The last time a 20-year-old had physical issues in a Slam SF...

[Kralingen]

yes, it has happened before.

Nadal reaches final after Djokovic retires

Novak Djokovic handed second seed Rafael Nadal a Wimbledon final encounter with Roger Federer after retiring injured with the Spaniard leading their semi-final 3-6 6-1 4-1 on Saturday.

www.reuters.com

A lot of people wrote 20-year-old Novak Djokovic off back then - and a lot of people looked very very stupid. I would caution anyone who writes off Alcaraz for doing the same.

 

[Razer]

yes, it has happened before.

Nadal reaches final after Djokovic retires

Novak Djokovic handed second seed Rafael Nadal a Wimbledon final encounter with Roger Federer after retiring injured with the Spaniard leading their semi-final 3-6 6-1 4-1 on Saturday.

www.reuters.com

A lot of people wrote 20-year-old Novak Djokovic off back then - and a lot of people looked very very stupid. I would caution anyone who writes off Alcaraz for doing the same.

Nothing to "write off" at that time because nobody was taking djokovic or murray seriously back then to write anything about them, they were both seen as second grade players to Federer and also to his young challenger Nadal.

2010 US open onwards Djokovic's fitness and stock started to rise a lot.

 

[StrongRule]

His opponent was not a 36 years old, you know. It was prime Nadal, and in the final he would have to face peak Federer. And he also had some long battles in earlier rounds.

 

[tex123]

yes, it has happened before.

Nadal reaches final after Djokovic retires

Novak Djokovic handed second seed Rafael Nadal a Wimbledon final encounter with Roger Federer after retiring injured with the Spaniard leading their semi-final 3-6 6-1 4-1 on Saturday.

www.reuters.com

A lot of people wrote 20-year-old Novak Djokovic off back then - and a lot of people looked very very stupid. I would caution anyone who writes off Alcaraz for doing the same.

What it tells us?

 

[ND-13]

But , But there is a difference

Didn’t Novak retire and achieve the retirement slam ?

Alcaraz couldn’t even retire at one event

 

[matterer]

No one is writing off Alcaraz. I'm sure he'll win slams when those two guys from that 2007 semifinal match you cited finally retire.

 

[ChrisRF]

The worst retirement in recent times was Chung against Federer in the 2018 AO SF. He retired with foot blisters! From a Slam SF! I don't even know anyone in our local club who ever retired from a simple fun match with foot blisters. And I saw the feet of quite some people after a match that had really bad foot blisters, including myself a handful of times over the past years.

 

[helterskelter]

yes, it has happened before.

Nadal reaches final after Djokovic retires

Novak Djokovic handed second seed Rafael Nadal a Wimbledon final encounter with Roger Federer after retiring injured with the Spaniard leading their semi-final 3-6 6-1 4-1 on Saturday.

www.reuters.com

A lot of people wrote 20-year-old Novak Djokovic off back then - and a lot of people looked very very stupid. I would caution anyone who writes off Alcaraz for doing the same.

As @StrongRule already pointed out with his characteristic wisdom and reasonableness, Djokovic wasn't facing a 36-year-old. As we all know, and as Alcaraz himself admitted, the quality of your opponent is the crucial factor in determining when a player suffers from loss of condition because of something like cramp. 2007 Djokovic would never have been so nervous about playing an ancient version of himself that he would have succumbed to cramp! He would have gone out and trounced him in 18 games, just as any prospective ATG would have done.

Moreover, you should also remember that Djokovic had already got a good achievement to his name by then - he'd beaten prime Nadal at Miami. Having a significant achievement insulates you a little from justified criticism if you underperform once, especially as Djokovic also had some decent wins against okay players such as Murray. By contrast, Alcaraz has yet to secure one single noteworthy result. Until he does so, this loss and any other bad loss should count heavily against him. To be honest, it all but destroys any chance he might have of one day meriting the tag of ATG himself.

 

[helterskelter]

yes, it has happened before.

Nadal reaches final after Djokovic retires

Novak Djokovic handed second seed Rafael Nadal a Wimbledon final encounter with Roger Federer after retiring injured with the Spaniard leading their semi-final 3-6 6-1 4-1 on Saturday.

www.reuters.com

A lot of people wrote 20-year-old Novak Djokovic off back then - and a lot of people looked very very stupid. I would caution anyone who writes off Alcaraz for doing the same.

And note also that it took several YEARS after Wimbledon 2007 before Djokovic really started putting it all together. He certainly had very good purple patches in the second half of 2007 and the first half of 2008 and his form through the next three years or so after Wimbledon 2007 was very good indeed. But he didn't start to become the Novak Djokovic that he eventually became until the US Open 2010, and even then, it was several more months before he fully took off. Alcaraz, too, could improve considerably from his current self and it might take him a long time to do it.

 

[robthai]

That era and the year 2007 in particular, seems a lot stronger compared to this current weak era since covid, and I thought 2015-2019 was bad.

 

[xFedal]

And note also that it took several YEARS after Wimbledon 2007 before Djokovic really started putting it all together. He certainly had very good purple patches in the second half of 2007 and the first half of 2008 and his form through the next three years or so after Wimbledon 2007 was very good indeed. But he didn't start to become the Novak Djokovic that he eventually became until the US Open 2010, and even then, it was several more months before he fully took off. Alcaraz, too, could improve considerably from his current self and it might take him a long time to do it.

Strange that Rafa has never taken 3 sets of Novak in Wimbledon match but Murray has and Nadal has 3-0 Wimbledon record against Murray!

 

[robthai]

Anyone remember this?

 

[TheNachoMan]

That was Glutenovic, not Djokovic.

 

[robthai]

Also retired in this match too

 

[Zardoz7/12]

Djokovic before 2011 had many questions over his physical health.

 

[Tennfan123]

I don't think everyone is writing him off. Some are deescalating the hype. Others are pointing out his SF performance sucked a bit.

 

[Waves]

Look, there’s no way a 20 yr old, no. 1, in that situation, should be cramping. Ffs, I can play 2 sets without cramping…we all can. Wtf?

No, the kid wilted under the pressure, under Novak’s gaze…like Sauron’s eye. Novak took his soul, it is done. From now on, Alcaraz will be under his control. Anyone who even plays remedial tennis knows what happened out there. It wasn’t a physical issue, lol.

 

[mike danny]

yes, it has happened before.

Nadal reaches final after Djokovic retires

Novak Djokovic handed second seed Rafael Nadal a Wimbledon final encounter with Roger Federer after retiring injured with the Spaniard leading their semi-final 3-6 6-1 4-1 on Saturday.

www.reuters.com

A lot of people wrote 20-year-old Novak Djokovic off back then - and a lot of people looked very very stupid. I would caution anyone who writes off Alcaraz for doing the same.

Was this Nadal 36?

And Djokovic had gone through hell reaching this SF. Alcaraz had an easy road to his semi.

 

[mike danny]

The worst retirement in recent times was Chung against Federer in the 2018 AO SF. He retired with foot blisters! From a Slam SF! I don't even know anyone in our local club who ever retired from a simple fun match with foot blisters. And I saw the feet of quite some people after a match that had really bad foot blisters, including myself a handful of times over the past years.

Chung was never touted as the next best thing.

 

[mike danny]

As @StrongRule already pointed out with his characteristic wisdom and reasonableness, Djokovic wasn't facing a 36-year-old. As we all know, and as Alcaraz himself admitted, the quality of your opponent is the crucial factor in determining when a player suffers from loss of condition because of something like cramp. 2007 Djokovic would never have been so nervous about playing an ancient version of himself that he would have succumbed to cramp! He would have gone out and trounced him in 18 games, just as any prospective ATG would have done.

Moreover, you should also remember that Djokovic had already got a good achievement to his name by then - he'd beaten prime Nadal at Miami. Having a significant achievement insulates you a little from justified criticism if you underperform once, especially as Djokovic also had some decent wins against okay players such as Murray. By contrast, Alcaraz has yet to secure one single noteworthy result. Until he does so, this loss and any other bad loss should count heavily against him. To be honest, it all but destroys any chance he might have of one day meriting the tag of ATG himself.

If you remember Djokovic's path to the semis and compare it to Alcaraz's, you'd understand why Djokovic wilted.

 

[Terenigma]

Yup! I seem to remember Murray super young getting them during a match at Wimbledon and both he and Djokovic became two of the best and most physically fit players on the tour so yeah, Alcaraz will be completely fine. He'll train more, get his fitness up and be a contender for many more slams over his career.

 

[Kralingen]

Was this Nadal 36?

And Djokovic had gone through hell reaching this SF. Alcaraz had an easy road to his semi.

That’s totally fair but it was just one of many times when Djokovic faltered physically, that’s my point.

And he has now become the most accomplished player in tennis history despite it.

 

[RS]

His opponent was not a 36 years old, you know. It was prime Nadal, and in the final he would have to face peak Federer. And he also had some long battles in earlier rounds.

Ok good counter lol

 

[mike danny]

That’s totally fair but it was just one of many times when Djokovic faltered physically, that’s my point.

And he has now become the most accomplished player in tennis history despite it.

Alcaraz collapsed physically after an easy draw and 2 hours. Embarrassing stuff.

 

[StrongRule]

Yup! I seem to remember Murray super young getting them during a match at Wimbledon and both he and Djokovic became two of the best and most physically fit players on the tour so yeah, Alcaraz will be completely fine. He'll train more, get his fitness up and be a contender for many more slams over his career.

Murray became one of the most physically fit players on the tour? ROFL!!!

 

[helterskelter]

If you remember Djokovic's path to the semis and compare it to Alcaraz's, you'd understand why Djokovic wilted.

Don't recall Djokovic playing any five/six year younger ATGs, and they are the only opponents worthy of the name! (Well, even younger ATGs are, too, of course, but unless an opponent is both an ATG and at least five years younger than you, struggling to beat them is a major ding on your ATG credentials!)

Hewitt and Baghdatis were good opponents, of course, but Djokovic also dropped sets against Amer Delic and a Nicholas Kiefer who had only played one match all year prior to Wimbledon. It's not obvious to me that Tsitsipas is worse than those opponents, but Alcaraz did handle him more easily, for sure.

 

[mike danny]

Don't recall Djokovic playing any five/six year younger ATGs, and they are the only opponents worthy of the name! (Well, even younger ATGs are, too, of course, but unless an opponent is both an ATG and at least five years younger than you, struggling to beat them is a major ding on your ATG credentials!)

Hewitt and Baghdatis were good opponents, of course, but Djokovic also dropped sets against Amer Delic and a Nicholas Kiefer who had only played one match all year prior to Wimbledon. It's not obvious to me that Tsitsipas is worse than those opponents, but Alcaraz did handle him more easily, for sure.

Point is he played very long matches as a grass rookie which is why he had nothing left against Nadal. Unlike Carlos who hasn't been a rookie anymore and had an easy road to the semis.

Embarrassing stuff from Carlitos.

 

[helterskelter]

Alcaraz collapsed physically after an easy draw and 2 hours. Embarrassing stuff.

I don't think it was an easy draw. It was a draw that he cruised through.

Point is he played very long matches as a grass rookie which is why he had nothing left against Nadal. Unlike Carlos who hasn't been a rookie anymore and had an easy road to the semis.

Embarrassing stuff from Carlitos.

You are doing your usual thing of reading the material in the way that will best suit your agenda.

Here, you give Djokovic credit for not beating players easily and deny Alcaraz credit for beating players easily. By your logic, it would be less embarrassing for Alcaraz to have cramped yesterday if he had been taken to five sets by Tsitsipas (and Musetti) previously. But that logic implies that it's better to struggle through than to win through easily, and I don't think you'd conclude that so easily if you weren't trying to push an agenda.

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Alcaraz collapsed physically after an easy draw and 2 hours. Embarrassing stuff.

It was more mental than physical, like Coria in 2004.

 

[mike danny]

I don't think it was an easy draw. It was a draw that he cruised through.


You are doing your usual thing of reading the material in the way that will best suit your agenda.

Here, you give Djokovic credit for not beating players easily and deny Alcaraz credit for beating players easily. By your logic, it would be less embarrassing for Alcaraz to have cramped yesterday if he had been taken to five sets by Tsitsipas (and Musetti) previously. But that logic implies that it's better to struggle through than to win through easily, and I don't think you'd conclude that so easily if you weren't trying to push an agenda.

Point is I understand why Djokovic wilted, not that I approve of him struggling as much as he did. And again, he was a grass rookie (and we know how difficult grass is for the younger ones even today).

If this was grass, I'd be less critical of Carlos, but it's a surface on which he's won big stuff before.

 

[ChrisRF]

Chung was never touted as the next best thing.

Doesn't matter for what I said though. It was a quite pathetic retirement from a young player against someone 15 years older in a Slam SF.

And by the way, when he beat Djokovic that same year, there were indeed some TV commentators calling him a younger and better version of "old" Djokovic.

 

[mike danny]

It was more mental than physical, like Coria in 2004.

Well, Carlos is better than Coria, isn't he? And at least Coria lasted until the end even if he choked.

 

[Silverbullet96]

I'm pretty sure he had like a marathon 5 set match against Baghdatis in the QF, as well as had lost 3 sets earlier in the event.

 

[mike danny]

Doesn't matter for what I said though. It was a quite pathetic retirement from a young player against someone 15 years older in a Slam SF.

And by the way, when he beat Djokovic that same year, there were indeed some TV commentators calling him a younger and better version of "old" Djokovic.

I agree it was pathetic, but it's much more pathetic from Carlos considering the hype.

 

[mike danny]

I'm pretty sure he had like a marathon 5 set match against Baghdatis in the QF, as well as had lost 3 sets earlier in the event.

Exactly. The 2 situations are not the same.

 

[ibbi]

Nothing to "write off" at that time because nobody was taking djokovic or murray seriously back then to write anything about them, they were both seen as second grade players to Federer and also to his young challenger Nadal.

2010 US open onwards Djokovic's fitness and stock started to rise a lot.

To say nobody was taking them seriously is a stretch. Djokovic was plenty hyped ever since his 2006 Roland Garros run. If Federer and Nadal/the awful schedule of Wimbledon 2007 were not there, he has a not entirely unrealistic shot of winning all 4 majors in a row in 2007/08, and he surely would have been world number 1. The writing-off definitely didn't really begin till later in 2008, with Roddick, then Federer, etc. but the hype was there.

 

[helterskelter]

Point is I understand why Djokovic wilted, not that I approve of him struggling as much as he did. And again, he was a grass rookie (and we know how difficult grass is for the younger ones even today).

If this was grass, I'd be less critical of Carlos, but it's a surface on which he's won big stuff before.

Point is, you always interpret the evidence in the way that you think will bolster Federer's claims to being the goat. That has come to mean that you will always give maximum credit to players from the past and always give minimum credit to players of today. Thus, it is completely predictable that you'd say that Djokovic of 2007 was excusable whereas Alcaraz of 2023 was not. If Alcaraz had cramped as the result of several long matches, you'd be saying that he was a mug for needing four or five sets to overcome mediocre opposition. Thus, whichever way his run to the semis worked, you would have judged him negatively.

 

[Lauren_Girl']

Quite amazing that an injured, Slamless, inexperienced Djokovic was able to win a set against prime Nadal on grass. Not a coincidence if one has 7 Wimbledon titles and the other one has 2.

 

[mike danny]

Point is, you always interpret the evidence in the way that you think will bolster Federer's claims to being the goat. That has come to mean that you will always give maximum credit to players from the past and always give minimum credit to players of today. Thus, it is completely predictable that you'd say that Djokovic of 2007 was excusable whereas Alcaraz of 2023 was not. If Alcaraz had cramped as the result of several long matches, you'd be saying that he was a mug for needing four or five sets to overcome mediocre opposition. Thus, whichever way his run to the semis worked, you would have judged him negatively.

Perhaps, but it doesn't apply in this case and not everything is about Federer.

Craping after only 2 hours is inexcusable irrespective of who you are.

 

[Halba]

yes, it has happened before.

Nadal reaches final after Djokovic retires

Novak Djokovic handed second seed Rafael Nadal a Wimbledon final encounter with Roger Federer after retiring injured with the Spaniard leading their semi-final 3-6 6-1 4-1 on Saturday.

www.reuters.com

A lot of people wrote 20-year-old Novak Djokovic off back then - and a lot of people looked very very stupid. I would caution anyone who writes off Alcaraz for doing the same.

Alcaraz doesnt have a gluten issue to resolve - need to take care with analysis - also this is grass, alcaraz is much worse on grass

 

[arvind13]

No one is writing off Alcaraz. I'm sure he'll win slams when those two guys from that 2007 semifinal match you cited finally retire.

What kralingen means by writing off is that ppl will write off alcaraz beating djokovic at slams like you are doing in this post. You think alcaraz cannot beat djokovic at a slam. Well let them meet again at a hard court slam say us open or Australian and let’s see what happens. When alcaraz isn’t cramping

 

[helterskelter]

Perhaps, but it doesn't apply in this case and not everything is about Federer.

Craping after only 2 hours is inexcusable irrespective of who you are.

@mike danny Very disappointing, certainly. I agree on that. I don't think he owes anyone any excuses, though.

Unfortunate typo on cramping, by the way!

 

[mike danny]

@mike danny Very disappointing, certainly. I agree on that. I don't think he owes anyone any excuses, though.

Unfortunate typo on cramping, by the way!

 

[SonicNirvana]

Okay but we’ll always remember him cramping against the 36 year old. Even if he ends up surpassing the legends.

 

[mike danny]

Okay but we’ll always remember him cramping against the 36 year old. Even if he ends up surpassing the legends.

Especially as most likely he won't have any legends to contend with for many years.

Federer at least had Sampras and Agassi early on.

 

[DSH]

The worst retirement in recent times was Chung against Federer in the 2018 AO SF. He retired with foot blisters! From a Slam SF! I don't even know anyone in our local club who ever retired from a simple fun match with foot blisters. And I saw the feet of quite some people after a match that had really bad foot blisters, including myself a handful of times over the past years.

The easiest semifinal of Federer's career happened to the Swiss when he was over 36 and his opponent was 15 years his junior.

 

[SonicNirvana]

Especially as most likely he won't have any legends to contend with for many years.

Federer at least had Sampras and Agassi early on.

I’m still rooting for the guy but it’s definitely a stain if he’s to be compared to them later on.

And the career is still young. There can always be a challenger that we don’t know about who comes to be his main rival.

 

[UnforcedTerror]

Nothing has changed for Alcaraz and only dumb people would write him off for losing to freaking Djokovic. Alcaraz will have a better off-clay career than Bull. Book it.

 

[mike danny]

By the way, @Kralingen, Novak's collapse was definitely physical and despite all that he still managed to win the first set against Grassdal. Carlos lost the first set against old Novak.

 

[SonnyT]

Chung was never touted as the next best thing.

Chung defeated already injured Djokovic. Hundreds of players could've done the same thing. That was among the 8 slams Djokovic didn't win, the longest losing string since 2011!

During that 2016-18 period Federer won his last 3 slams. No way he won any with a healthy Djokovic, as history told us!