JaoSousa
Hall of Fame
More like his main opponent wasn't stupid enough to get DQed.
Should Djokovic AO Win have asterisk?
- Thread starter Nadalgaenger
- Start date
Hitman
Bionic Poster
I think there is a battle coming for Novak in the final. Most important thing is that he is feeling better and looks mentally focused, he was all over the place earlier in the event.
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Lol: tennis’ version of cancel culture
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
EXACTLY
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Ha well that’s not exactly apples to apples...I take it the same rule will apply to Margaret Court's disputed AO draws from the 60s and 70s?
How many women outside of Australia actually played AO?
Like when all-England club wouldn’t even have let a Scot play
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
In fairness Medvedev would be much tougher test on HC now than Rafa.
TennisManiac
Hall of Fame
Actually... yes. Wawrinka's a washed up bum. And Zverev is just plain pathetic 90% of the time. Thiem was the only good player Novak could have played. But thanks to Nick... Thiem was exhausted and lost to Dimitrov... another bum.
D
Deleted member 748597
Guest
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Like when all-England club wouldn’t even have let a Scot play
Scotsmen have been winning Wimbledon almost since it began (Herbert Lawford 1887, Harold Mahoney 1896)).
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
With wins over Zverev, and potentially future ATG Medvedev or Tsisipas? Very solid 8/10 strength slam won while injured.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
If we start handing out asterisk for 7-8/10 slams like this one then that’s like 15 slams gone for Fed, half of Nadal’s USOs and RGs too.
sredna42
Hall of Fame
That Karen shrinking in exaggerated terror from novak was the nail in the coffin for linespeople, fauxdemic or not
daggerman
Hall of Fame
I don't know about anybody else, but playing 3 players in a row who consistently hit 135+ mph serves on a quick court doesn't seem particularly easy to me.
Or are big servers on a quick court only a threat to Novak in hypothetical matches played on 90s Wimbledon grass?
Can't have it both ways, folks.
Or are big servers on a quick court only a threat to Novak in hypothetical matches played on 90s Wimbledon grass?
Can't have it both ways, folks.
Sunny014
Legend
Except Thiem the clown winning USO there is no asterix anywhere.
Novak fought against his muscular problems and got stronger as the tournament progressed, there is no asterix here.
We deserved win if he beats medvedev
Infact it wud have been easier to face Rafa in the final for novak ....
Novak fought against his muscular problems and got stronger as the tournament progressed, there is no asterix here.
We deserved win if he beats medvedev
Infact it wud have been easier to face Rafa in the final for novak ....
Sunny014
Legend
Wawrinka maybe but not Thiem .... thiem is a clown who is not upto the mark in 2 matches back to back.
Kyrgios could have been a tough candidate
Sunny014
Legend
Only Peak Roger Federer has the power to take down multiple big servers back to back to back to back
No one else.
Ye he is inconsistent. But whenever he shows up he gives a tough match to Djokovic. Better than Qualifier for sure..
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Never mind that “clown” had a tougher draw at USO.
Slams are slams. Get over it.
of course it has an Asterix, no doubt Djoks would have won USO if Feds hadn't bribed the line judge
Sunny014
Legend
What tougher draw ?
Even if you you play 5 sets in a slam then next match if it up against someone like Dimitrov then losing in straight sets is a sin if you even dream of beating Novak
Novak would have crushed ( yes thats right) DIMITROV even after a 5 setter.
Secondly Novak is 33+ and having fitness issues .... while Thiem is 27 and full fit .... incompetent as he is ... he was on the verge of choking vs Zverev at USO, stop dreaming as if he is a worthy rival.
He is NOTHING...... NOvak is the 8 time champion and he will be playing like a champion in the final ........
Remember : If you wanna take down the Alpha then behave like an alpha, don't cry like a beta " Ohh my draw was tough ... ohh dimitrov was too good... ohh Nick was tough for me ... " ....
Sunny014
Legend
People like Novak became 1 in the world by earning his right, not by crying about draws or by being in awe of federer or rafa
Thiem is NOTHING ..... an underserving winner of the USO.....
It was bad that he won it ..... Someone like Medvedev winning USO would still have been respectable....
Thiem is NOTHING ..... an underserving winner of the USO.....
It was bad that he won it ..... Someone like Medvedev winning USO would still have been respectable....
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Lol this cracks me up...
Hopefully you are trolling.
Sunny014
Legend
I am not trolling.
People who have the level to lift slams don't lost in straight sets to Dimitrov after a 5 setter with Kyrgios.
Thiem despite being 6-7 years younger to Novak-Rafa has often run out of gas, his peak level is not worthy of a slam.
Period!
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
I am not trying to put Thiem in same category as Novak lol.
Why the vitriol?
Sunny014
Legend
zagor
Bionic Poster
Novak has been far away the main favourite for the title here, no one thought Thiem (or Zverev) had any hope of winning USO until Novak throated Karen. There's no asterisk and Thiem "earned" it by reaching so many slam finals until he faced a fellow choker but it's not really an impressive slam title (for me).
Also, are FFA and de Minaur supposed to be impressive wins now? Why exactly? Because they're overhyped?
Nadalgaenger
G.O.A.T.
Lol so what? We’re you fans of these guys? Why would you be disappointed in guys that you consider losers not winning?
Standaa
G.O.A.T.
No one is disputing those. They stand clearly on the record.I take it the same rule will apply to Margaret Court's disputed AO draws from the 60s and 70s?
An asterisk is perhaps not the best way to draw attention to a weak major win. The ATP does not give asterisks on its major wins records.
However, it is reasonable to point out in discussion when comparing great players that someone had a weak major win.
That happens routinely in discussing who was the greatest player or who had the greatest career achievements.
There is another way to approach it, take the opposite tack and give special credit for a major win against very strong opposition.
The Djokovic problem is that he has too many Aussie titles, but that is an evaluation of a career record.
Djokovic needs more Wimbledon and U.S. titles to be considered among the all-time greats.
Federer and Sampras lead the way in major majors. Tilden third.
However, it is reasonable to point out in discussion when comparing great players that someone had a weak major win.
That happens routinely in discussing who was the greatest player or who had the greatest career achievements.
There is another way to approach it, take the opposite tack and give special credit for a major win against very strong opposition.
The Djokovic problem is that he has too many Aussie titles, but that is an evaluation of a career record.
Djokovic needs more Wimbledon and U.S. titles to be considered among the all-time greats.
Federer and Sampras lead the way in major majors. Tilden third.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Neither are asterisked.
But Djokovic doesn't generally need as much luck as Thiem to win a slam, so there's that.
But Djokovic doesn't generally need as much luck as Thiem to win a slam, so there's that.
Similar threads
- Poll
