enjoyment of tennis at this point, a sport that I’d consider my second favourite.

There are a handful of sporting moments where I have felt this sickened: The penalty shootout loss to Spain in 2002, Vincent Clerc’s last minute try at Croke Park in 2007, and Thomas Barr missing Olympic bronze by a whisker. This is right up there!

Blinky Plebum

forumdedum wrote: »

I used to rate him. Today's prize was gifted to him. Sadly there appears to be no up and coming quality to take on this top 3.

A lot of people I know stopped watching tennis a long time ago because it has become dull. Djokovic is dull in my opinion. I guess you're not allowed express and opinion on a forum. I'll google the word "forum" to clarify.

I know how the game is played thank you. I didn't count the points or games.

You said the following:

Personally I can't understand how Djokovic would want that trophy. I guess that's just me.

What the **** would Djokovic not want the trophy, he won the match simple as that.

Djokovic is a beast and good to watch, in the past I used to not fully appreciate him and Nadal because Federer is so beatiful to watch and those 2 will never match him for aesthetics but it doesn't mean you can't appreciate Nadal and Djokovic.Players like Federer who can combine brilliance and be unbeleivably beautiful at the same timeonly appear onec e every 20 or 30 yers in any sport, so expecting more players to be like him is ridiculous.

forumdedum

Blinky Plebum wrote: »

You said the following:


What the **** would Djokovic not want the trophy, he won the match simple as that.

Grand. If he enjoys receiving the trophy then good for him.

If it were me, I would not want the prize.

Blinky Plebum

forumdedum wrote: »

Grand. If he enjoys receiving the trophy then good for him.

If it were me, I would not want the prize.

No disrespect but in that case you are a complete bonehead.

forumdedum

Blinky Plebum wrote: »

No disrespect but in that case you are a complete bonehead.

That is disrespectful so you should leave out that part of the sentence.

I'll leave this forum now. I thought it was a place to express opinion. Didn't realise insult came with the territory.

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

Grand. If he enjoys receiving the trophy then good for him.

If it were me, I would not want the prize.

Tennis has two outcomes-
1. Someone who wins the game
2. Someone who loses the game

It’s very simple really and this is known to both players at the start of the match- so there’s no surprises really. It’s not a hard concept and since both players are professionals they’ll both live with the result and move on with their lives.

josip

Chivito550 wrote: »

I feel utterly sick. Got way too invested in the match and was utterly deflated after Federer didn’t convert the 2 match points on his serve. Slept terribly last night as mind was racing thinking about the tennis.

I can’t wait til all 3 retire and I can just watch tennis as a neutral. It’s a truly horrible sport to get overly invested in, as it’s 5 hours of putting yourself through turmoil. At least with rugby and football you get a 15 minute breather, with athletics and many other Olympic sports, the races are short. It’s the long drawn out agony that’s not good for the health.

I need to stop caring who finishes with the most grand slams. It’s definitely spoiling my enjoyment of tennis at this point, a sport that I’d consider my second favourite.

There are a handful of sporting moments where I have felt this sickened: The penalty shootout loss to Spain in 2002, Vincent Clerc’s last minute try at Croke Park in 2007, and Thomas Barr missing Olympic bronze by a whisker. This is right up there!

If you think things were tense there, try watching it in a Serbian household
Even Baba (granny) got out of bed to watch the first 3 sets with us before returning, complaining it was too tense.
But still asked her grandson to run updates to her after each game.

I also have to be careful not to express too much admiration for Federer's ability because they get suspicious I'm not fully supportive of Djokovic.

walshb

Chivito550 wrote: »

I feel utterly sick. Got way too invested in the match and was utterly deflated after Federer didn’t convert the 2 match points on his serve. Slept terribly last night as mind was racing thinking about the tennis.

I can’t wait til all 3 retire and I can just watch tennis as a neutral. It’s a truly horrible sport to get overly invested in, as it’s 5 hours of putting yourself through turmoil. At least with rugby and football you get a 15 minute breather, with athletics and many other Olympic sports, the races are short. It’s the long drawn out agony that’s not good for the health.

I need to stop caring who finishes with the most grand slams. It’s definitely spoiling my enjoyment of tennis at this point, a sport that I’d consider my second favourite.

There are a handful of sporting moments where I have felt this sickened: The penalty shootout loss to Spain in 2002, Vincent Clerc’s last minute try at Croke Park in 2007, and Thomas Barr missing Olympic bronze by a whisker. This is right up there!

Yeh, it's sickening. Roger was a good solid first serve away from slam 21....that is how damn close he got...

Add this to the match stats as regards points won and winners, and it's more sickening.

splinter65

To see Mirka so obviously putting herself through the wringer yesterday when she used to enjoy the whole experience in such a relaxed way was quite telling.
His parents too.
He must be displaying a lot of anxiety in private about the approaching end of his career.
The dying of the light.
It demonstrates a certain amount of naivety in his whole group that they never considered that the end would ever come.
Pete Sampras seemed quite happy to disappear into the sunset as soon as he saw the first bits of writing on the wall.
The manner of his exit and his continued absence is an example to every other professional sportsperson.

Christy42

forumdedum wrote: »

Grand. If he enjoys receiving the trophy then good for him.

If it were me, I would not want the prize.

Why? Hardly the first undeserved slam. Nasal won a US Open when Fed and Djokovic were missing and I am not really sure other opposition counts as much.

Others have mentioned finals Fed got lucky in.

Undeserved sure but hey no one gives you trophies for the ones you lost and deserved so may as well take these ones.

Hopefully Murray can come back. The younger generation seems hopeless at stopping the big 3 (seriously at this point I would not be surprised if a decently trained Labrador beat Tserev in a GS match). If Federer gets weaker with age then we could really struggle to get good matches going forward.

Hector Savage

Well, I am a Djokovic fan and feel hollow to be honest.

The better man lost yesterday, very tough on Federer.

in 2014+15 it was far more satisfying to witness the wins, yesterday was more like a sigh of relief.

Will be tough for Fed to mentally take this.

Christy42

splinter65 wrote: »

To see Mirka so obviously putting herself through the wringer yesterday when she used to enjoy the whole experience in such a relaxed way was quite telling.
His parents too.
He must be displaying a lot of anxiety in private about the approaching end of his career.
The dying of the light.
It demonstrates a certain amount of naivety in his whole group that they never considered that the end would ever come.
Pete Sampras seemed quite happy to disappear into the sunset as soon as he saw the first bits of writing on the wall.
The manner of his exit and his continued absence is an example to every other professional sportsperson.

Never understood this. If Federer is still enjoying the tour then everyone else may bugger off. He is still 2nd/3rd best in the world (and at worst 4th on his worst surface). At the very least Nadal vs Fed and Fed vs Djok gave us two competitive matches instead of everyone waiting around for Nadal for Djok at the end.

Federer was told to retire years ago and has won a bunch of trophies since then. Go out when it is right for you in your life and when you don't enjoy it anymore/family becomes too pressing. Not at the first hint of failure.

The man enjoys tennis. Let him play tennis.

Chivito550

splinter65 wrote: »

To see Mirka so obviously putting herself through the wringer yesterday when she used to enjoy the whole experience in such a relaxed way was quite telling.
His parents too.
He must be displaying a lot of anxiety in private about the approaching end of his career.
The dying of the light.
It demonstrates a certain amount of naivety in his whole group that they never considered that the end would ever come.
Pete Sampras seemed quite happy to disappear into the sunset as soon as he saw the first bits of writing on the wall.
The manner of his exit and his continued absence is an example to every other professional sportsperson.

Roger keeps playing because he loves the game. He’s a fan of the sport. He watches tennis in his spare time.

Pete never loved the sport. He was simply very good at it.

Federer was a whisker away from winning Wimbledon. He can easily play on another few years if he likes.

And I wouldn’t worry about him when he retires. He’ll put his money and his time to good use. He’ll always stay involved in the sport he loves. He’s a great example to sportspeople of all abilities. Love your sport first and foremost.

walshb

splinter65 wrote: »

To see Mirka so obviously putting herself through the wringer yesterday when she used to enjoy the whole experience in such a relaxed way was quite telling.
His parents too.
He must be displaying a lot of anxiety in private about the approaching end of his career.
The dying of the light.
It demonstrates a certain amount of naivety in his whole group that they never considered that the end would ever come.
Pete Sampras seemed quite happy to disappear into the sunset as soon as he saw the first bits of writing on the wall.
The manner of his exit and his continued absence is an example to every other professional sportsperson.

Very presumptuous all this, based off some visuals of a wife watching her husband play, a husband who is still at elite level and very very close to slam wins..

He could easily retire, but the fact that he is still up at the top, and challenging hard for slam wins, well?

Sampras was not near that consistently brilliant level in 2001/2002 across all surfaces...and he was what, 31/32? Young man....he just was not the same specimen that Roger is.

He's 37....not 47, and he is not old and worn and haggard......his whole career was played with elegance and style and effortlessness...

Hector Savage

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Damn

https://twitter.com/christophclarey/status/1150478601994874880?s=19

Ah Bob Falkenburg ! Great player!

gimli2112

Yeah he had a couple of match points and played very well. What will get him to retire is the many hours he has to put in off tv, training etc. While he's still competitive though it must be difficult to give it up.

Hector Savage

sxt wrote: »

Djkovic has won 4 of the last 5 Slams. He will be at this level for at least 5 more years. Unless Federer hires a hit man, djokovic is winning 25+ Grand Slams

Nonsense, this won't last.

Djokovic at best will finish on 19.

Nadal will win at least 2 FO's and hope no other slams.

We could see Fed + Nadal finish on 20, Nole on 19 .... fitting...

BarryD2

forumdedum wrote: »

If I were Djokovic I would'n't want that trophy. I'd want to earn it with less negative tactics. Though that don't make sense if you're Djokovic. I would feel Federer lost it, that I did not win it.

Shame as there were many good moments in the match. Djokovic attitude in set 2 was shocking imo.

Here now, Djokovic was not only playing Federer but also large sections of the crowd. Their cheering on points where Fed won a point as Novak played a poor shot was not exactly tasteful. That'd get under anyone's skin.

Federer arguably played better but Djokovic beat him, he handled his poorer form and got over the line. That too, is the mark of a champion. To play below your best and win.

forumdedum

Hector Savage wrote: »

Well, I am a Djokovic fan and feel hollow to be honest.

The better man lost yesterday, very tough on Federer.

in 2014+15 it was far more satisfying to witness the wins, yesterday was more like a sigh of relief.

Will be tough for Fed to mentally take this.

Well said.

forumdedum

BarryD2 wrote: »

Here now, Djokovic was not only playing Federer but also large sections of the crowd. Their cheering on points where Fed won a point as Novak played a poor shot was not exactly tasteful. That'd get under anyone's skin.

Federer arguably played better but Djokovic beat him, he handled his poorer form and got over the line. That too, is the mark of a champion. To play below your best and win.

Over the years I have watched great players outplay the opposition despite the crowd many times.

Djokovic was lucky that Federer made a mess of quite a few shots at difficult times. Same way Del Potro was handed the US Open years back.

forumdedum

Christy42 wrote: »

Why? Hardly the first undeserved slam. Nasal won a US Open when Fed and Djokovic were missing and I am not really sure other opposition counts as much.

Others have mentioned finals Fed got lucky in.

Undeserved sure but hey no one gives you trophies for the ones you lost and deserved so may as well take these ones.

Hopefully Murray can come back. The younger generation seems hopeless at stopping the big 3 (seriously at this point I would not be surprised if a decently trained Labrador beat Tserev in a GS match). If Federer gets weaker with age then we could really struggle to get good matches going forward.

Yes true. I think Federer won a French because Nadal was injured.

Yes there is luck in sport.

I am entitled to say I would not want an undeserved trophy. I agree with the way you say "undeserved".

Can't see Murray coming back. I'm not a huge fan of his game and feel he won one Wimbledon because Djokovic had been shattered by a long semi-final with Del Potro.

I can't see Federer recovering mentally from that mess up. It will forever play on his mind in my opinion.

BarryD2

Apart from the box office ticket sales and TV revenues, it'd be better if all three Federer, Djokovic and Nadal joined Murray and retired from Grand Slam singles. Let another generation have a go, new blood is what keeps a sport from stagnating.

forumdedum

BarryD2 wrote: »

Apart from the box office ticket sales and TV revenues, it'd be better if all three Federer, Djokovic and Nadal joined Murray and retired from Grand Slam singles. Let another generation have a go, new blood is what keeps a sport from stagnating.

Does new blood not need to play against high level players to improve?

I'm not sure their retiring would help. We are lucky to live in an age where there are 3 brilliant players (even though I can't stand Djokovic's recent negative approach). I hear many people saying they've stopped watching GAA football (not hurling) because of dull defensive play. Though I don't see that in the top 2 or 3 teams.

New blood may not have the minds of the top 3 for tennis needs a lot of quick thinking. Do they have the work ethic? Someone who works every point? Or are they Pogba types?

BarryD2

forumdedum wrote: »

Does new blood not need to play against high level players to improve?

I'm not sure their retiring would help. We are lucky to live in an age where there are 3 brilliant players (even though I can't stand Djokovic's recent negative approach). I hear many people saying they've stopped watching GAA football (not hurling) because of dull defensive play. Though I don't see that in the top 2 or 3 teams.

New blood may not have the minds of the top 3 for tennis needs a lot of quick thinking. Do they have the work ethic? Someone who works every point? Or are they Pogba types?

I think in any sport that close competitive matches are more important than actual skill levels, assuming the skill levels are at a decent level. That's what keeps things ticking over - the seed planted in an individual or teams mind that they have a chance of winning. In mens tennis, those 3 have dominated far too much for nearly two decades now.

Christy42

forumdedum wrote: »

Yes true. I think Federer won a French because Nadal was injured.

Yes there is luck in sport.

I am entitled to say I would not want an undeserved trophy. I agree with the way you say "undeserved".

Can't see Murray coming back. I'm not a huge fan of his game and feel he won one Wimbledon because Djokovic had been shattered by a long semi-final with Del Potro.

I can't see Federer recovering mentally from that mess up. It will forever play on his mind in my opinion.

I feel like a tough loss would change my opinion but each to their own (and I agree you should be able to have your opinion - would be hella awkward on camera refusing it:P).

Murray is not overly entertaining but at least it would be a competitive match (and maybe stop him reaching 20). Though they could end up playing 10 minutes on the first 3 points as they try for longer and longer rallies. I don't know if he will be back.

Really it would be best if the new generation came along. I don't know it is lack of talent or work but something is off. Nadal and later Murray and Djokovic put themselves through the ringer to try and match Federer. Will anyone new be willing to do the same? At least Thiem is second favourite on clay I guess stopping them from being 3 favourites for every slam.

Hector Savage

Chivito550 wrote: »

I feel utterly sick. Got way too invested in the match and was utterly deflated after Federer didn’t convert the 2 match points on his serve. Slept terribly last night as mind was racing thinking about the tennis.

I can’t wait til all 3 retire and I can just watch tennis as a neutral. It’s a truly horrible sport to get overly invested in, as it’s 5 hours of putting yourself through turmoil. At least with rugby and football you get a 15 minute breather, with athletics and many other Olympic sports, the races are short. It’s the long drawn out agony that’s not good for the health.

I need to stop caring who finishes with the most grand slams. It’s definitely spoiling my enjoyment of tennis at this point, a sport that I’d consider my second favourite.

There are a handful of sporting moments where I have felt this sickened: The penalty shootout loss to Spain in 2002, Vincent Clerc’s last minute try at Croke Park in 2007, and Thomas Barr missing Olympic bronze by a whisker. This is right up there!

Have to agree with this, it was like a 5 hour penalty shootout yesterday, horrible ....

Hector Savage

BarryD2 wrote: »

Apart from the box office ticket sales and TV revenues, it'd be better if all three Federer, Djokovic and Nadal joined Murray and retired from Grand Slam singles. Let another generation have a go, new blood is what keeps a sport from stagnating.

I'd say the opposite, money wise the ATP are in big trouble when these 3 retire, none of the new lads have any charisma, maybe Krygios cos he is a rude bollocks that says what he wants, but he's like the guy you love to hate.
He won't draw the interest the Nadal and Federer have.

splinter65

Christy42 wrote: »

Never understood this. If Federer is still enjoying the tour then everyone else may bugger off. He is still 2nd/3rd best in the world (and at worst 4th on his worst surface). At the very least Nadal vs Fed and Fed vs Djok gave us two competitive matches instead of everyone waiting around for Nadal for Djok at the end.

Federer was told to retire years ago and has won a bunch of trophies since then. Go out when it is right for you in your life and when you don't enjoy it anymore/family becomes too pressing. Not at the first hint of failure.

The man enjoys tennis. Let him play tennis.

He nor his family didn’t enjoy one minute of that day yesterday which is a terrible pity.
They were in despair.
So few families in tennis have had the pleasure of even one day out in centre court.
Really very few men have won Wimbledon in comparison to the other slams.
The Feds have had literally dozens of sensational days out there, some as the vanquished but many many as the victors.
It will be a shame if his last center court appearances are filled with bitter disappointment and frustration.

AbusesToilets

Hector Savage wrote: »

I'd say the opposite, money wise the ATP are in big trouble when these 3 retire, none of the new lads have any charisma, maybe Krygios cos he is a rude bollocks that says what he wants, but he's like the guy you love to hate.
He won't draw the interest the Nadal and Federer have.

Doesn't help that there hasn't been a great American tennis player since Agassi retired. Which is incredible in its own right, thread talking about the lack of an Irish star is kind of funny in that light.

Chivito550

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Doesn't help that there hasn't been a great American tennis player since Agassi retired. Which is incredible in its own right, thread talking about the lack of an Irish star is kind of funny in that light.

To be fair, in any other era Roddick would have about 4-5 slams. Even still, he’s won a US Open and been a three time Wimbledon runner up.

josip

Who was this woman shown when Federer moved to Championship point?
Or was she just a randomer from the crowd?
She seemed to be showing 1 (1 more point?) to somebody/somewhere in particular ?

walshb

Chivito550 wrote: »

To be fair, in any other era Roddick would have about 4-5 slams. Even still, he’s won a US Open and been a three time Wimbledon runner up.

Roddick was every bit as good as Andre, but unfortunately he had Fed in his era...

fryup

couldn't understand why everyone (majority) was up for Federer ??

Novak is a far more likeable character imo

dominatinMC

walshb wrote: »

Roddick was every bit as good as Andre, but unfortunately he had Fed in his era...

Ah come on now, hold your horses! I know a lot of Fed fans are in despair of the result yesterday but that doesn't excuse some of the borderline delusional posts! :pac: Agassi was a much more complete player than Roddick, and has the slam count to prove it - in an era where he competed with Sampras. Furthermore, Agassi completed the career grand slam, when the surfaces were actually very different, rather than the homogenized nature of them now. Roddick possibly should have won a Wimbledon or two, maybe another USO, but he never got past the 4th round at the FO, and wasn't really a contender in Oz either. Agassi was a completely different calibre of player.