French Open 2021

Coneygree

murphyebass wrote: »

When do the Nadal and Federer fan boys admit ND is the goat?

Not a Nadal fan boy but he's always been my favourite to watch and I'd be comfortable with having Djokovic above him.

Girly Gal

glasso wrote: »

Thiem and Zverev were poor and don't really have it mentally.

Tsitsipas even in defeat showed grit today, up to end of the final game.

Sinner I expect should be good also if he continues to develop.

Tsitsipas looks the best of the lot (that's not saying much), plus he won't have to deal with Djokovic for most of his career, Sinner by the time he's in his prime 2 or 3 years from now won't have Djokovic to deal with either that's massive.

I think Theim, Zverev and Medvedev are all too flaky to be considered real contenders on a consistent basis, this was a great opportunity for Theim especially to win the FO with Nadal and Djokovic on the other side, plus he has the game on clay to beat Novak, yet, he went out in the first round, yes I know he's form was poor coming into it, but, to fall at the first hurdle was poor.

I wonder how long more do we have to wait for the next gen to win a slam where Djokovic or Nadal ( or even Federer) aren't absent for one reason or another?

Tsipsitas did well today - he didn't hand it to Djokovic

There was plenty of tension on a couple of Djokovic's service games in the final set

He had some fantastic holds on his service games and even when Djokovic broke it was mostly very hard won.

He literally hit 4 winners on bp's in that crucial game in the third set but just couldn't do it a 5th time.

He knows what it is to meet ultimate level competition in a GS final and just fall short.

Invaluable experience.

Could be worth more to him than a slam in the long-run as it could be the difference in winning a few of them in the future.

Hector Savage

https://twitter.com/JJWatt/status/1404129861732601861?s=20

That kid will remember that moment forever!!!

Girly Gal

glasso wrote: »

Tsipsitas did well today - he didn't hand it to Djokovic

There was plenty of tension on a couple of Djokovic's service games in the final set

He had some fantastic holds on his service games and even when Djokovic broke it was mostly very hard won.

He literally hit 4 winners on bp's in that crucial game in the third set but just couldn't do it a 5th time.

He knows what it is to meet ultimate level competition in a GS final and just fall short.

Invaluable experience.

Could be worth more to him than a slam in the long-run as it could be the difference in winning a few of them in the future.

He should definitely learn a lot from today, but, I wouldn't necessarily agree that you have to lose one to win one, he was in a great position, 2 sets up with his opponent not playing well, yes Djokovic improved, but, I'd still say Djokovic didn't play that well today, certainly well below the level he normally has to play to, to win a slam final
Once Djokovic broke in the third set there really was only one winner for me, Tsitsipas completely lost his belief and started to play a lot of loose shots,obviously difficult knowing you have such a difficult opponent on the opposite side who just won't die like a normal player would.

I'm not saying you have to lose I've to win one, rather that that experience could be the difference between being a lasting consistent force at the top of the men's game in the future and not.

Furze99

lostcat wrote: »

Hard to see Djokovic letting it slip today, but if Tsitsipas comes out aggressive and is painting the lines it will be very interesting. I don't think he will be able to keep it up for 3 sets however

Good read

Furze99

SlickRic wrote: »

The amount of top 3 dominance that is down to the head is underplayed.

And that's why I don't like some of Djokovic's court carryon. He's No1 and should treat those lower down the order as he'd like to be treated himself.

Rob2D

I guess he just didn't understand the rules?

Girly Gal

Rob2D wrote: »

I guess he just didn't understand the rules?

Hope he learnt more than that!

whiterebel

They say you have to lose one to know how to win one. At 22 I’d say he’ll get a few. Remarkable how he kept his composure even as it fell apart for him.

Chivito550

Backed Djokovic at 11/4 just after the end of set 2. Paid for a lovely steak dinner out in the continental type weather this evening.

murphyebass

Chivito550 wrote: »

Backed Djokovic at 11/4 just after the end of set 2. Paid for a lovely steak dinner out in the continental type weather this evening.

He’s a man that will continue to pay out. Bye bye Federer and Nadal. It’s over boys. He has youth on his side

klr87

Girly Gal wrote: »

He should definitely learn a lot from today, but, I wouldn't necessarily agree that you have to lose one to win one, he was in a great position, 2 sets up with his opponent not playing well, yes Djokovic improved, but, I'd still say Djokovic didn't play that well today, certainly well below the level he normally has to play to, to win a slam final
Once Djokovic broke in the third set there really was only one winner for me, Tsitsipas completely lost his belief and started to play a lot of loose shots,obviously difficult knowing you have such a difficult opponent on the opposite side who just won't die like a normal player would.

The semi-final must have taken a lot out of Djokovic, both physically and emotionally. I doubt us mere mortals could ever properly appreciate something like that. He did well to get back to a level that was good enough to beat his opponent today, but the knowledge that Tsitsipas was in unknown territory would have encouraged him to stick with it.

I wonder if there's any expression in Serbo-Croat along the lines of "The old dog for the hard road". That's how it felt to me as the match wore on. Djokovic knew exactly what he had to do, and wasn't afraid to knuckle down.

MisterAnarchy

Slashermcguirk wrote: »

What a phenomenal competitor Djokovic is, just never knows when he is beaten. His mental strength at key moments is remarkable. First player in open era to win all slams twice, amazing achievement

Tough as nails but I'd prefer if he played more attacking tennis like he did earlier in his career.

He is alot more defensive as a player in recent times, happy to grind away for large parts of matches.
He can play more aggressive tennis, I'd like to see that.

murphyebass

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Tough as nails but I'd prefer if he played more attacking tennis like he did earlier in his career.

He is alot more defensive as a player in recent times, happy to grind away for large parts of matches.
He can play more aggressive tennis, I'd like to see that.

That’s how the greatest of all time adapt. Amazing competitor.

Patd6

murphyebass wrote: »

He’s a man that will continue to pay out. Bye bye Federer and Nadal. It’s over boys. He has youth on his side

Nadal is just a year older than the djok

yerwanthere123

Once Djokovic got the early break in the fourth set I knew exactly where it was heading. I headed out for a run midway through the 5th, no point in continuing to watch as the match was clearly over.

Mad as it may sound, I never entertained anyone else winning at the start of the tournament, I just assume it would be the usual Nadal stroll to the title. Had Nadal been on the opposite side of the draw and played Djokovic in the warmer conditions of the final it's possible the result would've been different. Obviously irrelevant though, and we'll never know for sure.

The craziest thing for me is that Nadal will now probably never stand alone with the most grand slams of all time. I always thought he would, at least for a few months, but it's not looking likely now.

It can't be ruled out completely though, let's not forget he's won the US Open four times. Who knows what'll happen between now and then, but if someone could take out Djokovic then he'd likely be the favourite. He'd need a lot of luck, but it's still possible that he could win 21 before the year is out. I can't currently see any other result than Djokovic winning Wimbledon though.

forumdedum

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Once Djokovic got the early break in the fourth set I knew exactly where it was heading. I headed out for a run midway through the 5th, no point in continuing to watch as the match was clearly over.

Mad as it may sound, I never entertained anyone else winning at the start of the tournament, I just assume it would be the usual Nadal stroll to the title. Had Nadal been on the opposite side of the draw and played Djokovic in the warmer conditions of the final it's possible the result would've been different. Obviously irrelevant though, and we'll never know for sure.

The craziest thing for me is that Nadal will now probably never stand alone with the most grand slams of all time. I always thought he would, at least for a few months, but it's not looking likely now.

It can't be ruled out completely though, let's not forget he's won the US Open four times. Who knows what'll happen between now and then, but if someone could take out Djokovic then he'd likely be the favourite. He'd need a lot of luck, but it's still possible that he could win 21 before the year is out. I can't currently see any other result than Djokovic winning Wimbledon though.

Crying shame Federer messed up that Wimbledon to move 2 ahead of Djokovic. Federer outclassed him and somehow lost.

MisterAnarchy

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Tough as nails but I'd prefer if he played more attacking tennis like he did earlier in his career.

He is alot more defensive as a player in recent times, happy to grind away for large parts of matches.
He can play more aggressive tennis, I'd like to see that.

Djokovic is a winning machine.

He wins.

He's given up on wanting to be loved by the crowds in the stands or at home watching Tv.

He has his following now and he's focused on winning more GS titles and he's doing ok there

Has even had analytics guys working for him in the past working out the best way to do it.

forumdedum

glasso wrote: »

Djokovic is a winning machine.

He wins.

He's given up on wanting to be loved by the crowds in the stands or at home watching Tv.

He has his following now and he's focused on winning more GS titles and he's doing ok there

Has even had analytics guys working for him in the past working out the best way to do it.

I like many others just don't watch anymore. Tennis not as popular as it once was.

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

Crying shame Federer messed up that Wimbledon to move 2 ahead of Djokovic. Federer outclassed him and somehow lost.

Federer just isn't and never was as mentally strong as Djokovic.

Too much of the "oh lovely shot Roger" stuff went to his head to his detriment and he just wasn't as good at winning.

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

I like many others just don't watch anymore. Tennis not as popular as it once was.

Djokovic doesn't really care.

He's on a mission.

When all is said and done he will have pretty much all the records.

That's what he wants.

If you can't see the beauty in his pure will to win then so be it.

forumdedum

glasso wrote: »

Federer just isn't and never was as mentally strong as Djokovic.

Too much of the "oh lovely shot Roger" stuff went to his head to his detriment and he just wasn't as good at winning.

Federer was older? That's the sad part. At his peak no one could lace his boots.

Girly Gal

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Once Djokovic got the early break in the fourth set I knew exactly where it was heading. I headed out for a run midway through the 5th, no point in continuing to watch as the match was clearly over.

Mad as it may sound, I never entertained anyone else winning at the start of the tournament, I just assume it would be the usual Nadal stroll to the title. Had Nadal been on the opposite side of the draw and played Djokovic in the warmer conditions of the final it's possible the result would've been different. Obviously irrelevant though, and we'll never know for sure.

The craziest thing for me is that Nadal will now probably never stand alone with the most grand slams of all time. I always thought he would, at least for a few months, but it's not looking likely now.

It can't be ruled out completely though, let's not forget he's won the US Open four times. Who knows what'll happen between now and then, but if someone could take out Djokovic then he'd likely be the favourite. He'd need a lot of luck, but it's still possible that he could win 21 before the year is out. I can't currently see any other result than Djokovic winning Wimbledon though.

Very hard to see anything other than Djokovic winning Wimbledon, Federer too old now, wouldn't be surprised at an early exit, looks like Nadal doesn't have the stamina anymore to go toe to toe with Djokovic over 5 sets and has a possible foot injury. Can't really recall any of the next gen guys doing much at Wimbledon so wouldn't expect much from them, although Tsitsipas probably has come on a fair bit in the last 2 years.

The US Open could be more interesting, Djokovic's record there isn't that great for some reason, was surprised he only has won it 3 times considering his hard court record, seems to be a bit of an unlucky tournament for him, would still have him as strong favourite if he avoids injury, but, no guarantee he'll win it as he's likely to be under the pressure of getting the calendar grand slam and also getting number 21, that will definitely play on his mind and as already mentioned the US Open isn't exactly a happy hunting ground for him, he's probably suffered more shock defeats there than all the other slams put together.

forumdedum

glasso wrote: »

Djokovic doesn't really care.

He's on a mission.

When all is said and done he will have pretty much all the records.

That's what he wants.

If you can't see the beauty in his pure will to win then so be it.

Good for him, he's incredibly dull. Used to think he was super.

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

Federer was older? That's the sad part. At his peak no one could lace his boots.

Federer had a good number of years where aside from Nadal and the very odd time Safin was in the mood he barely had to face any player of any great stature.

forumdedum

And most of these guys including Djokovic win when they meet bottlers like your man today. Sad reflection of a sport that no one up and coming.

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

Good for him, he's incredibly dull. Used to think he was super.

oh he's still great if you look hard enough.

forumdedum

glasso wrote: »

Federer had a good number of years where aside from Nadal and the very odd time Safin was in the mood he barely had to face any player of any great stature.

Basically like Djokovic these days. Nadal is done, Fed too old.

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

And most of these guys including Djokovic win when they meet bottlers like your man today. Sad reflection of a sport that no one up and coming.

that "bottler" did quite well actually and made a match of it right to the end.

today will be hugely valuable to him over the next 12 years or more.

Fed himself did the ultimate bottle job.

Complete lack of respect to the event.

josip

Chivito550 wrote: »

Backed Djokovic at 11/4 just after the end of set 2. Paid for a lovely steak dinner out in the continental type weather this evening.

You didn't have to use the winnings to cover the losses on your Nadal bet 2 days ago?

Chivito550 wrote: »

Backed Nadal at 7/4 to win tournament there at end of 3rd set.

forumdedum

glasso wrote: »

that "bottler" did quite well actually and made a match of it right to the end.

Fed himself did the ultimate bottle job.

Complete lack of respect to the event.

He didn't do enough.

Yes Fed was wrong to pull out the way he did.

Girly Gal

This bickering is more entertaining than the match

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

Basically like Djokovic these days. Nadal is done, Fed too old.

Tsipsitas would be better than any Roddick or out-of-date Hewitt tbh

lostcat

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Had Nadal been on the opposite side of the draw and played Djokovic in the warmer conditions of the final it's possible the result would've been different. Obviously irrelevant though, and we'll never know for sure.

I can't currently see any other result than Djokovic winning Wimbledon though.

If Nadal had put away that volley the other night he may well have won the match and, as someone said above, he would probalby have made shorter work of Tsitisipas today than Djokovic did. et voila, 21.

A lot of the younger guys have a game thats a decent fit for grass, so I wouldn't have Djokovic as hot favourite for Wimbledon, just favourite.
The US is wide open at this stage also I think so Djokovic getting to 20+ is still going to take a small bit of doing.
I think Nadal is going to need, as you say, a good slice of luck to win a slam this side of next years French. And Tsitsipas will be a year stronger by then then, Thiem might be back, and Nadal might be seeded 4 or 5.

forumdedum

glasso wrote: »

Tsipsitas would be better than any Roddick or out-of-date Hewitt tbh

Not sure Tsipsitas has the grit of either of those.

lostcat

lostcat wrote: »

If Nadal had put away that volley the other night he may well have won the match and, as someone said above, he would probalby have made shorter work of Tsitisipas today than Djokovic did. et voila, 21.

A lot of the younger guys have a game thats a decent fit for grass, so I wouldn't have Djokovic as hot favourite for Wimbledon, just favourite.
The US is wide open at this stage also I think so Djokovic getting to 20+ is still going to take a small bit of doing.
I think Nadal is going to need, as you say, a good slice of luck to win a slam this side of next years French. And Tsitsipas will be a year stronger by then then, Thiem might be back, and Nadal might be seeded 4 or 5.

that's reaching.

Djokovic would have won this match in max 4 and easily 3 if he didn't go into bants mode with the umpire and space out for 2 minutes at 6-5 in the first. that's a lot more plausible of an argument.

no guarantee indeed that Djokovic will take Wimbledon but by the end of 2022 he will have 21 at least I think.

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

Not sure Tsipsitas has the grit of either of those.

Hewitt was gritty but by the time Fed was winning he was totally ineffective.

Roddick was pretty much no better than a Cilic or a Raonic.

There was very poor competition on grass in those days.

Girly Gal

glasso wrote: »

that's reaching.

Djokovic would have won this match in max 4 and easily 3 if he didn't go into bants mode with the umpire and space out for 2 minutes at 6-5 in the first. that's a lot more plausible of an argument.

no guarantee indeed that Djokovic will take Wimbledon but by the end of 2022 he will have 21 at least I think.

He's won 3 of the last 5 slams played, disqualified from one ( US 20) and lost to Nadal in the other (FO 20), so unless he suffers an injury which is possible or a serious dip in form he'll have 21 by AO next year at the latest, would expect him to pick up at least one more by end of 22 to bring him to 22

yerwanthere123

I'm sure Djokovic won't be getting too ahead of himself right now, but CYGS must be on his mind. Is never usually an option with Nadal's dominance of RG but looking at the rest of he field, he'll never get a better chance.

Girly Gal

Girly Gal wrote: »

He's won 3 of the last 5 slams played, disqualified from one ( US 20) and lost to Nadal in the other (FO 20), so unless he suffers an injury which is possible or a serious dip in form he'll have 21 by AO next year at the latest, would expect him to pick up at least one more by end of 22 to bring him to 22

yes I did say at least.

sort of worst case scenario for him.

forumdedum

glasso wrote: »

Hewitt was gritty but by the time Fed was winning he was totally ineffective.

Roddick was pretty much no better than a Cilic or a Raonic.

There was very poor competition on grass in those days.

Federer set the standard on grass, Nadal eventually got to his level on that surface though in my opinion damaged his body in the process.

Federer made too much hard work of beating Roddick in Wimbledon final.

yerwanthere123

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

I'm sure Djokovic won't be getting too ahead of himself right now, but CYGS must be on his mind. Is never usually an option with Nadal's dominance of RG but looking at the rest of he field, he'll never get a better chance.

he has a chance but still very difficult.

that's why it hasn't been done since 1969 and even then many top players didn't really play all of the GS events.

but it would really put the icing on the cake for him and blow the GOAT argument out of the water.

yerwanthere123

I think the GOAT debate is likely done at this stage. Multiple slams at all four, h2h's with his main rivals, weeks at #1 plus masters record as well I think? He's there. Well unless Nadal springs an unexpected late challenge, but not likely.

Girly Gal

glasso wrote: »

yes I did say at least.

sort of worst case scenario for him.

Expect him to be on at least 22

yerwanthere123

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

I think the GOAT debate is likely done at this stage. Multiple slams at all four, h2h's with his main rivals, weeks at #1 plus masters record as well I think? He's there. Well unless Nadal springs an unexpected late challenge, but not likely.

yes I've no doubt that he is but a calendar grand slam would mean that even the absolute Federer or Nadal die-hards would also have to concede that he is.

forumdedum

glasso wrote: »

yes I've no doubt that he is but a calendar grand slam would mean that even the absolute Federer or Nadal die-hards would also have to concede that he is.

He could win 100 and I would never concede.

Girly Gal

glasso wrote: »

yes I've no doubt that he is but a calendar grand slam would mean that even the absolute Federer or Nadal die-hards would also have to concede that he is.

Some will never concede, that's why they're die hard fans, also everyone is entitled to their own opinion, that's part of the fun in sport and makes it interesting, be a bit boring if everyone held the same view.

forumdedum

forumdedum wrote: »

He could win 100 and I would never concede.

good to know.

but that's impossible so is moot.

if he managed to win the calendar slam it would be just a dissenting voice that nobody would pay much heed to

Most Fed fans were ok with Djokovic until he started beating him at every single grand slam they met at

9 years and counting.