View Single Post
Old 01-29-2013, 02:56 AM   #33
Towser83's Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,376

Originally Posted by veroniquem View Post
Bull. Djoko would have beaten Fed more easily than Murray did and it wouldn't have affected his perf in the final. (Djoko has already won AO after beating Fed in the semi and Murray in the final in 2011). He also had Murray, Nadal back to back in 2012 and I can't think of any tougher combination (much tougher than Fed + Murray), although the other way around (Nadal first and Murray next) would no doubt be even worse. It doesn't matter what draw you throw at Djoko at AO, a bit like Rafa at RG although not for as long.
Originally Posted by NadalAgassi View Post
Djokovic would have beaten Federer in straight sets in the semis just as he did in 2008 and 2011, and would have been physically in fine shape for the final regardless. He may have been better sharpened up despite the straight sets win than his rout of Ferrer, started better, and won the final more easily. Djokovic is the Australian Open GOAT, was always going to be a big ask for Murray to beat him here, but he gave a good try.
Djokovic couldn't play Fed in the semis, they're 1 and 2. Djokovic could have played Murray in the semis. And he still would have won the tournament, but the finalwould have been better even if Djokovic did another straight sets job on Federer. Their other 2 semis were 3 close sets of good tennis, like the 2007 US Open final too.
How to clarky - work out most or only realistic outcome, claim the opposite
Federer, Djokovic, Delpo fan (also like Nalbandian, Dimitrov, Tsonga)
Towser83 is offline   Reply With Quote