“Wish I’d be Federer, I could make an ace at 40/15” – Fonseca wants to change Wimbledon 2019 champion

[gamelovergold]

It is a testament to Fed's greatness then, that he was a part of one of the most iconic moments of the Open Era (as you put it) at the age of 38.

At the same age, your boy got dumped by Zverev in straights, in his house. And that's despite him opportunistically preserving himself for clay his whole career by taking annual breaks.

Sure enough a great point. Roger at 38 played Novak in finals and was one point away to win it and nadal lost in FO despite preserving himself for clay . Novak still looks like he can win 1 more and still fully fit.

 

[zagor]

Fact Check: Federer was 37 in the 2019 Wimbledon final.

Semantics old chap. It's the season in which he turned 38, which means it corresponds to the 2024 season for your idol.

So my comparison still stands.

 

[Spencer Gore]

Semantics old chap. It's the season in which he turned 38, which means it corresponds to the 2024 season for your idol.

So my comparison still stands.

Not semantics. He was 37, no matter which way you phrase it.

 

[zagor]

Not semantics. He was 37, no matter which way you phrase it.

Nah, my initial point stands irregardless of Fed being a month or two shy from his 38th birthday.

You just don't like the parallel I made.

Pushing a 6 year old younger ATG to a 5 set thriller is a much better look than getting dumped out by an era filler like Zed in straights.

 

[Passingshot78]

Funny i Just watched Fonseca serving for a match and having to matchpoints against Mensik...

...well they needed a tiebreak to decide this one

 

[Mainad]

An ace would have indeed sealed the deal but a well-placed serve may have got the same result.

 

[messiahrobins]

5 years past prime? so six years before when he lost to Buster Douglas he was in his prime? Same Douglas who was KOed by Holyfield half year later?

Both of them were past prime Holifield 4 year older and after ringwars against Bowe Mercer nad Moorer. Tyson after jailtime break. Its the same excuse Pasquiao fans uses against Floyd

What means nothing is opinions and excuses cos at the end of the day what really matter is what happend inside ring.

Tyson was never the same post 1989. Tyson's peak was mid 80s.

 

[Sudacafan]

After Fed squandered his damned 40/15, I find it harder to convert my own 40/15 chances.
That is so serious that whenever I'm serving at 30/15, I'd do something silly to lose the next point.

 

[Passingshot78]

Tyson was washed up when they fought. Their fights meant nothing. Tyson was 5 years past prime

Their fights was 1996 1997

Tyson was never the same post 1989. Tyson's peak was mid 80s.

I think You have to decide Maybe it was 1984 Golden Gloves ?

 

[FlyingSaucer]

After Fed squandered his damned 40/15, I find it harder to convert my own 40/15 chances.
That is so serious that whenever I'm serving at 30/15, I'd do something silly to lose the next point.

 

[aldeayeah]

After Fed squandered his damned 40/15, I find it harder to convert my own 40/15 chances.
That is so serious that whenever I'm serving at 30/15, I'd do something silly to lose the next point.

Sanest Fed fan.

 

[Kiam]

The legacy of that match is only going to grow larger with time. The greatest Wimbledon champion of all time, with 2 CP on his own serve, serving for another Wimbledon title....and on the other side of the net, was the ONLY guy who could have done what he did. Insane.

Especially after he did exactly the same thing twice before....in the. 2010 US Open semifinal ,on his own serve, down 15-40, and the following year, US Open semifinal, on Roger's serve. When it got to 40-15 Roger in 2019, they cut to Mirka, and you could see she was petrified that it might happen again, so she started praying....but it DID happen again....on Roger's serve, on grass, with THE SUN IN NOVAK's EYES! I used to teach math. The odds against Novak winning all three of those matches is literally in the millions to one.....

 

[anarosevoli]

“I’ve not met Roger yet, but he’s my idol in tennis...."

but I've met Novak

 

[Hitman]

but I've met Novak

I guess so.

 

[Hitman]

Especially after he did exactly the same thing twice before....in the. 2010 US Open semifinal ,on his own serve, down 15-40, and the following year, US Open semifinal, on Roger's serve. When it got to 40-15 Roger in 2019, they cut to Mirka, and you could see she was petrified that it might happen again, so she started praying....but it DID happen again....on Roger's serve, on grass, with THE SUN IN NOVAK's EYES! I used to teach math. The odds against Novak winning all three of those matches is literally in the millions to one.....

The odds of it even happening are very low, then the odds of Djokovic winning all three are even lower. Its freakish, almost cartoonish what happened.

 

[GoatNo1]

I wonder why not one straight into the body?

it was, 2nd one in 2011 SF. nole returned with his BH. 1st one in W F was to noles BH but it was net serv. 2nd serv was on FH.

 

[GoatNo1]

Well, if Federer had won that MP against Anderson the year before, you wouldn't have to worry about any changes in the rules. Federer not winning that point hurt him quite badly.

it is quite interesting that fed use to lose his slams matches with wasted MPs in pairs. first wa at AO, 02 ond 05, then at USO 10 and 11 and at the end at W 18 and 19.

 

[GoatNo1]

Court > Graf, Navratilova, Serena, Chris Evert

you are absolutely right! slams are not, and can not be, everything in tennis. everything counts. slams are just T1 criteria together with YE#1 and weeks at #1. but WTFs, masters, OG, all titles, CGSs, CGMs, max points, W%, h2h, owning all 4 slams at once, everything counts and it does not see good for fed or any other player compare with no1e!!!

 

[GoatNo1]

Just like 8>7.

and 3-1, 3-0 in Fs

AND 8-7 is asterisked due to W20 cancelation

 

[Hitman]

it is quite interesting that fed use to lose his slams matches with wasted MPs in pairs. first wa at AO, 02 ond 05, then at USO 10 and 11 and at the end at W 18 and 19.

Overall Federer has lost 24 matches where had at least one MP. That's crazy.

 

[GoatNo1]

Especially after he did exactly the same thing twice before....in the. 2010 US Open semifinal ,on his own serve, down 15-40, and the following year, US Open semifinal, on Roger's serve. When it got to 40-15 Roger in 2019, they cut to Mirka, and you could see she was petrified that it might happen again, so she started praying....but it DID happen again....on Roger's serve, on grass, with THE SUN IN NOVAK's EYES! I used to teach math. The odds against Novak winning all three of those matches is literally in the millions to one.....

evolution of mirka and 40-15

 

[GoatNo1]

Overall Federer has lost 24 matches where had at least one MP. That's crazy.

i know. some says 24 some 25. but he also won 22 being MP down. no one comes close to nole who is 17-4 (rafa 17-9 and muzza is on 16-8 which is next best after no1e)

 

[Hitman]

i know. some says 24 some 25. but he also won 22 being MP down. no one comes close to nole who is 17-4 (rafa 17-9 and muzza is on 16-8 which is next best after no1e)

Yes, swings and roundabouts.

 

[mike danny]

Especially after he did exactly the same thing twice before....in the. 2010 US Open semifinal ,on his own serve, down 15-40, and the following year, US Open semifinal, on Roger's serve. When it got to 40-15 Roger in 2019, they cut to Mirka, and you could see she was petrified that it might happen again, so she started praying....but it DID happen again....on Roger's serve, on grass, with THE SUN IN NOVAK's EYES! I used to teach math. The odds against Novak winning all three of those matches is literally in the millions to one.....

Are we going to just ignore that Federer messed up the tiebreaks in non-Federer fashion? That was a far bigger blunder than 40-15.

 

[mike danny]

Overall Federer has lost 24 matches where had at least one MP. That's crazy.

There’s 2 ways to look at this though: sure it looks bad, but is is better to lose in easier fashion otherwise?

 

[GoatNo1]

Are we going to just ignore that Federer messed up the tiebreaks in non-Federer fashion? That was a far bigger blunder than 40-15.

i don't think so. nole is pretty good in TB him self and i those particularly 3 he did not committed single UE! nole leads 16-12 in TB vs fed. and he won all decisions TBs and is 4-0 deciding TBs. so to win all 3 so important TBs there he makes no UE is not so strange.

 

[Enceladus]

Court > Graf, Navratilova, Serena, Chris Evert

Wrong. Part of Court's titles are from the amateur era, so they are of inferior value. That's why Court ranks behind Graf, Navratilova, and S. Williams in the female GOAT rankings.

 

[GoatNo1]

There’s 2 ways to look at this though: sure it looks bad, but is is better to lose in easier fashion otherwise?

no, it shows that he is not as clutch in very tight 50-50 matches. it shows that it is 50-50 for him but not for nole. he lost more matches with MP up than rest of the big4 together!

 

[GoatNo1]

Wrong. Part of Court's titles are from the amateur era, so they are of inferior value. That's why Court ranks behind Graf, Navratilova, and S. Williams in the female GOAT rankings.

yes BUT slams are not the only thing that matter in tennis anyway.

 

[mike danny]

i don't think so. nole is pretty good in TB him self and i those particularly 3 he did not committed single UE! nole leads 16-12 in TB vs fed. and he won all decisions TBs and is 4-0 deciding TBs. so to win all 3 so important TBs there he makes no UE is not so strange.

Nah, Fed was 8-4 in slam tiebreaks before that match. Not committing a single UE means Fed messed up more himself.

 

[mike danny]

no, it shows that he is not as clutch in very tight 50-50 matches. it shows that it is 50-50 for him but not for nole. he lost more matches with MP up than rest of the big4 together!

Which also means that the other Big 4 didn't even get that far and lost in easier fashion. Don't see how that's better.

And why do only 50/50 matches count?

 

[vokazu]

I'm afraid Fonseca would've been gassed out before the 5th set and could not hit any ace at all in the 5th set. 6-0 Game, set and match Djokovic.

 

[Hitman]

There’s 2 ways to look at this though: sure it looks bad, but is is better to lose in easier fashion otherwise?

Sure it is not better. What hurts him more, losing a match like RG 2008 or W 2019, when just looking solely at the result?

 

[mike danny]

Sure it is not better. What hurts him more, losing a match like RG 2008 or W 2019, when just looking solely at the result?

Both hurt in different ways. The former started his mental block vs Nadal.

 

[Hitman]

Both hurt in different ways. The former started his mental block vs Nadal.

But which one lingers more? The one you had no chance in, or the one that you had on your racket?

 

[mike danny]

But which one lingers more? The one you had no chance in, or the one that you had on your racket

Again, both stung for different reasons. The former even costed Fed the Wimb title.

And Djokovic cried after losing to Stan in 4 in the FO F

 

[GoatNo1]

Which also means that the other Big 4 didn't even get that far and lost in easier fashion. Don't see how that's better.

And why do only 50/50 matches count?

no necessarily. nole won more (big titles, top10 and 105 matches, vs rafa and in their h2h) and lost less than fed. fed even won more matches saving MPs so it is not that he wins his matches easy way. he was involved in 46 matches there both players had MPs and nole in 21. it is in 50-50 matches that requires more mental stability to prevail. you not need mental toughness when you are winning easily. it is 50-50 matches that show clutchness.

 

[Hitman]

Again, both stung for different reasons. The former even costed Fed the Wimb title.

And Djokovic cried after losing to Stan in 4 in the FO F

Not saying only one type will sting, but what makes the mind linger more.....one where you had realistically no chance, or the one where you could taste the win and were on the cusp of a historic win?

 

[mike danny]

no necessarily. nole won more (big titles, top10 and 105 matches, vs rafa and in their h2h) and lost less than fed. fed even won more matches saving MPs so it is not that he wins his matches easy way. he was involved in 46 matches there both players had MPs and nole in 21. it is in 50-50 matches that requires more mental stability to prevail. you not need mental toughness when you are winning easily. it is 50-50 matches that show clutchness.

But you don’t need mental toughness to claw your way back when you’re getting outplayed? Nole has lost something like 10 slam finals in 3 or 4 sets, which is not in any way better

 

[mike danny]

Not saying only one type will sting, but what makes the mind linger more.....one where you had realistically no chance, or the one where you could taste the win and were on the cusp of a historic win?

At 38 you are not going to linger for too long. Many others wouldn’t have even got that close.

Nole lost his chance vs Alcaraz in the 2nd set in 2023

 

[Hitman]

At 38 you are not going to linger for too long. Many others wouldn’t have even got that close.

Nole lost his chance vs Alcaraz in the 2nd set in 2023

The match will always linger, and it will also linger in the minds of those who watched it.

Nole lost his chance against Alcaraz, yes, but he still has the cushion of knowing he retires with all the records.

 

[mike danny]

The match will always linger, and it will also linger in the minds of those who watched it.

Nole lost his chance against Alcaraz, yes, but he still has the cushion of knowing he retires with all the records.

Fed would not have retired with the records anyway in that case

 

[mike danny]

The match will always linger, and it will also linger in the minds of those who watched it.

Nole lost his chance against Alcaraz, yes, but he still has the cushion of knowing he retires with all the records.

And yes, Fed did mess up. But I’m tired of people using that match as something that defines Fed’s career. Like losing a slam final at 38 in any way defines you. Considering you’re not even supposed to get that close to begin with

 

[Hitman]

Fed would not have retired with the records anyway in that case

At least he would have that win.

 

[mike danny]

At least he would have that win.

Still he has the Nadal win.

 

[anarosevoli]

Wrong. Part of Court's titles are from the amateur era, so they are of inferior value. That's why Court ranks behind Graf, Navratilova, and S. Williams in the female GOAT rankings.

And she has only 3 Wimbledons, which was undoubtedly considered worth much more than the other slams at her time. I'm sure even BJK was considered greater than Court by 70s standards.

 

[Hitman]

And yes, Fed did mess up. But I’m tired of people using that match as something that defines Fed’s career. Like losing a slam final at 38 in any way defines you. Considering you’re not even supposed to get that close to begin with

I get where you are coming from. But what happened was freakish and no, his age didn't all of a sudden become a factor when he was holding two CP on his serve. He basically blinked in that moment.

Federer's legacy is that he is the GOAT of Wimbledon and the grass GOAT, that match only adds to it. But historically that match is going to be talked about because of the extraordinary circumstances of what took place. The odds of it happening were crazy, yet it did.

 

[Hitman]

Still he has the Nadal win.

Of course, the one thing Federer did to enhance his legacy is, he solved the Nadal problem outside of clay, getting payback for AO and W.

 

[GrassMasters]

Federer is a choking mug. I'm surprised he even won 1 slam.

 

[GoatNo1]

But you don’t need mental toughness to claw your way back when you’re getting outplayed? Nole has lost something like 10 slam finals in 3 or 4 sets, which is not in any way better

of course you need. nole won 7 times vs fed after losing first set (4 at masters and 3 at slams, once after 0-2). fed won vs nole after losing 1st set only once (MM SF).