RS
Bionic Poster
Was just convo startinI said 7 billion plus so still technically correct if it's over 8 million
Straight set losses in slam finals for the Big 5 of the open era
- Thread starter abmk
- Start date
Actually you raise a good point, how can the Big 3 be viewed as anything more than pretenders given their double digit losses to a guy with the second serve of a 12 year old at tennis campLol....but his losses to Wawrinka are somehow ok?
Murray "mugged" it up against the Big 3 in 3 Bo5 finals (2 Slams, 1 Olympics) and 9 other big finals (1 WTF, 8 Masters). How " careless" of them all!
Try and get a grip Kralingen. You're anti-Murray diatribes are getting tiresome and telling us more about you than it does about him!!!
RS
Bionic Poster
Rate the level of the straight sets winner from best to worst after Nadal RG 08.
Worry about the GOAT debate? ROLMAO !!
That's rich coming from Nadovic fan. They spam this place with goat threads like clock work
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
A win is a win and a loss is a loss. It means very little when Djokovic is 21-11 in Slam finals and Federer is 20-11.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
It’s a completely meaningless statistic. According to this stat if Novak had lost to Zverev in USO21 SF or to Tsitsipas in the RG20 SF he would have a better record? That’s ridiculous.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
Exactly. Short answer, no.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Are you sure? Because it seems like Djokovic fans are extremely proud of him losing early in AO 2009, 2010, 2017, 2018 and so avoiding losing to Nadal and Federer in these years. Some of them even use it as an argument to why Djokovic in AO is the greatest player ever at a single tournament.
Last edited:
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
I've never seen anybody say this except you just now.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Actually you raise a good point, how can the Big 3 be viewed as anything more than pretenders given their double digit losses to a guy with the second serve of a 12 year old at tennis camp
Clearly there's a great deal more to tennis than second serves.
RS
Bionic Poster
Baggy has a puncher chance Vs AO 06 Fed tbh I would say he gets to 5 in a SF match if they played but loses.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Vamos pack?
The only thing we “need” is for things to stay as they are so ultronians can stay salty
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
He just makes up these straw man arguments all the time
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
RS
Bionic Poster
I want that as my avi
RS
Bionic Poster
The rest?
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
RS
Bionic Poster
Your fault
nice
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah, that's what they do. Like to mention how Nadal doesn't have wins over Djokovic at the AO, that Djokovic has no losses in semifinals and finals, and so on. So him losing early when not ready to win the tournament makes him better according to them.
Lauren_Girl'
Hall of Fame
Federer is just lucky he faced Djokovic so many times in AO SEMIFINALS instead of finals. Djokovic beat him 3 times in straight sets there. Had they played the final in 2008, 2011 and 2020, I think he would have 4 straight set losses instead of 1...
And given the beatdown from the AO19 final, I think Nadal can thank Thiem and Tsitsipas for avoiding 2 similar humiliations in 2020 and 2021.
What about Slams like AO2011, USO 2018 or Wimbledon 2022? Not Djokovic's fault if Nadal wasn't fit enough to beat the last player before a very likely straight set loss in the final.
Nadal never played for the CYGS either. Wasn't even close. Let's see how many sets he wins in the USO final if he puts himself in this position one day... with all the fatigue and mental pressure of the match.
Last edited:
Born_to_slice
Legend
What you need is another pandemic, I'm afraidThe only thing we “need” is for things to stay as they are so ultronians can stay salty
The Fedfather
Legend
Even when Djokovic was facing 38-year-old Federer in semis (almost down a double break too), but no surprise, somehow Federer was the lucky one still. Lol
it's obvious they were facing off in semis because of rankings. If you wanted Djokovic to face Federer in more finals, all complaints to Novak not being born earlier.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
We can similarly say Djokovic was lucky not to face Nadal in RG 2007 and 2008 finals, but just in semifinals. Or facing Federer in USO 2009 semifinal. So your "argument" makes zero sense.
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Bloody hell, has Djokovic ever achieved anything over Nadal that you actually give him credit for?!
And Nadal isn't "clearly" the better US Open player either, don't start going all abmk on us T_O.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Bloody hell, has Djokovic ever achieved anything over Nadal that you actually give him credit for?!
2/3 finals won in their prime dude come on, what more proof is required? Oh what's that.... Nadal has another title there as well!!! Oh... what's that weak draws you say? You mean like Djok's free walk to the final in 2016 where he still failed? Or how about how he was losing to PCB so he smashed a ball into a linewoman's throat to get himself DQ'd? Oh what's that, Nadal beat the same guy in the final who straight set Djok just 2 years later...
Like I said before, full credit to Djok for the 12 months stretch from AO11 to AO12. He fully deserves credit for that. Had he been able to sustain that or show more of it in the next 3 years, I'd probably have a very different opinion on him... but the fact that he couldn't, as Fed pummelled him at WIM and Nadal at RG and US in the following years of his prime... I'm not going to be delusional like Goran and say he is getting better as he gets older...
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
I very much doubt that
No, your reading is incorrect. There are 2 independent stats at play. Losing earlier than finals and losing in a big final.
Not necessarily. People hate one sided finals and tennis lovers remember such bad finals. FO 08 is no exception.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
His worst defeat in a slam final ever (yes, worse than Wimbledon 2019). Fed endlessly hit neutral rally balls to Del Po's forehand, so you're right-- his tennis IQ was atrocious that match. I think he didn't there was a chance in hell he could lose the match, so ego and pride got involved. Sheer idiocy. Hit every ball to Del Po's BH and he wins the match in straights.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Who cares what you doubt? You seem to think I give a stuff about your opinion of me... you've made it clear many times you think I'm the scum of the Earth just because I don't support the same player you do and you don't like the points I make about tennis results. Honestly says a lot more about you than me...
I've been very consistent in over 10 years on here... 04-07 was a weak era, there's no going around that. No amount of story telling and hypotheticals is going to convince me that Roddick, 34+ yr old Agassi, Hewitt and their supporting act were providing Federer with a tougher challenge than what Nadal faced in prime Fed, prime Djoker, prime Murray, Del Potro, Tsonga, Soderling and Berdych... not even close. And that's what he had from 08-13... that was the toughest era we had in a long time... possibly in the entire open era...
17+ also weak. I'd say weaker than 04-07. The only thing is, Nadal isn't at his peak vulturing every slam in sight... neither is Novak at his peak. They've pretty much split the number of slam wins in the 17+ era and at 30+ years of age which evens it out with Fed's 04-07 era. Only Djok got the added bonus of too declined Fed and Nadal in the worst form of his career from mid 2014 till 2016 to pound on as well as incredibly favourable draws at the last 4 Wimbledons... Nadal gets one weak US Open draw at 31 years of age and Fed + Djok fans need to pounce on it like as if all his draws are weak... total nonsense and reeks of desperation...
Fact is, if Djok was able to reproduce his 12 months from AO11 till AO12, he'd be clear slam leader and have done it during his prime in a much tougher era. Nadal and Fed would be nowhere near him. So of course, it would be delusional to have doubts about him. However, that wasn't the case. In 2012 he barely got past Nadal at his pet slam, he lost RG to Nadal, he lost to Fed at WIM, he lost to Muzzah at the US Open and in 2013 when he was racking up top 10 wins, he actually had someone else hanging with him in that department and he lost both matches they played at the majors... then in 2014 he gets bounced out of his pet slam by Stan and again loses to Nadal at RG. Only he finally scrapes past a 33 year old Fed at WIM then gets bounced out of the US Open by freaking Nishikori. So excuse me if I'm not too impressed by his Sampras like career after turning 28 years old...
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
this is an interesting assumption
for it to be true, I would have to think the same about every other Nadal fan on this board
I do not
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Not every Nadal fan spends their time posting the points I do... I've made points on here that completely break down all the Fed fans arguments into dust. Some so desperate they need to keep writing essays on here filled with hypotheticals... So when I do break those down, I rub it in for added effect... if there weren't a pack of Fed fans that enjoyed dishing out arrogant remarks and wishing Nadal to break his leg, I'd have been more constructive in the way I make my points.
That's what separates me from them and that's why I bother you so much... otherwise spill the beans... it's not like I've shot Bambi...
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
if you lose early you can’t lose in the final. They are not independent at all. So according to these idiotic stats that would be better. If Novak had lost in the RG20 SF he would improve his record in these stats.
I used to think that trolling was the worst part of TTW. But it’s really the truly crappy analysis
Last edited:
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Yeah but big 3 have all made similar number of slam finals... RG20 wasn't the only straight sets loss for Djok in a slam final...
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
So? The stats remain meaningless. According to these stats it’s better to lose early than to reach a final.
And losing in straight sets or losing in 5 sets is exactly the same. A loss. Novak’s AO19 win isn’t worth more than his WB19 win just because one of them was in straight sets
Last edited:
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
So? The stats remain meaningless. According to these stats it’s better to lose early than to reach a final.
And losing in straight sets or losing in 5 sets is exactly the same. A loss. Novak’s AO19 win isn’t worth more than his WB19 win just because one of them was in straight sets
I wouldn't say its meaningless. Rather, not as important as others.
It really only shows that Djok has been meek in more finals than Fedal.
The really dumb one floated around on here is 63% of Nadal's slams are on clay... so in order to be better, he should have won a lot less on clay giving him a more even distribution...
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
OP is trying to troll, because as a Fed fan that’s all he’s left with. So he came up with these “stats” to try to make Novak look bad.
if we are going to compare slam results there is only one result that matters, slam wins. And there Novak is already ahead of OP’s fav player.
makes no sense to say Novak has been “meek”. He won more finals than Federer and today is just one slam behind Nadal. Let’s see how it all ends
abmk
Bionic Poster
erm, what?
AO 08 - fed was affected by mono. It was Djokovic who got majorly lucky there. Else fed would've been the slight favorite. No way in hell Djoko comes close to beating him in straights if not for mono.
AO 2020 - fed was hampered by injury and would not play for like an year after that. You have some sheer shamelessness bringing that up.
AO 11 semi is counterbalanced by USO 09 semi.
abmk
Bionic Poster
its not that simple.
while fed's strategy of hitting as much as he did to delpo's FH was dumb, delpo's BH back then was really good, solid and powerful. not an easy get out of jail card.
secondly federer's below par serving also cost him. his worst serving in a slam final (closely followed by the AO 09 final)
abmk
Bionic Poster
oh, so, ********* don't like getting a taste of their own medicine.
Surprise! surprise!
(just a mere taste, mind you. Not even the full medicine!)
I simply provided the stats because I got a reminder of Med's straight set win over Djoko in USO 21 final in the other thread. I didn't even say anything about analysis in my opening post.
Last edited:
ForehandRF
Legend
I remember AO 2009 as being the worst
All of the big 3 have reached almost the same number of finals . Sorry , you are wrong in this mate
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
You keep repeating that as if it made any difference
The difference is Djokovic’s stats are inferior for the same amount of finals . I am done
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Once again, according to this logic it’s better to lose before the final. Makes no sense whatsoever
Lauren_Girl'
Hall of Fame
We are going in circles here. If being sick, tired or injured justifies a straight set loss then we can use similar dumb excuses for everyone.
We could also point out all the time the big 3 lost in straight sets in Grand Slams. Why single out the finals? Federer was straight setted by clay specialist Robredo in the 4th round of a HC Slam. How many sets do you think he wins against Nadal or Djokovic in the USo 2013 final? Straight setted and bagelled in his favorite Slam.Nadal has been straight setted in his own pet Slam, just like Djokovic.
It's an unending debate but it doesn't tell us anything. 76 16 76 26 1312 or 61 61 61, Djokovic still won Wimbledon 2019... the score is very secondary in the tennis books. Only the result matters.
H
Herald
Guest
Not to mention dominated Rodger at his favorite slam, which was really hard to endure as a Fedfan
Similar threads
