Could Novak's U.S. Open loss launch another run?

T

Tony48

Legend
Of all the top guys, I think Federer and Djokovic hate losing the most....especially to each other :)

Djokovic lost to Federer for 3 consecutive years at the U.S. Open (2007-2009) and was staring down the barrel of yet another loss when he found himself down match point. I think one factor that made him go for broke back in 2010 was that he was just sick of losing. He's talented and he knows it so he hit the ball harder, closer to the lines, and ended the rally with piercing swinging volley. He then fended off a 2nd match point just as offensively as he did the previous one.

As for last year, I think he was just angry at the crowd decided to vent by whacking the return ("Take that, U.S. Open crowd!...oh s**t, it went in!")

Same with Federer: after that U.S. Open loss in 2011, Fed went on an absolute tear and didn't lose another match until the Australian Open SF.

I think losing is a great motivator for a lot of people, especially for guys like Djokovic and Federer. And perhaps losing a close U.S. Open final could be the catalyst for another stellar year.
 
N

NadalAgassi

Guest
slowfox said:
Sometimes I wonder if Djoker's 2011 will end up being like Wilander's 1988... their peak.
Click to expand...

A 3 slam peak year with numerous other years as a slam winner or spending time at #1. Hardly anything to despair over.
 
OverratedIvanovic

OverratedIvanovic

Semi-Pro
Hopefully not, don't wanna watch a human backboard who just brings the ball back with no variety at all and looks clumsy at net and not to forget his newly developed slice which looks atrocious.
 
tennisMVP

tennisMVP

Banned
RF20Lennon said:
that too but we dont know how nadal will be after he comes back
Click to expand...

Well, we know he's only going to play when he's 100% fit. No more bandaid solutions according to Uncle Toni. And we know he is skipping some hardcourt events (Indian Wells, Miami maybe?) to make sure he's fresh. So he'll be better than the 2012 clay season when he apparently played in pain.
 
Last edited:
RF20Lennon

RF20Lennon

Legend
tennisMVP said:
Well, we know he's only going to play when he's 100% fit. No more bandaid solutuons according to Uncle Toni. And we know his skipping some hardcourt events (Indian Wells, Miami maybe?) to make sure he's fresh. So he'll be better than the 2012 clay season when he apparently played in pain.
Click to expand...

Oh ok I see did not know that but he exerts his body more on clay so you never know he could be in pain but he should be fresh most likely
 
batz

batz

G.O.A.T.
Tony48 said:
Of all the top guys, I think Federer and Djokovic hate losing the most....especially to each other :)

Djokovic lost to Federer for 3 consecutive years at the U.S. Open (2007-2009) and was staring down the barrel of yet another loss when he found himself down match point. I think one factor that made him go for broke back in 2010 was that he was just sick of losing. He's talented and he knows it so he hit the ball harder, closer to the lines, and ended the rally with piercing swinging volley. He then fended off a 2nd match point just as offensively as he did the previous one.

As for last year, I think he was just angry at the crowd decided to vent by whacking the return ("Take that, U.S. Open crowd!...oh s**t, it went in!")

Same with Federer: after that U.S. Open loss in 2011, Fed went on an absolute tear and didn't lose another match until the Australian Open SF.

I think losing is a great motivator for a lot of people, especially for guys like Djokovic and Federer. And perhaps losing a close U.S. Open final could be the catalyst for another stellar year.
Click to expand...


Wasn't Novak's previous streak triggered by a great high rather than a low?
 
S

Sid_Vicious

G.O.A.T.
batz said:
Wasn't Novak's previous streak triggered by a great high rather than a low?
Click to expand...

Batz, the problem with these types of arguments is that Point A can be moved to many places along a time line. One can say that Federer's good streak started because he picked up more and more confidence during the indoor season rather than the bitter loss to Novak
 
batz

batz

G.O.A.T.
Sid_Vicious said:
Batz, the problem with these types of arguments is that Point A can be moved to many places along a time line. One can say that Federer's good streak started because he picked up more and more confidence during the indoor season rather than the bitter loss to Novak
Click to expand...

Of course you can Sid - I'm just playing back what Novak himself said. Also, Nole had plenty of tough losses before The Streak, none of which seemed to spur him on like his DC win supposedly did.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there isn't much data to support Tony's idea that a bad loss has the effect of spurring Novak on to great things. That doesn't of course mean that Novak is incapable of starting another streak.
 
6-1 6-3 6-0

6-1 6-3 6-0

Banned
Nope. Nadal rightly predicted that Djokovic wouldn't EVER be able to repeat his 2011 season, especially since Djokovic's season was only really successful because he started showing balls against Nadal in finals, but since Djokovic can no longer beat Nadal, there's nothing that can give him the recurring confidence to win titles again and again. The mental gap has vanished, and Nadal has finally figured him out.

Advantage Nadal.

I wouldn't be surprised if, after winning Davis Cup 2012, Nadal went on a similar run to Djokovic (winning AO 2013 and then going on to win lots of other tournaments), then started beating Djokovic in lots of finals as repayment for 2011.
 
tennisMVP

tennisMVP

Banned
Sentinel said:
Of course, we do. the Rosol loss will result in Nadal launching another run, alongside Nole. Nadal and Noel will both be "on the run".
Click to expand...

I don't think the Rosol loss was legit. Considering Nadal hasn't played since Wimbledon, clearly the loss to Rosol was injury related (Hoffa's syndrome). The only reason why he didn't lose on clay is because he's so comfortable on clay that his knees can be in awful condition and he'll still beat everyone. Grass comes less naturally to him, requires a bit more work, and requires the knees to be decent therefore. Bottom line, I don't think the Rosol loss was a big deal.
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Nope. Nadal rightly predicted that Djokovic wouldn't EVER be able to repeat his 2011 season, especially since Djokovic's season was only really successful because he started showing balls against Nadal in finals, but since Djokovic can no longer beat Nadal, there's nothing that can give him the recurring confidence to win titles again and again. The mental gap has vanished, and Nadal has finally figured him out.
Click to expand...

This all depends on what kind of shape Nadal is going to come back in!

6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
I wouldn't be surprised if, after winning Davis Cup 2012, Nadal went on a similar run to Djokovic (winning AO 2013 and then going on to win lots of other tournaments), then started beating Djokovic in lots of finals as repayment for 2011.
Click to expand...

Nadal is already 3-1 v Djokovic in finals this year; 1-1 in Slams.
 
P

Prisoner of Birth

Banned
tennisMVP said:
I don't think the Rosol loss was legit. Considering Nadal hasn't played since Wimbledon, clearly the loss to Rosol was injury related (Hoffa's syndrome). The only reason why he didn't lose on clay is because he's so comfortable on clay that his knees can be in awful condition and he'll still beat everyone. Grass comes less naturally to him, requires a bit more work, and requires the knees to be decent therefore. Bottom line, I don't think the Rosol loss was a big deal.
Click to expand...

That's a ridiculous claim. Rosol, on that day, would've beaten most any player. It was just like Nadal said. He didn't play as well as he could have in the first 3 sets. Rosol went into God-mode in the 5th set, where the best Tennis Nadal could produce still came up short.
 
T

Tony48

Legend
batz said:
Wasn't Novak's previous streak triggered by a great high rather than a low?
Click to expand...

That's true, but I don't think Davis Cup was the sole contributor. I'm basing it partly on the fact that Novak has done (at least) the U.S. Open final-Australian Open final combo since 2007 (whenever he made the U.S. Open final, of course).

In 2010, Novak won neither a slam nor a masters so I think that could have been enough of a motivator to get his 2011 going. The Davis Cup victory magnified his motivation of course. So I'm not saying that he's going to "repeat" his 2011 year.....just considering whether the loss could trigger a year better than 2012.
 
tennisMVP

tennisMVP

Banned
Prisoner of Birth said:
That's a ridiculous claim. Rosol, on that day, would've beaten most any player. It was just like Nadal said. He didn't play as well as he could have in the first 3 sets. Rosol went into God-mode in the 5th set, where the best Tennis Nadal could produce still came up short.
Click to expand...

I agree Rosol played great, and he would have beaten many players on that day. But Nadal was falling over an awful lot. I bet Hoffa's syndrome was the reason for that. The only time Nadal looked balanced was when he served (which he did great, 19 aces and 120mph 1st serve average). Apart from that, Nadal was far below par (from the baseline).
 
6-1 6-3 6-0

6-1 6-3 6-0

Banned
Prisoner of Birth said:
That's a ridiculous claim. Rosol, on that day, would've beaten most any player. It was just like Nadal said. He didn't play as well as he could have in the first 3 sets. Rosol went into God-mode in the 5th set, where the best Tennis Nadal could produce still came up short.
Click to expand...

And right after that match, Nadal skipped 4 tournaments. Yep, injury couldn't have been the reason for that loss... :-?
 
P

Prisoner of Birth

Banned
tennisMVP said:
I agree Rosol played great, and he would have beaten many players on that day. But Nadal was falling over an awful lot. I bet Hoffa's syndrome was the reason for that. The only time Nadal looked balanced was when he served (which he did great, 19 aces and 120mph 1st serve average). Apart from that, Nadal was far below par (from the baseline).
Click to expand...

I'm not saying Nadal played his best Tennis. But everybody has their less-than-stellar days, even when they're injury-free. Given the quality of Tennis Nadal was playing up until that day, I don't think his injury really hurt his play. I'm sure it hurt him, but he's played through pain before.
 
6-1 6-3 6-0

6-1 6-3 6-0

Banned
Prisoner of Birth said:
I'm not saying Nadal played his best Tennis. But everybody has their less-than-stellar days, even when they're injury-free. Given the quality of Tennis Nadal was playing up until that day, I don't think his injury really hurt his play. I'm sure it hurt him, but he's played through pain before.
Click to expand...

Nadal didn't play too well against Thomaz Bellucci (trailed 0-4 in the first set) in the first round, so clearly Nadal wasn't at his best in the tournament. And Nadal made 5 finals in 5 consecutive attempts (2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011), so since he didn't make the final in 2012, it's obvious that something was wrong.
 
SQA333

SQA333

Hall of Fame
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Nadal didn't play too well against Thomaz Bellucci (trailed 0-4 in the first set) in the first round, so clearly Nadal wasn't at his best in the tournament. And Nadal made 5 finals in 5 consecutive attempts (2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011), so since he didn't make the final in 2012, it's obvious that something was wrong.
Click to expand...

NaDaL SuX. hee was to weeek in the wimpelton.
 
RF20Lennon

RF20Lennon

Legend
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Nadal didn't play too well against Thomaz Bellucci (trailed 0-4 in the first set) in the first round, so clearly Nadal wasn't at his best in the tournament. And Nadal made 5 finals in 5 consecutive attempts (2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011), so since he didn't make the final in 2012, it's obvious that something was wrong.
Click to expand...

So since Federer won wimby 5 consecutive times he loss to nadal in 2008 means something was wrong, he was injured.
 
T

Tony48

Legend
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
And right after that match, Nadal skipped 4 tournaments. Yep, injury couldn't have been the reason for that loss... :-?
Click to expand...

I've called in sick before. Doesn't mean I was actually sick.

Nope. Nadal rightly predicted that Djokovic wouldn't EVER be able to repeat his 2011 season, especially since Djokovic's season was only really successful because he started showing balls against Nadal in finals, but since Djokovic can no longer beat Nadal, there's nothing that can give him the recurring confidence to win titles again and again. The mental gap has vanished, and Nadal has finally figured him out.

Advantage Nadal.
Click to expand...

You credit Nadal specifically with that prediction? I don't think ANYONE said Djokovic would repeat his 2011 season.

And as far as Djokovic no longer being able to beat Nadal....where did you get that from? Djokovic is not Federer. He has no trouble beating Nadal outside of clay.
 
6-1 6-3 6-0

6-1 6-3 6-0

Banned
RF20Lennon said:
So since Federer won wimby 5 consecutive times he loss to nadal in 2008 means something was wrong, he was injured.
Click to expand...

Nadal's results (since 2006, excluding 2009) were F F W W F 2R. Clearly the 2R is an outlier. Whereas for Federer (from 2003), it was W W W W W F. The F isn't really an outlier, since he was only one match away from the title (which Nadal won in the longest Wimbledon final of all time, 6-4 6-4 6-7 6-7 9-7, to win his first Wimbledon title and completed the channel slam, the first man to do so since Bjorn Borg in 1980).
 
RF20Lennon

RF20Lennon

Legend
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Nadal's results (since 2006, excluding 2009) were F F W W F 2R. Clearly the 2R is an outlier. Whereas for Federer (from 2003), it was W W W W W F. The F isn't really an outlier, since he was only one match away from the title (which Nadal won in the longest Wimbledon final of all time, 6-4 6-4 6-7 6-7 9-7, to win his first Wimbledon title and completed the channel slam, the first man to do so since Bjorn Borg in 1980).
Click to expand...

unnecessary its common knowledge but yes i agree with you on this I see your point But Fed lost at the QF's two years in a row and even though he had mild back issues it was Berdych and Tsonga that were on fire!! So credit to Rosol!
 
P

Prisoner of Birth

Banned
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Nadal's results (since 2006, excluding 2009) were F F W W F 2R. Clearly the 2R is an outlier. Whereas for Federer (from 2003), it was W W W W W F. The F isn't really an outlier, since he was only one match away from the title (which Nadal won in the longest Wimbledon final of all time, 6-4 6-4 6-7 6-7 9-7, to win his first Wimbledon title and completed the channel slam, the first man to do so since Bjorn Borg in 1980).
Click to expand...

Rosol outplayed Nadal in that match
tumblr_lmj8w1pM2T1qe4zhy.gif
 
dr325i

dr325i

G.O.A.T.
RF20Lennon said:
Possible but with Murray around and with fed with still a little left i doubt it!
Click to expand...

Murray has a lot to prove.
He really had no competition till the finals, a bit of luck on his side and he handled the wind better than Novak did.
He needs to add one or two more to his collection to really be there. So far, I value Delpo's single slam more than Murray's, however, the time will tell...
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
dr325i said:
Murray has a lot to prove.
Click to expand...

Sigh...Murray ALWAYS has a lot to prove, hasn't he! No matter what he does, what he achieves, people will NEVER be satisfied. I have never come across ANY player on here who is consistently given so little credit for what he does as Murray. He is always lucky, or it's always a fluke, or his opponents were tired or sick or the conditions favoured him. Never that he did it on his own ability. His tennis apparently never has anything to do with what he achieves! If he were ever to end up with 17 Slams like Federer, I'm convinced people will say he did it the 'easy way' and was 'lucky' unlike Fed who did it, of course, out of pure genius!

dr325i said:
He really had no competition till the finals
Click to expand...

I think Lopez, Cilic and especially Berdych gave him some competition. He certainly had far more competition than either Federer or Djokovic had to face prior to the semi-finals!

dr325i said:
a bit of luck on his side and he handled the wind better than Novak did.
Click to expand...

Yep. That's all it takes to win a Slam. A bit of luck and a bit of wind! Unless you're not named Murray in which, of course, it's just your sheer playing ability that got you through! :rolleyes:

dr325i said:
He needs to add one or two more to his collection to really be there. So far, I value Delpo's single slam more than Murray's, however, the time will tell...
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how many Slams Murray wins. You would never be satisfied. Until recently, the consensus round here was that Murray would never 'prove himself' until he won a Slam. Now that he's managed to do that, the goal-posts are promptly moved to ' Murray will never prove himself until he wins ANOTHER Slam'. And so it goes on, endlessly.

It's quite clear that you are not a Murray fan and certainly haven't followed or understood his career. It's perfectly within your rights to dislike him as a player, but just because you dislike his playing style should not translate into disrespect for his abilities and recourse to glib and facile assumptions about his 'luck' etc. etc. It's high time you credited some of his supposed 'luck' to actual abilities along with those of every other player talked about on here!
 
Crisstti

Crisstti

Legend
Prisoner of Birth said:
I'm not saying Nadal played his best Tennis. But everybody has their less-than-stellar days, even when they're injury-free. Given the quality of Tennis Nadal was playing up until that day, I don't think his injury really hurt his play. I'm sure it hurt him, but he's played through pain before.
Click to expand...

Rafa had not being playing too well in any of the grass matches from this year.

Rosol wouldn't have beaten any player. Nadal almost beat him, and he played relatively subpar.

RF20Lennon said:
So since Federer won wimby 5 consecutive times he loss to nadal in 2008 means something was wrong, he was injured.
Click to expand...

There's a pretty big difference between getting to the final and the second round. I would have no problem believing Fed was injured were he to lose to a 100th ranked player in the second round of a slam...
 
dr325i

dr325i

G.O.A.T.
Mainad said:
Sigh...Murray ALWAYS has a lot to prove, hasn't he! No matter what he does, what he achieves, people will NEVER be satisfied. I have never come across ANY player on here who is consistently given so little credit for what he does as Murray. He is always lucky, or it's always a fluke, or his opponents were tired or sick or the conditions favoured him. Never that he did it on his own ability. His tennis apparently never has anything to do with what he achieves! If he were ever to end up with 17 Slams like Federer, I'm convinced people will say he did it the 'easy way' and was 'lucky' unlike Fed who did it, of course, out of pure genius!



I think Lopez, Cilic and especially Berdych gave him some competition. He certainly had far more competition than either Federer or Djokovic had to face prior to the semi-finals!



Yep. That's all it takes to win a Slam. A bit of luck and a bit of wind! Unless you're not named Murray in which, of course, it's just your sheer playing ability that got you through! :rolleyes:



It doesn't matter how many Slams Murray wins. You would never be satisfied. Until recently, the consensus round here was that Murray would never 'prove himself' until he won a Slam. Now that he's managed to do that, the goal-posts are promptly moved to ' Murray will never prove himself until he wins ANOTHER Slam'. And so it goes on, endlessly.

It's quite clear that you are not a Murray fan and certainly haven't followed or understood his career. It's perfectly within your rights to dislike him as a player, but just because you dislike his playing style should not translate into disrespect for his abilities and recourse to glib and facile assumptions about his 'luck' etc. etc. It's high time you credited some of his supposed 'luck' to actual abilities along with those of every other player talked about on here!
Click to expand...

I would suggest you to stay away from trying to "read" others and to stay away from the predictions what others like or dislike.
There are two players on the Tour I really like and have followed from their junior years -- Djokovic and Murray. I have a respect for the other greats, too.
Yes, Murray has done a lot, but GREATLY over exaggerated since his USO win. Lopez, Cilic -- give me a break, please. Berdych -- he has been playing the worst tennis of his last two years, finally got something positive after the quarters at the USO. It was obvious he cannot pull two in a row...

I am glad Andy has done it, I just want to see him do it again...
 
3fees

3fees

G.O.A.T.
With the ATP Point system the way it is,,it favors the repeat winners,,once a tournament is won,,the winner then defends the points next time around, he gains nothing by winning it again, he simply does not lose any points,that being said,, it seems a player must pick where he wants to win, for if he does not repeat points go down,,if he get bumped early,,points going down is huge in the major tournaments.

One can say with certainty Nole,federer,nadal,and now murray is on the hook, if they dont repeat slam wins they lose points, if they get bumped early, they drop huge points in rating,,,

:)
 
Last edited:
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
dr325i said:
I would suggest you to stay away from trying to "read" others and to stay away from the predictions what others like or dislike.
Click to expand...

I merely infer from what I have read and from what I have read I think my reply was justified. This 'Murray is always lucky whenever he achieves something' routine is getting really irksome and tedious and needs to be put into context.

dr325i said:
There are two players on the Tour I really like and have followed from their junior years -- Djokovic and Murray. I have a respect for the other greats, too.
Click to expand...

So you like Murray then? That's nice to hear. But from your remarks it is not at all clear that you have much respect for him at all!

dr325i said:
Yes, Murray has done a lot, but GREATLY over exaggerated since his USO win.
Click to expand...

How and in what way has it been 'GREATLY over exaggerated' as you claim?
The guy just won his first Slam for Pete's sake and his fans on here are pleased for him and don't think it was all down to luck and chance as you appear to do.

dr325i said:
Lopez, Cilic -- give me a break, please. Berdych -- he has been playing the worst tennis of his last two years, finally got something positive after the quarters at the USO. It was obvious he cannot pull two in a row...
Click to expand...

Dodig, Lopez and Cilic can all be pretty dangerous when they play well as indeed can Raonic on hard courts. None of them however are as potentially dangerous as Berdych who, I will remind you, beat Djokovic and Federer back to back on his way to the 2010 Wimbledon final and who took out Federer, the #1 seed, yet again at this year's USO. So Murray had to beat the guy who beat Fed and someone who, in addition, still has a winning H2H against him. I can only repeat that all 5 were infinitely tougher draws than anybody Federer and Djokovic had to face prior to the semi-finals so, if Murray was lucky to draw those guys, then the top 2 seeds pretty much had byes all the way to the semis!

dr325i said:
I am glad Andy has done it, I just want to see him do it again...
Click to expand...

Nice to see we can agree on something. Just try to have a little more faith in him in the future.
 
Fedex

Fedex

Legend
Can we just copy and paste Mainad's last two posts for anyone that says Murray was lucky, hasn't proved himself and had an easy draw?
 
PhrygianDominant

PhrygianDominant

Hall of Fame
People seem to forget that Murray can make his opponents play worse. He stayed number 4 in the world for years just by playing defense and varying pace and spin. He still reverts to these tricks against heavy hitters and in wind, where it's difficult to set up and let fly; it's a legitimate strategy. Now that he has a forehand it's not his only one, but it served him well in the USO.
 
6-1 6-3 6-0

6-1 6-3 6-0

Banned
smoledman said:
This obsession with #1 is the destroyer of careers.
Click to expand...

Yep, just the reason why Djokovic can't beat Nadal when he becomes obsessed with getting the #1 ranking, whereas Nadal doesn't care about the #1 ranking, so he can continue to rack up the slams whilst Djokovic will fall back to his 2010 level. That's why Nadal's mentality is so great. He doesn't obsess over simple things like rankings. He just plays his best tennis, and it just so happens that when Nadal plays his best tennis, he wins everything.
 
Mike Sams

Mike Sams

G.O.A.T.
6-1 6-3 6-0 said:
Yep, just the reason why Djokovic can't beat Nadal when he becomes obsessed with getting the #1 ranking, whereas Nadal doesn't care about the #1 ranking, so he can continue to rack up the slams whilst Djokovic will fall back to his 2010 level. That's why Nadal's mentality is so great. He doesn't obsess over simple things like rankings. He just plays his best tennis, and it just so happens that when Nadal plays his best tennis, he wins everything.
Click to expand...

Uhm...this isn't 2010 anymore you know? :? Remember 2010? The final year that Nadal won an actual tournament OFF of clay? The final year that Nadal managed to beat Djokovic off of clay?
Nadal has only won 2 Slams in 2 years and both were on clay. He has NEVER defended a non clay title in his life.
Djokovic even despite not playing his best tennis can STILL make the finals of Roland Garros and US Open. Nadal can't even make it past the 2nd round on one of his best surfaces at Wimbledon against a #100 ranked qualifier.:lol:
Nadal can't win anything except clay titles anymore.
Take clay away from Rafa and he has 4 Slams. Take clay away from Federer and he has 16 Slams.
So if Nadal plays his best tennis, how is he winning everything considering he only has 4 Slams OFF clay over the past 11 years on the pro tour? Apparently he must be losing some matches somewhere...:lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Federer and Another Obsecure Record?
Replies
12
Views
1K
BlackSheep
BlackSheep
M
Federer and U.S. Open and Records
Replies
10
Views
923
Moose Malloy
M
M
In retrospect, Federer's Wins at U.S. Open look better
Replies
14
Views
1K
fednad
fednad
Aldi Patron
How will Djokovic handle the U.S. Open crowds this year?
2
Replies
76
Views
4K
FedNad316
F
M
Do you think a walkover should count as a win/loss
Replies
15
Views
5K
Larry Duff
Larry Duff
Top