Australian Open 2016 SF - [1] Djokovic vs. [3] Federer

Winner?

  • Djokovic in 3

    Votes: 38 20.9%

  • Djokovic in 4

    Votes: 63 34.6%

  • Djokovic in 5

    Votes: 9 4.9%

  • Federer in 5

    Votes: 12 6.6%

  • Federer in 4

    Votes: 49 26.9%

  • Federer in 3

    Votes: 11 6.0%
  • Total voters
    182
  • Poll closed .
All Novak needs to do against Fed, especially on plexicushion, is hit deep angles. Or even just deep. Then Fed can't attack and he's screwed. Before long he'll cough up a weak ball or hit it out.

I think Fed has become mentally weak against Novak, like he did Nadal, because he knows he can't counter such a simple strategy.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
All Novak needs to do against Fed is hit deep angles. Or even just deep. Then Fed can't attack and he's screwed.
Click to expand...

And yet Fed is happy to constantly give Djokovic too much width in the backhand exchanges. On the forehand, he just hits it hard and deep. Big whoop. Maybe Federer was scared of using width on the FH but it's been a feature of his FH all event anyway; some improvements and sometimes devastating but typically lacking width.
 
junior74 said:
Watching the replay now. Federer found more 1st serves in the 3rd set, and got some comfy holds. Haven´t checked the stats, but I don´t believe he made more than just over 50% of his 1st serves in the two first sets. 5 aces in 4 sets is very poor by Federer´s standards. Without the 1st serve, Federer is easily kept at the baseline by Djokovic. Watching the replay, this was not "the best tennis ever seen". Perhaps it was better "live"? ;)
Click to expand...

Definitely the best counterpunching on HC around, given the platform to showcase certain aspects of his tremendous talent due to Fed's (IMO) dumb play to open. As previously stated in response to Nolefam, Djokovic didn't blow Federer off the court, he just expertly and ruthlessly crushed Federer's court positioning with consistent depth and accuracy, to which Fed was resistant to in not wanting to cede barely any ground from the baseline whatsoever - and to build his tactics hastily and seemingly with fear.
 
TearTheRoofOff said:
Well, I didn't get to catch the match live, but I've just watched some decent highlights.

I'm really not seeing this unbeatable monster from the first 2 sets that everyone else is. There was a period of the 2nd set where he was playing that way but generally it wasn't much that I haven't seen from him before. Maybe I've been spoilt with Fed highlight reels from his dominant years and envision that level of athleticism and reliable firepower overcoming Djoker in some of these rallies when that is irrelevant to the situation.

However, he was playing to a very high level (as usual against Fed), with unreal defense and counter-punching ability (some gets were utterly insane) that would have required a huge performance from Fed, which he could only muster in the 3rd set. There was a decently long window of opportunity for Fed in the 4th set where Djoker cooled off, and the Fed of the 3rd set would likely have taken that set or pushed it very close. But Fed messing up on 2nd serve returns so often and making some surprising errors was very costly. Djokovic served great throughout the match and often does against Fed lately. Fed really does bring the very best out of him it seems, which is good for tennis.

First set taken off Djoker on Plexi though, which a lot of people have overlooked. Much of Fed's play really stretched Armstrong to his absolute limits, and if Fed can do that on molasses, then I'm pretty excited as to what he's going to be able to do on a faster court.

This is just the beginning for this optimist.
Click to expand...

I'm quite sure Federer will never beat Djokovic in a Slam again but if he hangs onto such form #18 is not out of the question.
 
Nathaniel_Near said:
Definitely the best counterpunching on HC around, given the platform to showcase certain aspects of his tremendous talent due to Fed's (IMO) dumb play to open. As previously stated in response to Nolefam, Djokovic didn't blow Federer off the court, he just expertly and ruthlessly crushed Federer's court positioning with consistent depth and accuracy, to which Fed was resistant to in not wanting to cede barely any ground from the baseline whatsoever - and to build his tactics hastily and seemingly with fear.
Click to expand...

High quality counterpunching indeed. But too one-sided to be called the best tennis ever. My point is that when Federer finds his 1st serve, Djokovic can´t return deep and with purpose, and then Federer gets easy holds. The serve is the foundation of Federer´s game, while the ROS is Djokovic´s. Therefore, when Fed serve fails, Djokovic´s force becomes more visible and gets even more impact on the outcome.
 
junior74 said:
High quality counterpunching indeed. But too one-sided to be called the best tennis ever. My point is that when Federer finds his 1st serve, Djokovic can return deep and with purpose, and then Federer gets easy holds. The serve is the foundation of Federer´s game, while the ROS is Djokovic´s. Therefore, when Fed serve fails, Djokovic´s force becomes more visible and gets even more impact on the outcome.
Click to expand...

Someone laughed at it earlier, but I think currently in the match-up, Djokovic's serve is getting as much work done as Federer's, maybe sometimes more and sometimes less. Federer's serve is better, but in the match-up he's having severe problems reading both deliveries. Djokovic is onto way more Federer deliveries. I'd be interested in finding the full match and only looking at every serve (and return) at some point. I think, even in accounting for Djokovic's return instincts, that just the first step in actually reading the serve, Djokovic is confusing Federer more than vice versa - this is not accounting for what's done when they get a racket onto the ball, but rather the initial read. And it isn't like Federer can't return - he's been doing a good job of it for most of the tournament. Djokovic's serve is very accurate now and he has patterns that are difficult to read. Djokovic reads Federer's patterns - something Fed needs to think about for the next matches, surely.
 
Novak Djokovic played great tennis thru the First 2 sets, Third set he started hitting the ball shorter and paid the price with a set loss, 4th set, he got the break and consolidated it to win the match.
Now he has two days rest and waits for the finals opponent he has to beat to lift the 6th AO Title.

Cheers
3Fees:)
 
Nathaniel_Near said:
Someone laughed at it earlier, but I think currently in the match-up, Djokovic's serve is getting as much work done as Federer's, maybe sometimes more and sometimes less. Federer's serve is better, but in the match-up he's having severe problems reading both deliveries. Djokovic is onto way more Federer deliveries. I'd be interested in finding the full match and only looking at every serve (and return) at some point. I think, even in accounting for Djokovic's return instincts, that just the first step in actually reading the serve, Djokovic is confusing Federer more than vice versa - this is not accounting for what's done when they get a racket onto the ball, but rather the initial read.
Click to expand...

Djokovic serves with very good variation! But, what I was saying; the serve is what Federer´s game is built upon. When it fails, everything collapses against players of this format. For Djokovic, a day with better service than normally is more like a bonus. It´s not what he builds upon. In the third, and most of the fourth, it evened out, because Federer plays with more freedom when he holds without too much trouble. That´s why he got BPs. When Federer serves 50% 1st serves, he will never win a set against Djokovic. No one will, for that matter :)
 
junior74 said:
Djokovic serves with very good variation! But, what I was saying; the serve is what Federer´s game is built upon. When it fails, everything collapses against players of this format. For Djokovic, a day with better service than normally is more like a bonus. It´s not what he builds upon. In the third, and most of the fourth, it evened out, because Federer plays with more freedom when he holds without too much trouble. That´s why he got BPs. When Federer serves 50% 1st serves, he will never win a set against Djokovic. No one will, for that matter :)
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree entirely. I wasn't arguing against your point though, but was merely adding more things to the discussion on the topic of the serve-return dynamics in the match-up. Good stuff.
 
junior74 said:
Djokovic serves with very good variation! But, what I was saying; the serve is what Federer´s game is built upon. When it fails, everything collapses against players of this format. For Djokovic, a day with better service than normally is more like a bonus. It´s not what he builds upon. In the third, and most of the fourth, it evened out, because Federer plays with more freedom when he holds without too much trouble. That´s why he got BPs. When Federer serves 50% 1st serves, he will never win a set against Djokovic. No one will, for that matter :)
Click to expand...

Didn't Stan serve around 50% in the RG final? He normally does.

edit: nm 67%. 70-73% in the sets he won. I know he served like crap against Fed though.
 
Last edited:
InsideOut900 said:
He didn't rely on Fed's mistakes such as Nadal.Just saying
Click to expand...

Did you see how many clear winners Djokovic hit AFTER he has pinned Federer on his BH side or after a longish exchange and switching of positions?

It is akin to saying that Nadal is a great volleyer based on his success rate at the net, although he goes to the net basically after his set up delivery pretty much guarantees him the "easy" volley.

:cool:
 
Last edited:
Watching the replay of the match. Federer with a lame match. All Novak had to do what was just play and put the ball in play. Another pathetic effort by fed. He knew his serve had to be a key and he couldn't put a first serve in play
 
Nathaniel_Near said:
Someone laughed at it earlier, but I think currently in the match-up, Djokovic's serve is getting as much work done as Federer's, maybe sometimes more and sometimes less. Federer's serve is better, but in the match-up he's having severe problems reading both deliveries. Djokovic is onto way more Federer deliveries. I'd be interested in finding the full match and only looking at every serve (and return) at some point. I think, even in accounting for Djokovic's return instincts, that just the first step in actually reading the serve, Djokovic is confusing Federer more than vice versa - this is not accounting for what's done when they get a racket onto the ball, but rather the initial read. And it isn't like Federer can't return - he's been doing a good job of it for most of the tournament. Djokovic's serve is very accurate now and he has patterns that are difficult to read. Djokovic reads Federer's patterns - something Fed needs to think about for the next matches, surely.
Click to expand...

agreed, Djokovic's serve has put him on the top of the mountain, he's pretty much as good offensively as defensively because of it....nobody can come close to his ability to win a point with one shot or a hundred
 
Federer just doesn't have the confidence he has against any other player when he plays Djokovic. He is in his head.
Murray is a slightly lesser version of Djokovic and Federer plays a completely different level against him, and it's not all down to Murray. Wimbledon was the same.
 
Adv. Edberg said:
It's very off topic now. But he won a slam in 90. He still competed with prime Sampras/Agassi etc (who had won slams) even if he was gonna retire 4 years later. And peak Edberg/Becker/Mac/Lendl etc.
Click to expand...
Yes he won AO in 1990 (vs Edberg) at almost 30 and in the wake of a dominant 1989 and that was all she wrote for Lendl, just like that. He made a few big finals after that: AO 1991, Canada and Cincy 1992 but lost all of them to the new top guns: Becker/Sampras/Agassi and the Lendl era was officially over.
I found the fact that his last big year ended up being 1989 very symbolic of how much Lendl embodied the 80s. Agassi/Courier 's powerful baseline play would make Lendl's, once considered formidable, seem slightly outdated.
 
Tennis_Hands said:
Did you see how many clear winners Djokovic hit AFTER he has pinned Federer on his BH side or after a longish exchange and switching of positions?

It is akin to saying that Nadal is a great volleyer based on his success rate at the net, although he goes to the net basically after his set up delivery pretty much guarantees him the "easy" volley.

:cool:
Click to expand...
Out of coincidence,I finished watching full match 5 min ago.
The second set was more spectacular than just pinning Federer on his BH. There where passing shots from streching position, multiple BHDTL from NEUTRAL position(aimed toward Federer's forehand),Djokovic's forehand just went within inches of the baseline every time. You need to rewatch it.
 
InsideOut900 said:
Out of coincidence,I finished watching full match 5 min ago.
The second set was more spectacular than just pinning Federer on his BH. There where passing shots from streching position, multiple BHDTL from NEUTRAL position(aimed toward Federer's forehand),Djokovic's forehand just went within inches of the baseline every time. You need to rewatch it.
Click to expand...

Please, list the number of the shots you just mentioned for respective winners.

Thanks.

:cool:

P.S. I will rewatch the match when I can find it, as I didn't record it.
 
Tennis_Hands said:
Please, list the number of the shots you just mentioned for respective winners.

Thanks.

:cool:

P.S. I will rewatch the match when I can find it, as I didn't record it.
Click to expand...
5 aces to start with,one forehand DTL passing shot at 1-1 30-0(clocked at 142kph) A 18 shots rally,where Djokovic recovered from extreme defensive position with a lob and finished with a down the liner from center of the court to Federer's forehand 3-1 0-15,
one DTL at 5-1,return passing shot at 0-0 15-0,passing shot with the forehand in the beginning of the second game. There was 1 more than I don't recall atm. Yeah,found the 12th one Backhand DTL to end the second game.
BTW,you have a link from me at #3365.
 
Last edited:
veroniquem said:
Yes he won AO in 1990 (vs Edberg) at almost 30 and in the wake of a dominant 1989 and that was all she wrote for Lendl, just like that. He made a few big finals after that: AO 1991, Canada and Cincy 1992 but lost all of them to the new top guns: Becker/Sampras/Agassi and the Lendl era was officially over.
I found the fact that his last big year ended up being 1989 very symbolic of how much Lendl embodied the 80s. Agassi/Courier 's powerful baseline play would make Lendl's, once considered formidable, seem slightly outdated.
Click to expand...

And that's what doesn't happen nowadays. New generations don't bring along a more powerful and destructive game that can do away with the previous champions. This anomaly is what's allowed these players we now call the big 3 to accumulate so many titles at the Grand Slam level. And because it's a very unusual anomaly, it probably won't happen again.
 
Lendl's final streak:

1- Madrid 1981
2- Barcelona 1981
3- Basel 1981
4- Vienna 1981
5- Cologne 1981
6- Buenos Aires 1981
7- WTF 1981
8- Delray Beach 1982
9- La Quinta 1982
10- Genova 1982
11- Munich 1982
12- Strasbourg 1982
13- Frankfurt 1982
14- M-C 1982
15- Houston 1982
16- Dallas 1982
17- Madrid 1982
18- Forest Hills 1982

Compared to Djoko's streak, Lendl's is a complete JOKE and it doesn't even remotely compare!! It is full of insignificant Mickey Mouse events and IT DOESN'T INCLUDE A SINGLE SLAM!!!!
The only tier 1 in there are 1 WTF and 2 masters: Forest Hills and M-C (with Lendl winning only 1 of the 2).

What Djoko is currently achieving is absolutely unique, unparalleled and unprecedented and no male player in open era has come even close (Fed would be the closest of course)
 
Nathaniel_Near said:
Someone laughed at it earlier, but I think currently in the match-up, Djokovic's serve is getting as much work done as Federer's, maybe sometimes more and sometimes less. Federer's serve is better, but in the match-up he's having severe problems reading both deliveries. Djokovic is onto way more Federer deliveries. I'd be interested in finding the full match and only looking at every serve (and return) at some point. I think, even in accounting for Djokovic's return instincts, that just the first step in actually reading the serve, Djokovic is confusing Federer more than vice versa - this is not accounting for what's done when they get a racket onto the ball, but rather the initial read. And it isn't like Federer can't return - he's been doing a good job of it for most of the tournament. Djokovic's serve is very accurate now and he has patterns that are difficult to read. Djokovic reads Federer's patterns - something Fed needs to think about for the next matches, surely.
Click to expand...

That is to say, I think, that what counts is not comparing serve to serve but comparing serve/return match ups. Given Federer's return, Djokovic's serve is more effective than is Federer's serve against Djokovic's return. Right?

On another note, Djokovic's forehand was also better than Federer's forehand last night. And Djokovic's passing shots were outstanding (which doesn't augur well for Raonic should he make the final).
 
Note also that Djokovic always used to be criticized for his conversion rate in Slam finals (and to a lesser extent semi-finals) and has even been accused of "majoring in minors." Yet these are his Slam results as a 27 and 28-year-old: Runner-Up, Won, Semi-Final, Won, Runner-Up, Won, Won, Final (pending).

At worst:
Won 4
Runner-Up 3
Semi-Final 1

veroniquem said:
Lendl's final streak:

1- Madrid 1981
2- Barcelona 1981
3- Basel 1981
4- Vienna 1981
5- Cologne 1981
6- Buenos Aires 1981
7- WTF 1981
8- Delray Beach 1982
9- La Quinta 1982
10- Genova 1982
11- Munich 1982
12- Strasbourg 1982
13- Frankfurt 1982
14- M-C 1982
15- Houston 1982
16- Dallas 1982
17- Madrid 1982
18- Forest Hills 1982

Compared to Djoko's streak, Lendl's is a complete JOKE and it doesn't even remotely compare!! It is full of insignificant Mickey Mouse events and IT DOESN'T INCLUDE A SINGLE SLAM!!!!
The only tier 1 in there are 1 WTF and 2 masters: Forest Hills and M-C (with Lendl winning only 1 of the 2).

What Djoko is currently achieving is absolutely unique, unparalleled and unprecedented and no male player in open era has come even close (Fed would be the closest of course)
Click to expand...
 
veroniquem said:
Yes he won AO in 1990 (vs Edberg) at almost 30 and in the wake of a dominant 1989 and that was all she wrote for Lendl, just like that. He made a few big finals after that: AO 1991, Canada and Cincy 1992 but lost all of them to the new top guns: Becker/Sampras/Agassi and the Lendl era was officially over.
I found the fact that his last big year ended up being 1989 very symbolic of how much Lendl embodied the 80s. Agassi/Courier 's powerful baseline play would make Lendl's, once considered formidable, seem slightly outdated.
Click to expand...

His last "big year" was, I think, 1990. Although he slipped from #1 to #3 in the year-end rankings, and so it was his first year not finishing in the top two since 1984, the top four were all pretty close that year. Lendl was ITF World Champion for the year, so I don't think it'd be fair to say he was off the pace. By 1991, he definitely wasn't quite at the top anymore.
 
InsideOut900 said:
5 aces to start with,one forehand DTL passing shot-almost full stretch(clocked at 142kph) A 18 shots rally,where Djokovic recovered from extreme defensive position with a lob and finished with a down the liner from center of the court to Federer's forehand,
one DTL at 5-1,return passing shot at 0-0 15-0. There were 2 more than I don't recall atm.
BTW,you have a link from me at #3365.
Click to expand...

The links are of downloadable contents, which I will never do from a random source, but I sure will find a very good quality, like I normally do.

Aces are winners without any shot exchange, so .....

The third shot you describe (I presume it is the one at 3-1 0-15): the shot that finished the point was after a 6 shot exchange on Federer's BH, so.

The fourth shot Novac passed a pretty bad approach from Federer and again after the rally was mostly on Federer's BH.

Like I said, list them and we can talk, because what you are describing is not exactly my impression of what happened.

:cool:
 
12473513_748372918597063_850573114511432723_o.jpg
 
ScentOfDefeat said:
And that's what doesn't happen nowadays. New generations don't bring along a more powerful and destructive game that can do away with the previous champions. This anomaly is what's allowed these players we now call the big 3 to accumulate so many titles at the Grand Slam level. And because it's a very unusual anomaly, it probably won't happen again.
Click to expand...
Is it your analysis? I disagree. Nadal brought spin to a degree never seen before. Djoko brought a combination of accuracy and consistency from the baseline ruthlessly unique. Someone younger than Djoko will bring something new to the plate, I have no doubt.
 
veroniquem said:
Is it your analysis? I disagree. Nadal brought spin to a degree never seen before. Djoko brought a combination of accuracy and consistency from the baseline ruthlessly unique. Someone younger than Djoko will bring something new to the plate, I have no doubt.
Click to expand...

Nadal utilized what Borg did but with a modern equipment.

Who was the player, who first utilized the new technology to the best in the same way that Nadal later also used?

Come on, show us that you know something.

:cool:
 
veroniquem said:
Is it your analysis? I disagree. Nadal brought spin to a degree never seen before. Djoko brought a combination of accuracy and consistency from the baseline ruthlessly unique. Someone younger than Djoko will bring something new to the plate, I have no doubt.
Click to expand...

Yes, they did in relation to previous generations (more or less at the same time). What we don't see - and likely won't see, since they're all either in their 30's or getting there - is the new generations doing it to them. That's the anomaly I was talking about.
 
veroniquem said:
Lendl's final streak:

1- Madrid 1981
2- Barcelona 1981
3- Basel 1981
4- Vienna 1981
5- Cologne 1981
6- Buenos Aires 1981
7- WTF 1981
8- Delray Beach 1982
9- La Quinta 1982
10- Genova 1982
11- Munich 1982
12- Strasbourg 1982
13- Frankfurt 1982
14- M-C 1982
15- Houston 1982
16- Dallas 1982
17- Madrid 1982
18- Forest Hills 1982

Compared to Djoko's streak, Lendl's is a complete JOKE and it doesn't even remotely compare!! It is full of insignificant Mickey Mouse events and IT DOESN'T INCLUDE A SINGLE SLAM!!!!
The only tier 1 in there are 1 WTF and 2 masters: Forest Hills and M-C (with Lendl winning only 1 of the 2).

What Djoko is currently achieving is absolutely unique, unparalleled and unprecedented and no male player in open era has come even close (Fed would be the closest of course)
Click to expand...

you are the complete JOKE
 
helterskelter said:
His last "big year" was, I think, 1990. Although he slipped from #1 to #3 in the year-end rankings, and so it was his first year not finishing in the top two since 1984, the top four were all pretty close that year. Lendl was ITF World Champion for the year, so I don't think it'd be fair to say he was off the pace. By 1991, he definitely wasn't quite at the top anymore.
Click to expand...
He was already "majoring in minors" in 1990. AO 1990 was the only tier 1 final he reached. Edberg/Becker/Agassi were the rulers of the game (no Courier yet + of course Sampras "out of the blue" breakthrough at USO)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Adv. Edberg
  • Poll Poll
2016 Australian Open Final - [1] Djokovic vs. [2] Murray
43 44 45
Replies
2K
Views
122K
mattosgrant
M
jm1980
Match points saved and squandered by the Big Four
6 7 8
Replies
375
Views
62K
jm1980
jm1980
Love Game
  • Poll Poll
Melzer vs. Federer -- US Open 4th Rnd
8 9 10
Replies
490
Views
27K
Starfury
S
R
Nadal has been in almost every epic and significant battle in last 5 years
Replies
43
Views
4K
BeatlesFan
BeatlesFan
Garhi Shot First
  • Poll Poll
RG 2016 QF: Stan Wawrinka [3] vs. Albert Ramos-Vinolas
Replies
40
Views
3K
fundrazer
fundrazer
Back
Top