Ljubicic "He changed the sport, Wimbledon 2019 the big regret"

TMF said:
Nah, Federer will always be the main star - brilliant, class, styles, sportsmanship, the most iconic figure...

Not even Nadal was able to fill these shoes, let alone Djokovic. None of them became the phenomenon that Federer had become but who could expect for lightning to strike twice !
Click to expand...

It struck 3 times; SORRY! Roger will be forgotten soon enough! Just give it a decade ot 2! He'll be glamorized for a while, but the attention span of the world is short! :-D :laughing:
 
gjm127 said:
But that loss is a perfect symbol of his mental fragility against Djoker. Something that got worse with time throughout his career.
Click to expand...
Fed is 6 years older than Djoker and played him countless times in huge matches when he was older than Novak is currently. Yet the H2H is 27-23 Djokovic. Considering the age difference it's perfectly respectable.
 
BeatlesFan said:
Fed is 6 years older than Djoker and played him countless times in huge matches when he was older than Novak is currently. Yet the H2H is 27-23 Djokovic. Considering the age difference it's perfectly respectable.
Click to expand...

Which is why IDK why the age difference keeps coming up? It was just a 1 year age difference from Nadal, but Fedal highlighted w/ having the greatest rivalry ever! :unsure::giggle:
 
Fiero425 said:
Roger will be forgotten soon enough! Just give it a decade ot 2! He'll be glamorized for a while, but the attention span of the world is short! :-D :laughing:
Click to expand...
And you're so spectacularly obtuse you think either Novak or Rafa will be remembered for more than 5 minutes after they retire? They're all in the same boat and utterly disposable to the current generation. If Alcaraz starts winning endless slams and dominating, it will instantly be, "Rafa/Novak who?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMF
Ehh Even if Fed won Wimbledon in 2019, he would still be behind both Djoker and Nadal currently. (Year end #1 gone, Weeks #1 gone, Masters gone, Slam record gone, No Double Career slam) .. One match doesn't make up for that. And Nadal/Djoker aren't even done adding to their resumes. Both guys just attained a better overall body of work for their careers.

Nadal and DJoker just keep winning even into their later 30s and they aren't done. . Fed didn't win anything of note since 2017
 
BeatlesFan said:
And you're so spectacularly obtuse you think either Novak or Rafa will be remembered for more than 5 minutes after they retire? They're all in the same boat and utterly disposable to the current generation. If Alcaraz starts winning endless slams and dominating, it will instantly be, "Rafa/Novak who?"
Click to expand...

DId I say any different? Calm down babe! I go back to Borg and Connors in their hey day! They were lionized and rarely brought up even though they each hold records! :unsure:
 
Fiero425 said:
It struck 3 times; SORRY! Roger will be forgotten soon enough! Just give it a decade ot 2! He'll be glamorized for a while, but the attention span of the world is short! :-D :laughing:
Click to expand...
It never struck once; SORRY! They said the sane thing about Michael Jordan after he retire, yet no one forgot him and today his name gets mentioned quite often during game time or when talented players get praise. Federer will NEVER be forgotten. :-D :laughing:
 
TMF said:
It never struck once; SORRY! They said the sane thing about Michael Jordan after he retire, yet no one forgot him and today his name gets mentioned quite often during game time or when talented players get praise. Federer will NEVER be forgotten. :-D :laughing:
Click to expand...
A few folks very eager for him to be forgotten.

Kind of a lol. They’ll be waiting a while.

Think how much we hear about Borg, Mac, Laver, Connors, Pete, Andre on these boards!

And of course Fed’s a bit of a bigger fish to fry than those guys.
 
Mainad said:
That 2019 Wimbledon final showed just how far Djokovic had got into Federer's head when he faltered with multiple match points just as he had done in the semis of 2011 US Open. Djokovic proved to be Federer's true nemesis in the latter half of his career.
Click to expand...
Meh, that's just way too overblown. Fed beat Djokovic in comfortable 4 at Wimb right after that USO semi.
 
BlueHorizon said:
Federer choked the entire W 19 match in the most crucial moments. Losing all three
tie breaks! W 19 was the perfect bookend
to Djokovic’s mental stranglehold over
Federer in slams that decade.
FO 11 the exception . But of course
Federer failed to seize the opportunity vs Nadal
Click to expand...
Nah, Djokovic just had an age advantage and nothing more. Easy to be mentally tougher when you're the younger player.
 
Mustard said:
Losing 3 tiebreaks in a match ain't good. It was bad for Edberg at 1991 Wimbledon, who was reigning champion, reached the semi finals without dropping a set, then held serve in all 23 service games in the semi final, but still lost the match anyway.
Click to expand...
It happened to Nadal too though. Against a far worse opponent.
 
junior74 said:
Yes - third in this era, but first in his.

Rafa has not really had an era, has he?
Click to expand...
Practically made everyone at Roland Garros his bi*ch since 05.

Is owning the clay slam across 3 eras not meaningful to you?

Besides— there are many external variables that go into era dominance, such as era strength, so maybe it’s not as black and white as you think, no?
 
StrongRule said:
3 times at slam level is a pretty common thing. Given that losing from matchpoints up it something which doesn't happen too often.
Click to expand...
It only happened twice on his own serve. Twice in 9 years. It's clearly not that common.

The real problem in the Wimb F was the tiebreaks, not the 40-15 part. That was the only time he lost 3 tiebreaks in the same match.

But it happened to Nadal too so it's not about only Fed being a mental weakling.

Besides, Nadal's 40-15's are those matches lost from a break up in the 5th in 2 AO finals.
 
ForehandDTL said:
Practically made everyone at Roland Garros his bi*ch since 05.

Is owning the clay slam across 3 eras not meaningful to you?

Besides— there are many external variables that go into era dominance, such as era strength, so maybe it’s not as black and white as you think, no?
Click to expand...

I trust Rafa's own words. He is a good person, first and foremost.
 
jm1980 said:
A lot of Nadal fans legitimately believe losing early is better than losing in the final
Click to expand...
Losing early means he was probably injured/never in form, combination of the two.

If Nadal makes the final it usually means he’s in atleast decent form. The only oddball I can think of at the top of my head is AO 19 F
 
Hitman said:
No it wasn't. GOAT debate was from the time of Sampras when he said he was going to bring all the three big records - The slam count, the weeks at number one, and the year ending number one records together to end the arguments. Federer only picked up from where Sampras left off.
Click to expand...

Lmao at Sampras using weeks at No. 1 and YE #1 separately. When 1 derivative stat isn't enough, use 2!

Sampras always had the problem of not winning RG (and only making 1 SF). His problems were compounded when Agassi won RG in 1999, and he was basically dead in the water when Fed and Nadal both won the CGS in back to back years in 2009 and 2010.

Sampras will forever be defined by his era. He was an outstanding fast-court player, maybe the best ever, who also dominated the rankings because 3/5 most point-heavy events were on fast courts and because the tour was still full of specialists.
 
Fiero425 said:
A-Rod back in '09, Wimbl. final up a set & 6-2 in a TB! He butchered a high BH volley and never really recovered even though it took Roger a 5th set to win it 16=14! :-D:laughing:
Click to expand...
I am aware of what a bad choke is. The poster I was addressing seemed to think losing a match you held match point with your serve on isn't a bad choke, which is why I asked him to offer an alternative definition or example.
 
Ljubicic doing a lot of interviews:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571825742350258181

And this - although maybe part of the same one:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1571783650034995200

Generally I'm struck by how freely his close associates talk about the realities of his career which did have disappointments - there was an interview with Tony Godsick which had a couple of surprises in it is as well. I've always thought one of Federer's strengths was that he didn't surround himself with yes-men, this seems to confirm it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

davey25
  • Poll Poll
Who is more talented- Ljubicic or Gonzalez
Replies
35
Views
3K
inkpw2
inkpw2
P
‘I think the Australian Open is not a real possibility right now,’ says Roger Federer’s coach Ivan Ljubicic
Replies
43
Views
2K
DjokoLand
D
R
How far Nadal will go to Wimbledon ?
Replies
26
Views
1K
SonnyT
S
BeatlesFan
Ljubicic predicts the big 3 will rule tennis in 2020 once again
Replies
22
Views
2K
The Blond Blur
The Blond Blur
Frenchy-Player
Ricardo Piatti says he does not regret splitting from Novak Djokovic, reveals the Serb "squinted before hitting the ball" in his youth
Replies
3
Views
1K
Tennfan123
T
Back
Top