A Federer fan and a Djokovic fan rewatch the 2009 Wimbledon final

[metsman]

This is pretty rich considering I mentioned the court speed (in the very first paragraph of my post, to boot, so you really have no excuse for missing it) as well as everything else.

I think we would circumvent much of this dancing around the bush if you would simply admit to not reading any of the original posts.

I actually did read your posts and it was mostly pretty good but I honestly could not find that part, even after I reread the first post.

The bigger issue in this thread is your partner in crime comparing this match to the 2022 Wimbledon final and you know that, don't shoot the messenger. Although if that was your intention, to show the contrast between a Federer and Djokovic fan in how they view this match, I guess that's fine.

 

[RS]

It’s pretty garbage throughout the match except big points. So weird.

What things RS. What things specifically? And what tactical gameplan lol. I think his tactics as covered where quite strange but in fairness he was outmatched so not exactly any “good” tactics other than win the point off the serve or the immediate follow up.

I see him competing by holding serve every time just like Roddick. Think Fed likely wins in 4 due to mental stuff (Kyrgios gets broken due to lack of clutch and loses a couple TBs). Then again Roddick losing in 4 is also the most likely outcome given Fed and Rods respective levels in 09.

Net approaches were not GOAT but improved from what they used to be. Keeping Federer honest with the mixing up of the body serve which he had not done as much as before and keeping steady in play while maintaining decent aggression

I tend to agree with a lot of what you say but probably not this but I really see this Roddick as closer to the Murray/Hewitt tier than to Kyrgios.

I will have to relook Roddick's BH. I might be in total misreading it but I remember improvements under Stefanki.

 

[abmk]

He struggled in like every match. He struggled with Melzer. Yes Kyrgios run up to the final is clearly worse but they both showed their clear mediocrity on the way to the final that was my point not that they were exactly the same.

Roddick played meh in 1st week. Raised his level in 2nd week considerably.
Crushed Berdych in the 4th round.
Going 5 vs Hewitt playing well (though not prime) isn't struggling, neither is beating Murray in a competitive 4-setter.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

He struggled in like every match. He struggled with Melzer. Yes Kyrgios run up to the final is clearly worse but they both showed their clear mediocrity on the way to the final that was my point not that they were exactly the same.

Their levels of mediocrity are in no way comparable, leol. Also you know Novack struggled way worse at this mugbledon, like going two sets down to Sinner and dropping sets to three other non-great opponents. (inb4 Sinner future wimble winner therefore epick level) yet he is a totally worthy winner apparently in your mind, yes?

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

It’s pretty garbage throughout the match except big points. So weird.

Surely if even you feel it is weird that should make you wonder if that's really true and conduct a really detailed analysis out of sheer curiosity if nothing else?

 

[The Guru]

Their levels of mediocrity are in no way comparable, leol. Also you know Novack struggled way worse at this mugbledon, like going two sets down to Sinner and dropping sets to three other non-great opponents. (inb4 Sinner future wimble winner therefore epick level) yet he is a totally worthy winner apparently in your mind, yes?

Nah I agree Novak was also very mediocre. He stepped it up for the final though. My point is not that anyone in 09 or 22 is amazing it’s that they are all pretty mid.

 

[The Guru]

Surely if even you feel it is weird that should make you wonder if that's really true and conduct a really detailed analysis out of sheer curiosity if nothing else?

That’s literally what I did and Third Serve agrees. His BH sucked except in big points (and his BH passes were good)

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Nah I agree Novak was also very mediocre. He stepped it up for the final though. My point is not that anyone in 09 or 22 is amazing it’s that they are all pretty mid.

Or did he? Maybe mugios made them both look better by being an ultra-budget Roddick with nothing outside the serve? huehuehue

 

[Third Serve]

I actually did read your posts and it was mostly pretty good but I honestly could not find that part, even after I reread the first post.

The bigger issue in this thread is your partner in crime comparing this match to the 2022 Wimbledon final and you know that, don't shoot the messenger. Although if that was your intention, to show the contrast between a Federer and Djokovic fan in how they view this match, I guess that's fine.

I have no intention of defending my “partner in crime” or his opinions here (although I would say the way you’ve acted towards him in this thread leaves much to be desired), the point was simply to have us both—as Federer and Djokovic fans—watch the match at the same time and jot down our thoughts. It is, after all, the very title of the thread.

FWIW I don’t think the Roddick/Kyrgios comparison is justifiable. Nick probably served as well as Roddick but the rest of his game, especially the mental aspect, varied from slightly to considerably worse. Nick in the 2022 final is basically how people think Roddick played in the 2009 final.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Nah I agree Novak was also very mediocre. He stepped it up for the final though. My point is not that anyone in 09 or 22 is amazing it’s that they are all pretty mid.

Is anyone ever amazing if you look deep enough into it, really? All of them have mug plays or even if they look impeccable that's against mug opponents. In any remotely competitive match there's a lot of imperfection from both sides. What it tells us?

 

[metsman]

Roddick played meh in 1st week. Raised his level in 2nd week considerably.
Crushed Berdych in the 4th round.
Going 5 vs Hewitt playing well (though not prime) isn't struggling, neither is beating Murray in a competitive 4-setter.

He didn't even struggle in the first week, every set he lost he was already up 2. That's nothing, just some small losses in focus, anyways only Federer coasts through the early rounds with no sets lost anyways. Djokovic and Murray had clearly worse results/sets list in 2011(Tomic, Baghdatis), 2012 (Ferrer, Karlovic, Baghdatis, Stepanek), 2013(Fiasco, even Jerzy), 2014(Cilic/Stepanek/Dimitrov) and 2015(Anderson) than losing some throwaway sets or needing 5 vs a decent Hewitt. Obviously we know the story with Nadal although in 2007 he gets something of a pass.

So it's pure propaganda.

 

[RS]

metsman isn't having it today

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

I have no intention of defending my “partner in crime” or his opinions here (although I would say the way you’ve acted towards him in this thread leaves much to be desired), the point was simply to have us both—as Federer and Djokovic fans—watch the match at the same time and jot down our thoughts. It is, after all, the very title of the thread.

FWIW I don’t think the Roddick/Kyrgios comparison is justifiable. Nick probably served as well as Roddick but the rest of his game, especially the mental aspect, varied from slightly to considerably worse. Nick in the 2022 final is basically how people think Roddick played in the 2009 final.

Conversely, Roddick in the 2009 final is how some think Kyrgios played in the 2022 final, lel.

 

[metsman]

Nick probably served as well as Roddick.

This is patently absurd. I have no idea how one could ever arrive to this conclusion unless you are only looking at ace counts and calling it a day.

 

[The Guru]

Or did he? Maybe mugios made them both look better by being an ultra-budget Roddick with nothing outside the serve? huehuehue

No doubt Nick made him look better. Playing a servebot almost always makes matches look much cleaner but I think he was genuinely a level up from the rest of the tourney in the final though that’s not exactly some great feat because as we’ve agreed Novak was pretty garbo before the final.

 

[Third Serve]

This is patently absurd. I have no idea how one could ever arrive to this conclusion unless you are only looking at ace counts and calling it a day.

Nick served insanely well in 2022. That’s a point that shouldn’t be up for dispute.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

No doubt Nick made him look better. Playing a servebot almost always makes matches look much cleaner but I think he was genuinely a level up from the rest of the tourney in the final though that’s not exactly some great feat because as we’ve agreed Novak was pretty garbo before the final.

That doesn't tell us anything of substance, does it? You're a Joe fan with conviction, of course you think that. What makes your opinions better than those you criticise? (Not the conduct, theirs is more deplorable clearly.) If nothing, where's the fun?

 

[RS]

Was Djokovic USO 15 final even better than Kyrgios Miami 17 SF?

 

[RS]

Was Djokovic USO 15 final even better than Kyrgios Miami 17 SF?

Both 8 to 8.5/10 lol.

 

[The Guru]

That doesn't tell us anything of substance, does it? You're a Joe fan with conviction, of course you think that. What makes your opinions better than those you criticise? (Not the conduct, theirs is more deplorable clearly.) If nothing, where's the fun?

Seems to be the consensus amongst all people not just Joe fans. Not that it means it’s true but it’s definitely not just me saying it.

 

[RS]

It should be pretty easy to notice that Roddick was going for bigger shots against Federer when he had the opportunities and generally was hitting the ball bigger but with not much loss in consistency vs with Murray he was happy to keep the points on the longer side and play percentages since he knew Murray wouldn't try to dictate. Obviously it's not a winning formula, but it's not something he'd try to avoid at all costs vs Murray. And indeed Federer dominated the longer rallies while Roddick was much more competitive with Murray and won several key ones.

Also while Roddick served very well in the SF, in the final he served maybe the best anyone's ever served in a slam final simply because he was feeling it that day and knew he had to bring his best. Not just in quality, but against Federer he had no real dips on serve, didn't cluster many bad service points together in a manner that can lead to a break, so while Federer won a healthy number of points, he didn't have any real chances besides the first set until Roddick capitulated in the end. Roddick served extremely well vs Murray but had least two glaring dips in the 2nd set and third set. Had he done that against Federer, he gets dusted in 4 if not less. Obviously Federer no longer being able to cheat code return his serve helped and gave him a lot of confidence. But you can easily argue Fed was still a tougher returner for Roddick's serve at that point than Murray. But still that style of smarter serving with more placement and variety would have served him better in 03/04 as well.

So these two factors add up to a pretty clear superiority, and should be pretty easy to notice.

Gave me a right telling off good job.

 

[NatF]

This thread is hilarious as expected lol.

 

[metsman]

Nick served insanely well in 2022. That’s a point that shouldn’t be up for dispute.

That's not the point I'm debating. I'm debating whether his serving was anywhere near probably the greatest serving produced in a slam final. There is so much more to serving. Give Roddick Nick's serve which is guaranteed to suffer many dips and mess up when he most needs it, or even hell his own serve from the SF against Murray, and he loses to Federer in 4 tops. Giving Federer easy breaks and letting him get out in front is a surefire way to get washed on grass. The fact that Roddick avoided that for so long, even if he lost the tiebreaks, is a big part of why that match was so close.

Anyways the point is it's not a comparison that should even be entertained in any manner whatsoever since the quality and gravitas of the tennis is so far apart. It's like comparing Isner serving up a storm in the 2nd round to Roddick's performance, I mean sure Isner's serve was great on paper but who cares? It's a different league.

 

[The Guru]

This thread is hilarious as expected lol.

Should’ve stuck to saying nothing but got annoyed at the rudeness will buzz off now

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Seems to be the consensus amongst all people not just Joe fans. Not that it means it’s true but it’s definitely not just me saying it.

Most people are clueless so their consensus means nothing. Even those that are not clueless rarely undertake proper effort to weed out bias 'cause it's pretty damn hard to actually capture the essence of play in a neutral fashion. Virtually no one's opinion matters.

 

[abmk]

About the post on 1st set and 2nd set. Agree with everything on the first set.
Going to the 2nd set.

At 6-2, Fed seizes one of the mini-breaks back with an even better backhand, this time a deft half-volley winner off of a hard-hit forehand from Roddick.

note that Roddick got in a big 1st serve at 6-2 which fed returned.

Still, in the first point, the second serve is pretty hefty and tilts the point firmly in Roddick's advantage.

Second point also begins with a second serve, but it's a really good second serve to Roddick's credit.

Here, Roddick hits a rare fault. Yes, it's big news that he hits a fault because he had very rarely been hitting them all set. And then, in the next point, he hits another fault. Two second serves in a row. These wouldn't stick out if it was any other player serving, but given Roddick's impeccable record throughout the rest of the first two sets, this is not really the best time to be hitting them, no?

given Roddick got 5/5 first five serves in TB including on 1st SP, it just seems nitpicky to talk about 2 missed first serves after that, given as you yourself mentioned he hit 2 pretty good 2nd serves on those points.

 

[RS]

It's so good being a Nadal fan and not watching him dragged in the mud on this thread.

 

[The Guru]

It's so good being a Nadal fan and not watching him dragged in the mud on this thread.

Nadals a bum he’d get dusted by Peaktini. There you go.

 

[RS]

This thread is hilarious as expected lol.

You embraced the hate on the Wim 09 final lol.

 

[RS]

Next.

1. Wim 04 final vs Wim 12 final.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Nadals a bum he’d get dusted by Peaktini. There you go.

More like Fed's a loser compared to superior Djokovic, lolol.

 

[RS]

Nadals a bum he’d get dusted by Peaktini. There you go.

Nadal Wim 07 final >~ Djokovic Wim 15 final

 

[BeatlesFan]

@Third Serve

Kudos to you for such in-depth analysis. I enjoyed reading it all and appreciate the time it took to assemble it. Job well done!

The only thing I would quibble with is not thinking (or believing 100%) that Andy choked away the second set. There's no other explanation except a choke when Roddick led the second-set tie-break 6-2, giving himself 4 consecutive set points (including two on his dominant serve) to take a two-set lead. One of the worst choking points in the OE has to be at 6-5 on his own serve, when Roddick hit a FH approach shot, and Fed's ensuing passing shot was weak and hit directly back at Andy. He blew an easy BH volley and allowed Fed to miraculously come back and win the set.

The quality of the 2009 final was anemic compared to their truly outstanding 2004 final. Roddick played very well to extend the match to a long fifth set, Fed was passive throughout, played well below his usual grass standard and was actually luck to win it. His serve was the only stellar component to his game and he played from the baseline almost entirely - a huge mistake. I think it's a long match but was never a great match and never that much of a nail-biter. Watching it as it was aired, most people knew Fed would eventually win it since he owned Andy.

 

[tudwell]

Are there really people who consider the 2009 final a classic?

 

[abmk]

@Third Serve

Kudos to you for such in-depth analysis. I enjoyed reading it all and appreciate the time it took to assemble it. Job well done!

The only thing I would quibble with is not thinking (or believing 100%) that Andy choked away the second set. There's no other explanation except a choke when Roddick led the second-set tie-break 6-2, giving himself 4 consecutive set points (including two on his dominant serve) to take a two-set lead. One of the worst choking points in the OE has to be at 6-5 on his own serve, when Roddick hit a FH approach shot, and Fed's ensuing passing shot was weak and hit directly back at Andy. He blew an easy BH volley and allowed Fed to miraculously come back and win the set.

The quality of the 2009 final was anemic compared to their truly outstanding 2004 final. Roddick played very well to extend the match to a long fifth set, Fed was passive throughout, played well below his usual grass standard and was actually luck to win it. His serve was the only stellar component to his game and he played from the baseline almost entirely - a huge mistake. I think it's a long match but was never a great match and never that much of a nail-biter. Watching it as it was aired, most people knew Fed would eventually win it since he owned Andy.

Federer had saved the first 3 SPs - with an excellent flick bh pass and 2 unreturnables. bh volley miss from Roddick was bad. But that was one out of 4 points. How you put that entirely on Roddick choking doesn't compute.

Federer did everything good/better - serve, fh, bh, movement, net play, apart from returning. lower prime overall, but still atleast good.
And it was an absolute nail-biter, given it went 16-14 in the 5th set.

2004 Wim final was better quality wise, but this was hardly anemic in comparision.

 

[NatF]

Should’ve stuck to saying nothing but got annoyed at the rudeness will buzz off now

I'm talking generally. I just find the tone of this thread humorous.

 

[RS]

Who played at a higher level?

1. Roddick AO 03 QF or Djokovic USO 15 final
2. Roddick Dubai 08 final or Nadal Dubai 06 final
3. Nadal YEC 10 SF or Agassi USO 04 QF
4. Djokovic RG 12 final or Murray Wim 12 final
5. Roddick USO 07 QF or Djokovic AO 15 final
6. Djokovic USO 08 SF or Murray AO 13 final
7. Roddick AO 03 QF or Roddick Wim 09 final

 

[RS]

@Third Serve

Kudos to you for such in-depth analysis. I enjoyed reading it all and appreciate the time it took to assemble it. Job well done!

The only thing I would quibble with is not thinking (or believing 100%) that Andy choked away the second set. There's no other explanation except a choke when Roddick led the second-set tie-break 6-2, giving himself 4 consecutive set points (including two on his dominant serve) to take a two-set lead. One of the worst choking points in the OE has to be at 6-5 on his own serve, when Roddick hit a FH approach shot, and Fed's ensuing passing shot was weak and hit directly back at Andy. He blew an easy BH volley and allowed Fed to miraculously come back and win the set.

The quality of the 2009 final was anemic compared to their truly outstanding 2004 final. Roddick played very well to extend the match to a long fifth set, Fed was passive throughout, played well below his usual grass standard and was actually luck to win it. His serve was the only stellar component to his game and he played from the baseline almost entirely - a huge mistake. I think it's a long match but was never a great match and never that much of a nail-biter. Watching it as it was aired, most people knew Fed would eventually win it since he owned Andy.

Were do you rate Wim 09 among Fed's best Wim's?

Would you place any post 09 years above it?

 

[RS]

Next.

1. Wim 04 final vs Wim 12 final.

@The Guru

You were saying you thought 12 was as good or a tiny bit better of a match from both the winner and loser so this would be good as a in depth breakdown.(you did a semi one on these matches I think on some other threads)

 

[RS]

Beating Tsitsipas = Beating Murray lol

Tpas 7/10 just like the RG 21 final lol

 

[The Guru]

I'm talking generally. I just find the tone of this thread humorous.

I know it just reminded me I shouldn’t have engaged

 

[NatF]

You embraced the hate on the Wim 09 final lol.

Underrated matches and I stand by that.

 

[NatF]

Tpas 7/10 just like the RG 21 final lol

Tsits peak on clay equals his peak on grass? Both double career slams are complete shams then

 

[NatF]

I know it just reminded me I shouldn’t have engaged

You're better off doing this stuff in a private chat unless you're prepared for strong reactions. Maybe do a Djokovic matches next time and you'll have more support.

 

[abmk]

Getting to the 3rd and 4th set.

3rd set: Worth mentioning that very few would be able to keep up level as Roddick did after losing that crushing 2nd set TB.
Relatively his weakest set of the match (incl serving), yet good enough to push it to a TB.

4th set ->

The exact baseline action in question is kinda meh. It's worse than in the first three sets (though our sample size for those sets is a little smaller) and the errors start creeping in a bit. First few games are quite ugly. Action does pick up a bit midway through the set, though, and some legit good points occur, but what does remain constant is that the returning isn't good. I noticed several instances of the players struggling against second serves (which, while damaging given the quality of the servers, are generally at least returnable).

disagree on the baseline action and the returning part. Both were atleast decent. Roddick probably returned his best in this set.
I have 6 UFEs for fed in this set and 3 for Roddick.
Roddick won 39.1% of RPs and Fed 30%.

Roddick won 41.7% of his 2nd serve points in this set and Fed won 33.3% of his. so how exactly were either struggling in returning 2nd serves?

I can't really blame him for not breaking Roddick in sets one and two, but Andy's serve did dip just a little bit in sets three and four and I would expect Fed to at least grab one. Not a huge black mark, but definitely some discredit to his returning.

fed needed to raise his returning level+clustering to get a break in the 3rd or 4th set. which he didn't.
but then again, he did do that in the 11th game of 1st set only to miss the FH on BP and roddick to erase the other 3 BPs.
either way should've got one or two breaks in sets 1/3/4 combined.

 

[Deleted member 765728]

@Third Serve

Kudos to you for such in-depth analysis. I enjoyed reading it all and appreciate the time it took to assemble it. Job well done!

The only thing I would quibble with is not thinking (or believing 100%) that Andy choked away the second set. There's no other explanation except a choke when Roddick led the second-set tie-break 6-2, giving himself 4 consecutive set points (including two on his dominant serve) to take a two-set lead. One of the worst choking points in the OE has to be at 6-5 on his own serve, when Roddick hit a FH approach shot, and Fed's ensuing passing shot was weak and hit directly back at Andy. He blew an easy BH volley and allowed Fed to miraculously come back and win the set.

The quality of the 2009 final was anemic compared to their truly outstanding 2004 final. Roddick played very well to extend the match to a long fifth set, Fed was passive throughout, played well below his usual grass standard and was actually luck to win it. His serve was the only stellar component to his game and he played from the baseline almost entirely - a huge mistake. I think it's a long match but was never a great match and never that much of a nail-biter. Watching it as it was aired, most people knew Fed would eventually win it since he owned Andy.

Apart from that volley, which wasn't easy by any means - a spinny ball from Fed's racquet and fairly above Andy's shoulder - a doable one, but far from easy, at which point do you think Roddick choked? I can't remember him being in a winning position during any other point.

And just because he was 6-2 up, doesn't mean that he necessarily choked. Krajicek led Sampras 6-2 in the tie-break during their 2000 USO encounter and lost the set (even he admitted it in a post-match interview) without choking. It happens.

 

[RS]

Underrated matches and I stand by that.

Did you enjoy us comparing Roddick to Kyrgios lol?

 

[metsman]

About the post on 1st set and 2nd set. Agree with everything on the first set.
Going to the 2nd set.



note that Roddick got in a big 1st serve at 6-2 which fed returned.







given Roddick got 5/5 first five serves in TB including on 1st SP, it just seems nitpicky to talk about 2 missed first serves after that, given as you yourself mentioned he hit 2 pretty good 2nd serves on those points.

The 6-6 2nd serve was basically first serve quality and would have drawn a forced error the majority of the time. But Federer managed to get it back deep which puts him in a great spot even though Roddick approached too soon and hashed the half volley.

I honestly think Roddick did less wrong here than Nadal did in the 4th set TB in 2008 or Djokovic in the 2nd set TB in 2015 (or even the 1st set TB in 2014, while he didn't have a big lead he played a worse TB than Roddick did here for sure). It only stands out since he didn't win the match.

 

[abmk]

The 6-6 2nd serve was basically first serve quality and would have drawn a forced error the majority of the time. But Federer managed to get it back deep which puts him in a great spot even though Roddick approached too soon and hashed the half volley.

yeah, that was a pretty good 2nd serve.

I honestly think Roddick did less wrong here than Nadal did in the 4th set TB in 2008 or Djokovic in the 2nd set TB in 2015 (or even the 1st set TB in 2014, while he didn't have a big lead he played a worse TB than Roddick did here for sure). It only stands out since he didn't win the match.

agree on the Wim 08 4th set TB (nadal DFed and missed a makeable BH - a UFE), but not necessarily on the 2015 Wim TB. djoko didn't miss any shot as easy as roddick's BH volley.

 

[NatF]

Did you enjoy us comparing Roddick to Kyrgios lol?

I found it incredulous lol. I find the idea that it's a 7/10 match crazy too, with serving that good they'd have to be 5's off the ground for that to be the case - which is obviously not true lol.