Sampras Says Nadal Challenges Federer's GOAT Claim

[Crisstti]

"It's not just now that he is almost 31 though that he's having troubles with him." - using basic logic, you claim that Federer HAD problems with Djokovic before Fed turned 30 and Novak reached his peak. I'm telling you that Fed until early 2011 had a commanding lead in the h2h.

I think you need to read your posts first before you can start an arguement.

He lost to him on two gs. Seems like having some trouble to me.

In any case, my point was really about Nadal more than Djokovic.

 

[tennis_pro]

Also, Sampras should've said "Federer has to figure out how to beat NADAL" instead of "those guys" as he never had major issues with Djokovic. It's nature that peak Novak is beating an older version of Federer, nobody is shocked that Fed can't win the majority of the matches these days.

 

[Laurie]

He choked at 6-3, letting go of an easy put-away volley, that would have landed him the set. It was an error in judgement which cost him the set, and probably the match. A similar thing happened to Roddick as well, in wimby 2009 vs Federer -- an otherwise easy put-away volley, he misjudged it to be going out, changed his mind at the very last moment, stuck his racquet out, and lost the point.

He difinitely left the ball, Krajicek is a very good volleyer but I assume he didn't want to deal with a high floating ball like that because they can be very easy to mess up even if they appear easy.

 

[tennis_pro]

He lost to him on two gs. Seems like having some trouble to me.

In any case, my point was really about Nadal more than Djokovic.

Once before the 2010 US Open, when Fed had mono by the way.

 

[Sartorius]

By figuring out you mean having a 20-0 h2h?

Also, for the record:
1) Fed was 4-0, 7-2, 13-6 at some stages against Djokovic.
2) At the end of 2007 Fed was 6-8 against Nadal but 5-2 on non-clay surfaces. Right now the h2h stands at a respectable 10-18 and Fed still leads the h2h on both grass and hard courts.

Hah, nailed it.

Sometimes the numbers are so exaggerated and the discussions are so rabid (Nadal absolutely owns Federer!!) you would think Federer hasn't won't a single match against Nadal, let alone 2 Wimbledon finals.

I mean it's just not accurate when people say Fed cannot have a positive h2h (or cannot "figure him out") against Rafa because he's 30. Fact is, he couldn't before either.

Fact is, half of their matches were on clay and by 2007 they had met only twice in post-Wimbledon season, which is very telling.

And yes, clay is a perfectly legitimate surface, Nadal was young to deal with hardcourts and so on and so on... The point is, there isn't much sense about discussing wildly about a "positive h2h", especially when you have two players with sharp contrast in styles, and with a considerable age gap.

By the way, the gap (both in h2h and general performance wise) between Federer and Nadal really started to appear in 2008, yes? Back then the talks about Federer going into decline were in full flight, and it seemed like Federer's time on top had gone long enough. Then Nadal beat him in 5 straight matches, first a trio on clay (which I would argue made the next two wins a bit easier) then 1 on grass and 1 on hard... Sound familiar?.. It should, even though I would actually say Djokovic's wins against Nadal raise different points, not a topic of this thread though.

 

[tennis_pro]

He difinitely left the ball, Krajicek is a very good volleyer but I assume he didn't want to deal with a high floating ball like that because they can be very easy to mess up even if they appear easy.

Seems like a choke to me. Krajicek prayed for the ball to go out and it didn't.

Krajicek didin't really go for it from 6-2 up in the breaker, he waited for it.

 

[Laurie]

Seems like a choke to me. Krajicek prayed for the ball to go out and it didn't.

Krajicek didin't really go for it from 6-2 up in the breaker, he waited for it.

On the 2nd set point, Krajicek served to Sampras' backhand (regulation for Krajicek), got the first serve in, put in a good volley and was passed with a great crosscourt backhand by Sampras.

But I think Kragster is right, I've been around long enough to know I am about to waste my time with getting into what will amount to be a silly argument. If you get your first serve in at set point and get passed with a crosscourt backhand, then that is too good.

 

[West Coast Ace]

...Fed cannot have a positive h2h ...Fact is, he couldn't before either.

You mean when Nadal couldn't make it to the SF/F at W/AO/USO? That's the point: Roger in his prime, waiting for an opponent who never showed up...

 

[Evan77]

Once before the 2010 US Open, when Fed had mono by the way.

please stop with this mono shmono thing. I said this before and I'll say this again. How the hell someone who has mono manages to reach semis of a major?
Ancic had to retire because of mono. Soderling has been out of the game for almost a year because of mono.

Federer is a sore loser, he's always been that way and most you Fed fans tend to be blind. Djokovic simply played out of his mind at the AO08. It's as simple as that, I saw that match probably over 10 times. Djokovic was simply brilliant.

Fed always comes up with some silly excuses when he loses a match. oh, it's mono, oh Djokovic hit a lucky FH (USO 2011). oh this, oh that ... he didn't even give any credit to Djokovic when he lost to him in Montreal 2007. pathetic.

 

[NadalAgassi]

please stop with this mono shmono thing. I said this before and I'll say this again. How the hell someone who has mono manages to reach semis of a major?
Ancic had to retire because of mono. Soderling has been out of the game for almost a year because of mono.

Federer is a sore loser, he's always been that way and most you Fed fans tend to be blind. Djokovic simply played out of his mind at the AO08. It's as simple as that, I saw that match probably over 10 times. Djokovic was simply brilliant.

Fed always comes up with some silly excuses when he loses a match. oh, it's mono, oh Djokovic hit a lucky FH (USO 2011). oh this, oh that ... he didn't even give any credit to Djokovic when he lost to him in Montreal 2007. pathetic.

Very true, Djokovic was unbeatable at the 2008 Australian Open. Nobody had any chance to beat him there, regardless of form. Tsonga was playing out of his mind, probably the best tennis he will ever play, and was also unbeatable to everyone else there he played, except Djokovic it turned out.

Djokovic is likely on his way to being the Australian Open GOAT. In a year or two it wont even be a debate.

 

[kragster]

please stop with this mono shmono thing. I said this before and I'll say this again. How the hell someone who has mono manages to reach semis of a major?
Ancic had to retire because of mono. Soderling has been out of the game for almost a year because of mono.

Federer is a sore loser, he's always been that way and most you Fed fans tend to be blind. Djokovic simply played out of his mind at the AO08. It's as simple as that, I saw that match probably over 10 times. Djokovic was simply brilliant.

Fed always comes up with some silly excuses when he loses a match. oh, it's mono, oh Djokovic hit a lucky FH (USO 2011). oh this, oh that ... he didn't even give any credit to Djokovic when he lost to him in Montreal 2007. pathetic.

I don't think Fed himself makes that many excuses, its more the ****s who make the excuses.

 

[DjokovicForTheWin]

It's not true that Djokovic was unbeatable at AO2008. If that was really the case, there should have been no reason for him then to suddenly become beatable at AO2009 and AO2010. Yet he was beaten. He was never unbeatable there before 2011. AO2008 was a fluke. The real Djoker is here and now.

 

[NadalAgassi]

DjokovicFAKEFANForWin calling one of Djokovic's wins a fluke. Is anyone surprised, LOL!

 

[Sentinel]

I don't think Fed himself makes that many excuses, its more the ****s who make the excuses.

Yup, we made up the thing of his being hospitalized for food poisoning prior to AO 2008. That was a look-alike lying in hospital, most likely Aphex.

 

[Talker]

It's not true that Djokovic was unbeatable at AO2008. If that was really the case, there should have been no reason for him then to suddenly become beatable at AO2009 and AO2010. Yet he was beaten. He was never unbeatable there before 2011. AO2008 was a fluke. The real Djoker is here and now.

True, Fed didn't have much spark that AO, just didn't look right and almost lost to Tipsy.

Fed wasn't near his best then, maybe mono or maybe not mono but two matches was enough to see something was wrong.

In those days Djokovic wasn't far from winning a slam anyway, he was very good even with the physical problems he had.