PDA

View Full Version : Djokovic has not lost match at a Grand Slam after winning the first set since FO 2010


5555
09-10-2012, 12:50 AM
He lost at the quarterfinals against Jürgen Melzer, but it should be said that Novak lost that match because of gluten allergy (it was before gluten-free diet).

Murray is a slow starter so...

Russeljones
09-10-2012, 12:51 AM
Murray is a slow starter so...

Murray won the 1st set in his last Slam final so...

Clarky21
09-10-2012, 05:57 AM
So what? How about he do that for years and years before his ***** start banging on about it.

Fedex
09-10-2012, 06:09 AM
He lost at the quarterfinals against Jürgen Melzer, but it should be said that Novak lost that match because of gluten allergy (it was before gluten-free diet).

Murray is a slow starter so...

The stat in your thread title is very impressive.
Shows how incredibly consistent Djokovic has been.

Fedex
09-10-2012, 06:10 AM
So what? How about he do that for years and years before his ***** start banging on about it.

Not meaning to be contradictory here, and putting aside your dislike of Djokovic, but I think that is a very impressive achievement already.

McEnroeisanartist
09-10-2012, 10:58 AM
The stat in your thread title is very impressive.
Shows how incredibly consistent Djokovic has been.

This streak covers 9 Grand Slams.

This really isn't that impressive when you consider that Federer did not lose a a match at a Grand Slam after winning the first set from 2006 Wimbledon to 2009 U.S. Open. This streak covered 13 Grand Slams.

Nadal had a streak from 2008 Australian Open to 2012 Australian Open. This streak covered 15 Grand Slams.

5555
09-13-2012, 08:12 AM
Murray won the 1st set in his last Slam final so...

"Andy Murray...is earning the reputation of being a slow starter."
http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/sport-comment/slow-starts-are-catching-up-on-andy-murray

Fedex
09-13-2012, 09:11 AM
This streak covers 9 Grand Slams.

This really isn't that impressive when you consider that Federer did not lose a a match at a Grand Slam after winning the first set from 2006 Wimbledon to 2009 U.S. Open. This streak covered 13 Grand Slams.

Nadal had a streak from 2008 Australian Open to 2012 Australian Open. This streak covered 15 Grand Slams.

If you want to use two of the greatest players ever as a benchmark then maybe it's not so impressive but by any other standards that is a mighty good streak.

Cup8489
09-13-2012, 09:23 AM
"Andy Murray...is earning the reputation of being a slow starter."
http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/sport-comment/slow-starts-are-catching-up-on-andy-murray

http://wa3.cdn.3news.co.nz/3news/AM/2012/9/11/268877/Murray-1200.jpg?width=460

Interesting that you use an article from March and pretend it's relevant now, despite Murray winning the first Two sets against Novak 3 days ago.

Mustard
09-13-2012, 10:26 AM
It's only happened to Nadal 3 times in his career, 2 of them in 2012.

tennisMVP
09-13-2012, 08:14 PM
Djokovic's 1st set stat is not impressive compared to Nadal. Prior to 2012, Nadal had only lost one match at the slams after winning the 1st set (and that one match was 2007 US Open).

Headshotterer
09-13-2012, 09:12 PM
He lost at the quarterfinals against Jürgen Melzer, but it should be said that Novak lost that match because of gluten allergy (it was before gluten-free diet).

Murray is a slow starter so...

Lmfao? He lost 3 sets at the 2011 RG you idiot

5555
09-14-2012, 07:20 AM
Interesting that you use an article from March and pretend it's relevant now, despite Murray winning the first Two sets against Novak 3 days ago.

If Murray won the first 2 sets in that match, it does not mean that he does not have any more reputation of being a slow stater. It's just one match and also what if Murray started slowly against Djokovic, but Novak was even worse because of wind?

Lmfao? He lost 3 sets at the 2011 RG you idiot

You idiot, Federer won the first set against Djokovic at the 2011 RG.

Cup8489
09-14-2012, 07:30 AM
If Murray won the first 2 sets in that match, it does not mean that he does not have any more reputation of being a slow stater. It's just one match and also what if Murray started slowly against Djokovic, but Novak was even worse because of wind?



You idiot, Federer won the first set against Djokovic at the 2011 RG.

If's, and's, and but's don't matter. What matters is Murray won the first two sets and won the match.

Get over it.

Headshotterer
09-14-2012, 12:00 PM
If Murray won the first 2 sets in that match, it does not mean that he does not have any more reputation of being a slow stater. It's just one match and also what if Murray started slowly against Djokovic, but Novak was even worse because of wind?



You idiot, Federer won the first set against Djokovic at the 2011 RG.

You idiot, that is exactly what I am saying.

5555
09-16-2012, 05:19 AM
You idiot, that is exactly what I am saying.

You idiot, can you explain how that proves that my argument is invalid?

5555
09-16-2012, 05:35 AM
If's, and's, and but's don't matter. What matters is Murray won the first two sets and won the match.

Get over it.

You attacked my claim that Murray has reputation of being a slow stater, I provided counterargument to support my proposition and then you failed to produce counterreason.

You lost the argument. Get over it.

Tony48
09-16-2012, 10:08 AM
You idiot, that is exactly what I am saying.

The thread is about Djokovic's record when winning the first set. He did not win the first set in that match.

Cesc Fabregas
09-16-2012, 11:25 AM
So what, Nadal has only lost about twice in his whole career.

Fedex
09-16-2012, 11:44 AM
If you want to use two of the greatest players ever as a benchmark then maybe it's not so impressive but by any other standards that is a mighty good streak.

So what, Nadal has only lost about twice in his whole career.

Just quoting myself to get the point across.
As Djokovic and now Murray achieve more success, I think it's unfair to minimise their achievements, a trend I'm noticing more often now, by comparing them to two of the greatest players in the history of tennis namely Federer and Nadal.
As I said, by any other standards, Djokovic's streak is very impressive.
And I'm not a fan.

Clarky21
09-16-2012, 12:17 PM
Just quoting myself to get the point across.
As Djokovic and now Murray achieve more success, I think it's unfair to minimise their achievements, a trend I'm noticing more often now, by comparing them to two of the greatest players in the history of tennis namely Federer and Nadal.As I said, by any other standards, Djokovic's streak is very impressive.
And I'm not a fan.


Why? The *********s on here want to lump him in with them so why not compare his achievements to theirs? They are getting exactly what they want so what's the big deal?