Alcaraz vs. Big 3: Season-by-season breakdown !

[DSH]

In that 2006 Wimbledon final, after Federer won the first set 6-0, Nadal broke Federer in the first game of the second set, and Nadal was a break up until he served for the second set at 5-4. Federer won the second set 7-6. That was the key moment for the match. Nadal did win the third set 7-6.

If I remember right about the fourth set, Federer raced out to a 5-1 lead, failed to serve it out at that time, but eventually did to win it 6-3.

Do you think that if Nadal had won the second set of the 2006 Wimbledon final, he could have also won the third and gone two sets to one up against that Federer?

 

[Mustard]

Do you think that if Nadal had won the second set of the 2006 Wimbledon final, he could have also won the third and gone two sets to one up against that Federer?

Very possibly.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

where? all i said was

---

well yeah i said

---

i said

where does this imply superiority?

---

prime Nishikori Slam chokes: vs Paire at USO '15
prime Davydenko Slam chokes: vs Federer at AO '06, Federer at RG '07, Baghdatis at Wimbly '07, Ljubicic at RG '08

bo3 record in close matches (above any reasonable points-level threshold one sets, e.g. 0.85/0.9/1 DR) is also far worse for Davydenko, but i cba to get into all that. anyway, clearly not just about Davydenko being able to play up to comp and then playing down

like i said with the clutchness discussion, you can say that the trait in question shouldn't count for as much, but you can't deny the existence and relative strength of that trait

So where does this idea that prime Federer would be struggling with Nishikori come from? If anything, Nish would give him less trouble than Davydenko, who was frequently able to make it close but couldn't close sets out.
(Also I don't know if the latter two were chokes; the Ljube loss was mug stuff but Davydenko was in middling form for most of the season, could just be bad play; I don't think losing to Baghdatis *on grass* should be considered a choke given that Baghs was the superior grasscourter, since Kolya was generally poor on grass altogether - not like you could expect him to do well there.)

fair enough, maybe a better example of my overall point is prime Sampras pigeonizing Chang regardless of YEC '95, or Vilas pigeonizing Mottram regardless of Hamburg '77

Hamburg wasn't a particularly big event like a slam; besides Vilas leading Mottram 14-2, most of his wins were routine including all three BO5 matches. As for Sampras-Chang, sure Pete owned Chang since fully priming, but I wouldn't consider said ownage complete given Chang's big win, even if it was his lone (non-clay) win over prime Sampras.

 

[Angrybirdstar]

So where does this idea that prime Federer would be struggling with Nishikori come from?

i said Nishikori would be less pigeonized, and it's because his playstyle has more purchase in the Federer matchup, since his relative strengths don't get canceled out as much

the Ljube loss was mug stuff but Davydenko was in middling form for most of the season, could just be bad play

take it from the horse's mouth - nah

I don't think losing to Baghdatis *on grass* should be considered a choke given that Baghs was the superior grasscourter, since Kolya was generally poor on grass altogether - not like you could expect him to do well there.

ehh...

the first tie-break of the match, which went the way of Baghdatis when Davydenko fired an easy forehand into the net

the tie-break was littered with mini-breaks, but when the dust finally settled, it was Baghdatis who emerged triumphant, taking the set courtesy of an overhit Davydenko forehand.

By now Davydenko's head appeared to be elsewhere, and he rather amateurishly surrendered his opening service game of the third set, firing weakly into the net to bring up break point and gifting the game to his opponent on a subsequent double fault.

getting into tiebreaks against a beatable Baghdatis, going down 2-0 thanks to repeated UEs on set point, and then effectively giving up in the 3rd, strikes me as a pretty clear choke.

Hamburg wasn't a particularly big event like a slam

it was '77 though - peak Vilas + mickey mouse RG. in that context, he needed to be taking non-stop moral Ws, and instead he flopped at 2/3 of the other biggest Euro clay tourneys. so i'd say it's a pretty resume-damaging loss (since it's nowhere close to losing to Borg x2 or Nastase with spaghetti strings), but still doesn't really lessen Mottram's pigeonization status

I wouldn't consider said ownage complete given Chang's big win, even if it was his lone (non-clay) win over prime Sampras.

i don't really bother drawing a line between ownage and complete ownage (in terms of being completely undefeated at Slams+YEC+Oly, vs effectively untroubled vast majority of time). to go back to the original topic, i don't think h2h ownage is inherently impressive, because it's pretty much always about matchup factors that come down to randomness in playstyle development. the most it really speaks to is having the minimum floor to consistently impose one's matchup advantage

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

i said Nishikori would be less pigeonized, and it's because his playstyle has more purchase in the Federer matchup, since his relative strengths don't get canceled out as much

To wit? What are those mythical strengths Nishikori possessed that Davydenko did not, aren't both return+BH centric players?

take it from the horse's mouth - nah

seems more like a general form problem at the time, but maybe
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jun/1/davydenko-lets-two-set-lead-slip-away/

ehh...


getting into tiebreaks against a beatable Baghdatis, going down 2-0 thanks to repeated UEs on set point, and then effectively giving up in the 3rd, strikes me as a pretty clear choke.

lack of confidence on grass is expected given Denko's history there

it was '77 though - peak Vilas + mickey mouse RG. in that context, he needed to be taking non-stop moral Ws, and instead he flopped at 2/3 of the other biggest Euro clay tourneys. so i'd say it's a pretty resume-damaging loss (since it's nowhere close to losing to Borg x2 or Nastase with spaghetti strings), but still doesn't really lessen Mottram's pigeonization status

I don't see why it should be considered resume-damaging to any notable extent. Vilas did dominate a Borg-and-Connors-less RG and he also dominated the clay USO with a clutch final win over Connors, thus proving himself as the best non-Borg claycourter of the season by level too. If Borg didn't skip RG in favour of WTT and didn't get injured for the USO, Vilas would've probably lost to him rather comfortably again, but the Argentinian did prove his superiority to everyone else that season.

i don't really bother drawing a line between ownage and complete ownage (in terms of being completely undefeated at Slams+YEC+Oly, vs effectively untroubled vast majority of time). to go back to the original topic, i don't think h2h ownage is inherently impressive, because it's pretty much always about matchup factors that come down to randomness in playstyle development. the most it really speaks to is having the minimum floor to consistently impose one's matchup advantage

An interesting thought that seems to have merit, may reflect more about it later.

 

[Angrybirdstar]

To wit? What are those mythical strengths Nishikori possessed that Davydenko did not, aren't both return+BH centric players?

i was saying Nishikori would be slightly less pigeonized by Federer relative to facing Djokovic. on the reverse, can also point to pre-prime Djokovic likely going 5-0 (instead of merely 3-2) vs peak/prime Davydenko if not for injury + choke, so prime to prime likely looks much uglier

proving himself as the best non-Borg claycourter of the season by level too.

right, but the relevant question is about Vilas in comparison to other '73-onwards RG winners, and i don't think it's clear that any sort of peak measure (since his RG prime was just meh in comparison to the 3x winners + Federer - Kuerten, and not much better than the non-fluky 1-2 winners) puts him very high!

for RG/single-bo5-match peak from the lesser primes, i'd take Kuerten, Bruguera, Nastase, Alcaraz, Courier, Ferrero, and Panatta

meanwhile for Euro clay season peak (since bringing in green/fall clay events is buffing Vilas for playing in '70s), i prefer '73 Nastase and '95 Muster pretty easily, and some of Kuerten and Ferrero's seasons + '25 Alcaraz are quite arguable (whereas flipping around the Mottram and Franulovic losses makes those a much tougher sell)