The better match: 08 or 09 Wimbledon Final
- Thread starter Azzurri
- Start date
phoenicks
Professional
If you think a match filled with ace, unreturnable serve is a better quality match, sth like 09 final is better, then why ATP slowdown the surface and make the ball heavier around 10 years ago when matches are nothing but a serve fest. Surely, if serve fest is what spectators want, they wouldn't slow down the surface in the 1st place, no?
Any sane tennis fan will agree 08 final is way better, the drama, rain ndelay alone trumps 09 final.
Oh and just 1 more thing, If Nadal had disposed federer in straights, then We all can agree 09 final is wayyyy better, But still I will take Federer being dethroned over anything anytime!!!!
Any sane tennis fan will agree 08 final is way better, the drama, rain ndelay alone trumps 09 final.
Oh and just 1 more thing, If Nadal had disposed federer in straights, then We all can agree 09 final is wayyyy better, But still I will take Federer being dethroned over anything anytime!!!!
borg number one
Legend
The 2008 Wimbledon was voted "sporting moment of the decade"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/te...tory-voted-sporting-moment-of-the-decade.html
Rafael Nadal's 2008 Wimbledon victory voted sporting moment of the decade
Rafael's Nadal's epic victory over Roger Federer in the 2008 Wimbledon's men's final has been voted by www.telegraph.co.uk readers as the sporting moment of the decade.
By Mike Norrish
Published: 10:08AM GMT 31 Dec 2009
Much like the final itself, the readers' poll was a close-run thing. Taking 17 per cent of the votes, Nadal/Federer edged Liverpool's 'Miracle of Istanbul' (15 per cent) into second place, with Arsenal's 'Invincible' season of 2003-04 coming third with 13 per cent. England's Rugby World Cup victory in 2003 came fourth, with 11 per cent of the vote.
It is indicative of our enduring passion for Wimbledon that a match between a Swiss and a Spaniard could generate such excitement.
No British male has reached a Wimbledon final in the Open era, while Virginia Wade's 1977 success is the last time a home woman lifted the trophy. Yet for many people, Wimbledon fortnight remains the highlight of the sporting year.
Nadal's 6-4, 6-4, 6-7, 6-7, 9-7 victory in near darkness is generally regarded as the greatest tennis match ever played. And it was fitting John McEnroe should be commenting on the match.
McEnroe's defeat against Bjorn Borg in the 1980 men's final had been enshrined in the popular consciousness as the ultimate match. But McEnroe was happy to concede that the final of 2008 eclipsed even that spectacle. "This is the greatest match I've ever seen," said McEnroe.
Wimbledon will never experience a match quite like it again, not least because it was the last final to be played without a roof.
The match lasted more than seven hours due to rain breaks, and as the fifth set dragged on there were fears the pair would have to return on Monday morning. But at 9.16pm, when Federer hit a forehand into the net, his domination of the All England Club lawns, which had lasted for five summers, finally came to an end.
The British response was somehow fitting too. At 9.20pm, shortly after Nadal had lifted the trophy, the National Grid recorded a 1,400 megawatt spike. It was the equivalent to 550,000 kettles being boiled.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/te...tory-voted-sporting-moment-of-the-decade.html
Rafael Nadal's 2008 Wimbledon victory voted sporting moment of the decade
Rafael's Nadal's epic victory over Roger Federer in the 2008 Wimbledon's men's final has been voted by www.telegraph.co.uk readers as the sporting moment of the decade.
By Mike Norrish
Published: 10:08AM GMT 31 Dec 2009
Much like the final itself, the readers' poll was a close-run thing. Taking 17 per cent of the votes, Nadal/Federer edged Liverpool's 'Miracle of Istanbul' (15 per cent) into second place, with Arsenal's 'Invincible' season of 2003-04 coming third with 13 per cent. England's Rugby World Cup victory in 2003 came fourth, with 11 per cent of the vote.
It is indicative of our enduring passion for Wimbledon that a match between a Swiss and a Spaniard could generate such excitement.
No British male has reached a Wimbledon final in the Open era, while Virginia Wade's 1977 success is the last time a home woman lifted the trophy. Yet for many people, Wimbledon fortnight remains the highlight of the sporting year.
Nadal's 6-4, 6-4, 6-7, 6-7, 9-7 victory in near darkness is generally regarded as the greatest tennis match ever played. And it was fitting John McEnroe should be commenting on the match.
McEnroe's defeat against Bjorn Borg in the 1980 men's final had been enshrined in the popular consciousness as the ultimate match. But McEnroe was happy to concede that the final of 2008 eclipsed even that spectacle. "This is the greatest match I've ever seen," said McEnroe.
Wimbledon will never experience a match quite like it again, not least because it was the last final to be played without a roof.
The match lasted more than seven hours due to rain breaks, and as the fifth set dragged on there were fears the pair would have to return on Monday morning. But at 9.16pm, when Federer hit a forehand into the net, his domination of the All England Club lawns, which had lasted for five summers, finally came to an end.
The British response was somehow fitting too. At 9.20pm, shortly after Nadal had lifted the trophy, the National Grid recorded a 1,400 megawatt spike. It was the equivalent to 550,000 kettles being boiled.
Actually 30 years, but I agree with you...1980 borg/mac was one of the best if not the best final ever.
People can have their own opinions on what is "better".
AndyArodRoddick
Professional
Quality was better in 09 in my oppinion, but the drama and some crazy shots and even crazier MP saves gives my vote to 08.
mandy01
G.O.A.T.
Thats subjective.Plenty of people will remember the 09 final as well.If you wont then thats upto you.
Maybe people will remember 2008 for now, but in the next 20 yrs, many will remember 2009 since it will bring up more frequently due to Roger made history!
DavidGarcia
Hall of Fame
I think we have a clear winner here guys. Look at the poll.
08 all the way for me.
08 all the way for me.
What do you expect, the combined number of Rafa and Pete fans >>>>>> Fed fans.
jamesblakefan#1
G.O.A.T.
That's stupid logic.
I never expect the 2009 match get more votes than 2008, but the lopsided has alot to do with which fans are actually doing the voting.:roll:
Joseph L. Barrow
Professional
...Roddick had 15-40 on Federer's serve at 8-8 in the fifth set, meaning double break point to serve for the title, Roddick having not been broken in over 30 service games through this point in the match. Do you mean to tell me you were sitting there coolly certain that Roddick didn't have a chance? If Roddick had won any of his four set points in the second-set tiebreaker or two break points at 8-8 in the fifth, I would be willing to put down money he'd have won the match. He wound up failing to do so thanks to a combination of Federer's clutch serving, stick saves and his own nerviness (at least on 6-5 in the tiebreak), but he easily could have, given one small stroke of luck such as a timely gust of wind or a Federer shank; in fact, looking at the film, I think it's likely Federer's last shot at 6-5 Roddick in the second set tie-break was going out, and that if Roddick had simply let it go, he would have the Wimbledon trophy right now.
It can be further pointed out that the '09 Wimbledon final saw more winners and fewer unforced errors than '08, and I do think that this in part reflects on the quality of the performance- '09 had barely any substantial dips in level of play all the way through. There were a few bad individual games on one guy's part or the other's, but there were no significant valleys in the match wherein someone was significantly dropping in form for a substantial portion of a set.
You didn't get my point. I already said I expected 2008 would get more vote. However, the lopsided results has to do with which fans voted. Had every NEUTRAL fans voted instead, I bet the outcome would be different(but 2008 still get more votes).
I know, and there are some like you, but not all of them. It's just that there are posters who will vote for their favorite players on purpose.
World Beater
Hall of Fame
09 was epic. actually so was 08.
they were both crazy. but some will prefer rallies and others shootouts.
they were both crazy. but some will prefer rallies and others shootouts.
flyinghippos101
Legend
kOaMaster
Hall of Fame
depends what "better" means. the outcome in 2009 was better and I did not thought as much as 2008 about the UE's.
but for excitement and entertainment, the 2008 match tops everything I've seen in tennis (I wasn't around watching in the 80's). it was SO dramatical, so close, so hard on the edge and I don't know. just awesome! sometimes I even forget nadal won (and that's the best sign!)
but for excitement and entertainment, the 2008 match tops everything I've seen in tennis (I wasn't around watching in the 80's). it was SO dramatical, so close, so hard on the edge and I don't know. just awesome! sometimes I even forget nadal won (and that's the best sign!)
M
Morrissey
Guest
Subjective? Well I guess thinking that the Borg-McEnroe was one of the best, if not the best is subjective as well. You can disagree, that's your choice. But not many will agree with you.
M
Morrissey
Guest
Well then how come nobody really remembers the Sampras-Rafter 01 match? Rarely is it ever brought up. People know he made history, but people don't really care for that match. While the Fed-Roddick went further with 5 sets, it wasn't a drama filled high quality match. It was mainly aces, unreturnables and UE's. But I sense that Federer fans are looking at this match more fondly because he won the 2009 final, as opposed to the 2008 final which was a heartbreaking loss to his main rival. Obviously denial to my statment will be in large numbers in here, but it's the factor in their decision.
LiveForever
Banned
M
Morrissey
Guest
I agree, this place since 2004 has been the Federer Fanhouse. I can attest to that since my first day here in 2004 as a Nadal fan. I have been away for a while and coming back there's new faces and personalities, but TMF is one "interesting" character in here. I don't know if he says the things he says to get people to raise eyebrows or he truly believes his own words. Being that we're in the Fed Fanhouse I think the latter.
LiveForever
Banned
I am pretty sure its the latter. He is an overly passionate fan. But yeah from what I have seen on these boards, Federer is the clear favorite for people. You cant even say that Nadal owns Federer without getting lectured on the clay to other surfaces breakdown, Like I did a few weeks of ago.
Oh, and seeing your avatar. I have to ask you, can you recommend me some good 'The Smiths' albums? I wanna download some of their music. I have been seeing some youtube vids and they are just great!
Last edited:
Joseph L. Barrow
Professional
Even entirely excluding service statistics, both Federer and Roddick still registered close to twice as many winners as they did unforced errors in the '09 final. In fact, there were fewer unforced errors in the '09 final than in the '08 final, in spite of the fact that the '09 final involved substantially more points. Now, I won't deny that the rivalry factor and abundance of long, spectacular rallies are both quite real and both operate strongly in favor of the '08 final, but the claim that the '09 final "wasn't a drama filled high quality match" or consisted primarily of unforced errors aside from points won by serve is absurd.
M
Morrissey
Guest
One of the many reasons why I left, well after the USO its pointless to post here. But I do believe that posting too much in here affects your mindset outside of the forum, all this arguing and delusional behavior in here makes one question one's faith in humanity. LOL! (I'm speaking to YOU Drakulie!) In other words, do it in serious moderation. PS, I'm shocked at how many became GOAT status as posters. Before I left it was only Breakpoint, now it's like 5-6 more guys with even less time devoted to a life.
Hmm, my favorite is the first album, I play that on guitar alot. Louder Than Bombs is great too. Most critics point to 'The Queen Is Dead', hard to argue with them. So go for these 3, 'The Smiths', 'Louder Than Bombs' and 'The Queen Is Dead'. But to point out, they never made a bad or average album.
M
Morrissey
Guest
I'll tell you what's more absurd, saying that the 09 final was better than the 08 final.
BTW, I love how you ignore the rest of my post to highlight the little part to support your argument.
LiveForever
Banned
Thanks a lot, Morrissey. Your help is very appreciated. I am gonna start gathering those albums together.
Azzurri
Legend
you may not know this, but TMF began watching tennis 6 months ago. he admitted this in another thread then quickly edited it. he has no clue who rafter is and does not understand the concept you and some others have discusses. You are correct, no one remembers who Pete beat for his 13th title. They remember the MATCH itself. in 30 years, more will discuss the 08 match simply because it was awesome from both players. Roddick should have won 09. He clearly chocked. Fed served well and that is all. I can barely remember many shots. But you have to know, TMF never even watched the Nadal/Fed match live (maybe not even on DVD). He is clueless.
Azzurri
Legend
Live, this just shows you how clueless TMF is. This site has 10 times more Fed fans than nadal fans and Roddick is not even in the equation. He never saw the 08 match anyway.
Blinkism
Legend
Quoted for truth.
You are pathetic LIAR. Point me where I said exactly what you claimed? Don't pretend you had me on ignore list, prove to me or it will just make you look like a complete laughing stock.
Atleast I(and many others) were able to prove that you said "losing in the 3rd round at the slam is FAR worse than in the final".
Azzurri
Legend
yep. can't remmeber exact words but something like this "I just got into tennis..blah, blah.."
someone said something and he edited it. it was from maybe Sep..as you can plainly tell, he is uttelry, unfortunetly w/out clue.
Then go find out where I said it you shameless liar? If you knew I said it, then you wouldn't have any trouble finding it.
a) I play tennis, but never talk about equipment etc on here. Others could be the same.
b) Someone can have an opinion without playing a sport. I don't agree with TMF about this, but it's pretty rude to say someone has to play a sport to have an opinion on it.
Azzurri
Legend
a) not talking about YOU
b) he is a liar. he does not play tennis and he just started watching
(bolded)that depends on the poster.
M
Morrissey
Guest
Well that explains everything. I see. One of "those" guys.
M
Morrissey
Guest
Hehe, I love how you outed this person.
Turning Pro
Hall of Fame
roddick choked alright, 4 freakin consecutive bp's lol anyone else and he would have cleaned volley like henman and called it a day, gd old choke artists, mental midgets and *******s like haas, roddick, acasuso, berdych etc to assist him.
TheFifthSet
Legend
Well heck I'm sure those guys are happy to at least be in a POSITION to choke against Federer (ie have opportunities to win), unlike Hewitt who gets his ass kicked every time they meet.
britbox
Rookie
Nah, TMF has been posting on other boards for years - so he must have been watching tennis for longer. Whether he plays or not is his business.
As for the original question, the 08 was a classic >> 09.
Azzurri
Legend
what boards?
edit: I see you have no proof. what, another "tmf" is on another board...TMF on this board clearly stated he was NEW to tennis.
Last edited:
Joseph L. Barrow
Professional
The '09 final had more games, more winners, fewer unforced errors, greater historical significance, and, in spite of your characterization, a tremendously high consistent level of play. There isn't anything absurd about believing it to be better than any match.
The highlighted words, along with the statement that the '09 final was "not a high quality, drama-filled match"- which I also quoted and responded to, contrary to the above- were the only factual claims you made about the '09 final in your post. Before this, your words were, "Well then how come nobody really remembers the Sampras-Rafter 01 match? Rarely is it ever brought up. People know he made history, but people don't really care for that match. While the Fed-Roddick went further with 5 sets..." Hence, the "wasn't a high-quality, drama-filled match" part was the actual crux of your argument, and the supporting claim was that it had consisted primarily in unforced errors aside from points won with the serve. Accordingly, in highlighting, quoting and addressing these words, I was engaging the actual pivotal segment of your argument within this post. The "why don't people remember the 2001 final?" comparison is only valid if the argument that the '09 final lacked drama or quality and was error-filled is, and since it isn't, the Sampras-Rafter comparison is void.
You proceeded to close out your post with, "But I sense that Federer fans are looking at this match more fondly because he won the 2009 final, as opposed to the 2008 final which was a heartbreaking loss to his main rival. Obviously denial to my statment will be in large numbers in here, but it's the factor in their decision." This is pure ad hominem; it isn't an "argument" to address so much as an assertion. For the record, I am not much of a Federer fan, and was rooting strongly for both Nadal and Roddick in these two respective finals, each of which I found profoundly captivating and dramatic. I was much happier with the '08 final's outcome, but the outcome itself does not dictate the quality or greatness of a match.
If you simply go back and objectively review the film of each of these respective finals, I think you will see that there were far more patches of scratchy play from one player or the other in the '08 final than in the '09 edition. I don't deny that '08 had more in the way of long, spectacular rallies than '09 did, but if you don't think '09 was high-quality or drama-filled, it's hard to see what your conception of these things must be; the second-set tiebreaker, not dramatic?! The 30-game fifth set, the longest ever in a Grand Slam final , including the 8-8 15-40 game on Federer's serve, with history riding on the line, not dramatic?!?! 181 winners against 72 unforced errors; not high quality?! Even if we excluded the serve- which would be silly, since the serve is one of the most important aspects of tennis- that makes for a brilliant winners-to-errors ratio. For comparison, the '08 final included 149 winners and 79 errors- a higher error count over the course of a significantly smaller number of points.
Now, I acknowledge that statistics aren't everything, but surely they, along with the exceptionally dramatic and historic circumstances and events of the match, do put a lie to the claim that it is "absurd" to think the 2009 final was better than the previous year's.
TheMusicLover
G.O.A.T.
^^ Wow, someone around here actually knows his tennis. Great post, perfectly explaining why 'most dramatic' should not be mistaken for 'best tennis quality'.
Similar threads
- Poll
