2019 ATP 500 Halle Final - [1.] Roger Federer vs. David Goffin

Who will win?

  • Total voters
    54
  • Poll closed .
t1uWcCG.png

Hmm, Fed got the most wins last year but I guess NoMercy's corrections had grass wins. Needs 5 more wins to be #1 again
 
Steve0904 said:
Fair enough, but it's 2 whole years since then. In another 2-3 the man will be 40. Obviously his running FH isn't going to get better. 2017 was great, but it also came off a year where Federer rested for 6 months off an injury, and we've seen that work for Nadal too, many times.
Click to expand...
I'm only hoping he'll improve it for the Wimbledon fortnight. I'm not greedy. :p
 
arvind13 said:
their rome 2006 match was better. so was Fed's AO 2005 SF match with Safin
Click to expand...

oh i know, heck i'll take AO 2009, those 4 sets had some good tennis even despite fed's lack of serve before that 5th set collapse. tennis channel is always promoting wimbledon 2008 along with the documentary, but funny no one ever talks about wimbledon 2009 which was also thrilling, had fed break pete's record and was a solid match between two formidable grass court players, but i suppose they dont like talking about anything where an american loses, i feel like people think its far more exciting when someone triumph's over fed.
 
icedevil0289 said:
oh i know, heck i'll take AO 2009, those 4 sets had some good tennis even despite fed's lack of serve before that 5th set collapse. tennis channel is always promoting wimbledon 2008 along with the documentary, but funny no one ever talks about wimbledon 2009 which was also thrilling, had fed break pete's record and was a solid match between two formidable grass court players, but i suppose they dont like talking about anything where an american loses, i feel like people think its far more exciting when someone triumph's over fed.
Click to expand...
Unlike Nadal, Andy's not still on tour. So it doesn't benefit them to prop him up. The Fedal rivalry is still popular so they can still make money off it.
 
Have to say, number 2 seed is good news. But it’s nothing compared to winning the title today. I’m not sure why my fellow Fed fans are crowing about a draw perk that (last year being a good example) could be completely irrelevant.

Let’s be clear; there are a fair few players that could beat Fed at Wimbledon now that he’s approaching 38.

I’m celebrating today’s title and today’s title only.
 
Tennis_Hands said:
The point is not that there are big celebrations (some of us know better than that). The point is your intentional insistence to speak from first person plural when talking about events related to the Federer fans. Why would you do that with such consistency, when it comes to such things?

:cool:
Click to expand...
Just to **** you off, I guess.
 
Federer is between a rock and a hard place. He's avoided Djoker in the SF but he could still get his nemesis, Rafa.
 
icedevil0289 said:
oh i know, heck i'll take AO 2009, those 4 sets had some good tennis even despite fed's lack of serve before that 5th set collapse. tennis channel is always promoting wimbledon 2008 along with the documentary, but funny no one ever talks about wimbledon 2009 which was also thrilling, had fed break pete's record and was a solid match between two formidable grass court players, but i suppose they dont like talking about anything where an american loses, i feel like people think its far more exciting when someone triumph's over fed.
Click to expand...

Didnt fed almost break the then record for aces in that match? He had about 50 or something like that and recently I tbink Karlovic had got something like 55 in match with Hewitt at RG. Course the Isner Mahut Match totally shattered that record with both players landing over 100
 
MeatTornado said:
Unlike Nadal, Andy's not still on tour. So it doesn't benefit them to prop him up. The Fedal rivalry is still popular so they can still make money off it.
Click to expand...

this is true, they are still marketable. i still think though that 2009 had a good story as well, history was made as well, imo good tennis was produced, fed was mad lucky to even get it to a 5th at wimbledon 2008. i also re-watching get a feeling that they really wanted that match to be something bigger than your regular match, the 2008 one. people can come for me for being bitter, but that match really should have been called for darkness and this isn't saying fed would have won, because imo nadal was def the better player like i said fed was lucky to get it to a 5th but sheer gritt and the fact that it was wimbledon he toughed it out, but i still think part of that match was manufactured in teh sense that they let it play out to get the story they wanted if that makes sense. like the story they wanted to create would have not worked if they called it like they should have and it resumed the next day. its funny though looking back, how people made that match into something much bigger with rafa overtaking fed that day more or less and both players continued playing 11 years later and i look back at that match as a dramatic match but in the trajectory for both players its just a match and not something the media/tennis pundits wanted it to be.
 
Tennisgods said:
Have to say, number 2 seed is good news. But it’s nothing compared to winning the title today. I’m not sure why my fellow Fed fans are crowing about a draw perk that (last year being a good example) could be completely irrelevant.

Let’s be clear; there are a fair few players that could beat Fed at Wimbledon now that he’s approaching 38.

I’m celebrating today’s title and today’s title only.
Click to expand...

Yeah. He went to overdrive in '17 to get the outright record at Wimbledon, and that'll do. Margins are always on the smaller side on grass. In any case these could be his last wins.
 
Towser83 said:
Didnt fed almost break the then record for aces in that match? He had about 50 or something like that and recently I tbink Karlovic had got something like 55 in match with Hewitt at RG. Course the Isner Mahut Match totally shattered that record with both players landing over 100
Click to expand...

i assume you are talking about wimbledon 2009? i think so unfortunately i can't remember.
 
icedevil0289 said:
this is true, they are still marketable. i still think though that 2009 had a good story as well, history was made as well, imo good tennis was produced, fed was mad lucky to even get it to a 5th at wimbledon 2008. i also re-watching get a feeling that they really wanted that match to be something bigger than your regular match, the 2008 one. people can come for me for being bitter, but that match really should have been called for darkness and this isn't saying fed would have won, because imo nadal was def the better player like i said fed was lucky to get it to a 5th but sheer gritt and the fact that it was wimbledon he toughed it out, but i still think part of that match was manufactured in teh sense that they let it play out to get the story they wanted if that makes sense. like the story they wanted to create would have not worked if they called it like they should have and it resumed the next day. its funny though looking back, how people made that match into something much bigger with rafa overtaking fed that day more or less and both players continued playing 11 years later and i look back at that match as a dramatic match but in the trajectory for both players its just a match and not something the media/tennis pundits wanted it to be.
Click to expand...
It also wouldn't have been as big a story or as well remembered if the underdog didn't win that day.

The 09 final would be far more legendary if it was the day Roddick finally took down Fed at Wimbledon.
 
MeatTornado said:
Even though I wanted it, it is kind of funny that we're celebrating the #2 seed when it might have made literally no change for all we know.
Click to expand...

lmao this is partially how i feel but im always second guessing everything. tbh the idea of wanting fed to get no.2 is so that he meets his toughest opponent in the final and there is the chance that nadal lands in novak's half they meet and kill each other and its smooth sailing for fed after that, but ofcourse one is making a lot of assumptions about how far players will go and where they wiill land in the draw.
 
clayqueen said:
Federer is between a rock and a hard place. He's avoided Djoker in the SF but he could still get his nemesis, Rafa.
Click to expand...

Or his nemesis could land in the other half.

Or his nemesis could lose early like in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2017

He could beat him nemesis like he has done the past 5 times off clay

He could lose early himself

Either way I doubt he cares, he's 37, anything he wins at this point is just a bonus on a great career
 
MeatTornado said:
It also wouldn't have been as big a story or as well remembered if the underdog didn't win that day.

The 09 final would be far more legendary if it was the day Roddick finally took down Fed at Wimbledon.
Click to expand...

maybe, i mean fed also retook his crown and broke sampras's record, id say that is legendary but i see what you are saying. teh story does look better when the under dog wins. i just think overall wimbledon 2008's story is not as exciting or ground breaking as one wants to believe but i do firmly believe that back then the media just enjoyed anyone taking down fed because was dominating so much so fed finally losing at wimbledon to nadal no less in the rain with barely any light was an exciting story for most. i mean lets be real even know people love the story of someone triumphing over fed even though he is 38. how many peddled the story of changing of the guard when tsitsipas took down federer at AO despite the fact that it should be a regular thing. its just what the media still enjoys writing about imo

i just have a lot of thoughts on wimbledon 2008 and while i never watched the documentary that tennis channel produced regarding that match, i have watched a lot of reviews on it and so its interesting to see the perspectives of that match and in reality how manufactured it was in many ways and what people wanted from it. idk if nadal was so much of an underdog at that point. he took federer to a 5th the year before and was coming into that match after thrashing fed at 2008 rg. maybe fed was the favorite but im sure it was a lot closer than the years prior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Chicharito
  • Poll Poll
A016: Roger Federer VERSUS David Goffin for a place in the Quarter Finals
15 16 17
Replies
801
Views
41K
5555
5555
mightyjeditribble
  • Poll Poll
2018 Halle (Gerry Weber Open); ATP 500 - General discussion & handwringering
24 25 26
Replies
1K
Views
62K
EloQuent
EloQuent
C
  • Poll Poll
2017 ATP World Tour Finals RRP - [1] Nadal vs [7] Goffin
4 5 6
Replies
257
Views
48K
BeatlesFan
BeatlesFan
The Green Mile
  • Poll Poll
2019 Cincinnati Final - [9] Daniil Medvedev vs [16] David Goffin
6 7 8
Replies
393
Views
20K
Vamos Rafa Nadal
V
mightyjeditribble
  • Poll Poll
2025 Halle ATP500 Final - D. Medvedev [3] vs A. Bublik
2
Replies
94
Views
2K
ibbi
ibbi
Back
Top