If Roddick/Hewitt couldn't beat prime Federer at AO/Wimbledon/USO, then why couldn't Murray?

abmk

Bionic Poster
I'm definitely taking that Tsonga over that Ferrer. Tsonga was goating that day and never played like that before or again at RG. Tsonga didn't have to do as much to beat 2013 Federer on clay who was quite bad. Credit to Ferrer for beating him easily that year though, but he played better in 2013 than 2012.
Tsonga played well only for 2.5 sets. from 2nd half of 2nd set to end of 4th set. Played a bad first set and collapsed in the 5th, wasn't playing that great in the 1st half of the 2nd set either. IMO, you are over-rating it.

Like I said:
How many others were playing that well in RG 12 anyways? Not fed. delpo had his issues after going up 2 sets to love vs Fed.

If ferrer plays like he did in 12 semi vs Nadal, he loses vs Tsonga. if he plays like in the previous rounds, he could win vs Tsonga by outlasting him.
 

InsideOut900

Hall of Fame
I would say only 2013 and 2016 are flat out better. I think he reached a slightly higher celing in both years. In 2011, he really wasn't pushed that much with a retirement and w/o until the Federer match. Then he took his level way up but was his ceiling higher there than 2012? Not so sure about that. He crushed Federer in the SF in 2012 in windy conditions whether he was at his best or not, and the way he played against Nadal in that final for a set and half was really something else, as well holding off Tsonga playing at that level.
2011 was cut out short by the W/O in the QF and the fact we didn't get to see what he would have done in the final.
But the SF is one of his better matches at RG for sure, so I extrapolated.
RG 12 seppi and tsonga matches < any of the matches in RG 13.


RG 13 semi vs Nadal > RG 12 final vs Nadal - overall including the fight.

RG 14 - Losing a set to in-form Gulbis doesn't mean much at all. The final, yeah, I know. But that doesn't make up 4R and QF in RG 2012.

Re: Wim 11, Tsonga played well for atleast 4 sets. Just because he lost the 2nd set in a TB doesn't mean he didn't play well in that 2nd set.
Its not just that Djokovic went 5 sets vs tsonga with tsonga playing well for only 2.5 sets, its that Djokovic had face MPs (though he did great to save them)

What about 2015? His best first 5 matches at RG? Yeah, level dipped in the SF and F, but 2012 was still clearly worse.
1. Ok, should have mentioned from the start, 2013 lands there by default irrespective of the other matches, because he had the mentality to actually go for the win, unlike 2012 where he had a down period during the clay season mentally. I mean yeah, he played better even before the SF in 2013, so agreed.

2. 2012 Nadal would probably be a handful though and beat 2013 Novak in the 4th set eventually.

3. Uh, 2014 Tsonga and Raonic aren't exactly formidable foes. I don't see 2014 Novak having it easy against 2012 Tsonga.
The SF/F looked better in 2012, but I could be wrong, haven't watched them in a while. Point is SF + F would trump earlier performances given how 2012 Tsonga would probably do the same to 2014 Novak. Subject to discussion if you think he wouldn't, of course.

4. I was trolling you with the Wimby 11 example :sneaky:
Tsonga obviously played better in the other 2 sets than he did in the 2012 RG QF.

5. Already said 2015 was better, but I wouldn't elevate it to the 2011, 2013 and 2016 tier.
 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
Tsonga played well only for 2.5 sets. from 2nd half of 2nd set to end of 4th set. Wasn't playing well before and collapsed in the 5th. IMO, you are over-rating it.

Like I said:
How many others were playing that well in RG 12 anyways? Not fed. delpo had his issues after going up 2 sets to love vs Fed.

If ferrer plays like he did in 12 semi vs Nadal, he loses vs Tsonga. if he plays like in the previous rounds, he could win vs Tsonga by outlasting him.
But like InsideOut just said, that's all it takes to win. Yea he didn't play great in sets 1 and 5 but played out of this world in the middle 3 sets. I'm giving credit where it's due.

It's not just how many others were playing well, it's that Tsonga's level was so high that he almost beat a well playing Djokovic in 4 sets. Djokovic played quite well that day. It's not like he let Tsonga do that to him. He himself was aggressive from the start. Only Nadal and Djokovic could take him out at that year's tournament if he played like that.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
The Soderling performaces vs Nadal in 09 and Fed in 10 in RG were as good or better than anything Djokovic did in RG.
 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
2011 was cut out short by the W/O in the QF and the fact we didn't get to see what he would have done in the final.
But the SF is one of his better matches at RG for sure, so I extrapolated.
Yea the 2011 SF was a great match from him, and on 2012 level imo so I agree there.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
2. 2012 Nadal would probably be a handful though and beat 2013 Novak in the 4th set eventually.
probably.

3. Uh, 2014 Tsonga and Raonic aren't exactly formidable foes. I don't see 2014 Novak having it easy against 2012 Tsonga.
The SF/F looked better in 2012, but I could be wrong, haven't watched them in a while. Point is SF + F would trump earlier performances given how 2012 Tsonga would probably do the same to 2014 Novak. Subject to discussion if you think he wouldn't, of course.
possible. This one is debatable.

4. I was trolling you with the Wimby 11 example :sneaky:
Tsonga obviously played better in the other 2 sets than he did in the 2012 RG QF.
I was like what's going on!

5. Already said 2015 was better, but I wouldn't elevate it to the 2011, 2013 and 2016 tier.
fair enough.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
But like InsideOut just said, that's all it takes to win. Yea he didn't play great in sets 1 and 5 but played out of this world in the middle 3 sets. I'm giving credit where it's due.

It's not just how many others were playing well, it's that Tsonga's level was so high that he almost beat a well playing Djokovic in 4 sets. Djokovic played quite well that day. It's not like he let Tsonga do that to him. He himself was aggressive from the start. Only Nadal and Djokovic could take him out at that year's tournament if he played like that.
InsideOut already admitted he was trolling with that part. 2.5 sets doesn't suffice if your opponent is playing pretty well on clay. (this ain't grass with finer margins and lesser chance to contain)
Djokovic got subdued when tsonga was clicking from what I saw. Wasn't as good as you are making it out to be.

I mean delpo GOATed for almost 3 sets in RG 2009 semi and played fairly well in the 5th set. Still wasn't enough beat Federer.
 
Last edited:

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
InsideOut already admitted he was trolling with that part. 2.5 sets doesn't suffice if your opponent is playing pretty well on clay. (this ain't grass with finer margins and lesser chance to contain)
Djokovic got subdued when tsonga was clicking from what I saw. Wasn't as good as you are making it out to be.
He didn't look subdued from the match I watched. He even hit more winners and less unforced errors in sets 2 and 4, and lost one and was 4 match points down to lose the other one but when an opponent is playing like that, you don't have many chances.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
He didn't look subdued from the match I watched. He even hit more winners and less unforced errors in sets 2 and 4, and lost one and was 4 match points down to lose the other one but when an opponent is playing like that, you don't have many chances.
How would you rate Tsonga in that match out of 10?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Not sure about HC for 09 but agree on clay. You could make a case 2008 was a prime year for Djokovic on clay and HC though.
Well, semi at USO, final in Miami, final in Cincy, semi in Shanghai and title in Paris. Also narrowly missed the semis at the WTF while winning 2 matches.

Pretty good HC season anyway.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
He didn't look subdued from the match I watched. He even hit more winners and less unforced errors in sets 2 and 4, and lost one and was 4 match points down to lose the other one but when an opponent is playing like that, you don't have many chances.
Like I already said, Tsonga only found his range of 2nd half of 2nd set, not even the 1st half. That's 2.5 sets of very good tennis.

Not just my comment in that thread btw:

Tsonga has since midway through the second. Novak just turned it up since saving match point at 4-5 (has saved 4 now).
I mean delpo GOATed for almost 3 sets in RG 2009 semi and played fairly well in the 5th set. Still wasn't enough beat Federer. That was Federer playing well - though not his best tennis. Tsonga OTOH vs djokovic had 4 MPs. Guess I have a higher standard for Djokovic playing well than you do.
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
9 for the middle sets (if AO08 SF and last 3 sets of Wimby 11 QF are a 10) and probably 5 or 6 for the other 2 sets.
Not quite unbeatable, but tough for a QF opponent.
tsonga hit 1 winner to 12 UEs in that 1st set, forced only 3 errors from djokovic.
that's 4 W+errors forced to 12 UEs.

that's pretty poor. Deserves a 3 if you ask me.

10W+errors forced to 11 UEs in the 5th set. Maybe a 5 for that.

 

NoleFam

Talk Tennis Guru
Overall though. He gave it 7.5/8 IIRC.
When you look at that match as a whole, sets 1 and 5 will bring his overall performance down so that's about right. It's not a match like 2008 AO SF where he was outstanding from beginning to end.
 

The Guru

Hall of Fame
I don't think he loses comfortably. 2012 Djokovic wasn't that good at the FO. He had his own close scares against Seppi (weaker player than Haas) and Tsonga (weaker player than Delpo).
I think Djoko dialed in in the SFs and F but that's fair enough.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
7.5-8 more like.
Though Novak shouldn't lose 3 consecutive sets to any Tsonga on clay, that is that.
Means you give that Djoko like a 8.5 to 9/10. I think the RG 13 SF was his most impressive match and i would put that as a 8.5 to 9/10 so it must have been super good.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Roddick served 11% aces vs Federer which is above average, but nothing special, even vs Federer. He's had way higher numbers on HC vs Federer.Murray's served that ace% vs Fed at Wimbledon. In that tournament, Soderling hit 16% aces, Karlovic was higher ofcourse. Tommy Haas hit 10% aces vs Fed. 1st% points won was 82% for Roddick, which was very far below Soderling, who actually had a way better DR than Roddick despite losing in straights. Roddick's% was average for him. 1st serve return, 2nd serve return, 2nd serve% points won were all equally bad for Roddick.

Was it good? Yes. But it wasn't otherworldly. The real miracle was Fed winning that many return points and getting less than 1 BP per 5 games.
Maybe that was somewhat due to Roddick being clutch on 30-30 points? IIRC he had a lot of success handcuffing Fed on the return with body serves.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Roddick served 11% aces vs Federer which is above average, but nothing special, even vs Federer. He's had way higher numbers on HC vs Federer.Murray's served that ace% vs Fed at Wimbledon. In that tournament, Soderling hit 16% aces, Karlovic was higher ofcourse. Tommy Haas hit 10% aces vs Fed. 1st% points won was 82% for Roddick, which was very far below Soderling, who actually had a way better DR than Roddick despite losing in straights. Roddick's% was average for him. 1st serve return, 2nd serve return, 2nd serve% points won were all equally bad for Roddick.

Was it good? Yes. But it wasn't otherworldly. The real miracle was Fed winning that many return points and getting less than 1 BP per 5 games.
Soderling only served at 56%. His serving performance was remarkable but obviously he wasn't anywhere near as clutch and went down at the end of each set which made it a fairly straightforward affair. Fed was mostly on cruise control the whole time. Roddick serving 70% and winning 83% of first serve points over a match that long is remarkable, better than what Karlovic did in the same tournament (and Federer is going to be more locked in for the final than he was for Karlovic or Soderling). Yeah his ace count was "low" but many many serves weren't coming back and Federer back then was still fairly hard to ace (unlike the older version). Fed barely getting his racket on a few serves shouldn't matter for anything, Roddick had at least as many unreturnables as he had aces.

Not to mention that Roddick kept this up in a match where the match was like double the length of the others, that makes the stats all the more impressive. He had a ton of aces in the first 3 sets, but then Federer started getting slightly better reads, still Roddick's serve was overall just as effective in the last 2 as the first 3.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Soderling only served at 56%. His serving performance was remarkable but obviously he wasn't anywhere near as clutch and went down at the end of each set which made it a fairly straightforward affair. Fed was mostly on cruise control the whole time. Roddick serving 70% and winning 83% of first serve points over a match that long is remarkable, better than what Karlovic did in the same tournament (and Federer is going to be more locked in for the final than he was for Karlovic or Soderling). Yeah his ace count was "low" but many many serves weren't coming back and Federer back then was still fairly hard to ace (unlike the older version). Fed barely getting his racket on a few serves shouldn't matter for anything, Roddick had at least as many unreturnables as he had aces.

Not to mention that Roddick kept this up in a match where the match was like double the length of the others, that makes the stats all the more impressive. He had a ton of aces in the first 3 sets, but then Federer started getting slightly better reads, still Roddick's serve was overall just as effective in the last 2 as the first 3.
I'd have liked to see the stat breakdown per set tbh. Roddick has had higher ace% vs Fed on HC, which shouldn't happen too often, serving like 15% aces vs Fed at the 2007 USO, which was also a pretty tight match.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Maybe that was somewhat due to Roddick being clutch on 30-30 points? IIRC he had a lot of success handcuffing Fed on the return with body serves.
Could be.. I think generally you win like 10% of return games with 30% return points won, so for Roddick to win 37 in a row before that is massive. Must be said that the variance goes up a lot if points% won numbers go down.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
I'd have liked to see the stat breakdown per set tbh. Roddick has had higher ace% vs Fed on HC, which shouldn't happen too often, serving like 15% aces vs Fed at the 2007 USO, which was also a pretty tight match.
Rod had a huge serving day in 2008 Miami too.

But in 07 USO (and 08 Miami) Roddick was serving stupidly huge so he got more balls by Federer. 2009 Wimbledon was more held back and focused on placement. But he also held up his serve much longer in 09, whereas in 07 after 2-2.5 sets he started to physically wear down. But still, 07 QF first two sets is the best Roddick has ever served against Fed given that Fed's return was still very good back then.

Roddick was much more ace heavy in the QF/SF but less successful on first serve. Of course Federer was a worse returner on grass than Hewitt/Murray by then, but he was also much better on second serves than they were. So it probably was good tactics from Roddick vs Federer to go for less and hit his spots.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Roddick served 11% aces vs Federer which is above average, but nothing special, even vs Federer. He's had way higher numbers on HC vs Federer.Murray's served that ace% vs Fed at Wimbledon. In that tournament, Soderling hit 16% aces, Karlovic was higher ofcourse. Tommy Haas hit 10% aces vs Fed. 1st% points won was 82% for Roddick, which was very far below Soderling, who actually had a way better DR than Roddick despite losing in straights. Roddick's% was average for him. 1st serve return, 2nd serve return, 2nd serve% points won were all equally bad for Roddick.

Was it good? Yes. But it wasn't otherworldly. The real miracle was Fed winning that many return points and getting less than 1 BP per 5 games.
Why would you focus on ace% numbers? You should be looking at serves unreturned%.

Wim 09 final: Roddick serves unreturned = 98/239 = 41%


USO 07 QF: Roddick serves unreturned = 43/103 = 41.74%


USO: slower surface, better returning federer
Wim: kept up serving for longer

I'd give edge to the serving at USO QF, but it isn't big.

Just to throw in another data point:
Wim 04 final: Roddick serves unreturned = 41/133 = 30.82%


At the bold part, that was fed's problem, he didn't cluster the points well: same problem in Wim 08 final, Wim 09 final, Wim 10 QF and Wim 11 QF.
Clustered it well in Wim 12 and beat both Djoko&Murray.

A good piece on the Tsonga-Federer match, from The Daily Fix blog at WSJ:


Djokovic’s Many Happy Returns.

By Carl Bialik

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga’s serve looked unbreakable for most of his Wimbledon quarterfinal upset of Roger Federer on Wednesday. Two days later, Tsonga was broken six times by Novak Djokovic, who claimed the No. 1 ranking and his first Wimbledon final berth with the win. The difference is mostly due to Djokovic’s superior return game, the best in tennis. But it also reflects the importance of winning points at the right time, something Federer didn’t do against Tsonga but Djokovic did.

In two days, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga’s serve devolved from extraordinary to ordinary.Federer won 29% of points in Tsonga’s service games, compared to 39% for Djokovic. That may sound like a moderate difference, but it turns out to be enormous. Breaking serve requires winning four return points, or more, in the same game and outscoring the server by at least two points. So any small edge in returning on any point accumulates over the course of a game. If Federer had the same 29% chance of winning any particular point in Tsonga’s service games, then he had a 9% chance of breaking in each of those games. Djokovic’s chance, assuming his probability of winning any Tsonga service point was 39%, was 25% — nearly three times as great as Federer’s. That means Federer could have expected to break Tsonga twice, and Djokovic five times (Tsonga had more service games in his five-setter against Federer than in his four sets against Djokovic). The actual numbers were close: One and six, respectively.

But on grass, where big servers often thrive and one break can be enough to win a set, Federer’s inability to get that second break may have prevented him from winning the match, while Djokovic’s extra break helped him close out Tsonga in four. The discrepancies reflect that Djokovic clustered his return points well: Tsonga had some easy service games against him, but Djokovic dominated him in others. Federer, instead, consistently scored one or two points on most Tsonga service games but never even had another break point after breaking Tsonga in Tsonga’s first service game. Given the number of return points he won, if Federer had clustered them randomly he could have expected to hold at least one break point in six different Tsonga service games. His probability of holding a break point in just one (or none) was 1%, yet that’s what happened. Tsonga, against Federer, clustered his return points well — he won just 24% of his and could have expected just one service break. Instead he broke three times and beat Federer, despite losing 10 more points than he won.

Sadly for Federer, this has become the norm at the tournament he once owned. This is the fourth straight Wimbledon in which he broke just once in his final match at the tournament. In 2009, that break was enough to beat Andy Roddick in five sets. But in the 2008 final against Rafael Nadal and in Federer’s 2010 quarterfinal against Thomas Berdych, one break didn’t suffice. And each time, Federer had fewer breaks than would be expected from the proportion of return points he won. Against Berdych he should have had three; against Roddick, three; and against Nadal, four. This is a result of Federer’s recent record of poor rates of break-point conversions in big matches at majors, but also of too many games in which he never quite got to break point. If Federer wants to beat the likes of Tsonga next year, as well as Djokovic and Nadal, he’ll have to find a way to pack his return points into single games, and make the most of them.

At Wimbledon last year Federer finally broke this pattern. He broke Djokovic 3 times, Murray 4 times.

Edit:
Lets actually look at Roddick's unreturned serves% in Wim 09 QF and SF

vs Hewitt: 73/165 = 44.24%

vs Murray: 49/137 = 35.76%

So Roddick actually had a higher% of serves unreturned vs Hewitt and about 5% lower serves unreturned vs Murray when compared to vs Fed in the final.
 
Last edited:

RS

G.O.A.T.
The Wim 09 final was such a bot fest just watched the first set and a bit very average returning very both and very few ground rallies. Good play but much overhyped.

Wim 2014 final was better quality and more exciting to watch let alone the 2018 SF.
 
The Wim 09 final was such a bot fest just watched the first set and a bit very average returning very both and very few ground rallies. Good play but much overhyped.

Wim 2014 final was better quality and more exciting to watch let alone the 2018 SF.
Go watch the first set of the latter and tell us how much less bottish it is not.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
The Wim 09 final was such a bot fest just watched the first set and a bit very average returning very both and very few ground rallies. Good play but much overhyped.

Wim 2014 final was better quality and more exciting to watch let alone the 2018 SF.
Well, in terms of quality, obviously the 2014 Wimb final is better. But that's also because Djokovic doesn't have Roddick's serve, otherwise that would be a bot fest too.

Besides, Fed himself was worse in the 2014 final. I just checked. Fed had only 1 BP in the first 3.5 sets. Djokovic's serve is good, but not as imposing as Roddick's, so Fed only mustering 1 BP against the Djokovic serve is weak sauce from him.

Fed would have been out in comfortable 4 if Novak hadn't gone on his choking spree in the 4th. One of Fed's best serving days, but off the ground and off the return he was very ordinary.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
Well, in terms of quality, obviously the 2014 Wimb final is better. But that's also because Djokovic doesn't have Roddick's serve, otherwise that would be a bot fest too.

Besides, Fed himself was worse in the 2014 final. I just checked. Fed had only 1 BP in the first 3.5 sets. Djokovic's serve is good, but not as imposing as Roddick's, so Fed only mustering 1 BP against the Djokovic serve is weak sauce from him.

Fed would have been out in comfortable 4 if Novak hadn't gone on his choking spree in the 4th. One of Fed's best serving days, but off the ground and off the return he was very ordinary.
Fed deserved a 5th setter. Djokovic choked a bit but so did Fed to get broken and Fed earned the comeback.

True about the returning but the match was played a far faster pace and still had comparable stats to the 2009 final despite being less serve prevelant. Djokovic only 6 less winners than Roddick despite 70 less points and not have a serve reliant game as Roddick did and Federer in 2014 hit one more winner as well.

In 2009 he didnt have to use his ground game that much to compare really to 2014 in the final nevermind the 2018 SF between Nadal and Djokovic.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Fed deserved a 5th setter. Djokovic choked a bit but so did Fed to get broken and Fed earned the comeback.

True about the returning but the match was played a far faster pace and still had comparable stats to the 2009 final despite being less serve prevelant. Djokovic only 6 less winners than Roddick despite 70 less points and not have a serve reliant game as Roddick did and Federer in 2014 hit one more winner as well.

In 2009 he didnt have to use his ground game that much to compare really to 2014 in the final nevermind the 2018 SF between Nadal and Djokovic.
I think he'd still struggle immensely with Roddick's serve in 2014.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
The Wim 09 final was such a bot fest just watched the first set and a bit very average returning very both and very few ground rallies. Good play but much overhyped.

Wim 2014 final was better quality and more exciting to watch let alone the 2018 SF.
Wim 09 final > Wim 14 final in terms of quality.

09: better federer from the ground, better returning from fed, better Roddick serving compared to Djokovic
14: Djokovic better from the ground and better returning - when compared to Roddick

more rallies does not necessarily equal better quality.
 

RS

G.O.A.T.
Wim 09 final > Wim 14 final in terms of quality.

09: better federer from the ground, better returning from fed, better Roddick serving compared to Djokovic
14: Djokovic better from the ground and better returning.


more rallies does not necessarily equal better quality.
Federer did not use his ground game that much even if it was a lot better generally. Hardly no pressure on the return from RoddICJ unlike Djokovic who was putting it on the feet of Federer non stop and forcing him out of his confort zone. Rallies show a faster pace though and way more room for UEs and errors in the 2014 final (the stats were still comparable)


Well below the Wim 14 final and Wim 18 SF and the Murray match in the SF was better as well imo.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Fed deserved a 5th setter. Djokovic choked a bit but so did Fed to get broken and Fed earned the comeback.

True about the returning but the match was played a far faster pace and still had comparable stats to the 2009 final despite being less serve prevelant. Djokovic only 6 less winners than Roddick despite 70 less points and not have a serve reliant game as Roddick did and Federer in 2014 hit one more winner as well.

In 2009 he didnt have to use his ground game that much to compare really to 2014 in the final nevermind the 2018 SF between Nadal and Djokovic.
Well, jeez,guess what Federer was considerably worse off the return&ground in 2014. No wonder Djokovic managed to get that many winners.

The far faster pace is a load of bullcr*p. Both Federer and Roddick were hitting hard in Wim 09 final. Federer most certainly was hitting harder than in Wim 14 final.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Federer did not use his ground game that much even if it was a lot better generally. Hardly no pressure on the return from RoddICJ unlike Djokovic who was putting it on the feet of Federer non stop and forcing him out of his confort zone. Rallies show a faster pace though and way more room for UEs and errors in the 2014 final (the stats were still comparable)


Well below the Wim 14 final and Wim 18 SF and the Murray match in the SF was better as well imo.
yeah, Federer did use his ground game quite a bit in Wim 09 final.
Federer was making Djokovic's serve look like Sampras' in the 14 final (minus the 4th set). For all the talk about Federer not returning well in Wim 09 final, he returned worse in Wim 14 final.
Wim 09 final > Wim 14 final.
 

StrongRule

G.O.A.T.
DR in AO 2009 final: Federer's DR = 1.011
DR in AO 2012 semi: Federer's DR = 0.863

How on earth is that similar?



LOL wut? Delpo of RG 09 would've beaten Djokovic of RG 12 in 4 sets as would federer of RG 09 (QF-F)
Delpo was GOATing in that match just like Stan of RG 15 final.
Federer beat Monfils in an excellent match in RG 09 QF and GOATed in the final vs Soderling. Played well enough to stave off a GOATing delpo.
But Djoko fanboys keep talking like RG 09 was bad from fed. Only 2 matches were below par - Haas&Acusaso. Its even more delusional stuff when talking about RG 12 djokovic - who was down 2 sets to love vs Seppi and had to save 4 MPs vs Tsonga.
Djokovic got broken 4 times by a pretty mediocre federer in RG 12 semi, LOL.
LOL, no. Del Potro being a favorite against Djokovic in a slam? This is a terrible matchup for him. At best case it would be a 5 set match, but Djokovic would end up winning, like always.
 
Top