Novak fans, does Med winning it make it more bearable?

Does Med winning it make it more bearable?


  • Total voters
    15

Cortana

Hall of Fame
Usually after such devastating losses from Novak I'm down for a couple of days (sometimes weeks).

But now it feels totally different. I really like Med a lot and he deserved it the most. So I'm fine with Djokovic losing him.

How do you feel about it? Does the player he lost to make it different?
 

Mivic

Semi-Pro
I really like Med as a person but it was difficult seeing Djokovic unable to hit through a guy who wasn't doing much more than pushing the ball for most of the first two sets. Granted, he was serving great and raised his level towards the end of the match, but if Djokovic had to lose I would have much rather seen it against a guy who was capable of taking the racquet out of his hands (like Stan) than a guy like Med who in my opinion didn't do much more than take advantage of Novak's physical and mental fatigue by keeping the ball in play after a cakewalk of a draw where he'd expended minimal energy. If the draws of the finalists are reversed I still strongly favour Novak in that match. The fact that Medvedev is a decent bloke doesn't really make a difference to me from that standpoint. Might sound like sour grapes but that's the way I feel.
 
Last edited:

Strale

Semi-Pro
Well Medvedev proved yesterday that only Federer is a weak era champ :D

Next gen finaly replacing the big 3.

It is only a matter of time for Tsitsipas to win FO and Zverev to win something aswell...

Djokovic king of the strongest era!!!!!
 

snr

Semi-Pro
I really like Med as a person but it was difficult seeing Djokovic unable to hit through a guy who wasn't doing much more than pushing the ball for most of the first two sets. Granted, he was serving great and raised his level towards the end of the match, but if Djokovic had to lose I would have much rather seen it against a guy who was capable of taking the racquet out of his hands (like Stan) than a guy like Med who in my opinion didn't do much more than take advantage of Novak's physical and mental fatigue by keeping the ball in play after a cakewalk of a draw where he'd expended minimal energy. If the draws of the finalists are reversed I still strongly favour Novak in that match. The fact that Medvedev is a decent bloke doesn't really make a difference to me from that standpoint. Might sound like sour grapes but that's the way I feel.
Draw aside though, it was interesting to see Djokovic playing someone with pretty much the exact same gamestyle of himself and how he typically plays people at the end of the slam (wears them down and creating fatigue)
 

Beacon Hill

Hall of Fame
I really like Med as a person but it was difficult seeing Djokovic unable to hit through a guy who wasn't doing much more than pushing the ball for most of the first two sets. Granted, he was serving great and raised his level towards the end of the match, but if Djokovic had to lose I would have much rather seen it against a guy who was capable of taking the racquet out of his hands (like Stan) than a guy like Med who in my opinion didn't do much more than take advantage of Novak's physical and mental fatigue by keeping the ball in play after a cakewalk of a draw where he'd expended minimal energy. If the draws of the finalists are reversed I still strongly favour Novak in that match. The fact that Medvedev is a decent bloke doesn't really make a difference to me from that standpoint. Might sound like sour grapes but that's the way I feel.
Agreed. It was hard to watch Djokovic lose to a guy that won by using the same tactics that Djokovic has used his entire career.
 

Strale

Semi-Pro
Medvedev completely deserved it and yes it feels right...

After that crowd bullying on his serve i kinda felt that it would be unfair if Djokovic somehow manages to win....

Medvedev proved that there is only one weak era champ and Djokovic will have to work harder and adapt better in order to win next slam.
 

Beacon Hill

Hall of Fame
Well Medvedev proved yesterday that only Federer is a weak era champ :D

Next gen finaly replacing the big 3.

It is only a matter of time for Tsitsipas to win FO and Zverev to win something aswell...

Djokovic king of the strongest era!!!!!
Exactly. Federer was beating useless guys like Roddick. Djokovic wouldn't even lose a set to Roddick if they had ever played. He'd eat up that 150 mph serve on fast courts.
 

Rina

Professional
So you do acknowledge he's in trouble then ?

Eventually the denial wears off and even you will see the truth.
I am not sure what you mean by trouble? Is he impenetrable and nobody can beat him? Of course not, he has weaknesses and we saw that he was both mentally and physically drained by stress and physical exhaustion? Sure.
Is he going to lose very match from now on? Heck, no. Are younger guys finally catching up to him? Yes, of course.
That doesn't mean that he is now a washed up, will never win anything again. If anything, it means that he lost one match.
Now if we find out that he has some injury, that is different.
So, again, what do you mean by trouble? Done like Federer seems to be? Far from it. I see this for what it is, nervous and tired tennis player lost a match under extreme pressure. Nothing else, and nothing more.
I expect him to be ready to win AO.
 

Omega Mouse

New User
Well Medvedev proved yesterday that only Federer is a weak era champ :D

Next gen finaly replacing the big 3.

It is only a matter of time for Tsitsipas to win FO and Zverev to win something aswell...

Djokovic king of the strongest era!!!!!
Would you shut up about weak era. Jesus Christ... if someone is utterly dominate, it's so convenient to claim it was just a "weak" era. How about Djokovic rising to his prime after Federer and Nadal were falling from theirs? What about nobody winning slams other than the big 3 for the last decade? Your weak era concept is flawed and if we look deeper, there's actually more of an argument that Djokovic was lucky to peak after Fed and Nadal were out of their primes.
 

Strale

Semi-Pro
Would you shut up about weak era. Jesus Christ... if someone is utterly dominate, it's so convenient to claim it was just a "weak" era. How about Djokovic rising to his prime after Federer and Nadal were falling from theirs? What about nobody winning slams other than the big 3 for the last decade? Your weak era concept is flawed and if we look deeper, there's actually more of an argument that Djokovic was lucky to peak after Fed and Nadal were out of their primes.
For your information Djokovic crushed these guys at their best and dominated last decade...

You have no shame lol...
 

netlets

Semi-Pro
For your information Djokovic crushed these guys at their best and dominated last decade...

You have no shame lol...
Winning the Grand Slam would have been an incredible accomplishment, but you also need some luck - like several great players not playing much that year and two of the big three injured and not able to play. Although I don't think Djoker normally would lose to Fed or Rafa on hardcourt, he certainly would have lost to Nadal in the state he was in yesterday. Djoker was fortunate to have that luck, but the pressure and mental exhaustion caught up with him. It's very interesting that it didn't until the very last match.
 

Omega Mouse

New User
For your information Djokovic crushed these guys at their best and dominated last decade...

You have no shame lol...
Your argument is not based in reality. Federer has not been his best since 2006. You're just making up a reality that you're happy with. Djokovic doesn't need any help in the form of "weak era" arguments to solidify his place as the GOAT. It's petty bull ****.
 

Strale

Semi-Pro
Winning the Grand Slam would have been an incredible accomplishment, but you also need some luck - like several great players not playing much that year and two of the big three injured and not able to play. Although I don't think Djoker normally would lose to Fed or Rafa on hardcourt, he certainly would have lost to Nadal in the state he was in yesterday. Djoker was fortunate to have that luck, but the pressure and mental exhaustion caught up with him. It's very interesting that it didn't until the very last match.
Djokovic is just better than Fedal,there is no luck and i dont care about hypothetical stuff
 

Strale

Semi-Pro
Your argument is not based in reality. Federer has not been his best since 2006. You're just making up a reality that you're happy with. Djokovic doesn't need any help in the form of "weak era" arguments to solidify his place as the GOAT. It's petty bull ****.
I know i know Federer is born declined and rafa injured....I am not making anything up...It is you who have to feed yourself a lie that Federer is declined and in a a hypothetical matchup he would have won for sure...Sorry but reality is that Djokovic is superior...
 
Top