2019 Basel SF Federer vs Tsitsipas: Why not beat the Big 3 twice?

[mike danny]

Lol, what Nadal has to do with it? Nadal stopped being a tough opponent for Federer looooooooooooooooooong time ago. The only tough opponent for Federer right now is Djokovic. He is the rival, not Nadal.

Federer is not beating Djokovic in a slam ever again, so I'll have to settle for Nadal.

 

[Breakpointerer]

Alright, alright, that's enough Wimby talk for today

 

[Red Rick]

James Blake just said, "Roger told me he's not improving anymore, that's impossible. I'm just trying to get back to what I once was." All those clueless Djokovic-Nadal fans who think he's "peak" need to take notice.

 

[Red Rick]

Alright, alright, that's enough Wimby talk for today

40-15

 

[BeatlesFan]

Basel would be a nice win, but meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

Winning Basel 10 times would be a nice achievement, just as he did in Halle.

 

[Breakpointerer]

40-15

Well, I tried

 

[Rafa.the.Magnificent]

Roger looks pretty damn untouchable at the moment. The Greek needs to fire himself up!

 

[mike danny]

Winning Basel 10 times would be a nice achievement, just as he did in Halle.

It is a nice achievement, but meaningless.

 

[BeatlesFan]

I don't watch cartoons, I honestly have no idea what this means.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

It is a nice achievement, but meaningless.

All of life is meaningless.

 

[jss]

funny how clunky Tsitsipas' service motion is
not a bad serve by any means though

 

[mike danny]

How did Fed lose to Tsits at the AO?

 

[Third Serve]

40-15

I hate to do this to you, but 7-5 6-7 6-7 6-3 14-16

 

[Breakpointerer]

It is a nice achievement, but meaningless.

I don't think you can call any achievement meaningless. Every milestone is special.

 

[BeatlesFan]

It is a nice achievement, but meaningless.

Another tournament win inches him closer to Connors 109 titles as well. That would not be meaningless, that record would stand for a long time.

 

[mike danny]

I hate to do this to you, but 7-5 6-7 6-7 6-3 14-16

Or, more simply, 6-2. He'll know what it means.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

How did Fed lose to Tsits at the AO?

Tanked to avoid Ned and Tio Toni. Ned had his new serve by then

 

[robthai]

Tsitsipas win against Fed at Australian Open is starting to look more like a fluke in hindsight.

 

[StrongRule]

Federer is not beating Djokovic in a slam ever again, so I'll have to settle for Nadal.

And what would be so special about beating Nadal? Just because he was a rival like 10 years ago? It's like saying Nadal beating Federer in AO 2014 was a great achievement. It wasn't. Right now even Thiem is a bigger challenge for Federer.

 

[mike danny]

Another tournament win inches him closer to Connors 109 titles as well. That would not be meaningless, that record would stand for a long time.

I never really cared for 109. He can have 150 for all I care. Wimb has convinced me he cannot be trusted when it matters the most.

 

[mike danny]

And what would be so special about beating Nadal? Just because he was a rival like 10 years ago? It's like saying Nadal beating Federer in AO 2014 was a great achievement. It wasn't. Right now even Thiem is a bigger challenge for Federer.

You clearly don't remember the 2014 threads on that one.

Nadal has been his best rival historically, not Djokovic. Djokovic just took off after Fed cooled down.

 

[MeatTornado]

It is a nice achievement, but meaningless.

I try to remind myself what my original expectations were for 2019 and it's very enjoyable through that lens.

He was miserable to watch this time a year ago and I wondered if he'd ever even sniff a Masters title again. Majors were out of the question. So just the fact that he still has this level in him continuously gives me hope for what it might lead to.

 

[jss]

I never really cared for 109. He can have 150 for all I care. Wimb has convinced me he cannot be trusted when it matters the most.

thank you. you can stop trolling now, it's really not that clever

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Fed so good that winning tournaments is meaningless now.

He has truly ascended.

 

[Breakpointerer]

Fed so good that winning tournaments is meaningless now.

He has truly ascended.

When do you think he'll finally peak?

 

[BeatlesFan]

I don't think you can call any achievement meaningless. Every milestone is special.

I agree. Basel may be "meaningless" compared to Wimbledon, but any victory is a big deal, especially at Roger's age. And beating Tsitsipas (which looks likely) bodes well next time they meet in a slam, which Roger retaining a mental edge. Anything helps.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

When do you think he'll finally peak?

Well he's 63 now, so I'd go with 70.

 

[Breakpointerer]

Well he's 63 now, so I'd go with 70.

Maybe. Personally I'd go with 80-85

 

[mike danny]

thank you. you can stop trolling now, it's really not that clever

I am trying to figure out where exactly I was trolling.

Yes, it is not clever, because it is not trolling.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Maybe. Personally I'd go with 80-85

Shame Laver retired at such a young age. He could help Federer out in 2020 by beating Djokovic for him.

 

[Third Serve]

Well he's 63 now, so I'd go with 70.

The day he retires will be the day he'll play his best match ever. All his experience and practice will build up to that moment.

 

[MeatTornado]

Maybe. Personally I'd go with 80-85

His whole career up to this point has just been practice for when he dominates the Wheelchair tour like no athlete has ever dominated any sport.

 

[Breakpointerer]

Shame Laver retired at such a young age. He could help Federer out in 2020 by beating Djokovic for him.

He'd beat Fed too though
He's older, so more experience

 

[mike danny]

I agree. Basel may be "meaningless" compared to Wimbledon, but any victory is a big deal, especially at Roger's age. And beating Tsitsipas (which looks likely) bodes well next time they meet in a slam, which Roger retaining a mental edge. Anything helps.

Tsitsipas was never my worry in a slam though. If Fed is playing well, he should beat him. AO was still just after his sub-par 2018.

 

[StrongRule]

You clearly don't remember the 2014 threads on that one.

Nadal has been his best rival historically, not Djokovic. Djokovic just took off after Fed cooled down.

I never read this forum in 2014 so I have no idea what anybody wrote. In their 2013-2014 matches I only consider Cincinnati 2013 a good win because Federer played pretty well in this match, and Nadal had to try really hard to get this win. The other wins didn't mean much.

As for Djokovic, you maybe have a point about his wins in 2014-2015, but this year Federer was ready to beat him in Wimbledon. The loss was 100% due to mentality.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

He'd beat Fed too though

No, Laver makes more with the Laver Cup checks Fed cuts him. Fed knows his paypal account by heart like he does Stans

 

[mike danny]

I never read this forum in 2014 so I have no idea what anybody wrote. In their 2013-2014 matches I only consider Cincinnati 2013 a good win because Federer played pretty well in this match, and Nadal had to try really hard to get this win. The other wins didn't mean much.

As for Djokovic, you maybe have a point about his wins in 2014-2015, but this year Federer was ready to beat him in Wimbledon. The loss was 100% due to mentality.

I agree with you here. This wasn't peak Djokovic. Fed simply succumbed to his mental block.

 

[Breakpointerer]

No, Laver makes more with the Laver Cup checks Fed cuts him. Fed knows his paypal account by heart like he does Stans

Ah, it all makes sense now.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Federer getting revenge on Tsitsipas is good enough for me. Tsits was pretty disrespectful about his win vs Fred, he definitely tried to hype himself up like he beat the best possible version of Federer that existed.

Was pretty clear Fedr blew that match.

Good on the 63 year old to school the 21 year old.

 

[mike danny]

I try to remind myself what my original expectations were for 2019 and it's very enjoyable through that lens.

He was miserable to watch this time a year ago and I wondered if he'd ever even sniff a Masters title again. Majors were out of the question. So just the fact that he still has this level in him continuously gives me hope for what it might lead to.

He needs Djokovic to be taken out. He is unlucky that his best slams are also Djokovic's best.

 

[jss]

Fed promised Mirka to make dinner tonight.
hasn't done groceries yet

 

[mike danny]

Federer getting revenge on Tsitsipas is good enough for me. Tsits was pretty disrespectful about his win vs Fred, he definitely tried to hype himself up like he beat the best possible version of Federer that existed.

Was pretty clear Fedr blew that match.

Good on the 63 year old to school the 21 year old.

Fed in a nutshell?

 

[Breakpointerer]

Great forehanding

 

[Third Serve]

The geriatric peak Federer is cruising through.

 

[flyingboris]

I was almost reaching for the like button on my stream when Fed hit that cross-court forehand

 

[BeatlesFan]

I am trying to figure out where exactly I was trolling.

Yes, it is not clever, because it is not trolling.

Well, to be fair, one could argue, why are you watching a semifinal of a tournament that is "meaningless?" Any tournament win for Fed is a great thing, even a 500 or 250. Connors at age 38 wasn't coming close to beating 21 year old top 10 players.

 

[MeatTornado]

Federer getting revenge on Tsitsipas is good enough for me. Tsits was pretty disrespectful about his win vs Fred, he definitely tried to hype himself up like he beat the best possible version of Federer that existed.

Was pretty clear Fedr blew that match.

Good on the 63 year old to school the 21 year old.

He already got revenge when he destroyed him in the Dubai final a month after that loss.

 

[mike danny]

@MeatTornado, correction: Fed needs Djokovic to be taken out AND manage his health and make sure it's 100%.

 

[Breakpointerer]

Fed to serve for it.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Fed in a nutshell?

Not really. There are plenty of matches Federer has won where he should have lost. It mostly balances itself out throughout a career.

Not like Djokovic and Nadal haven't lost slams they should have won as well.

The current slam count is about right, all things considered.