Novak has lost 2 major finals to Andy. What does this tell us ?

tennisaddict

tennisaddict

Bionic Poster
Federer has lost 8 major finals so far. ( 6 to Nadal, 1 each to Novak and Delpo)

Nadal has lost 6 major finals ( 2 to Fed, 3 to Novak and 1 to Stan)

Novak has lost 7 major finals ( 4 to Nadal, 2 to Murray and 1 to Fed)

Murray won 2 majors , beating Novak at both instances.

I think Murray won fair and square those 2 finals.

Are these major lost opportunities for Novak , considering the opponent was not Federer or Nadal ?

If Novak won those two majors, his losses would have been more in line with Fed / Nadal in terms of Win-Loss ratios. Now it is skewed badly.

Did Murray over achieve or Novak under achieved ?
 
Last edited:
tennisaddict said:
Federer has lost 8 major finals so far. ( 6 to Nadal, 1 each to Novak and Delpo)

Nadal has lost 6 major finals ( 2 to Fed, 3 to Novak and 1 to Stan)

Novak has lost 7 major finals ( 4 to Nadal, 2 to Murray and 1 to Fed)

Murray won 2 majors , beating Novak at both instances.

I think Murray won fair and square those 2 finals.

Are these major lost opportunities for Novak , considering the opponent was not Federer or Nadal ?
Click to expand...

The lost opportunities were no more major than when his opponents were Federer or Nadal!
 
Mainad said:
The lost opportunities were no more major than when his opponents were Federer or Nadal!
Click to expand...

Not sure how you can say that.

As a Fed fan, I can say very well the loss to Delpo stings more than anything else. Not just the mere fact Fed was within 2 points of winning.
 
tennisaddict said:
Federer has lost 8 major finals so far. ( 6 to Nadal, 1 each to Novak and Delpo)

Nadal has lost 6 major finals ( 2 to Fed, 3 to Novak and 1 to Stan)

Novak has lost 7 major finals ( 4 to Nadal, 2 to Murray and 1 to Fed)

Murray won 2 majors , beating Novak at both instances.

I think Murray won fair and square those 2 finals.

Are these major lost opportunities for Novak , considering the opponent was not Federer or Nadal ?
Click to expand...

Not so much the Wimbledon final due to Murray's great record there in previous years and the fact that he's probably a better grass court player than Djokovic anyway. But the '12 USO final, yeah, I do think Novak should've won that one.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Not so much the Wimbledon final due to Murray's great record there in previous years and the fact that he's probably a better grass court player than Djokovic anyway. But the '12 USO final, yeah, I do think Novak should've won that one.
Click to expand...

I don't, 2 sets up was Murray.

It tells us that Andy beat Novak twice in slam finals. You know, tennis is all about beating the guy across the net.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Not so much the Wimbledon final due to Murray's great record there in previous years and the fact that he's probably a better grass court player than Djokovic anyway. But the '12 USO final, yeah, I do think Novak should've won that one.
Click to expand...

Agree fully with this post.

It is a mystery / irony that Novak has more Wimbledon than Andy and Andy has same USO titles as Novak.
 
Aretium said:
I don't, 2 sets up was Murray.

It tells us that Andy beat Novak twice in slam finals. You know, tennis is all about beating the guy across the net.
Click to expand...

I just think Djokovic, as the better HC player, should have won the match irrespective of Murray being 2 sets up. It doesn't mean that I don't think he was the worthy winner that day, which is what you seem to have inferred from my post.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I just think Djokovic, as the better HC player, should have won the match irrespective of Murray being 2 sets up. It doesn't mean that I don't think he was the worthy winner that day, which is what you seem to have inferred from my post.
Click to expand...
He was beaten 6-2 in the last set. I think that says enough.
 
When you talk about lost opportunities, Andy was clearly the better player at AO '13 final until the feather incident and AO '12 SF, had Andy broken Novak at 5-5 in the 5th set, then perhaps the Scot would also be chasing a career GS with 2 Aussie titles under his belt.

Except, he didn't. Yes every player has had lost opportunities. Novak is no different.

Still, that FH Djok hit against Fed at USO'11 was an absolute fluke (or was it??). What could have been, Rafa completing the career Roger slam at Flushing.
 
It tells me that Andy Murray has won 2 Grand slams by defeating Novak Djokovic in the finals.

Nothing more, nothing less.
 
Logic has taken a hit today. Fed is a better player than anyone due to his records, so he can't be beat? Whuut Fed had 2 mp against Novak and should have won. No THe winner is the guy who wins the last point.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
That says nothing as you obviously didn't understand what I was trying to say in the first place.
Click to expand...
I did understand what you were saying. You were spouting the usual "Djokovic was tired/should have beaten Murray BS" and I replied with the fact that Murray beat Djokovic down in the last set and he had little to no chances of winning from that point..
 
Was Djokovic even leading at any point during the match?
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I just meant that Djokovic should have won the match before it got started, at no point did I state that he should have won throughout the course of it. Why do some people on here get so irked when a poster says that he feels his favourite player ought to have won certain matches here and there? I'll never for the life of me understand that. :confused:
Click to expand...
At the time people did concede that Djokovic was the better player and had the mental edge against Murray, it still doesn't mean he should have won..
 
If only Roddick and Hewitt had the opportunities in this era instead of them have to face prime Federer at the slam.
 
TMF said:
If only Roddick and Hewitt had the opportunities in this era instead of them have to face prime Federer at the slam.
Click to expand...
Roddick and Hewitt did have opportunities though. Both of them took them..

If Federer was not around though, I see Roddick as a 2 or maybe 3 time slam winner and Hewitt as a 3 or 4 time slam winner.. but that didn't happen and they are both still 1 and 2 time slam winners..
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I just think Djokovic, as the better HC player, should have won the match irrespective of Murray being 2 sets up. It doesn't mean that I don't think he was the worthy winner that day, which is what you seem to have inferred from my post.
Click to expand...

Djokovic on hard court isn't like Nadal on clay or Federer on grass. Djokovic isn't unbeatable in hard court slams. Nadal, Federer, Murray, Wawrinka have all beaten him to win hard court slams.
 
Backspin1183 said:
Djokovic on hard court isn't like Nadal on clay or Federer on grass. Djokovic isn't unbeatable in hard court slams. Nadal, Federer, Murray, Wawrinka have all beaten him to win hard court slams.
Click to expand...

Haha, so many posters on here who can't accept another poster's opinion. :)
 
It tells us that Andy Murray was better than Djokovic on those two occasions and it tells us that Andy Murray at his best is a challenge for Djokovic.

LOL @ the crazies saying Murray did not deserve his slam wins vs Djokovic or that losing to Murray is somehow more demeaning than losing to Federer or Nadal. Didn't Djokovic say when he was younger that he always thought Murray was more talented than him? I am pretty sure I read that. I have also read quotes from Federer from a few years back about Murray and he said he always thought Murray was very talented even more so than Djokovic. I know I read that but I don't have time to find and post the links right now.
 
Not many players can say that ther straight setted peak Nole at Wimbledon final something even Nadal and Federer has not managed (well except USO '07 over baby Nole).
 
I am sure Novak went into the matches with confidence knowing well that Andy had lost his every one of his prior finals convincingly, winning just 1 set in the bargain :

2–6, 5–7, 2–6 to Federer ( 2008 USO)

3–6, 4–6, 6–7 to Federer ( 2010 AO)

4–6, 2–6, 3–6 to Novak ( 2011 AO)

6–4, 5–7, 3–6, 4–6 to Federer (2012 Wimb)
 
The bias most posters on this site have towards Andy Murray is absolutely ridiculous. The guy has a more impressive Grand Slam and Masters 1000 (or equivalent) record than any other player with 2 Slam titles. Though he's not an all-time great, he has been a great player. Give the guy his due already. Geez.
 
Murray won fair and square? I guess. But he was also lucky in the two wins (1) 2012 USO final was very windy, greatly benefited his defensive styple; (2) 2013 W Djokovic had to play a five setter SF and Murray had an easy SF.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I just think Djokovic, as the better HC player, should have won the match irrespective of Murray being 2 sets up. It doesn't mean that I don't think he was the worthy winner that day, which is what you seem to have inferred from my post.
Click to expand...

Murray is the better fast HC player, when the two of them meet as is evidenced in their h2h on faster hards, which was 7-1 to Murray prior to this years US Open iirc.
Djokovic2011 said:
Haha, so many posters on here who can't accept another poster's opinion. :)
Click to expand...
Accepting an opinion means to agree with it, no? And there are relatively few, who agree with you that Djoko 'should' have won that match. I do not for the reason above, h2h Murray is the better fast HC player. I/we respect your right to have that opinion, but I/we will of course argue against it if we think it's unwarranted.

Do you accept my opinion on both matters - the match and the accept of opinions?
 
Last edited:
moonballs said:
Murray won fair and square? I guess. But he was also lucky in the two wins (1) 2012 USO final was very windy, greatly benefited his defensive styple; (2) 2013 W Djokovic had to play a five setter SF and Murray had an easy SF.
Click to expand...

Imagine if their was fork lightning, Murray would have triple bagelled Djokovic in that US Open final.
 
You guys think way too hard

Andy played better than him those two matches so its not a matter of overachieving or underachieving.
Simple as that. Any time you start a tennis match against anyone you have a chance of losing
 
Djokovic2011 said:
I'm still not gonna change my mind Chanwan. :wink:
Click to expand...
why would you? 7-1 ain't much of a difference, when you think about it, and Andy wasn't that hot coming in - losing Wimbledon (but playing well), demolishing Fed at the Olympics and having Lendl in his corner.
Wink
 
cc0509 said:
It tells us that Andy Murray was better than Djokovic on those two occasions and it tells us that Andy Murray at his best is a challenge for Djokovic.

LOL @ the crazies saying Murray did not deserve his slam wins vs Djokovic or that losing to Murray is somehow more demeaning than losing to Federer or Nadal. Didn't Djokovic say when he was younger that he always thought Murray was more talented than him? I am pretty sure I read that. I have also read quotes from Federer from a few years back about Murray and he said he always thought Murray was very talented even more so than Djokovic. I know I read that but I don't have time to find and post the links right now.
Click to expand...

Murray does have more natural talent than Djokovic IMO, there are several other posts I have seen on here that agree with that statement.
Djokovic relies more on hard work and consistency than natural gifts, although not to the extreme Nadal does. There is nothing at all wrong with that, but it is the truth.
Murray is a very "talented" individual actually. When I say "talent", I mean natural gifts. Federer, McEnroe, Safin are in this category.

I think a good way of determining a talented player is how difficult they are to blow out or beat in straights when they are down (ie when their "hard work" and "consistency" fail them as is bound to happen occasionally).

When un-injured Nadal loses (yes, it does happen Naddies), he often gets pummeled (WTF 2010 for instance).
Djokovic hammered him in Miami this year too, and on many other occasions also. Nadal hasn't had a look in many times he has played Novak. He often fails to make it competitive (take sets to 7-5 or 7-6, or win sets).

Djokovic, too, has been straight-setted twice this year by a certain Swiss, with only one competitive set in those two matches (7-5 at MC), and Nadal has had him for breakfast on occasion too (MC 2012 for instance).

It is clear that Nadalovic are consistency/form players who rely on their A game to win. This is not better or worse, just different.

Murray on the other hand does not give up bagel or even bread-stick sets almost at all, despite only having an ordinary serve.

Roger, even in 2013, wasn't just making every set competitive, he was taking sets off Nadal and Djokovic every time they met despite how poorly he was playing. Blowing out Federer is probably one of the toughest tasks there is. Whatever state he is in, if you win the first set 6-4, you can lose the next one 2-6 out of nowhere. That's how you know he is "talented", his B or C game is still world-class.

Just my two cents.
 
Chanwan said:
why would you? 7-1 ain't much of a difference, when you think about it, and Andy wasn't that hot coming in - losing Wimbledon (but playing well), demolishing Fed at the Olympics and having Lendl in his corner.
Wink
Click to expand...

So do you think Novak had no good opportunities( I daren't say he "should have won" anymore) going into any of the USO finals he lost?
 
Djokovic2011 said:
So do you think Novak had no good opportunities( I daren't say he "should have won" anymore) going into any of the USO finals he lost?
Click to expand...

I think he had plenty, yes. But as much or more against Rafa in 2013 and to a lesser extent 2010 (he led the HC h2h by a fair amount going into both matches and I feel he 'should' play Rafa on HC if both play their best more often than not (and I feel he should have won that 3rd set last year and with that, probably the match)) - he had good chances to take sets vs. Fed in 2007, but losing to the 3-time defending champion in your first slam final is no shame.

Given the h2h on fast HC between Murray and Nole, I wouldn't have been completely surprised had Murray won this year despite the fact that he was still looking for his first top-10 win since Wimbledon 2013 at the time. The first two sets showed he had the level to stay with Djoko, the 2 lasts showed he wasn't quite as fit as he was before surgery and that Djoko is a tremendous champion, who can - when needed - outlast and eventually outplay the best of them
 
Last edited:
Fed881981 said:
It tells us that, so far, Djokvic is the only player to lose a GS final to Murray.
Click to expand...

But to be fair, Djokovic has only lost to Nadal, Federer and Murray in slam finals. Nadal lost to Wawrinka and Federer lost to Del Potro. That is worse imo.
 
Flint said:
It tells me that Andy Murray has won 2 Grand slams by defeating Novak Djokovic in the finals.

Nothing more, nothing less.
Click to expand...

This.

This entire question shows the massive underrating of how small the gap between top players actually is - again. There is no certainty of any top dog 'always' beating any of his colleagues at (close-to)-the-same-level of play.

Heck, even top dogs at times lose to 'expendable characters', now what does that tell you (directed at OP, of course)?
 
7YUXolR.gif
 
tennisaddict said:
Federer has lost 8 major finals so far. ( 6 to Nadal, 1 each to Novak and Delpo)

Nadal has lost 6 major finals ( 2 to Fed, 3 to Novak and 1 to Stan)

Novak has lost 7 major finals ( 4 to Nadal, 2 to Murray and 1 to Fed)

Murray won 2 majors , beating Novak at both instances.

I think Murray won fair and square those 2 finals.

Are these major lost opportunities for Novak , considering the opponent was not Federer or Nadal ?

If Novak won those two majors, his losses would have been more in line with Fed / Nadal in terms of Win-Loss ratios. Now it is skewed badly.

Did Murray over achieve or Novak under achieved ?
Click to expand...

Lol, forgot to mention one little thing. Murray lost two finals to Djokovic too. :roll: So much hate against Djokovic. It is unbelievable. :mad:
 
Sabratha said:
At the time people did concede that Djokovic was the better player and had the mental edge against Murray, it still doesn't mean he should have won..
Click to expand...
To me "should have won" means what a betting person gambles on before the match happens. ;)

Because of his clay stats I would have bet on Rafa almost every year in the last 10.

I would have bet on Novak to win any HC contest that year. He won 6 HC titles.

Other than the USO, Murray only won Brisbane on HC. That's all year.

I would have bet on Novak except I don't bet.

That doesn't mean that Murray was not the best man on that day, when he won the USO. But his other win that year was at the Olympics, on grass.
 
They were definitely lost opportunities for Novak, the proof is in the pudding Murray has not won any other Slams apart from those two, and since losing to Murray at the US Open Novak has so 6 of their last 7 matches, so those two losses do appear to be something of an aberration.
 
ark_28 said:
They were definitely lost opportunities for Novak, the proof is in the pudding Murray has not won any other Slams apart from those two, and since losing to Murray at the US Open Novak has so 6 of their last 7 matches, so those two losses do appear to be something of an aberration.
Click to expand...

Uh, Murray has been losing to a lot of people since his return from surgery. That has nothing to do with deserving or not deserving his slams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tennisaddict
If Novak wins USO 2014, then he is better than Rafa on 3 majors
7 8 9
Replies
407
Views
17K
AssaultJoker
AssaultJoker
M
We are privileged to still be watching the 3 best of ALL TIME
Replies
0
Views
312
McEnborg
M
tennisaddict
Rating the quality of final opponents for the top 3 in the majors won
Replies
11
Views
902
SpicyCurry1990
SpicyCurry1990
M
Worst Slumps in Tournament Finals - Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic
Replies
1
Views
673
TMF
T
RaulRamirez
Who should be considered the US Open Fave - Rafa or Novak?
2
Replies
73
Views
4K
Towser83
Towser83
Back
Top