The real reason why Medvedev won, and why Djoko looked like that

Arak

Hall of Fame
BTW i have question for some of you. Do you think if it wasn't for Tsitsipas drama with the toilet/changeroom breaks, Djoko would have gone for break at some point, after the first or second set?
His own toilet breaks at the FO drew a lot of criticism already. Had he taken one in the final, he would have probably lost the crowd, which would have made him angry and won the match. I think he preferred to enjoy the love of the crowd instead.
 

Chanwan

G.O.A.T.
I don't want to answer x and y person individually losing my precious time with people that can't accept the reality, and all they do is making excuse after excuse, which from me is pathetic. I can make all the excuses in the world for why Medvedev lost AO against Djokovic.
Djoko draw was garbage easy till Zverev. It's his fault that he loses sets to players, that he shouldn't lose and manage to not waste energy along the way.
But this just an excuse, which i already destroy multiple time with how fast he was for the drop shots.

Anyway i decide to write, because Medvedev coach - Gilles Cervara, was interviewed and he pretty much confirm every single one of my points.
In my country there is an article with him, a cut one, but still he said that they have great tactics, and they know Djokovic adapt very well to his opponent play, and that they need to do various different stuffs, and Medvedev to be able to feel and to feel the moment to change if he see that Djoko adapts to his game.
This one one of my points in my first post, that it may not looks like that from the side, but Medvedev played with great variety.
And Cervara also said that that Medvedev used a lot of deep center shots, to not allow Djokovic to play much angles, and to move around the court, which is his strong side, and as well to be able to move Medvedev left-right.

Another thing of my point, which i cover exactly as what was Medvedev tactics and why they used it.
I don't like to praise myself, but i think Gilles Cervara comments just show you what an eye i have for details, tactical approach, and why Djoko was so out of his game, thanks to Medvedev superior tactics !!!
So you can be as bias as you like, that doesn't change the fact that Medvedev totally destroy him tactically !!! Pure masterclass !!!
I saw that interview and yes, he pretty much confirmed your exact points.

Last post summarized a lot of the post going around and so many, and many excuses of some of the biased fans.
I heard the so call Djokovic looks physically flat phrase so many times already. He absolutely always does that, when his opponent is on fire, and doesn't give him rhythm/momentum. He was playing "dead" so so many times. It's either a trick or body language.
But once he get an edge in the set, he is a different player.
Just a few mentioning of this. Million times against Federer, he does the same against Thiem in AO final, when Thiem start producing insane tennis, and we all know how that ended. Then he did exactly the same in Tsitsipas match.
He looks like he is set and done, and not even goes after some balls, and it's like he is injured or whatever, and the moment you drop your level, cause you say to yourself oh it's over, he punish you, and it's over, but for you.

Sorry to not believe this antics.
As far as the legs excuse i already bashed that out, as you can read in some of my previous post, but let me add, that this match was not a typical physical battle to say, he just didn't have the legs and fall shorts. It was nothing like that. It wasn't going left-right all over from Medvedev, so from what exactly his legs were gone? If the match was 4-5 hard set, make an excuse for Zverev match, but how in the blue hell you can make an excuse, where Medvedev was primary playing deep in the center part. :D
And the match was not a physical battle at all. Not so much long rallies as well. And Medvedev won the first set extremely fast.
And here is the perfect opposition as to why this excuse is exactly that - an excuse. Djokovic was super quick on Medvedev drop shots. He was always there, and he was there very early, because he was very quick on his feet. Every single drop shot and Djoko started super early, and he was super quick.

Chanwan, thanks for the praise, but then i'm exactly the opposite of what you are trying to make me. I got no problem going into the discussion, but what i see from few people here is just plan and simple excuses without any sensible explanation.
I'm all open to talk about the game, and what led to this result, as well if someone did not agree with some of my points, and how Medvedev produce this tactical masterpiece, but i'm yet to see someone to actually try to argue my points.
But you pretty much can't do it, simply because it was so so visible what his strategy was.

And BTW Djokovic had a cake walk till Zverev. And Zverev is a guy that never ever in his life has a win over top 10 player in a Slam. He usually go deep, because his draw are always super easy.
Don't make me laugh with Berrettini pls, cause this guy is terrible.
Djokovic previous matches was a joke as well.
And this was probably first Medvedev draw that turns out to be easy, he always have a nightmare draw. His draw at Wimbledon was absolutely insane, and Djoko still have a easy draw in there too.
And Djoko rested like a month after the Olympics, it's not like he was playing too much tournament before that.

Sorry but the fatigue excuses is just ridiculous, when he had so heavy Clay season, and played a tournament right before RG, and then have like 5 super hard matches, and at the end manage to win from 2-0 down, and was absolutely looking fresher than Tsitsipas in that final.
And just to mention English is not my native, and still have hard time with it. Got to put way more efforts into it. :D I'm very cool person usually.
No worries, feel free to argue as strongly as you will. One last comment from me though:
1) your legs can be heavy/dead due to nerves/stress as well as actual fatigue.
2) a Djoker fan posted a stat saying that Novak had won every slam final, he played, where he had a straigt set semi final win and won "only" 6-4 in slam finals if he played a 5-setter in the semis (6-5 now, if I got him right). Obviosly, there can be any no. of reasons for that, including better form in the runs, where he's had a straight set semi, but I found it interesting nevertheless.
3) I still believe it's not either (Med played with exactly the right tactics and executed brilliantly) or (Djoko was well below his normal standards), but a combination of the 2. You might be right that the main explanation is Med's tactics, but regardless of those my points below still have merit imo:

Your analysis of Medvedev's tactical approach and Novak playing subpar cause of nerves/stress/fatigue are not mutually exclusive. As is pointed out above, he was hitting his thighs early on. He also made a ton of errors at the onset of the first set. And he didn't get to 20 slams by being completely inable to make relevant adjustments to his opponent's tactics.

Did M's tactics make him play worse? Sure. Was he subpar to begin with, sure as well
 

thrust

Hall of Fame
Djokovic was off and Meddie was playing really well. I didn't think it'd happen like that. I really believed that to beat Djokovic, it would take a player who would be able to overpower him, because he anticipates so well. That was Zverev for me, not Medvedev. But full credit to him - it's a well deserved win.
Sad, but true.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Most people on this website said that Djokovic's draw was too big a hill to climb, and the tribe was correct for a change.
 

RaulRamirez

Legend
Yeah keep trying with the excuses, it's getting pathetic. If you cannot see the clear sign, hell i even write every single thing on his tactical plan, that was so obvious, then there is no savior for you. :D
I agree with much of your technical analysis of the match.
But since when is "he didn't play well" an acceptable excuse, or an excise altogether? Yes, Med was a big part of the reason for that, and so was nerves (even for a great big-match player) and what looked like fatigue.

Either way, full credit to Med.
 

a10best

Hall of Fame
In the first couple games went by Djokovic looked pale af. Like he’d seen a ghost. He was out of fuel.
Fed looked out of gas in their last Wimbledon final. I heard he had stayed up late the previous night. If Fed didn't shank that FH at 40-15 or wasn't 5 years older.
He beat Djokovic in every category except the final score. That almost never happens. Call it Djoko-luck.
- Nadal barely lost to Djokovic in their last Wimbledon meeting 10-8 in the 5th. And If Nadal didn't play ____... he would have won.
- And wait Tsistipas looked wasted too in their FO 5th set final. If either of those three were fresher and played on a 72-degree day, slight breeze it would be a different match, right?
- No sense in wasting time and posting endless excuses and if's. What will it change?
It's like ESPN or Fox Sports talk shows that go on forever about the million "ifs" and speculation.
 
Last edited:

lordlosh

Semi-Pro
Again i didn't see million excuses thread for Medvedev when he lost AO.
He lost to a better player on the given day, just move on.
It's the same old stuff with Nadal and Djokovic fans(most of them, cause not all of them are like that). The excuses for Nadal after Djokovic straight up beat him at RG this year was absolutely ridiculous.
And before the match, there was 3-4 Nadal fans that laughed at me, when i gave a full and detailed explanation why i think Djokovic will win, and that his draw prepared him better for Nadal in that match.
There was a guy that disappear after that and i still haven't seen him since then. He say he will mark my comment and used it as a laugh after the match. Eh it didn't turn out great for him after all .....
And what pissed me so much back then with Nadal fans, was the reason i just stated my opinion and give an detailed view on why i though Djokovic would win. And i even stated that this is MY opinion, and yet Nadal fans was still all over me, about my prediction.
Even if i was wrong, so if i believe a x person would beat y person, and this is not a popular opinion i should not give my opinion on the topic, right ?
I got no problem with any prediction and people opinion, especially when they use a solid arguments, explanation as why they thought so.

And lastly a lot of people have hard time understand when a certain player have a bad day in the office, and when it's mostly due to his opponent totally destroy his game, either tactically or technically.
Medvedev made sure to not give Djokovic any rhythm at all from the very beginning, and produce a masterpiece. And again he lost to Djoko at AO. His fans could have used all the excuses in the world, but they didn't. People slammed him hard, but i guess this just tells us about certain x fanbase ...

P.P. I want to make clear, that i'm not Medvedev fan(i like his tactical approach of the game tho, and so many youngster lacked that), and i'm neither a Djokovic hater.
Tho the only real player i don't like on the tour for real is Nadal, and the reason for that is his antics.
I'm Tsitsipas fan and while i defend him here and there, but i also criticize him and not like certain parts of his on court behavior. I though he made a huge progress this year, but it was till the RG, and after that everything fell apart. He is attitude is like a teen one. He definitely need to grow up.
 
Last edited:

a10best

Hall of Fame
I saw that interview and yes, he pretty much confirmed your exact points.


No worries, feel free to argue as strongly as you will. One last comment from me though:
1) your legs can be heavy/dead due to nerves/stress as well as actual fatigue.
2) a Djoker fan posted a stat saying that Novak had won every slam final, he played, where he had a straigt set semi final win and won "only" 6-4 in slam finals if he played a 5-setter in the semis (6-5 now, if I got him right). Obviosly, there can be any no. of reasons for that, including better form in the runs, where he's had a straight set semi, but I found it interesting nevertheless.
3) I still believe it's not either (Med played with exactly the right tactics and executed brilliantly) or (Djoko was well below his normal standards), but a combination of the 2. You might be right that the main explanation is Med's tactics, but regardless of those my points below still have merit imo:

Your analysis of Medvedev's tactical approach and Novak playing subpar cause of nerves/stress/fatigue are not mutually exclusive. As is pointed out above, he was hitting his thighs early on. He also made a ton of errors at the onset of the first set. And he didn't get to 20 slams by being completely inable to make relevant adjustments to his opponent's tactics.

Did M's tactics make him play worse? Sure. Was he subpar to begin with, sure as well
He played a level below the whole tournament. Losing a set to Rune, Brooksby, and expected set loss from Berretini, and Zev.
But wasn't he supposed to have an easier time with his much improved serve and ensuing free points? His serve is better no doubt.
Djokovic lost plain & simple and had 1.5 days rest. We all know he has next level recovery and stretching techniques. We've seen him play tired, injured abs or shoulder, get lucky breaks in tight 5 setters (against Fed) and still win. He has no excuses nor should his fans. Be respectable and gracious in a loss like he was at the podium.
Med was the better player that day. If they played again, I'd expect a 4 or 5 set match toss-up, no matter if Djokovic or Med played 5 sets the previous match or is a little bit injured.
 
Last edited:

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
Court conditions also suited Med a lot. He could win a good bunch of HC Slams were they all to be this lively, and not so high bouncing.
 

mwym

Semi-Pro
And here is the perfect opposition as to why this excuse is exactly that - an excuse. Djokovic was super quick on Medvedev drop shots. He was always there, and he was there very early, because he was very quick on his feet. Every single drop shot and Djoko started super early, and he was super quick.
What we can observe in physical reality can have a non physical cause.

Djokovic was not 'reading' Medvedev's serve. Which means his reactions were too slow - he was late. And most of Djokovic's UEs were made while making some rather easy shots because he was not 'on ball' with his usual perfect timing - he was late.

So, his legs are indeed what brings him on time, but it is his mind that who is in command of his legs - and his mind is what was constantly just a tiny bit late. His legs were not tired, here feet were not too slow. His mind was too slow. This proves his mind was not only playing the match like it usually does. His mind had compromised it's own focus the moment he entertained the thought and words about 'the most important match of his career' - the one to 'play like it is a last of his career' and all that self deluded BS.

That huge but infantile slip of a mind is rookie mistake for a person who is supposed to be well versed in all things mental. Which proves that whatever he does to make his mind superior is done based on instinct and not as a well trained and formally informed person on topic.

Therefore, as other pointed - dynamic AND outcome of the match were defined by both Medvedev AND Djokovic. They always are. Your point about Medvedev's brilliant tactics is spot on, but it got him the win in straight sets because Djokovic mindfvcked his own self by that idiotic narrative and self degraded his mind = mde his own mind too slow for the occasion.
 

guga_fan

Semi-Pro
Great thread OP. There's some awesome discussion in the comments on the tactics too, these type of posts are the best of TTW imo.

For me, the most important things mentioned were the blistering pace of play and deep center balls.

Medvedev was playing so, so fast on his service games and his serves (both 1st and 2nd) were tremendous. Most service games of his were done in 2 minutes, which immediately brought on a ton of pressure to Novak. This with him ahead all match since he got the break in the very opening game. So much mental and physical pressure with how fast Medvedev was playing. I think this, along with those deep center shots, was a very key part of breaking Djokovic's rhythm.

Just imagine it from Novak's side - you're down all match, you spend 8-10 minutes battling out a very difficult hold, then your 6'6" giant opponent smashes 4 serves in a row you have trouble reading, and just like that in barely over 1 minute you're back struggling on your serve again.

Great match from Medvedev, I was very impressed by how he rose to the occasion
People here talk as having fast service games is a strategic masterpiece, but it is not as simples as that. Medvedev only has his service for this and Djokovic’s poor return made it possible. The same thing was happening in the semifinals for long portions as Zverev held in less than a minute but with better 1st serve from Djokovic his service games were not very long.

Federer is a player who made his games on serve as quick as possible because he was aggressive and could come to the net behind his serve. Djokovic never liked that, but when in good form this was most of the time not enough to stop him. Medvedev doesn’t have that game to finish points quick, he only has a serve, if Djokovic returns well his service games are going to be long battles, unless he goes for broke from the baseline which he rarely does.

When Djokovic plays well you take time away from him during the points as Fed did, not off them. When he plays badly there are any number of ways to beat him.

Going forward I think both Med and Zverev will dominate Djokovic on HC, considering his return stats have been declining steadily year after year and they serve better than him.
 

mr tonyz

Professional
Yeah some people just don't understand the game, and that's it. You don't just win the first 3 GS title, and knocking in the door of history, and suddenly out of nowhere you play like a completely s****.
You are playing as much as your opponents allow you.
Yes there is matches, where the one player, have a great day, and other just have terrible, and not deliver, but this match was very, very different from that.
But you to understand the tactical part of the game, and to have an eye for it.

Without to insult someone, a lot of people here have no clue, they just pump hard, and claiming he is the greatest, or he is the greatest, he destroy x and y, he is the best, and all that kind of b.c. posts all around.
No one even comment why x or y result happen, what was the reason for it.

I was shocked to see no one comment, on all the point i mention, and especially the VERY obviously ones, like the very fast serving on Medvedev side, as well as Medvedev constantly playing deep ball in the center part. This was SO SO obviously a huge tactical plan, not just put the ball back in play.

Where was the Djokovic usual angles? Where was the Djokovic usable use of his opponent pace to math him ? Nowhere to be seen, cause Medvedev didn't give him any of that. He didn't gave him any space to play his angle, he didn't have him any pace, so Djokovic to use it.

Medvedev just totally outshine Djokovic tactically. That was a flawless tactical performance. If people can't see that, their tennis knowledge is just lacking.
Djoker had up until this point lost FIVE of his 8 US Open finals.

Djoker came into this final dropping SIX sets. None of which had anything to do with Medvedev's tactics.

Djoker just isn't as good @ The US Open as he is @ the other HC slam.

AO 9-0

UO 3-6

Staggering disparity in numbers throughout his career finals @ both HC slams.

Not saying that Med had nothing to do with it. But saying it was all Med & it was his tactics & there was nothing Djoker could do is absolute rubbish.

You can admit that Djoker was gassed coming in it won't kill you.

This coming from a guy that was all for Meddy to crush Djoker & put him out of his misery. & that's exactly what he did.

Edit. Medvedev literally admitted that Djoker wasn't playing his best tennis. I guess he meant that he made Djoker play like s**t ...
 
Last edited:

mr tonyz

Professional
Does he need 3 or 4 days now?
You answered your own question. This is what age does to our ageing bodies. Filled with years of wear-&-tear. I look after my body MORE & i am still in more general niggly pain than when i was a younger guy playing my sports whilst not doing as much to take care of myself (yet still doing a lot back then too)

It's a case of diminishing returns.

If you say that age is a non-factor or what have you, then @ what number does age start becoming relevant for you? Fred @ 40 just not really playing Tennis anymore despite not officially being retired?
 

sredna42

Hall of Fame
He successfully blocked the early second set soul-steal at 0-40 :cool:
That's it. The Big3, Djokodal in particular, seem to win alot of sets right at the pointy end, where the Next Genner just folds on-serve to hand it to them 6-4, and get early breaks after they lose a set like clockwork. Like a pattern of psychological lulls they have identified & trained extensively to capitalize on.

Its like, they sleepwalk the opposition to defeat, & lift at just precisely the right times.
 

Vamos Rafa Nadal

Hall of Fame
There were so many different reasons, even beyond their levels of play on the court, that defeated Djokovic. Spending 5 1/2 more hours running on the courts during the tournament impacted the final. His decisions to go for the golden slam and to skip Toronto and Cincinnati impacted the outcome. Medvedev's easier draw and Djokovic's harder draw (3 top ten players in a row, and Medvedev was helped by Alcaraz eliminating Tsistsipas). Medvedev put in the work to figure out how to win against Djokovic and I felt he was finally ready to win. All of the reasons tactically that others have mentioned are true but these other intangibles are true also. They were the reasons I predicted Medvedev would win the day the draw came out; the reason I predicted a 3 set victory for Medvedev had to do with their respective levels of play during the tournament.
 

lordlosh

Semi-Pro
Djoker had up until this point lost FIVE of his 8 US Open finals.

Djoker came into this final dropping SIX sets. None of which had anything to do with Medvedev's tactics.

Djoker just isn't as good @ The US Open as he is @ the other HC slam.

AO 9-0

UO 3-6

Staggering disparity in numbers throughout his career finals @ both HC slams.

Not saying that Med had nothing to do with it. But saying it was all Med & it was his tactics & there was nothing Djoker could do is absolute rubbish.

You can admit that Djoker was gassed coming in it won't kill you.

This coming from a guy that was all for Meddy to crush Djoker & put him out of his misery. & that's exactly what he did.

Edit. Medvedev literally admitted that Djoker wasn't playing his best tennis. I guess he meant that he made Djoker play like s**t ...
Djokovic also had a 20 combine GS title. Also making a 9 finals at a slam, it's not a suggestion that a player is weak at that slam lol.

And the equation have 2 side, that most of you are trying to avoid so hard. This was Medvedev 3rd final, and he lost the first 2. Not only that, Djokovic destroyed him at the AO this year, in the exact same manner, and AO 2021 and USO was pretty much the same. Djoko was supposedly tired, supposedly injured at AO, he played more hours than Medvedev, and we have see what happen.

I still can't believe some people/biased fans obvious still fall for Djokovic tricks/antics. His body language when losing big, have no answer tactically, and/or he is dominated physically or so, his body language and his expression is always the same.
Let me remember you if you forget, cause you seems to do the same mistake, as a lot of players on the tour do:
They see Djoko body language, and drop their concentration/level just a bit for a moment, and it's all over for them. Tennis is a sport about rhythm/momentum, and you should use every opportunities, and not give an inch to your opponent.
Can give million example with Djoko, but will give one recent with Tsitsipas and Alcaraz.
Tsitsipas thought the set was over at 5-1(or was 5-2) against Alcaraz. He let his guard go down a bit, he was distracted by the crowd, and he also get a penalty for coaching or so, and he let the momentum go, and he pay the price, and lost the whole set.
But this ain't over. Tsitsipas won 6-0 the next set, and Alcaraz looked absolutely Spend/Done, his body language speaks that he has nothing left, and guess what happen ? He won the next set in tiebreak, and produce insane quality, super strong shots.

But let me get back on Djoko. He looked like that in so so many occasion. After Thiem took the momentum in the match at AO, Djoko looked absolutely done. And the commentator was saying the same thing, oh Djoko looks so physically flat. Thiem though the same, and Djoko come back from 2-1 to win the match. Wasn't he tired back then ?
Wasn't he tired at RG this year? He played the whole Clay season, he played Rome with no rest, then he played his home tournament straight away, and he has zero rest for RG. Wasn't people talking the same thing, as he is tired, he is not on his usual level, when Mussetti lead with 2-0 ? Absolutely the same comments all over when Tsitsipas lead him 2-0. You got now, why i don't take some people seriously and their excuses could go straight to the bin.

But let me get back on RG, he had an insane though matches from the 4th round till the end. 5 set against Mussetti, 4 very very hard against Berrettini, 4 insanely rough against Nadal, and losing 2-0 against Tsitsipas, and Djoko looked exactly like he looked at USO when he was 2-0 set down. What happen? Exactly what Djoko wanted. His opponent drop his guard just for a momentum, and it was all over. This is what happen so so often in tennis. You let down for a moment, and your opponent take the control of the match, and it's all over for you. You just lose focus, start regretting, you get tired faster, because you start thinking way more, you start coming back and ask yourself how i let this slip, and you are done mentally. Ah and let me add, you totally forget to keep to the script that worked for you, you can no longer stick to your gameplan/tactics, you just totally forget everything.

So if Djoko can handle all that physically wear and tear, as well as manage to keep his emotion after beating Nadal at RG, and then made a f***** comeback from 2-0 and look like ***** i don't believe the USO version Djoko wasn't his usual version.

But you guess what, you can believe in whatever you wanna believe.

As far as what Medvedev says, its a usual answer, to a tennis question, but i cannot find the so call interview anywhere. So a link will be a good start. But still as i say, this is a typical respond to a dumb journalist question, for the like do you think he was x or y.
Still i take Medvedev coach words. He pretty much confirm my observation of the match.

And finally, the huge pressure was on both as well. Djoko is known for that he can handle it. But if someone think that Medvedev wasn't at huge pressure, he is out of his mind.
And lastly i did not exclude anything. But some people just don't have an eye and can't understand, that for a bad day to happen to X player, you also need an Y player.
Was Djokovic at his absolutely best ??? No one can tell that. Was Djokovic tired? Wasn't he at the million example i already gave? He still manage to win all this matches. Do i fall for his tricks/antics? Not in a million year !!! Would any other player won against this Djoko ??? Not in a million year, look for post number 1 in this thread. It was all Medvedev and his team a perfect gameplan/tactics for this match, and the guy execute it perfectly. He also knew and was prepared for the bad momentum that would eventually come, and he weather the storm perfectly. Something that XXX players before him couldn't do. He manage to finish the job DONE !!!!

Everyone can check my post history and see that im not a Djoko hater, neither im a Medvedev lover. This is 500% unbiased opinion, as im always.
And btw i think this is the last from me. I already covered all of the topics. But repeating the same old stuff, is not a discussion, it's a repetition of the same, as well as losing a precious time, that i for pity don't have.
 
Last edited:

smalahove

Hall of Fame
Very good post. But if you say when Federer plays with variety he can beat Djokovic, why doesn't Federer then always play this way against Djokovic?
Another point to be made here, is that the 2hbh is much more attuned to returning flat, low over the net, with medium-to-high pace, landing around the service line, than the 1hbh.
The 1hbh works best when you hit up on the ball, using TS to get it back down, deep, with more net clearance. Fed's weapon of choice for the short landing, low clearance ball would be the BH slice, but that's going to eat eaten up by Djokovic (or any other 2hbh player). You need the forward momentum/pace to keep the opponent stuck in the middle of the baseline.
 

mr tonyz

Professional
@lordlosh "and USO was pretty much the same."

I stopped reading where you say Djoker @ the US Open is the same as @ the Australian Open.

Not avoiding anything. Djoker is simply not as good @ The US Open where a paltry 3 of his 20 are US Open Crowns. Heck he was 1 point away in 2011 from it being 2 US Opens.

Let me make it real easy for you. If this were Topspin Tennis on Playstation or something, Djoker @ AO would be like a 9/10. US Open a 7-sh/10.

Combine that with his torturous run after failing @ the Olympics + he is now 34.

I can tell that you were chomping @ the bit to whack your post up after Djoker lost.

We have another nutjob around here that thinks Djoker can never lose to anyone in SpencerGore & now there's you saying it was all Medvedev & his tactics.

Both guys literally admitted the same thing in their post match pressers.

Was Meddy lying to us when he said that Djoker wasn't @ his best??

If Djoker had've lost AO '12 to Nadal. Fair & square as an example. This here, i watched a lot of his matches & quite frankly the guy should have been put out of his misery earlier on.

He dropped an opening set 6-1 to some dude named Brooksby??? Lost a set to his absolute Slam pigeon in Nishikori also. Then that Rune dude could have taken Djoker all the way but his body gave way on him. Yeah could you say that Djoker beat Rune due to his marvelous tactics when the shoe is on the other foot? That young guy was done after redlining & Djoker dodged a bullet.

How many more examples do i need to provide to you as evidence that this was a subpar Djoker ...

Medvedev had to play to a certain level to finish off Djoker. He played a very solid match that is typical of him with exceptional serving that had Djoker guessing ...
 

mr tonyz

Professional
But if someone think that Medvedev wasn't at huge pressure, he is out of his mind.
The guy was sitting on Zero slams. Most would have expected him to lose. Djoker was sitting on 3 slams going for history. If anything this would have made it all easier for Meddy mentally as he was in the perfect position to play party pooper.

All of your other examples are from the beginning of the year. Plus on Clay you don't have the same amount of depth of field. Typically for Djoker he can steamroll most of his opponents on Clay then run into the brick wall in Nadal.

Djoker got so lucky that the Zverev/Tpas 1st Semi went to 5 sets pushing the DjokerDal Semi into night conditions.

If that were the first Semi i'd put my money on Nadal taking that in the searing heat.

Trust me, i've watched Djoker play @ The US Open since '07. All those netrushes? All those terrible loopy dropshots from Meddy that normally would be eaten up by a Djoker slide & squash dig high angle cross court. I suppose he was netting all of those due to Meddy's tactics of terribly looping his dropshots so high over the net?

No it was terrible play from both guys with those loopy droppers that deserved to be put away. Poor level all-round in that regard.

Djoker's spot/serving vs Zverev wasn't there either. Who knows what it was, fatigue leading in or Meddy taking out Djokers legs with all of his trashballs down the centre of the court.

Djoker is the best in the world @ changing angles & going down the line. I simply don't buy that he couldn't handle puffballs straight down the centre of the court & redirect them if he were @ 100%.

How many random Unforced Errors did he just cough up during neutral rallies? Again you'll mention tactics & i'd counter that he played like crap & not in a way that say a Carreno Busta would make Djoker play like crap. That for me is a clear Match-Up issue that Djoker has with P.C.B.

Here it was a combination of a lot of things that i had mentioned & Meddy's play & tactics were only PART of the reason that Djoker lost & not the SOLE reason as to why he lost.
 

mr tonyz

Professional
But repeating the same old stuff, is not a discussion, it's a repetition of the same, as well as losing a precious time, that i for pity don't have.
No please stay as i have plenty of time.

Yeah you can repeat, orrr ...

You can isolate my counter-arguments one-by-one & provide me with your own counter arguments to each.
That's what i do & people tend to just pretend the conversation with me just didn't exist :D

Oh yes, Djoker does play possum. He looks like he is tired, it's his very nature to play possum.

Want to know if he's really tired or not? This is what i do, i watch how consistant he is during actual match-play, not in between points. If he is running around like an energizer bunny for 5 hours barely missing any shots then yeah ...

He can play possum all he wants, i know he's in the zone. The guy is 34 & there are only so many 'vitamins' & 'booster shots' that this guy can take before he starts to get stuck with diminishing returns & he starts to physically tap-out. to the next best of the rest on HC which is clearly Zverev/Med.

p.s I would have personally handpicked a Zverev Semi & Meddy final in that order as i wanted Djoker to lose. The first thing i checked up on his side was to see if Zverev was there & not Tpas. The toughest draw@ a HC slam right now are those 2 guys with a fit Nadal a close third. Honourable mention to Theim when he's back in action too.
 

mr tonyz

Professional
Djoker/Hyeon Chung @ AO17 4th round was so much higher in quality than this years US Open final. Djoker whist not @ his best there either was still playing @ a much higher level.
 

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
Djoko looked like that, because of Medvedev genius tactical gameplan. Medvedev game may not have the beauty of technique, but it's a brilliant in tactical way.
And this is what i wanna see way more from the newcomers and actual tactical gameplan, and how to actually win matches. Not i will try to outshot him, and when it's not happening, they have no Plan B, and keep repeating the same, and keep losing.
Med is a champion junior chess player. Will always have a Plan B.
That said, Djoker likely wins if they had met in SF.
Zverev in SF followed by Med in final proved to be just too much.
 

lordlosh

Semi-Pro
@lordlosh "and USO was pretty much the same."

I stopped reading where you say Djoker @ the US Open is the same as @ the Australian Open.

Not avoiding anything. Djoker is simply not as good @ The US Open where a paltry 3 of his 20 are US Open Crowns. Heck he was 1 point away in 2011 from it being 2 US Opens.

Let me make it real easy for you. If this were Topspin Tennis on Playstation or something, Djoker @ AO would be like a 9/10. US Open a 7-sh/10.

Combine that with his torturous run after failing @ the Olympics + he is now 34.

I can tell that you were chomping @ the bit to whack your post up after Djoker lost.

We have another nutjob around here that thinks Djoker can never lose to anyone in SpencerGore & now there's you saying it was all Medvedev & his tactics.

Both guys literally admitted the same thing in their post match pressers.

Was Meddy lying to us when he said that Djoker wasn't @ his best??

If Djoker had've lost AO '12 to Nadal. Fair & square as an example. This here, i watched a lot of his matches & quite frankly the guy should have been put out of his misery earlier on.

He dropped an opening set 6-1 to some dude named Brooksby??? Lost a set to his absolute Slam pigeon in Nishikori also. Then that Rune dude could have taken Djoker all the way but his body gave way on him. Yeah could you say that Djoker beat Rune due to his marvelous tactics when the shoe is on the other foot? That young guy was done after redlining & Djoker dodged a bullet.

How many more examples do i need to provide to you as evidence that this was a subpar Djoker ...

Medvedev had to play to a certain level to finish off Djoker. He played a very solid match that is typical of him with exceptional serving that had Djoker guessing ...
Just look at your quote, and answer your question, as to why people do not like to go into a discussion with you.
What you are doing is, completely miss the whole point of the post, as well as obviously reading between the lines, as well as trying to twist someone opinion, as well as taking 1 out of 10 points, and trying to twist the post.

Now tell me where exactly i have said that Djokovic at the USO is the same as AO ??? This is an absolutely pathetic try to twist what i have said.

And the equation have 2 side, that most of you are trying to avoid so hard. This was Medvedev 3rd final, and he lost the first 2. Not only that, Djokovic destroyed him at the AO this year, in the exact same manner, and AO 2021 and USO was pretty much the same. Djoko was supposedly tired, supposedly injured at AO, he played more hours than Medvedev, and we have see what happen.
This is a lot different, isn't it ?
I was obviously talking about the condition they met, was that hard to get it? That was pretty clear, wasn't it.

As well as Novak missing x or y ball i already covered that, read better.

As far as Novak not been as good, or blq, blq, blq, another b.c. excuse, you cannot say someone that get to 9 finals, he ain't good enough. This is an absolutely ridiculous post.
You can't even say that Djoko ain't that good at RG, cause he has some finals, and 2 titles, and beat the biggest Clay court player of all time.

But following your ridiculous logic, he ain't that good at RG as well, but he beats the very 2 best players this season back to back in Nadal and Tsitsipas name.
So that argument is send to the trash bin.

As far as the he lost x or y set to x or y guy. That is another pathetic excuse, that i can send to the trash bin. Why? Because he always does that. He does that in RG, he does that in AO, he does that in Wimbledon. Does he ever won a slam, without losing some set, to a player that no one expect to take a set from Nole.
He lost a set to a qualifier in Wimby, a guy that was absolutely terrible and i have never heard before.
He lost 2 sets to Mussetti at RG for god sake.
He lost 2 sets against T Fritz at AO, and looked "physically flat" once again, injured, and all that nonsenses, that people love to excuse him if his opponent doesn't fall and finish him.

If he was not at his best, he wouldn't beat Zverev, who was on a tremendous streak, right ?
As far as the recovery, he had a a full month off, since the Olympics, so no way in hell he was not fully physically fit.
And we already saw his "insane' recovery at RG, where he played multiple tournaments before the RG, and even play a tournament right before the RG, where everyone rested, and every single match from 4rth round was insanely hard, and he still make a comeback from 2-0. So he was tired, his feet was gone, and all that nonsenses are just that.

Again he was super quick on every single dropball by Medvedev, so his feet was perfectly fine.

And as far as what Medvedev say, once again you are trying to twist things to your liking.
Medvedev say he had a clear tactical gameplan, and what he said about Djokovic WAS not like, oh see he was no where near his best, he was garbage, blq, blq, blq. He tried to be respectful, and he say that his tactical gameplan worked, and saying Was Djokovic at his best, maybe not, today he was at a lot of pressure, but i was too. He also state that he had a clear gameplan for Djokovic serve and to not give him easy points, another point i have made with Medvedev returning so so back, and put pressure on Djokovic and make him go for more, and thats why his % was s****. Again it was stupid excuse question from the journalist, that you answer that way, in order to be respectful.
But Medvedev made a good point talking about AO, and how you can make a point he had a bad day in there ....

Lastly just read better next time. I have said that people can make their mind, and i did not EXCLUDE anything. I made my points clear.
Loosing more time on a topic that was already being covered for me is a waste of time i don't have. I'm both working and studying, main reason why i don't post so so often in this forums.
But even if i had tons of time i would prefer to make post like the first one, analysis of certain matches, tactics and so on.

Again you can have your own mind, as everyone. You can think whatever you can want, as well as everyone.
This is the last from me, cause this is already an absolutely repetition of the same. The topic is already covered.
 

PrinceMoron

Legend
I put 250 on Medvedev to win at 2/1
There was not a moment in the match where the cash out wasn’t positive.
The least Medvedev was going to do was win the first set if Djokovic previous matches were anything to go by.

where is Goran by the way?
 

mr tonyz

Professional
As far as Novak not been as good, or blq, blq, blq, another b.c. excuse, you cannot say someone that get to 9 finals, he ain't good enough. This is an absolutely ridiculous post.
& win only 3 of them ...

He lost 2 sets against T Fritz at AO, and looked "physically flat" once again, injured, and all that nonsenses, that people love to excuse him if his opponent doesn't fall and finish him.
You definitely have an agenda here & it screams "Djokovic the ultimate faker that's always got an excuse"

If he was not at his best, he wouldn't beat Zverev, who was on a tremendous streak, right ?
Djokovic doesn't need to be @ his best to beat a guy like Zverev. He is that good. Zverev was playing some of his most best tennis i had ever seen him play & he still came up short. Getting broken 3 times in that final set just won't cut it against the very best (not playing @ their absolute best) Eventually we will get to the point where Djoker's best won't cut it, but it has not arrived just yet.

And we already saw his "insane' recovery at RG, where he played multiple tournaments before the RG, and even play a tournament right before the RG, where everyone rested, and every single match from 4rth round was insanely hard, and he still make a comeback from 2-0
You don't get it. Just because he can battle back from 0-2 down in sets doesn't just automatically tick off some imaginary box in my head that says "yeah he to be 100% because he took it in 5"

Maybe, just maybe if Djoker had played better then he wouldn't have been 0-2 down to start with. I can reverse your logic here quite easily.

But Medvedev made a good point talking about AO, and how you can make a point he had a bad day in there ....
Yes i can actually because i have no agenda here & i'm basing this off the matches that i watched. I agree with you here that Meddy had a brain fade/meltdown @ AO earlier this year.

I can play your role here (inverted) & just say that it was all Djoker & his miraculous "tactics". Nothing to do with Meddy & his genius mind having a total meltdown after losing the first set. He folded like a deck of cards & an injured Djoker didn't have to get out of third gear to moonwalk his way to a 9th AO Crown.

Can you see, I'm not against Meddy & i wanted him to crush Djoker & i'm glad that he did. But i also know full well, that was a subpar Djoker irrespective of Meddy.

Again it was stupid excuse question from the journalist, that you answer that way, in order to be respectful.
But Medvedev made a good point talking about AO, and how you can make a point he had a bad day in there ....
Right here you are picking & choosing what is a Pro-Athletes P.R reply & then what you believe is his honest reply ...

Bolded goes against your agenda of Djoker being injured so you believe that Meddy was just being "respectful" & disingenuous with his reply because it is what YOU believe to be true, so Meddy has to believe that Djoker was @ 100% also.

Italics favour your agenda so right there Meddy was now being honest.Because again, it's what you believe to be true.

You're conveniently picking what you believe to be a a P.R reply & what you believe is an honest reply purely predicated upon your predisposition.

If i see that Meddy beats an awesome Djoker playing @ his best for his age.I'll tip my hats off to Meddy. But this US Open final wasn't it.

Hyeon Chung vs Djoker 4th round of AO '18. I tip my hats off to that guy as that was a fantastic match. No Djoker fan would ever admit that was a great Djoker but that match in isolation was absolutely fantastic. No excuses with that one. Djoker got Djoker'd by Chung.

As a Fred fan i should just say that Freddy beat a fully fit Chung in that Semi-Final also, because why not? It was Fed's tactics & nothing to do with Chungs blistered up foot for running his feet into the cement with that 4th Round grindfest against Djoker.

In which other HC slam have you seen Djoker drop SIX SETS across FIVE MATCHES en-route to the final?? It was an ominous sign & it still took the best of the rest in a Tag-Team to finally put him down.
 
Last edited:

pico

Professional
Good analysis. Gilles Cervara did mention that point 5 at least was part of the plan. I read it in an article.
 

a10best

Hall of Fame
You answered your own question. This is what age does to our ageing bodies. Filled with years of wear-&-tear. I look after my body MORE & i am still in more general niggly pain than when i was a younger guy playing my sports whilst not doing as much to take care of myself (yet still doing a lot back then too)

It's a case of diminishing returns.

If you say that age is a non-factor or what have you, then @ what number does age start becoming relevant for you? Fred @ 40 just not really playing Tennis anymore despite not officially being retired?
at what age? it's hard to compare because it depends on how many matches you play annually, off season training. In general, all professional endurance sports, your legs go at around age 35 or sooner no matter what you do (take time off, eat healthy by cutting out inflammatory foods, injured and come back too soon). Djokovic's strength is his fetching / defensive play so he needs to have that to win. Since he has had many long 4 and 5 set matches throughout his career and so may masters wins it is probably all catching up to him. Look at the guys he came on the tour with who are always injured (Monfis, Murray, Tsonga.) Add to the fact he is playing against younger, taller more powerful players who also have excellent defensive skills. (Zev & Med)
Djokovic is used to having some lucky slam draws with player defaults and winning a squeaker in the semis or finals. Rog probably could have lost his two Wimbledon final victories over Roddick too. Luck does play a role sometimes.

I don't get the Fred name. Let's give "Roger" the deserved respect and not call him by some msg board name. The big 3or 4 gave us some great tennis.
 

urban

Legend
Med played a fine tournament from A to Z, no doubt. And he played a clever game in the final, as analyzised above. But it takes two to tango. Some obervations on Djoker. I don't buy the tiredness issue. He played outside the slams only a handful of tournaments his season, and had enough time to reload his batteries after Tokyo, where he indeed showed some stamina problems in the heat. That he lost maybe some of his form, is certainly right. But this is normal, and all players like Borg or Nadal had that problems, when they focussed on the RG-Wim-Double.
Nole was never the guy, who hit his way out of trouble. He hasn't that big forehand, nor the forecourt game, to really attack, when cornered. With his flexible body, he likes a smooth rhythm of left and right moves and counterstrokes, to get the opponent out of balance. Last year in RG final under favorable conditions, he began to overhit, when Nadal rushed him into his shots. Connors, also a counterpuncher and great returner, at least had a dangerous backhand down the line and a fine approach shot, to follow it to the net. Nole relies on moments, when the other guy lets his level sink, and then he sneaks in. I found it astonishing, that so many guys won the first set against him, but instead of upping the pressure and using the momentum, they let slip away the second set pretty easily, like Zverev, who has the big serve to survive some crises, but in the crucial second played the worst set of the event, as he told afterwards. Med did withstand the Nole pressure in the early second set with his serve, and after that Nole had nothing left, no B plan or something.
One other thing: Nole has never been a lock at Flushing. While being a natural hardcourter, he has "only" won 3 USOs, and lost a lot of finals, overall 6 there to different opponents. This 3 out of 9 is a fragile finals record like that of Lendl, who won 3 out of 8 US finals, while being the best hardcourter of his era. Even Nadal won more finals at Flushing. So i think, a combination of various things led to the downfall on last Sunday.
 
Last edited:

liriel

Semi-Pro
Med played a fine tournament from A to Z, no doubt. And he played a clever game in the final, as analyzised above. But it takes two to tango. Some obervations on Djoker. I don't buy the tiredness issue. He played outside the slams only a handful of tournaments his season, and had enough time to reload his batteries after Tokyo, where he indeed showed some stamina problems in the heat. That he lost maybe some of his form, is certainly right. But this is normal, and all players like Borg or Nadal had that problems, when they focussed on the RG-Wim-Double.
Nole was never the guy, who hit his way out of trouble. He hasn't that big forehand, nor the forecourt game, to really attack, when cornered. With his flexible body, he likes a smooth rhythm of left and right moves and counterstrokes, to get the opponent out of balance. Last year in RG final under favorable conditions, he began to overhit, when Nadal rushed him into his shots. Connors, also a counterpuncher and great returner, at least had a dangerous backhand down the line and a fine approach shot, to follow it to the net. Nole relies on moments, when the other guy lets his level sink, and then he sneaks in. I found it astonishing, that so many guys won the first set against him, but instead of upping the pressure and using the momentum, they let slip away the second set pretty easily, like Zverev, who has the big serve to survive some crises, but in the crucial second played the worst set of the event, as he told afterwards. Med did withstand the Nole pressure in the early second set with his serve, and after that Nole had nothing left, no B plan or something.
One other thing: Nole has never been a lock at Flushing. While being a natural hardcourter, he has "only" won 3 USOs, and lost a lot of finals, overall 6 there to different opponents. This 3 out of 9 is a fragile finals record like that of Lendl, who won 3 out of 8 US finals, while being the best hardcourter of his era. Even Nadal won more finals at Flushing. So i think, a combination of various things led to the downfall on last Sunday.
Im easily swayed but your post makes the most sense.
Clever game and tactics but it takes two to tango. Novak had a bad day. He was the worse player and made some club-level tennis mistakes. He was obviously very nervous it was clear. But Medv was as well. US open is his weakness overall and losing sets to other players weren't just accidents. It wasn't an even match.
 

mr tonyz

Professional
at what age? it's hard to compare because it depends on how many matches you play annually, off season training. In general, all professional endurance sports, your legs go at around age 35 or sooner no matter what you do (take time off, eat healthy by cutting out inflammatory foods, injured and come back too soon). Djokovic's strength is his fetching / defensive play so he needs to have that to win. Since he has had many long 4 and 5 set matches throughout his career and so may masters wins it is probably all catching up to him. Look at the guys he came on the tour with who are always injured (Monfis, Murray, Tsonga.) Add to the fact he is playing against younger, taller more powerful players who also have excellent defensive skills. (Zev & Med)
Djokovic is used to having some lucky slam draws with player defaults and winning a squeaker in the semis or finals. Rog probably could have lost his two Wimbledon final victories over Roddick too. Luck does play a role sometimes.

I don't get the Fred name. Let's give "Roger" the deserved respect and not call him by some msg board name. The big 3or 4 gave us some great tennis.
Freddy sounds so much more 'cooler' just as with Medvedev i call him Meddy. I highly doubt these millionaires that are unaware of our existence give 2 hoots about what we refer to them as.

If we are talking about the peakest of peaks i think it's from around the age of 24-28. If we are talking absolute peak. Plus the other thing that never gets mentioned is that with the guys @ the very top (big-3) they can afford to have an absolute legion of doctor's, personal trainers,chefs etc which the lower ranked guys wouldn't be able to afford. Which is all relative here, but for instance Djoker @ age 34 most probably has a bunch of doctors on 24/7 turnaround wherever he may be in the world.He is older but he also most likely has access to things that Meddy & Zed still don't have to this day.

Yeah you have to work your way to the top, but once you're there it always comes with behind the scenes privileges which is not a a complaint from me, just more so shedding light on the fact that these things are never all purely equal.

Yeah i will say it. I always feel like the top guys must be "on something". Specifically looking @ DjokerDal here & Fred would have been also, but different 'stuff' possibly some type of 'relaxants'. Yeah there won't be any proof because why would the ATP want the public to ever know about their cash cows taking 'substances'. Again there won't be any proof if ever, but if Lance Armstrong or all of the Olympic history is anything to go by, i stand by this.

These guys are the breadwinners of their sport, The ITF & ATP could not have ever imagined a dream scenario where a Trio of dudes could have collectively destroyed almost every record in tennis history. 20-20-20 is absolutely an unfathomable scenario that came to fruition all within relatively the same era (18 year span)

Winning 13 French Opens, gosh if Nads was absolutely clean, that would be historic in of itself. I'd have to question his d.n.a @ that point ;P
























































re cooler
 

thrust

Hall of Fame
Physically, for someone in the kind of shape he is with modern recovery methods? 2 days is plenty as long as there's been no repurcusions in terms of minor injuries, blisters and so forth.

What's more difficult is the toil of the stress involved and that's dependant on both the ebb and flow of the matches up to that point and whatever surrounding issues the player may be going through.

I thought the Prime commentators were totally over-egging Novak looking physically flat. I thought he looked physically little different to how he's looked the last couple of years but he looked emotionally strung out and on a razor's edge.



The same Murray who regularly hit his first serve north of 130mph? Murray's problem wasn't not having a big first serve it was that serve was horribly unreliable and backed up by a second serve of questionable quality - not as bad as they hyperbole would suggest, mind.

Medvedev's doing things with his second serve Murray couldn't, or at least never dared to do, but then Medvdev's several inches taller.
Two day's rest? Didn't Novak play his 5 set semi Friday night and the final Sunday evening, whereas, Medvedev played his 3 set semi Friday afternoon? Chances are Medvedev would have won anyway, but his age and scheduling did give him a slight advantage.
 

a10best

Hall of Fame
Yeah i will say it. I always feel like the top guys must be "on something". Specifically looking @ DjokerDal here & Fred would have been also, but different 'stuff' possibly some type of 'relaxants'. Yeah there won't be any proof because why would the ATP want the public to ever know about their cash cows taking 'substances'. Again there won't be any proof if ever, but if Lance Armstrong or all of the Olympic history is anything to go by, i stand by this.

These guys are the breadwinners of their sport, The ITF & ATP could not have ever imagined a dream scenario where a Trio of dudes could have collectively destroyed almost every record in tennis history. 20-20-20 is absolutely an unfathomable scenario that came to fruition all within relatively the same era (18 year span)

Winning 13 French Opens, gosh if Nads was absolutely clean, that would be historic in of itself. I'd have to question his d.n.a @ that point ;P
nickanames like Gilbert gives them? ok
Lance had won 7 tour de Frances in a row? had a hott gf/famous singer and everything and then it all disappeared.

True. The records the big three hold the last 20 years is not normal. Sampras' 14 slam record should have lasted a good 30-40 years, not 10.

Nadal has always been a beast since he was a teen. He's always had great endurance, extreme spins and power. Fed also had always been played the way he plays.
No change in either's endurance, speed or power over the years. Maybe they took something to improve their vision and reaction times?
Otoh, Novak used to always get tired and then he went gluten free which suddenly gave him superior energy and strength over his opponents? I just don't buy it. Whatever he is taking isn't illegal but he's taking something. Once revealed his defense will be it was legal at the time. Maybe the same response for Nadal or Fedif they took something. At age 34, Novak is always roses fresh in the 5th set like a 23 year old. Something was definitely odd about him at the 2021 FO.
 

Aabye5

Hall of Fame
nickanames like Gilbert gives them? ok
Lance had won 7 tour de Frances in a row? had a hott gf/famous singer and everything and then it all disappeared.

True. The records the big three hold the last 20 years is not normal. Sampras' 14 slam record should have lasted a good 30-40 years, not 10.

Nadal has always been a beast since he was a teen. He's always had great endurance, extreme spins and power. Fed also had always been played the way he plays.
No change in either's endurance, speed or power over the years. Maybe they took something to improve their vision and reaction times?
Otoh, Novak used to always get tired and then he went gluten free which suddenly gave him superior energy and strength over his opponents? I just don't buy it. Whatever he is taking isn't illegal but he's taking something. Once revealed his defense will be it was legal at the time. Maybe the same response for Nadal or Fedif they took something. At age 34, Novak is always roses fresh in the 5th set like a 23 year old. Something was definitely odd about him at the 2021 FO.
I think this is a slippery slope. If you look hard enough you can find a reason to paint anyone with that brush.
 

a10best

Hall of Fame
I think this is a slippery slope. If you look hard enough you can find a reason to paint anyone with that brush.
From my summary of the big 3, how could "any player" be painted with the same brush?
we had freaks of nature making records easy.
- Sammy Sosa & Mark McGwire
- Lance Armstrong

Must be freak of nature to have 3 GOATS. Fed became the greatest on grass surpassing Sampras. Nadal greatest on clay surpassing Borg, and Djokovic beating both on their best surface while dominating the AO.

It's like having: Joe Montana, Brady, Peyton Manning, John Elway, Barry Sanders, Emmit Smith, Deion Sanders, Dickerson, the Steel Curtain or Ravens defense, all compete in the same era.
or Pele, Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar, Romario, Maradona, all playing at the same time, It's just rare when you look back.
 

Aabye5

Hall of Fame
From my summary of the big 3, how could "any player" be painted with the same brush?
we had freaks of nature making records easy.
- Sammy Sosa & Mark McGwire
- Lance Armstrong

Must be freak of nature to have 3 GOATS. Fed became the greatest on grass surpassing Sampras. Nadal greatest on clay surpassing Borg, and Djokovic beating both on their best surface while dominating the AO.

It's like having: Joe Montana, Brady, Peyton Manning, John Elway, Barry Sanders, Emmit Smith, Deion Sanders, Dickerson, the Steel Curtain or Ravens defense, all compete in the same era.
or Pele, Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar, Romario, Maradona, all playing at the same time, It's just rare when you look back.
You're losing me...My point is that if you can claim Djokovic is doing something less than kosher, someone could also claim the same for Nadal and Federer. The poster I was replying to was singling him out among the 3.
 

mr tonyz

Professional
You're losing me...My point is that if you can claim Djokovic is doing something less than kosher, someone could also claim the same for Nadal and Federer. The poster I was replying to was singling him out among the 3.
Personally i think they're all on something.Tennis is an individual sport so it's not like a team sport where @ an old age they can be carried by younger team-mates. These 3 guys have all earned these 20 slams each all on their own, with all of their vitamins & minerals & other stuff.
 

a10best

Hall of Fame
You're losing me...My point is that if you can claim Djokovic is doing something less than kosher, someone could also claim the same for Nadal and Federer. The poster I was replying to was singling him out among the 3.
That is what I was inferring too as well. It's too much of a concidence for all records to be broken in 20 years. I just didn't notice much change in Fed or Nadal's performance since they were young.
If they were taking something I wish they had given it to Monfis. He would have been an interesting multi-slam champ.
 

Winners or Errors

Hall of Fame
Why didn't he was OFF, against Zverev or Berrettini? Because they absolutely have no idea how to tactically play against Djokovic. They pretty much play the same for the whole match, and that's why Djokovic sooner or later adapt to their game, and he just outplay them after that.
Medvedev didn't gave him that. I have always stated that, the easiest way to beat Djokovic is to not give him rhythm and momentum at all, and also use your game with great variety.
Musetti was playing with great variety in the first 2 sets against Djoko at RG, and the result was clear.

Tsitsipas tried to outgrind Djokovic, but Djoko adapt, and Tsitsipas get tired, because of his game, and that require a lot of effort for his shots. Berrettini at RG in the third and the forth was absolutely in the zone and try to outshot Djokovic, and he eats it.

Federer always do great against Djokovic, when he is playing with great variety, and doesn't give Djoko rhythm and you squeeze a lot of UE from Djoko that way. There was few matches at the ATP finals where Federer was playing with insane variety and Djoko had no rhythm and looked like ******, and Fed won this easy. When Federer try to outgrind him, he pretty much always lost, let's call it a close call.
Zverev choking had little to do with Djokovic.
 

Aabye5

Hall of Fame
That is what I was inferring too as well. It's too much of a concidence for all records to be broken in 20 years. I just didn't notice much change in Fed or Nadal's performance since they were young.
If they were taking something I wish they had given it to Monfis. He would have been an interesting multi-slam champ.
For the first part, I can't bring myself to say that any of them were...I choose to live in blissful ignorance until someone proves otherwise. Foolish, you say? Certainly, but we all make compromises with this thing we call life.

And lol about Monfils. I'm a big Monfils fan, but I'm almost glad no one gave him any "special drink", it would compromise his morals. Tennis is for "fun", and how fun can it be when you have to take stuff to get the win? Still, I hope he gets the win over Djokovic before he retires. He's too good to go down without one win against the guy.
 
Top