Still the facts show he was only 2 sets away from winning the Grand Slam (and in the context of winning the 2008 US Open and the 2010 Australian Open - actually 2 sets away from a 6 slam win streak). I am not saying he was unlucky, I am just saying he was close. And that is a fact, he was just two sets away.
2009 Federer vs 2012/2014 Djokovic
- Thread starter vanioMan
- Start date
Still the facts show he was only 2 sets away from winning the Grand Slam (and in the context of winning the 2008 US Open and the 2010 Australian Open - actually 2 sets away from a 6 slam win streak). I am not saying he was unlucky, I am just saying he was close. And that is a fact, he was just two sets away.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
You don't know that for sure though timnz. Even if he'd won the USO in 09 it doesn't necessarily mean he would've still gone on to win the AO a few months later. I've said it before but tennis doesn't work that way. In fact no sport does.
2009 is the most emotional year for a Fed's fan like me. The heart breaking loss in AO finals followed by F-W double and the 5 set defeat in US Open final while I thought he would win. He broke Sampras's record, finally won FO after so many defeats, and can we forget the famous phrase I wanna talk, I talk, alright?
2009 is the most memorable year in this millennium for me.
Back to the topic: is it really a question? In both 2012 and 2014 Djokovic has many bad losses in slams. Typical Djokovic years.
2009 is the most memorable year in this millennium for me.
Back to the topic: is it really a question? In both 2012 and 2014 Djokovic has many bad losses in slams. Typical Djokovic years.
Yes, you are possibly right on the 6 slam streak. But it is an absolute fact that he was 2 sets away from a 5 slam streak (having already won the 2008 US Open).
That to me is a stronger argument (even if I am arguing for Federer - I agree that this argument has merit).
The people arguing for Djokovic,k yourself this, would you rather win two slams or one and a bunch of masters? Whether you like it or not, slams are what people remember.
Just listen to the intro at the WTF or slams. " The holder of 17 slams..." Never heard he's the holder of 27 masters or 23 masters or whatever.
Fact!
Just listen to the intro at the WTF or slams. " The holder of 17 slams..." Never heard he's the holder of 27 masters or 23 masters or whatever.
Fact!
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Personality trait.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
2009 Federer was a couple of points off a calendar year Slam. Nothing Djokovic has ever done compares to that scenario.
vanioMan
Legend
2009 was a GOAT year from a tennis point of view (aka not the guy you suppot, but the game itself). It was full of incredible Slam matches, including three great finals and lots of great encounters in the earlier stages.
- several 5-setters during the AO, including the Nadal - Verdasco and Nadal - Federer matches.
- Murray winning Rotterdam and Miami; also reaching the final in IW; the Nadal - Delpo match in Miami
- Nadal dominating the clay season, going toe to toe with Djokovic three times, including what is considered by many the greatest 3-set match ever.
- Federer ending Nadal's 32 (?) winning streak on clay and winning Madrid.
- RG - Soderling beating Nadal; Federer's matches against Haas and Delpo; the Soderling - Gonzalez semi.
- Wimbledon - Roddick coming as close as he ever has to winning the title; Federer doing the impossible and regaining the #1 ranking.
- The NA HC swing - some great matches in Canada - Tsonga taking out Federer; Delpo beating Nadal and Roddick before losing to Murray in the final; Federer winning Cincy in style.
- Delpo winning USO after beating Nadal and Federer back to back, whilst being 2 points away from defeat in the final.
- Davydenko doing a 2007 Nalbandian playing video-game tennis in Shanghai and WTF.
- A great WTF tournament with high-quality matches.
I think 2009 was also one of the more emotional years, if not the most emotional one in the past 10-15 years.
NatF
Bionic Poster
You summarized 2009 very well. I think 2009 was an incredible year for tennis. Lots of high quality matches from a strong top 10 and some really good stories. Probably the best year of tennis I remember. All of the slams had some epic matches in 2009 and it was one of the best WTF's. Plus some great masters encounters as well. Other great years IMO are 2005 and 2012.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
You do know that Djokovic would probably still have more points in those years even without winning a slam, right? Even if he loses the AO final in 2012 and the Wimb final in 2014 he still ends with more points.
What I am saying is that number of points isn't the best indicator.
Djokovic just played better outside the slams while Fed played better at the slams.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
2009 Federer.
Mind boggles!
vanioMan
Legend
I actually think when we take into consideration this:
Federer clearly edges it. By a mile. I mean, have you ever seen such elegant. graceful and classy pronunciation of the phrases:
- "Don't tell me to be quiet, okay?! When I wanna talk, I talk."
- "Stop showing me your hand, okay?!"
- "I don't give a sh*t what he said"
- "Don't f*cking tell me the rules!"
Pure class. Now compare it with this:
Nowhere close to IDontGiveASh*terer.
Federer clearly edges it. By a mile. I mean, have you ever seen such elegant. graceful and classy pronunciation of the phrases:
- "Don't tell me to be quiet, okay?! When I wanna talk, I talk."
- "Stop showing me your hand, okay?!"
- "I don't give a sh*t what he said"
- "Don't f*cking tell me the rules!"
Pure class. Now compare it with this:
Nowhere close to IDontGiveASh*terer.
rodrigo_palacio88
Rookie
what a troll!!
yes federer lost the mental edger in 2011.....because that he beated him in RG, was two match poins in the us open, beated him in wimbledon and took the n°1 of nole´s hands, bagel him in cincinatti and more.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
As others have said, I don't think there's much to talk about here. Djokovic did nowhere near well enough in the Masters and YEC in either year (and Federer won 2 Masters himself) to compensate for 2>1 in slams and all 4 four finals being made by Federer. I'd take a Slam runner up over a Masters win any day regardless. Berdych's most notable achievement for example is being Wimbledon runner up in 2010 even though he won the Paris Masters in 2005. Same with a guy like Soderling whose most notable achievement is making 2 slam finals even though he won the Paris Masters in 2010.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Sorry Steve but I'm a little confused. How did Djokovic not do enough at the YEC in either season when he won it both times?!
TheMusicLover
G.O.A.T.
Poster " billboard " reminds me of a certain MTF legend of a couple of years ago called heya.
Always posting incomprehensible mumbo-jumbo about Federer, and most notably, Roddick. Can't be a coincidence, unless heya has an identical twin brother.
Just appreciate it, or put it on ignore.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
The point remains. Overall, Djokovic didn't do anywhere near enough. This comparison is not even close, with no disrespect meant to the OP. Where does either one of Djokovic's years beat Federer's? 3>2 in Masters in 2012 (and 4>2 in 2014) and a win at the YEC in both years. If that's the best that Djokovic has in this comparison then that's just simply not good enough. And that's a fact, not an opinion. There's no way that beats 2 slams to 1 and making all 4 finals. If we take the 2012 season Djokovic is restricted to 3 Masters with better results in the slams, or if we take 2014 he has one more Masters with lesser slam results compared to 2012.
The 2014 QF in Australia and SF in NYC just kill this comparison considering Federer made finals in both events. And the 2012 one is better, but it's not enough. A Wimbledon SF doesn't do it. Essentially Federer's 2009 season and Djokovic's 2012 come down to whether you think the extra slam that Federer has beats out a YEC win and an extra Masters. And I'd say about 99% of people do. The 1% being reserved for crazy Djokovic fans.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
OK, you just scared me a little bit lol although you seem to think I was implying that Djokovic's seasons were better when I was merely asking you a simple question about the YEC. And be honest, it probably wouldn't have mattered if Novak's results in the slams had been slightly more impressive in 2012/14. So long as Federer had more slam wins you'd always argue that 2>1 which is fine btw.
Fed trolls must be desperate. Their idol was totally humiliated by Rafa, but Novak was the one who exhausted fedal year after year. Rafa had to recover in multiple vacations. Fed lost the Olympics on grass and was destroyed by Young Murray and seppi, but the trolls were sure of his warrior genius.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
OK, you just scared me a little bit lol although you seem to think I was implying that Djokovic's seasons were better when I was merely asking you a simple question about the YEC. And be honest, it probably wouldn't have mattered if Novak's results in the slams had been slightly more impressive in 2012/14. So long as Federer had more slam wins you'd always argue that 2>1 which is fine btw.
Yeah, I probably would argue for slams anyway. Especially in a seasonal context like this. Historical is a little different IMO, but in a seasonal context between 2 great players like this, usually slams trumps everything else.
mattosgrant
Banned
He was much closer to losing at the French and Wimbledon numerous times than he was to winning the Australian or U.S Open finals. He should have even lost to Berdych in the Australian Open 4th round when he was down 2 sets to 0 and Berdbrain choked, and Nadal came back from a 5 hour marathon and still controlled the majority of the final and was clearly the rightful winner despite it going to a 5th set. Seriously your premise is stupid in this thread. Federer himself would admit he was on the high side of luck in many different ways in 2009 slams than the low side. You are indeed a large Federer fan as you state yourself if you somehow cook up fantasies of the Grand Slam that got away that most viewed as a godsend for him at that point.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Is that why Federer won the majority of points in match and especially in the first 4?
mattosgrant
Banned
I am not someone who looks at points won after a match. I did learn Nadal won over 20 more points than Djokovic in the 2013 semis and that shocked me, as I ended the match feeling Nadal was lucky to win, especialy with the netchord thing. Frankly I didnt even care as IMO it didnt really demonstrate fully what went on having watched the match.
Federer with his serve probably has lots of easy service holds when he does hold. Nadal rarely does. So the points thing would be no surprise. All I know is after the 1st set I never once doubted Nadal would win the match, and I am not a fan of either player. He looked firmly in control to me, with Federer fighting to stay in the match, then going down easily in the 5th set, never leading in sets, hardly (or never that I recall) leading in breaks in any of the 3 sets he lost. Outplaying Federer from the baseline, and playing the big points better as usual when they meet.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
You could see the mental scars Federer obtained because of Nadal. Getting broken back immediately in the first set, missing dozens of BP in the 3rd set. Their 2012 match was similar. Both times Federer should have won the 3rd set in both matches and ended up losing it in a tiebreak. IMO Federer is afraid of Nadal and that's why he can't win the crucial 3rd set or the set that would give him a crucial lead. Their first 2 AO matches were close but Fed just doesn't believe he can beat Nadal and that's the difference between him and Djokovic. Federer can beat Nadal but doesn't believe it. Djokovic can beat Nadal and also believes it.
Leaving that aside, the USO 2009 final is the one that got away as he could have confortably obtained a 2-0 lead in sets and also had a 2-1 lead in sets. This is the one that Federer had no bussiness losing.
Novak wasted 6 set pts. and 4-2 at 2007 U.S. open. Fed knew he was in a lucky match there because he believed he was far better there.
He fumed as soon as he lost against the slightly injured Novak in 2011 U.S. open.
That was when French open losses didn't hurt so much.
Novak just didn't realize this fact until this Wimbledon.
He fumed as soon as he lost against the slightly injured Novak in 2011 U.S. open.
That was when French open losses didn't hurt so much.
Novak just didn't realize this fact until this Wimbledon.
mattosgrant
Banned
I agree he should have won the U.S Open final probably. However he didnt, and I disagree that he should have won the Australian Open final all things considered (and it seems you get that too). If one says he should have won the U.S Open final, one can say he should have lost the Wimbledon final to Roddick, and he should have lost at Roland Garros to both Haas and Del Potro, and he should have lost at the Australian Open long before the final to Berdych. Ultimately none of that matters, the person who in a way should have won all those matches couldnt seal the deal so they lost, and ultimately the player who shouldnt have won really should have simply because they did win.
Federer escaped defeat many more times than he escaped victory in slams that year. That isnt even to mention the gift from the heavens sent by Soderling at Roland Garros, along with Nadal's shocking second half decline for whatever reason (knee injury, loss of confidence from RG, whatever). His year in the end was a dream for him, and should be for any of his rational fans, not inventing a fantasy of a Grand Slam, or that it ought to have been something even better.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
True, but Fed could also have won all 4 - he really should have won the AO final in 4 and had he not decided to go toe to toe with Delpo from the baseline, he should/could/would have won that too.
OT, "I think Federer's biggest argument over Djokovic could be making 4 GS finals and winning the Channel Slam (very impressive), but Nole was more consistent all year round in 2012/2014, especially during the Masters events".
This is spot on. Fed was (quite a bit) better during the slams, whereas Djoko was (quite a bit) better during the regular season and at the WTF.
The WTF makes it close, but it's hard to compete with 2 slams and 4 slam finals for any 1 slam year. So Fed for me.
mattosgrant
Banned
I saw the 2009 Australian Open final and I personally fail to see why why he should have won that in 4. What I would say is Berdych should have his round of 16 encounter with Federer in 3 though.
I agree on the U.S Open final. He did really blow that one kind of, which was amazing after all his narrow escapes at the French and Wimbledon, and the confidence and momentum he had. However seeing how things have turned out for poor Del Potro, I am glad it worked out exactly as it did.
I agree on the U.S Open final. He did really blow that one kind of, which was amazing after all his narrow escapes at the French and Wimbledon, and the confidence and momentum he had. However seeing how things have turned out for poor Del Potro, I am glad it worked out exactly as it did.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Hey for me as a Fed fan that loss doesn't hurt me anymore. Federer did beat Delpo when it really mattered in 2009: the FO.
mattosgrant
Banned
I agree. I mean when you look at both matches, the loser probably should have even won in straight sets. However the way it turned out was more fitting for both anyway, so it is good.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Almost. It's a fact that he was a set away from winning each, but if he wins the AO 2009, there's no saying what that does to his FO and Wimbledon let alone US Open 2009.
But yeah, as I said, both very winnable matches that he f****d up to some degree.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
Me too on the latter and I didn't mind too much at the time either given Delpo's one of my other favorites.
I just think Fed was clearly the better player in the first 4 sets at the AO (despite losing two of them 6-3). He won more points in the match despite the fifth set, more points on return and, iirc, had won close to 15 more points after the first 4 sets.
Btw, can you please quote, when you respond? I've noticed you often just reply to me (and others') without quoting, which makes it easy to overlook if I'm not in the thread.
mattosgrant
Banned
I often dont q
mattosgrant
Banned
I often dont quote since I am right below, but then sometimes another message comes while I am typing it. I will try to quote in the future.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
cheers, you're great at responding in general, but a lot of people aren't and if I'm typing in many threads it's easy to overlook your responses if I don't get alerts.
Similar threads
