2015 Wimbledon Final - [1] Novak Djokovic vs. [2] Roger Federer

Who wins Wimbledon?


  • Total voters
    216
  • Poll closed .

Rosstour

G.O.A.T.
I think right now even if Nadal was mentally at his strongest, he'd just be incapable of winning a Slam. He isn't physically ready. To me it's that simple. Now unfortunately, that also impacts the rest of his game and so it means he has many things to fix right now, but perhaps just being physically ready will put everything else in its place in double-quick time. On the other hand, the damage that has filtered down to his psyche might be unrecoverable even if he finds his fitness. Hard to say.

I agree, but I am offering (and endorsing) the premise that he cannot recover his peak physical form/fitness due to age.

Knowing that he can't do that will continuously bring his mentality down. Rafa's game was always about outlasting, and now he can't do that. As he ages, he will need to keep points shorter, which isn't exactly helping Fed hang with the younger, fitter top dog.

I see Nadal's situation a lot like Roddick's. Even when Roddick was in his mid 20s, a lot of observers were concerned that his body would break down early because of the wrenching style and his appetite for anti-inflammatories. And obviously that's what happened. I think it's happening to Rafa too.
 
N

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
@Rosstour

I think you're probably right. The only difference is Nadal had such extreme superiority at RG that I can't rule out just one more run there.
 

AngryBirds

Semi-Pro
Federer did the best he could given his age and physical deteriorations. It was obvious that he wasn't able to physically keep up with prime Djokovic in the 3rd and 4th set. Federer in 2006-2007 would have beaten Djokovic yesterday.
 
I watched the match but completely agree with you. This was none exciting match from the start. Murray or Stan would be match interesting final opponents for Djoko. Fed played really well last year and still lost. I wonder what makes Fed fans more hopeful for this year final when Novak overall results is nearly as good 2011 if not better.

I think it's because this year's Djokovic, while winning, doesn't have that dominant aura he had in 2011 where you knew he'd win regardless of how well his opponent played, the matchup, etc. This year, the right guys can push him to the limit simply by playing well, not dominant, and Djokovic needs to push out all stops to squeak by wins. I don't take his record this year as some sort of factor to him being anywhere near as good as 2011.
 

GabeT

G.O.A.T.
Federer did the best he could given his age and physical deteriorations. It was obvious that he wasn't able to physically keep up with prime Djokovic in the 3rd and 4th set. Federer in 2006-2007 would have beaten Djokovic yesterday.

Maybe, maybe not. Who knows? We don't have a time machine. All we know is that Nole beat Federer yesterday.
 

Soul_Evisceration

Hall of Fame
you are the one to speak of fails.....



who's the idiot really?

You're still the idiot since you don't know what you're talking about, you don't know the basics of tennis and you just make bogus claims about the dumbest things. Just because you made one good prediction, it doesn't mean I'll look at you differently. You're still useless IMO.
 
My thoughts about the final: Underwhelming, really. Fed dropped his level quite a bit in the final, both on his service and on returns. Groundstrokes went missing also. Congrats to Djokovic, but I find him as boring as a robot designed by a Czech librarian with Aspergers in his free time.
 

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
The is true, but you can argue Djokovic cost Nadal RG 15 also. We don't know for sure what would have happened if Nadal had managed to get past Djokovic. We know how lethal he is in the business end of RG.
That's seriously stretching it given the form Rafa showed in the RG, especially vs. Novak, and given how Murray and Stanimal competed vs Djoko.
At most Novak took 3 slams away from Rafa and one of them, US Open 2011, you could make the argument for Fed (I personally favor Rafa in a US Open 2010 final, but give the small edge to Fed in a hypothetical 2011 encounter) and in another, AO 2012, you could make an argument for Murray who played Djoko just as close and has beaten Rafa at the AO (and the US for that matter).

With Fed, Novak did take Wimbledon 2015 (Gasquet, no argument I presume), W 2014 (Dimi, agree I presume?), AO 2008 and 2011 (Tsonga, first time slam finalist, but Fed played Novak close in the semi and I think his experience, despite being ill, would have been enough. 2011 vs. Murray I have close to no doubt given how their slam encounters unfolded those years and apparently still do).
And then there's the questionable US Open 2011.

In total:
Rafa lost 2-3 due to Novak (0,5 + 0,5 = 1 for US Open 2011 and AO 2012)
Fed lost 4-5 due to Novak (0,5 + 0,5 = 1 for AO 2008 and US Open 2011).

Lets just agree to disagree again. Nadal stunk up the joint in 2014 also, and still walked away the RG champion. He is undefeated when he makes the title match, so I won't right him off, if he had got past Novak. If he got past him, he would have been a massive favorite in the eyes of quite a few people. So lets just agree to disagree. :)
But that's a very hypothetical if. He wasn't even close to matching Novak's level. Had he beaten him, he would have been a definite favorite, but it would also have meant he had played on a level far far above anything he displayed at that tournament. So imo, you can't quite phrase it that way as that's assuming Rafa played as he can at his very best, which he was far away from
Yeah but the losses Nadal had were at his peak/prime, thus more detrimental especially after the fantastic 2010 that he had. Nadal could have won four slams in a row and would have overtaken Federer in GS count. While Federer was post prime for most of his losses against Novak, even in 08 he was sick during AO. Novak was expected to win most of those matches.
He did possibly prevent a Rafa slam though it's not clear cut because of Muzz, see above, but he took more from Fed nevertheless.
 
Last edited:
Nadal was never winning RG 2015. The poster who stated that is nuts. Murray and Wawrinka both pounded the stuffing out of him already that year, and either would have done so again (let alone beating both), as his form at RG was absolutely no better than the rest of the clay season. The only person who made the quarters he would have beaten is probably Federer of course.
 

tlm

G.O.A.T.
He had a chance. Not a great chance, but he had a chance. I've been in sport a long time now and believe me when I tell you I've seen bigger 'upsets' than Federer beating Djokovic. To say he had no chance at all is just plain ignorant.


If you want to see plain ignorant just look at the poll above on this match. It's like 156 for fed and 60 for joker, now that would classify as plain ignorant.

It just proves how much dreaming and the amount of posters here who live in fantasyland. The best part is how I am accused of not knowing much about tennis and blah blah and this is coming from the same guys that had fed in 4. LOL
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Novak has really become the man to beat on grass since Becker came into the picture. Way to erase the frustrating RG loss. I didn't think he could rebound so fast, on the other hand, it was obvious he was having another 2011 since the start of 2015, which made it extremely likely he would score another multiple slam season. Very happy for him, he's almost guaranteed to hit the double digits in slam titles now, which should put a conclusive end to some haters trying to pass him as a second class or second tier player on the sole basis of # of slams won.
This was Novak's 8th final of the season out of 9 events played!! and the only event where he didn't reach the final was the least important (a 250: Doha) and incredibly it was also his 8th final in a row, all tier 1 events except for Dubai. It was his 6th final won (his 2 losses were at Dubai and RG).
 

Djokovic2011

Bionic Poster
Novak has really become the man to beat on grass since Becker came into the picture. Way to erase the frustrating RG loss. I didn't think he could rebound so fast, on the other hand, it was obvious he was having another 2011 since the start of 2015, which made it extremely likely he would score another multiple slam season. Very happy for him, he's almost guaranteed to hit the double digits in slam titles now, which should put a conclusive end to some haters trying to pass him as a second class or second tier player on the sole basis of # of slams won.
This was Novak's 8th final of the season out of 9 events played!! and the only event where he didn't reach the final was the least important (a 250: Doha) and incredibly it was also his 8th final in a row, all tier 1 events except for Dubai. It was his 6th final won (his 2 losses were at Dubai and RG).
I was wondering why you hadn't posted yet vero! How amazing is it, 3 times Wimbledon champion? I still don't think it's sunk in properly lol. And already on 6 tier 1 tournaments won with 6 more remaining! :)
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
I was wondering why you hadn't posted yet vero! How amazing is it, 3 times Wimbledon champion? I still don't think it's sunk in properly lol. And already on 6 tier 1 tournaments won with 6 more remaining! :)
I was on vacation! But I taped the final of course. 9th slam title, what a treat!
 

racquetreligion

Hall of Fame
34 yo man is no2 in the world who gets gassed when 4th ranked 30 yo Stanimal wouldnt just shows how strong this generation is for Nole.
Nole has put up with Fed and Rafa just long enough to have virtually no competition except Stanimal.

If Federer was truly fit then he should think and believe he has a chance at another slam and yes there are plenty of long distance athletes which are better after 34. However there is not reason atm for him to want to be more than no2 or win another Slam unless he also gets lucky in more than the draw.

Mauresmo got her first slam from an injured Henin, buts thats one in a zillion
 
D

Deleted member 688153

Guest
If Nadal is playing like his actual self again, he'll beat Novak at the FO. The problem is will he be able to not mug up next clay season for the 3rd year straight?
That's the question indeed.
Even Rafa has to be playing well to win there.
 

Rosstour

G.O.A.T.
@Rosstour

I think you're probably right. The only difference is Nadal had such extreme superiority at RG that I can't rule out just one more run there.

Same here. I don't think he is necessarily done winning slams, but he's absolutely done being a threat to win every Slam he enters. Once the aura of invincibility is gone, it doesn't come back.

To win another FO he will need the draw to break just right, a la Fed at Wimby '12. I don't think he can get through Nole anymore, and Murray and Stan are debatable. He'd probably still beat Fed at RG, but I think he'd need to play someone like Ferrer in the Final to claim another cup d'mosquitoes.

If Nadal is playing like his actual self again, he'll beat Novak at the FO.

I don't think he can do this. Not anymore.
 
34 yo man is no2 in the world who gets gassed when 4th ranked 30 yo Stanimal wouldnt just shows how strong this generation is for Nole.
Nole has put up with Fed and Rafa just long enough to have virtually no competition except Stanimal.

What is the excuse for Nole winning 2008 AO? What about his entire run in 2011? Face it, Nole belongs up there with them. His 2011 is up there with all-time greats. The only problem is, Nole beats a 34-year old Federer for the 2015 Wimbledon while Federer beats a 35-year old Agassi for the 2005 US Open. Djokovic beats Tsonga (highest singles rating of #5 in world) for his first grand slam, Federer beats Philippoussis (highest singles rating of #8 in world) for his first grand slam. Neither guy will (or has in Phillippoussis case) win a GS in their career. Federer clinches his 2009 FO by having Soderling take out the guy Federer stands no chance at beating, Djokovic takes out that same guy in 2015 FO but runs out of gas doing so. Federer has won 4 grand slams where finalists have had zero grand slams themselves (Phillippoussis, Gonzalez, Baghdatis, and Söderling). All of Djokovic's finals, except his very first, came against one of the Big Four (or the Dark Knight Wawrinka who now has 2 GS).

I mean, this is a pretty scary 'finalists' opponent table is it not?

NrGHH9K.png
 

Start da Game

Hall of Fame
You're still the idiot since you don't know what you're talking about, you don't know the basics of tennis and you just make bogus claims about the dumbest things. Just because you made one good prediction, it doesn't mean I'll look at you differently. You're still useless IMO.

says a proven idiot.....
 
D

Deleted member 688153

Guest
To win another FO he will need the draw to break just right, a la Fed at Wimby '12.
The draw wasn't really that great for Federer at Wimbledon 2012.
He had to play Djokovic in the SF, and then Murray (the worst opponent from the other half) in the final.
He also had some tricky earlier round opponents for him (Benneteau, Malisse), but did get a break with Youhzny in the QF I suppose.
I stand by what I sometimes say, that if a player is in a slam-winning mood, the draw doesn't matter much, and a player who isn't feeling it will not be helped by anything bar the muggiest of draws.
At Fed's age, probably stops applying though.
 

joekapa

Legend
Federer did the best he could given his age and physical deteriorations. It was obvious that he wasn't able to physically keep up with prime Djokovic in the 3rd and 4th set. Federer in 2006-2007 would have beaten Djokovic yesterday.
Don't be too sure my friend. Federer's weaknes as a player started to show in 2009, when Nadal (untilthen a clay court specialist), Djokovic, and Murray started to gain the better of him. By 2011 it was all over for him against these players. They had his number. Federer then was 28, and at his peak. But the cracks in his game were showing.

There is absolutey no doubt that if Federer was in the same age group as Murray, Djokovic and Nadal, he would NEVER of amassed so many titles. It is wishfull think to think otherwise. Nadal, Djokovic, AND Murray simply changed the game altogether, which. They made it more physically demanding and powerful. Which Federer could not cope with. Understandably.
 

fednad

Hall of Fame
Don't be too sure my friend. Federer's weaknes as a player started to show in 2009, when Nadal (untilthen a clay court specialist), Djokovic, and Murray started to gain the better of him. By 2011 it was all over for him against these players. They had his number. Federer then was 28, and at his peak. But the cracks in his game were showing.

There is absolutey no doubt that if Federer was in the same age group as Murray, Djokovic and Nadal, he would NEVER of amassed so many titles. It is wishfull think to think otherwise. Nadal, Djokovic, AND Murray simply changed the game altogether, which. They made it more physically demanding and powerful. Which Federer could not cope with. Understandably.

Bold part - post and poster lose credibility the moment they write something like this.
So, Nadal had his peak last year. Great !
Novak has his peak right now. So in a year or so if he slips and get few beatings, I would say he did not go down from his peak. He just sky-dived in a year.
 

joekapa

Legend
Bold part - post and poster lose credibility the moment they write something like this.
So, Nadal had his peak last year. Great !
Novak has his peak right now. So in a year or so if he slips and get few beatings, I would say he did not go down from his peak. He just sky-dived in a year.


You see, it is always an excuse with Federer fans. I repeat, I idolize NO tennis players like you guys do. Except for my childhood idols of Lendl, Becker, and later Sampras. I stopped idolizing when I grew up.

Please, don't sit here and tell me about tennis. It was evident from Nadal, and later Djokovic and Murray, that Federer had it easy in his first few years as a player. Way to easy.
 

fednad

Hall of Fame
You see, it is always an excuse with Federer fans. I repeat, I idolize NO tennis players like you guys do. Except for my childhood idols of Lendl, Becker, and later Sampras. I stopped idolizing when I grew up.

Please, don't sit here and tell me about tennis. It was evident from Nadal, and later Djokovic and Murray, that Federer had it easy in his first few years as a player. Way to easy.

If you come on a tennis board, you will be told about tennis. I will continue to tell you.
And, it really does not matter to me if you idolize anyone or not.

It was not about Federer, it was about lack of commonsense in the post.
A guy (Roger in this case) becomes number 1 at 23 and stays there for 4-5 years to lost it at 27-28. And, next we know, a guy behind the keyboard on some tennis forum, 7-8 years after that phase comes and claim that 28 was at his peak. This is always the excuse used by Joker-****s, Kneedalito-****s and Samras-****s to lower Roger's achievements - is that a good enough logic ?

Now, I will point out something to you. Do you think this is Novak's peak? Mind you, he is 28, right.
Result wise, this year may prove to be his peak. Play leavel wise - it is not.
Novak, at 28 years right now - peak as per your definition - will lose most of the matches to Novak of 2011.
He is not as good as he was that year. Result wise, he may achieve more. Level wise, 2011 was better.
 
D

Deleted member 688153

Guest
If you come on a tennis board, you will be told about tennis. I will continue to tell you.
And, it really does not matter to me if you idolize anyone or not.

It was not about Federer, it was about lack of commonsense in the post.
A guy (Roger in this case) becomes number 1 at 23 and stays there for 4-5 years to lost it at 27-28. And, next we know, a guy behind the keyboard on some tennis forum, 7-8 years after that phase comes and claim that 28 was at his peak. This is always the excuse used by Joker-****s, Kneedalito-****s and Samras-****s to lower Roger's achievements - is that a good enough logic ?

Now, I will point out something to you. Do you think this is Novak's peak? Mind you, he is 28, right.
Result wise, this year may prove to be his peak. Play leavel wise - it is not.
Novak, at 28 years right now - peak as per your definition - will lose most of the matches to Novak of 2011.
He is not as good as he was that year. Result wise, he may achieve more. Level wise, 2011 was better.
Precisely.

Exact age does not determine peak results, that's just silly.
Some people peak earlier, some later.
Look at Nadal, Becker.
Now look at Federer.
Now look at Serena.
Just silly.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
The fact Federer at 34 years old is still able to easily beat someone like Murray says a lot about the whole "weak era" debate and those who argue it.
 

rh310

Hall of Fame
If Nadal is playing like his actual self again, he'll beat Novak at the FO. The problem is will he be able to not mug up next clay season for the 3rd year straight?

I genuinely believe Nadal is done winning slams. In many of his current pictures (I.e., since his loss at the AO to Wawrinka), I see what looks to me like an unhealthy gauntness. I think he's out of gas and running on fumes, permanently.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
I genuinely believe Nadal is done winning slams. In many of his current pictures (I.e., since his loss at the AO to Wawrinka), I see what looks to me like an unhealthy gauntness. I think he's out of gas and running on fumes, permanently.
Maybe all the years he's been on tour has taken its toll on him, mentally. This guy has been playing and winning for a long time.
 

rh310

Hall of Fame
Maybe all the years he's been on tour has taken its toll on him, mentally. This guy has been playing and winning for a long time.

Would certainly be understandable. The flame that burns twice as bright burns half as long, as they say.
 

joekapa

Legend
Just realized the results of the poll. 80% believed that Federer would win. Unbelievable bias. Wishful thinking. Just goes to show how susceptible tennis fans are to marketing. If I was to ask "Who would win a best of 5 on any surface, between Djokovic and Federer", I bet the result would be the same.

If I was to ask the same question, but with Nadal, the results would be the same.

Federer fans, are not real fans of tennis. I'd hate to say it, but it is true. They have a blatant one eyed view of the game, which in a lot of ways, does not allow them to enjoy it, and analyze it accordingly.
 

70後

Hall of Fame
Just realized the results of the poll. 80% believed that Federer would win. Unbelievable bias. Wishful thinking. Just goes to show how susceptible tennis fans are to marketing. If I was to ask "Who would win a best of 5 on any surface, between Djokovic and Federer", I bet the result would be the same.

If I was to ask the same question, but with Nadal, the results would be the same.

Federer fans, are not real fans of tennis. I'd hate to say it, but it is true. They have a blatant one eyed view of the game, which in a lot of ways, does not allow them to enjoy it, and analyze it accordingly.

Before the match, I bumped last years Djok/Fed Wim final thread. Nearly mirror spread of votes, everybody was going Fed in 4 and arguing the same things they were saying this year.

Of course, what they say is one thing, how people really think is how they bet.
 

rh310

Hall of Fame
Just realized the results of the poll. 80% believed that Federer would win. Unbelievable bias. Wishful thinking. Just goes to show how susceptible tennis fans are to marketing. If I was to ask "Who would win a best of 5 on any surface, between Djokovic and Federer", I bet the result would be the same.

Nah. It's just hard for anyone to tell "who do you want to win?" from "who do you think will win?" - just look at all the Nadalians who voted he'd win the FO when it is obvious to any true fan of tennis that Nadal is utterly washed up for any more winning grand slams.

Federer fans, are not real fans of tennis. I'd hate to say it, but it is true. They have a blatant one eyed view of the game, which in a lot of ways, does not allow them to enjoy it, and analyze it accordingly.

Mmmhmm. See what I did up there?
 

FedTheMan

Professional
Just realized the results of the poll. 80% believed that Federer would win. Unbelievable bias. Wishful thinking. Just goes to show how susceptible tennis fans are to marketing. If I was to ask "Who would win a best of 5 on any surface, between Djokovic and Federer", I bet the result would be the same.

If I was to ask the same question, but with Nadal, the results would be the same.

Federer fans, are not real fans of tennis. I'd hate to say it, but it is true. They have a blatant one eyed view of the game, which in a lot of ways, does not allow them to enjoy it, and analyze it accordingly.


What an idiot, generalizing all Federer fans.:rolleyes:

Yep, I spend hours a week playing tennis because I am not a tennis fan.LOL. Federer is my fav player but I like playing tennis a lot and I like multiple players on the ATP such as Nishi, Tsonga, etc.

Don't speak for everyone next time. Maybe you should replace the word with fanatic.
 

jga111

Hall of Fame
It's hilarious how many fed lovers were actually thinking fed had a chance of winning the final. I will give him credit for making it and taking out Murray. But please this match was a joke, there was no way in hell old man fed was going to take 3 sets off joker. He was lucky that that joker pulled one of his choke jobs in the 2nd otherwise it was a routine straight set win.

I will give fed credit for still playing good at his age but he has no chance of taking 3 sets in a major against joker. It does show with rafa fading and Murray a head case there is not much competition for joker. He is getting off easy. I am sorry but these titles off old man fed don't mean much. Where was he when fed was in his prime? I can only remember him taking fed out at AO years back when fed was playing at his peak level.

And here we are today - this should be a lesson for understanding Federer ALWAYS HAD A CHANCE. Too many who had written him off early with their 'professional' analysis. Jokers
 

AngryBirds

Semi-Pro
And here we are today - this should be a lesson for understanding Federer ALWAYS HAD A CHANCE. Too many who had written him off early with their 'professional' analysis. Jokers
To be fair, if Djokovic was still playing like that, he'd take down old man Fed today easily. That version of Djokovic was just too good.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Reading this thread makes me understand why the hivemind tries to delude itself into thinking why a year with Djokovic out due to injury together with many others was the best year in tennis in a long time
 

fedtennisphan

Hall of Fame
Reading this thread makes me understand why the hivemind tries to delude itself into thinking why a year with Djokovic out due to injury together with many others was the best year in tennis in a long time

Please, the only people who care about Djokovic are Fedhaters and are mad their pawn failed along with their other pawn.
 

moonballs

Hall of Fame
To be fair, if Djokovic was still playing like that, he'd take down old man Fed today easily. That version of Djokovic was just too good.
Too good to last, or even for his own health apparently.

I am not laughing at Djokovic’s injury. I think he is as good as Nadal and want him back soon. I am not worried about anyone beating Fed’s record and have not worried about it for a long time.
 
Top