Why was Fed so close to losing US Open 2007 final to Nole?

[mike danny]

Nah, he doesn't have the same flair. Budget version.

They don't make 'em like they used to anymore.

 

[Breakpointerer]

You forgot Bogdanovic, but yeah that was pretty good.

And Bogdanovic

 

[Samprodal]

Djoker was already pretty good.
He had beaten Federer in Montreal final in a great match.
I dont see any bad in almost losing a set to that Djokovic.

Fed shoulda lost 2 sets to that Djokovic
Why?

 

[ForehandRF]

Djokovic played well for a first-time finalist, and also Fed wasn’t too impressive at the 2007 USO overall. Don’t get me wrong, he played well, but just a bit worse than in 2006.

Fed failed to bring the level from the previous matches and Djokovic offered a challenge beyond expectations at that point.

 

[ForehandRF]

You forgot Bogdanovic, but yeah that was pretty good.

We can add Igor Andreev but wait, that was in 2008, and the stronk era already started in the evening of the Wimby Final.

 

[Rosstour]

If this was vulture, what is beating Bautista Agut in Wimbledon SF or Pouille in AO SF???

Ultimate warrior mindset.

 

[Samprodal]

They don't make 'em like they used to anymore.

We are having a quality discussion here. Feel free to participate, but don't drag it down please.

 

[beard]

Let’s just cut to the chase. It’s because Federer was never as good as people say, and even a baby GOAT had enough to challenge him at the peak of his weak-era vulture power.

I know you were sarcastic, but you are 100% right...anyway good defensive move...

"The truth behind sarcasm is that there is ALWAYS truth in every sarcastic comment"...

 

[arvind13]

SaintPetros back at it again.

aka 90s clay

 

[Third Serve]

aka 90s clay

They’re different posters. One produces higher quality trolling than the other, though.

 

[Samprodal]

I know you were sarcastic, but you are 100% right...anyway good defensive move...

"The truth behind sarcasm is that there is ALWAYS truth in every sarcastic comment"...

100 percent I was going to post the same thing, but thought I'd leave someone else the joy

 

[zagor]

You're not close to losing the match if you happen to win in straights.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

You're not close to losing the match if you happen to win in straights.

Federer was much closer to being straight-setted by Davydenko at RG and yet he wasn't really all that close considering he won that match in straight sets himself, so there.

 

[Hitman]

Close to losing?

 

[Samprodal]

You're not close to losing the match if you happen to win in straights.

The key. He "happened" to win in straights because the 20 year old choked in his first ever slam final. Otherwise he probably shoulda lost in straights with a reverse score.

 

[Rosstour]

Funny that the guy who had no qualms to do this shot in the semi-final stage of a grand slam had the gall to criticize Nole for a rip return down matchpoint 2 years later

He was in disbelief, angry at himself for assuming Djok wouldn’t go for it.

 

[zagor]

The key.

Is that he won 3 straight set sets, in a BO5 match.

As far as men's slam finals go, that's an easy win.

 

[zagor]

Federer was much closer to being straight-setted by Davydenko at RG and yet he wasn't really all that close considering he won that match in straight sets himself, so there.

Tennis is a game of fine margins, the vast majority of matches are decided by a few key points.

Calling this match close is a stretch, saying Fed was close to losing is either trolling or just plain ignorance.

 

[Samprodal]

Tennis is a game of fine margins, the vast majority of matches are decided by a few key points.

Calling this match close is a stretch, saying Fed was close to losing is either trolling or just plain ignorance.

Fed was real lucky Nole didn't have mental strength or hunger at this point, otherwise he woulda been booted off the big stage like a naughty child.

 

[zagor]

Fed was real lucky Nole didn't have mental strength or hunger at this point, otherwise he woulda been booted off the big stage like a naughty child.

Which is why he also won their next two USO meetings with the loss of one set combined.

 

[Samprodal]

Which is why he also won their next two USO meetings with the loss of one set combined.

2008 was worn out b/of beef with Roddick and the way the crowd unfairly became hostile towards him for defending himself against Rod's slander. '09 was an out of focus year, I mean he lost to Roddick of all people at the Aussie on a retirement.

 

[flutzingitaway]

2008 was worn out b/of beef with Roddick and the way the crowd unfairly became hostile towards him for defending himself against Rod's slander. '09 was an out of focus year, I mean he lost to Roddick of all people at the Aussie on a retirement.

So there is an excuse for every year. You know I just decided Conchita Martinez is better than Graf and Seles. She is something like 1-15 vs both but there is an excuse for every loss. The one time she won vs each was the one time there wasn't something unlucky and wrong with her, so was the proper result it would have been each time without the different excuses.

 

[DSH]

One of the most misleading results in the history of tennis.

 

[Zetty]

Pathetic troll attempt. This was Djoker's best year outside of '08 until he hit 2.0 mode. He gave Nadal the business twice that hard court season before the US Open after losing to him early on. And beat both Fed and Nadal in Canada, his form was strong and Fed recovered well. He was pretty dominant that hard court season outside of Cinci leading up to the US Open. AKA he was a formidable opponent that Fed stepped up to meet the challenge of.

 

[Mike Sams]

Nole had set points in the first, up a break in the second, of course he choked those away (it was his first slam final) but the question remains why did Fed struggle so mightily against 20 year old Nole in his mint slam final (if) he was at the height of his powers?

Discuss

Djokovic beat Federer in the Montreal Masters Final a few weeks before that. Then again, Federer was losing to players like Canas, Volandri, Nadal and Nalbandian in the Masters events that same year also.

 

[Mike Sams]

Pathetic troll attempt. This was Djoker's best year outside of '08 until he hit 2.0 mode. He gave Nadal the business twice that hard court season before the US Open after losing to him early on. And beat both Fed and Nadal in Canada, his form was strong and Fed recovered well. He was pretty dominant that hard court season outside of Cinci leading up to the US Open. AKA he was a formidable opponent that Fed stepped up to meet the challenge of.

Why was Super Unstoppable Destroyer Djokovic version 2.0 struggling so much against a fading Federer in 2011?

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Pathetic troll attempt. This was Djoker's best year outside of '08 until he hit 2.0 mode. He gave Nadal the business twice that hard court season before the US Open after losing to him early on. And beat both Fed and Nadal in Canada, his form was strong and Fed recovered well. He was pretty dominant that hard court season outside of Cinci leading up to the US Open. AKA he was a formidable opponent that Fed stepped up to meet the challenge of.

If we can make excuses like that for Djokovic guess we can make excuses for Fed when he should have beat 2.0 Djokovic at half the slams in 2011.

 

[Federev]

Why was Mt.Nolerest down 2 MPS (WB) and then pulverized (WTF) by Geeeeezerer in 2019?

One trolly question deserves another.

 

[Third Serve]

RIP in peace again, SaintPetros.

 

[yokied]

The 90s Clay Guide to TTW Trolling needs some amendments and students really need to read and follow the whole damn guide. Note the part about posting about players with less than 5 majors. One of 90s Clay's greatest hits was about Nishikori.

FFS give us some variety folks.

 

[beltsman]

That was peak Fed tho, hardened from years of battling Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro, Wawrinka, and others

Troll confirmed.

Low energy!

 

[Federev]

Also - why did a GOAT like Sampras have such a hard time with baby Roger in 2001?

Pete almost lost that 4th Round Wimby match. He barely squee -

WAIT!!!

WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT MATCH???

 

[tacou]

Rafa similarly nearly lost to Roger in the 2008 french open final. Roger only needed 3 more sets !

 

[Third Serve]

How did you know?

Posting style is way too similar for it to have been somebody else. Plus, he's made attempts to come back before. There's not a doubt in my mind.

 

[Third Serve]

I mean account deletion.

If you try to go to his profile, it'll tell you that his profile is currently unavailable. That's when you know he's been banned. For example, go to this profile:

@90's Clay

Account deletion is different. Usually, it just changes the poster's name to "Deleted Member _____" and you can't click on the username.

 

[Third Serve]

For some people, it literally says that they're banned under their username, but that doesn't apply to all banned users.

 

[Breakpointerer]

Anyone want to take a guess at his next username?

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Djokovic is a highly trained athletic machine.

 

[guitarra]

Close? He beat him in straight sets. So he was literally 3 sets, 18 games, 72 points from losing it.

 

[stringertom]

Anyone want to take a guess at his next username?

@ForPete’sSake

 

[BeatlesFan]

Mt.Nolerest

Mt. Nolerest!

 

[tudwell]

Djokovic was one point away from a two-set lead in that match! Incredible from the young Nole. The gulf in talent between the two was clear even then.

 

[stringertom]

Djokovic was one point away from a two-set lead in that match! Incredible from the young Nole. The gulf in talent between the two was clear even then.

This defies logic. Please enlighten all of us as to how you can win two sets by the winning of just one point.

 

[tudwell]

This defies logic. Please enlighten all of us as to how you can win two sets by the winning of just one point.

I don’t know. Some Nole fan said that a few weeks back. Clearly operating at a level of reasoning far beyond our ken, so I thought it worth repeating.

 

[stringertom]

I don’t know. Some Nole fan said that a few weeks back. Clearly operating at a level of reasoning far beyond our ken, so I thought it worth repeating.

I read that one too. Thankfully, all that is missing in your post is quotation marks and attribution. Otherwise, I would be concerned for your sanity in these very strange times.