2016 Australian Open Final - [1] Djokovic vs. [2] Murray

[KK Partizan]

Yes, but for some lazy people, for which watching tennis for the game itself is a bore, is much easier and quicker to get reputation for knowledge by going by the ranking, no?

That saves them the trouble to actually have to understand things, which can be, well , bore and lacking adrenalin.

Sorry, that's a cop out. Rankings are based on consistent results. If Federer ran into a God-mode "Player X" for the day, currently ranked 175 in the world, who played him to a nail-biting 5th set, that shouldn't count for more than Murray getting decimated as the #2 player in the world. Why? Simple - guys at the top can, at a split seconds notice, turn it up a notch (maybe not consistently except Djokovic) and have the potential to turn the tide. A guy who's having the day of his life or playing well above his ranking can provide a fantastic opposition to a top guy, BUT...due to a lack of experience and results at the top level, if a guy like Federer turns it up Player X will fold. That's just how it works 99.9% of the time.

Having you and "The Green Mile" talk down fans who DON'T view things your way certainly isn't appealing to a vast majority of posters I'm sure.

Fact is, the way Djokovic played the last 3 matches, it would have taken a Herculean effort from one of the GOATs playing at their peak level to even stand a chance.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Sorry, that's a cop out. Rankings are based on consistent results. If Federer ran into a God-mode "Player X" for the day, currently ranked 175 in the world, who played him to a nail-biting 5th set, that shouldn't count for more than Murray getting decimated as the #2 player in the world. Why? Simple - guys at the top can, at a split seconds notice, turn it up a notch (maybe not consistently except Djokovic) and have the potential to turn the tide. A guy who's having the day of his life or playing well above his ranking can provide a fantastic opposition to a top guy, BUT...due to a lack of experience and results at the top level, if a guy like Federer turns it up Player X will fold. That's just how it works 99.9% of the time.

Having you and "The Green Mile" talk down fans who DON'T view things your way certainly isn't appealing to a vast majority of posters I'm sure.

Fact is, the way Djokovic played the last 3 matches, it would have taken a Herculean effort from one of the GOATs playing at their peak level to even stand a chance.

What are you talking about?

We are talking about the difference between looking at the rankings to know what happened and actually knowing what happened.

 

[The Fedfather]

Fact is, the way Djokovic played the last 3 matches, it would have taken a Herculean effort from one of the GOATs playing at their peak level to even stand a chance.

Seems a little hyperbolic, don't you think? Like, we know Djokovic played awesome but Federer who wasn't playing very good, to put it mildly, still took a set off of him. So I don't think your estimation of what it would have taken for GOATs to stand a chance against Novak is correct.

 

[KK Partizan]

What are you talking about?

We are talking about the difference between looking at the rankings to know what happened and actually knowing what happened.

I had a bit about the Golden State Warriors and Philadelphia Sixers vs. the Warriors/Spurs game, but decided to delete it *facepalm*. Basically, I don't appreciate the Warriors defeating Sixers (worst team in NBA) by 3 points than Warriors decimating Spurs (second best team easily) by 30.

My whole point was, I value ranking more than play for the day (so #2 getting decimated by #1 is more valuable than #21 giving #1 a nail biting 5-setter) because I don't trust the #21 to finish the deal at any point in time. Consistency PRIOR TO the match should play a significant role in determining how "tough" the opponent is because there's a consistency behind it. Sure, maybe they get routed but you KNOW there's an "inkling" of a chance that they can turn it around and WIN. With a low ranked opponent that's playing a game of their life, that possibility is far less likely due to less experience/confidence/skill.

 

[KK Partizan]

Seems a little hyperbolic, don't you think? Like, we know Djokovic played awesome but Federer who wasn't playing very good, to put it mildly, still took a set off of him. So I don't think your estimation of what it would have taken for GOATs to stand a chance against Novak is correct.

6-1, 6-2, 3-6, 6-3

Nobody is immune from dropping their level of play for a while, but let's not kid ourselves some of the shots Djokovic hit in the first two sets were mind boggling. Plus, we're talking about Federer taking a set off him, not some run-of-the-mill player. Contrary to most Djokovic fans, Federer is still far-and-away the GOAT of my generation and like Michael Jordan before him, he can 'turn back the clock' for brief periods of time.

 

[The Fedfather]

6-1, 6-2, 3-6, 6-3

Nobody is immune from dropping their level of play for a while, but let's not kid ourselves some of the shots Djokovic hit in the first two sets were mind boggling. Plus, we're talking about Federer taking a set off him, not some run-of-the-mill player. Contrary to most Djokovic fans, Federer is still far-and-away the GOAT of my generation and like Michael Jordan before him, he can 'turn back the clock' for brief periods of time.

I'm not kidding myself. Novak played unbelievable 2 sets in the SF and his level overall was very impressive. However, you went overboard with "it would have taken a Herculean effort from one of the GOATs playing at their peak level to even stand a chance." That was my point. And yes, Federer is still far-and-away the GOAT and can 'turn back the clock' but he wasn't playing his peak level in the 3rd set if that's what you're implying.

 

[Bobby Jr]

A 7-5 followed by a 7-6 set seems fairly competitive to me. And a bad call on a break point at a crucial part of the second set.

Not really, for most of that time he was barely hanging on - surviving multiple break points in service games and then Djokovic holding relatively straight-forward. For each longer rally he won he'd then give a point back with a mindless or meek error. To me, that's not being overly competitive - pushing one set to a tie break was about the only decent period of the match for him... and then he bungled that terribly.

 

[KK Partizan]

Is it just me or did it look like Djokovic partially coasted through the match? The commentators repeatedly pointed out how grueling it appeared for Murray to compete in the rallies, while Djokovic was relatively silent. Is it possible Djokovic knew he had it in the bag and didn't want to overly exhaust himself while Murray went all out? Or is this just more hyping Djokovic up by the commentators?

 

[The Green Mile]

What are you talking about?

We are talking about the difference between looking at the rankings to know what happened and actually knowing what happened.

This. People look at his AO 2006 draw and see Fed faced #54 ranked Baghdatis in the final. Then start to talk crap about Fed facing some Mug, and what has this mug accomplished in his Career. So basically just sh1tting on Marcos. Yet he played an amazing match in that final. Played a better match against Fed, than Murray against Djokovic this year. Stuff like this is very common this board, and is quite disrespectful to a LOT of players.

I'm not talking down fans either. Don't know where you got that idea. All I said was I hold some posters in Pro Match Results in high regard is all...

 

[KK Partizan]

I'm not kidding myself. Novak played unbelievable 2 sets in the SF and his level overall was very impressive. However, you went overboard with "it would have taken a Herculean effort from one of the GOATs playing at their peak level to even stand a chance." That was my point. And yes, Federer is still far-and-away the GOAT and can 'turn back the clock' but he wasn't playing his peak level in the 3rd set if that's what you're implying.

Well, part of it was my attempt at blunting/excusing the first two sets for my second favorite player.

 

[KK Partizan]

This. People look at his AO 2006 draw and see Fed faced #54 ranked Baghdatis in the final. Then start to talk crap about Fed facing some Mug, and what has this mug accomplished in his Career. So basically just sh1tting on Marcos. Yet he played an amazing match in that final. Played a better match against Fed, than Murray against Djokovic this year. Stuff like this is very common this board, and is quite disrespectful to a LOT of players.

But that was my point in one of my earlier posts. Did you *REALLY* think Baghdatis could come out victorious when the moment got big? Like, I know he was - at that time - the 54th best ranked player (and probably a top 15 most talented) but there's a HUGE dropoff between 1 and 10, let alone 1 and 15+. Would he be able to seize the moment? If so, what prior experience would he have to justify the confidence required to beat a prime Fed?

I hope I'm starting to make sense. LOL

It's not intended to disrespect the other players, I just value historical output over 'in the moment' performances. It's just a preference.

 

[The Green Mile]

But that was my point in one of my earlier posts. Did you *REALLY* think Baghdatis could come out victorious when the moment got big? Like, I know he was - at that time - the 54th best ranked player (and probably a top 15 most talented) but there's a HUGE dropoff between 1 and 10, let alone 1 and 15+. Would he be able to seize the moment? If so, what prior experience would he have to justify the confidence required to beat a prime Fed?

I hope I'm starting to make sense. LOL

It's not intended to disrespect the other players, I just value historical output over 'in the moment' performances. It's just a preference.

Well, I get your point and I suppose you have a point. In that match it was more of Marcos's level dropping and Fed's rising slightly somewhere late int he 2nd IIRC. But for all of Murray's experience, the story has always ended the same. And can turn it up a notch is another story to did turn it up a notch. Marcos had confidence going into that match and it showed, while Murray had lost 9 out of the last 10 matches to Novak. It can work both ways.

 

[The Green Mile]

All I'm really saying is that I don't judge players competition and draws on rankings, like many here seem to do.

 

[VexlanderPrime]

Sorry, that's a cop out. Rankings are based on consistent results. If Federer ran into a God-mode "Player X" for the day, currently ranked 175 in the world, who played him to a nail-biting 5th set, that shouldn't count for more than Murray getting decimated as the #2 player in the world. Why? Simple - guys at the top can, at a split seconds notice, turn it up a notch (maybe not consistently except Djokovic) and have the potential to turn the tide. A guy who's having the day of his life or playing well above his ranking can provide a fantastic opposition to a top guy, BUT...due to a lack of experience and results at the top level, if a guy like Federer turns it up Player X will fold. That's just how it works 99.9% of the time.

Having you and "The Green Mile" talk down fans who DON'T view things your way certainly isn't appealing to a vast majority of posters I'm sure.

Fact is, the way Djokovic played the last 3 matches, it would have taken a Herculean effort from one of the GOATs playing at their peak level to even stand a chance.

In fairness I wasn't particularly blown away by Djokers level today or against Ninja. I'd give him a B+ grade (on his spectrum of course). B+ still bounced Andy and Ninja. He'd have had to play better if he was facing 2013 Rafa for instance

 

[VexlanderPrime]

This. People look at his AO 2006 draw and see Fed faced #54 ranked Baghdatis in the final. Then start to talk crap about Fed facing some Mug, and what has this mug accomplished in his Career. So basically just sh1tting on Marcos. Yet he played an amazing match in that final. Played a better match against Fed, than Murray against Djokovic this year. Stuff like this is very common this board, and is quite disrespectful to a LOT of players.

I'm not talking down fans either. Don't know where you got that idea. All I said was I hold some posters in Pro Match Results in high regard is all...

Yah GM is one of the most respectful posters on TTW. Can't think of a time where he really belittled anyone.

 

[VexlanderPrime]

People really shouldn't look at rankings when looking at who had the tougher paths to the trophy. One of the most ignorant ideas on here really (IMO). If you watched all these matches you can see who played well and who didn't, which is all that matters really. It's why I regard opinions of some guys who are very active in Pro Match Results, and who watch a lot of matches.

How did u think Andy played today? After the first set I thought he played at a pretty high level - especially defending break points.

 

[VexlanderPrime]

Commiserations mate. But I still feel that Murray will win another major this year and I think he has a great chance of winning the AO over the next couple of years. It would be such a shame if his great consistency there isn't rewarded.

Agreed. He's not that far off. Just needs Nole to be upset or he himself to get mentally tougher. Fixing that 2nd serve would help too

 

[Emperor of Belgrade]

I feel sad for Andy a bit. This is the 4th time Djokovic defeated him in a Slam final. Would prefer seeing him beat Federer or Nadal more, but I guess Murray is the only other guy worthy of a Slam final. Good luck to him in the future.

 

[The Green Mile]

How did u think Andy played today? After the first set I thought he played at a pretty high level - especially defending break points.

I thought he played well in patches. Forehand was shaky from the get go, but got better as the match progressed. Started to play more aggressively in the 2nd and the stats reflected that. His patience in some points could have been better, which in turn affected his shot selection. His serve was shaky too. While Novak put in a solid and focused performance.

 

[Bartelby]

Up most of night on phone to wife while watching brother win and then on the next flight back to Britain - Not a professional performance.

 

[Mainad]

I thought he played well in patches. Forehand was shaky from the get go, but got better as the match progressed. Started to play more aggressively in the 2nd and the stats reflected that. His patience in some points could have been better, which in turn affected his shot selection. His serve was shaky too. While Novak put in a solid and focused performance.

He got better with each set. Now if only it had been best of 7!

 

[Mainad]

Up most of night on phone to wife while watching brother win and then on the next flight back to Britain - Not a professional performance.

He wants to make sure he's back in time for the birth. Whether we like it or not, tennis is not his sole priority at this moment.

 

[veroniquem]

This is Novak's 7th consecutive title: USO, Beijing, Shanghai, Paris, WTF, Doha and AO. Another remarkable run for him! It may not be the best he's ever been physically but I think he's at his peak mentally
Those are the top 10 players he beat during that amazing run:
1- Murray (Shanghai, Paris, AO)
2- Federer ((USO, WTF, AO)
3- Nadal (Beijing, WTF, Doha)
4- Berdych (Paris, WTF, Doha)
5- Nishikori (WTF, AO)
6- Wawrinka (Paris)
7- Ferrer (Beijing)
8- Cilic (USO)

 

[rh310]

Exactly, there was no consistent competition at the top.

Otherwise known as "depth of field."

 

[VexlanderPrime]

Up most of night on phone to wife while watching brother win and then on the next flight back to Britain - Not a professional performance.

Prof career clearly takes precedence over family health. Well said rofls

 

[veroniquem]

Otherwise known as "depth of field."

But there was no credible rivalry at the top. "Depth of field" is no substitute for strong elite, sorry, or for consistent rivals.

 

[Nostradamus]

mark my words, Novak will be done after next year. after he passes 30, he will be done. Stress on his body will be too much

 

[Djokovic2011]

This is Novak's 7th consecutive title: USO, Beijing, Shanghai, Paris, WTF, Doha and AO. Another remarkable run for him! It may not be the best he's ever been physically but I think he's at his peak mentally
Those are the top 10 players he beat during that amazing run:
1- Murray (Shanghai, Paris, AO)
2- Federer ((USO, WTF, AO)
3- Nadal (Beijing, WTF, Doha)
4- Berdych (Paris, WTF, Doha)
5- Nishikori (WTF, AO)
6- Wawrinka (Paris)
7- Ferrer (Beijing)
8- Cilic (USO)

Interestingly vero, this is the second time that Novak's won seven titles in a row(he also did it in 2011) and if he wins Dubai next month he'll join Mac, Lendl and Borg as the only players in the open era to win eight consecutive tournaments!

 

[3fees]

Just watched the match on ESPN, Djokovic played solid and deserved the win and the AO trophy his 6th.

Cheers
3Fees

 

[sbengte]

Fed is officially the one of the big 3 who is the most competitive vs Novak but at almost 35, how long can he still hang on?

I wonder what we can infer from that on the quality of opposition in general.

 

[nmanimaran15]

I am very happy for the sixth AO win of Novak.Sorry for Murray.He would have thought to present the AO title to his child.But, it didn't happen against the solid and unbeatable Novak.Losing five finals in a same major is really indigestible. Being the fourth best player in the world gives more more damage than being out of top10. He is little unlucky to play in the era of federer, nadal and Novak.

 

[joekapa]

Murray t

I feel sad for Andy a bit. This is the 4th time Djokovic defeated him in a Slam final. Would prefer seeing him beat Federer or Nadal more, but I guess Murray is the only other guy worthy of a Slam final. Good luck to him in the future.

Murray is the most underrated of players. Surely the best player in the open era, never to reach no 1. If players like Rodick were no.1, and Murray wasn't......goes to show you the quality after the Sampras/Agassi era.

 

[joekapa]

mark my words, Novak will be done after next year. after he passes 30, he will be done. Stress on his body will be too much

Youstill don't realise that Djokovic does not put the same pressure on his body, that Nadal did. He will not have the same demise as Nadal.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

I had a bit about the Golden State Warriors and Philadelphia Sixers vs. the Warriors/Spurs game, but decided to delete it *facepalm*. Basically, I don't appreciate the Warriors defeating Sixers (worst team in NBA) by 3 points than Warriors decimating Spurs (second best team easily) by 30.

My whole point was, I value ranking more than play for the day (so #2 getting decimated by #1 is more valuable than #21 giving #1 a nail biting 5-setter) because I don't trust the #21 to finish the deal at any point in time. Consistency PRIOR TO the match should play a significant role in determining how "tough" the opponent is because there's a consistency behind it. Sure, maybe they get routed but you KNOW there's an "inkling" of a chance that they can turn it around and WIN. With a low ranked opponent that's playing a game of their life, that possibility is far less likely due to less experience/confidence/skill.

This is not a discussion about who could potentially bring it on.

This is a discussion about what really happened, and veroniquem relies on the rankings of the players to "decide", who had the more difficult path to the title.

The reasons for that are, as stated in previous posts:

1) her total lack of knowledge for the game itself (which she tries to mask by quoting tons of stats (whether relevant or not is another matter, as she doesn't know how to read stats as well))

2) she is not interested in tennis per se, but in her agendas, which coincide either with her crush for Nadal, or her willingness to be appreciated as knowledgeable

If you asked her, whether she watched the said match, she will tell you that she doesn't have to, despite of the fact, that by watching such matches (if not witnessed in their time), she could learn a lot about the players that actually made an impression

 

[nes k]

The ceremony was quite a let down compared to the ladies. Murray was a bit flat, but tinged with emotion with all that has gone on. Made mention of being on first flight home to Kim and he seemed a bit choked up about it (the emotional high point of both speeches.) Murray can give a really flat speech, but Nole seemed to top him. Very predictable stuff except for one thing. Djoko's ignorance of tennis history had him praising amateur era great Roy Emerson to the skies (6 Auz and 12 slams overall, one more than Nole) who was not in the stadium and then makes no mention of Rosewall (on the podium), but does mention Laver (of course and who does show up at a lot of tournaments.) In an Open era with all the top pros competing its debatable whether Emerson would have won any slams. Rosewall is up there with Laver (much longer career, longer than Connors) and to completely ignore "Muscles" was an ignorant snub by the champ (and I thought I could see the hurt in Rosewall's eyes.)

Can't comment on the match as I was semi-comatous through out. (And still a touch groggy for the speech.)

Hi mentioned Roy Emerson and Rod Laver since their records are related to his 11 Slams and 6 AO, He probably shouldn't bother to mention any of those guys since they are all heavily pro Federer and Rod Laver didn't even bother to come down to the field to present to trophy to Novak,

 

[Meles]

Hi mentioned Roy Emerson and Rod Laver since their records are related to his 11 Slams and 6 AO, He probably shouldn't bother to mention any of those guys since they are all heavily pro Federer and Rod Laver didn't even bother to come down to the field to present to trophy to Novak,

Laver is at a lot of tournament and is well known and liked by the players.

 

[3fees]

You cant compare Rod Rocket Laver with Djokovic and other modern players, Wooden Frames were used plus 3 slams were on grass, now 1-grass, and 2 HC's, entirely different tennis play and entirely different tennis, Laver was seen mostly on TV thru PBS , Boston , Mass, Bud Collins was the announcer, there was no espn, internet ect..

Further during Laver era the auzzies especially were married to there mixed doubles partner, because they traveled so much, it was the only way to hold down relationship, in there era, of course you all know this.



Cheers
3Fees

 

[nes k]

mark my words, Novak will be done after next year. after he passes 30, he will be done. Stress on his body will be too much

David Ferrer still going strong and he is 33.

 

[mellowyellow]

Djoko way too good! 11th slam coming! Then career slam next with NCYGS then on for golden CYGS

Half way there!

 

[mattosgrant]

David Ferrer still going strong and he is 33.

Yeah a guy with about half the talent of Djokovic too.