Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
Who says this is a boost? lol
He blew a completely winnable match from a seemingly unassailable position.
The reason no younger ATG has broken through?
- Thread starter Spencer Gore
- Start date
Who says this is a boost? lol
He blew a completely winnable match from a seemingly unassailable position.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Trite as it may sound, it's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game.
Small picture - Sebi lost a match, when he had the lead.
Big picture - Sebi had match points on the player with the most Slams. He played better today than any top 20 player who has faced Rafa this year.
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
in this case, it's "how you lose the match"
If he had been the one fighting back and Rafa just closed the door....yeah, I can see that being a boost.
But this?
And I didn't even know he had MPs!! That just makes my point even stronger.
Nothing, nothing is worse as a tennis player than clearly being the better player and still losing after having MPs.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Sure, no one likes losing after MPs, but sometimes a crushing loss can get a player fired up.
Look at FAA this year, he's served a bagel in his match with Med at the ATP Cup. Seems miles behind, and then comes up with an outrageous performance against Med at the AO. Stef wishes he had played half as well in his semi. How did FAA gain any confidence from that tough loss?
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
Of course.People might forget that 1st major win without defeating an ATG, but they more than made up for it when the Big 3 contested just about every major ATP event for the last 15 years! Sampras had a bunch of clunker finals against "also rans," but Fedalovic consistently had to beat 1 or 2 of the others to win even a Masters 1000!
Medvedev is better than Pioline, don't you think so too?
DSH
Talk Tennis Guru
I think the main reason is that Nadal never gives up and that intimidates his opponents that they cannot withstand the pressure and total intensity of the Spanish player's game and in the end they end up succumbing.Who's doubting that? Med's the new #1! Still has a problem finishing off Nadal when in a commanding position! It's gotta be mental!
Rosstour
G.O.A.T.
I hope you are right, I'm pulling hard for Korda and I'm tired of watching young guys regurgitate matches and just hand it to Rafa
AnOctorokForDinner
Talk Tennis Guru
Lmao at the usual propagandists trying to big up a young mug choking badly to Oldal playing at his muggest just because name over form. Classic deplorables.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Can't make any promises, but I'm pulling for him, too.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Med beat Novak at the USO and that didn't give him confidence to beat great players regularly.
So yeah, it has aged poorly.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
But he's not a Philippoussis type of player?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
We're past that.
Point is Med has a slam and that hasn't given him the confidence like it gave Fed.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
How? He won, the hard way, not the easy way like so many players before. Beating a two time finalist is arguably not as difficult as beating a twenty time titlist.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Exactly, but the point from the other poster was that if the young guns had a relatively easy opponent in their first slam finals they would have won which would have given them a confidence boost and lead to a break through letting them win multiple subsequent slams similar to Federer. Med has already won his first slam and - as you yourself say - against a GOAT candidate to boot, however, in the final against Nadal there was not much to see that this had given him a confidence boost such that he will now beat the geriatric versions of the big 3 on a consistent basis. If anything, Meds slam win looks like a fluke due to the special circumstances for Djokovic and that Med will continue loosing against Djokodal for the foreseeable future.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Considering how easy his draw was and how flat Djokovic was I wouldn't say he won it the hard way. Hard way is Nadal at 2008 Wimb or Djokovic at 2011 USO.
Be that as it may, why didn't that USO win help Med and why didn't it propel him to greater heights?
I mean, if winning one slam final was all it took, how come it didn't help Med?
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
I think Med has shown he can beat Djokovic -- at least once. That does not mean he can beat Djokovic every time they play, much less does it mean that he can suddenly beat Nadal. They are two different players.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Considering how easy his draw was and how flat Djokovic was I wouldn't say he won it the hard way. Hard way is Nadal at 2008 Wimb or Djokovic at 2011 USO.
Be that as it may, why didn't that USO win help Med and why didn't it propel him to greater heights?
I mean, if winning one slam final was all it took, how come it didn't help Med?
I say he did, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. (I'm not saying he had the hardest draw ever, but it wasn't easy)
It has -- he now sits at the top of the rankings, thanks in large part to that win in New York.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
And did so while losing the Paris final to Djokovic, the WTF F to Zed, the AO F to Nadal and the Acapulco SF to Nadal again.I say he did, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. (I'm not saying he had the hardest draw ever, but it wasn't easy)
It has -- he now sits at the top of the rankings, thanks in large part to that win in New York.
He pretty much got to no.1 thanks to special circumstances outside his control, not because that win propelled him to greater heights.
And no, beating that Djokovic wasn't hard. Worst slam final Djokovic has ever played.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
So @jm1980's point is null after all.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
I don't think it was the worst Slam final Djokovic ever played. We won't agree on this, so leave it at that.
Why does Bo3 only count when you count them? Don't compare Bo3 to Bo5, they are different animals.
And yes, his number 1 ranking was a present from Novak, but he has been knocking on the door long before.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Agree. But then winning his first slam against a lesser opponent wouldn’t have helped him either. His situation against Djok and Nadal would still be the same and he would need to hope for them to loose early in order to have a chance (which as we know doesn’t really happen often). No matter how we spin it, there is not really a scenario where any of those mugs would be a multiple slam champion by now.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Jiri Vesely is probably confident he can beat Novak in Bo3. How does that confidence somehow transfer to beating Rafa?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Ok, what was his worst, then?
You get to no.1 by winning in both BO3 and BO5.
No, he wasn't.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
jm1980's point was that if the young guys received a Phillippoussis type player in a slam final, then they would win and gain confidence from that to win more.
Med beat a better player than Phillippoussis and that still wasn't enough, as it didn't help him one bit against Rafa despite going up 2 sets to love. And it also didn't help him in his other matches with Djokodal since that USO F. I mean, surely BO3 should be a formality if Med could win in BO5, no?
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Yeah, not everyone can be Federer just because they can beat a Phillippoussis type player.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Maybe, maybe not. The only NextGen player who has ever had that opportunity is Zed, and he lost. If he wins that final, many things change for him.
Does he suddenly win every time he plays a Slam? No, that's not how confidence works. But maybe it gives him the edge against Tsitsipas at RG. Or he has fewer of those hiccups early on in Slams. Maybe he wins the USO match with Nole.
Confidence is most important in those matches that hinge on a few points.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
You don't become Federer magically, but you might be able to beat Tsitsipas.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Also I do not think that everything is about mental strength. Sure the next gen mugs are unprecedented mental midgets and choke artists but also they are simply considerably weaker tennis players than the big three. With Federer it was always clear even in 2000-2003, that he had all shots in the book and only needed to get his mental stuff together, with the next gen however, I do not see the same potential irrespective of mental strength.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
jm1980's point was that if the young guys received a Phillippoussis type player in a slam final, then they would win and gain confidence from that to win more.
Med beat a better player than Phillippoussis and that still wasn't enough, as it didn't help him one bit against Rafa despite going up 2 sets to love. And it also didn't help him in his other matches with Djokodal since that USO F. I mean, surely BO3 should be a formality if Med could win in BO5, no?
No, not at all. After that win, Medvedev could rest on his laurels for the rest of 2022, and he did.
Rafa is a matchup issue with him. If a guy has your number that isn't going to help much.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Did you miss 2021? How many Bo3 matches did Nole win?
Med already had chances to take number 1 in 2021. He didn't get there, but there was no guarantee that Djoker would have kept his ranking even if he played the AO. Med was beating down his door.
Last edited:
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Nole won about as much in BO3 as Med.Did you miss 2021? How many Bo3 matches did Nole win?
Med already had chances to take number 1 in 2021. He didn't get there, but there was no guarantee that Djoker would have kept his ranking even if he played the AO. Med was beating down his door.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
No, not really. Just look at the titles and finals. Nole has wins in the Serbia Open, Belgrade Open, and Paris M1000.
Med has titles in Marseille, Mallorca, and Canda, plus finals in Paris and Torino.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
So jm1980's point is null. Not even a Phillippoussis level player in a slam finals would have helped Med.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Exactly, exhibit B on why jm1980's point is null.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
But jm1980 said and I quote "like Fed"
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Some people say this or that player plays "like Fed". And while we might both agree that Gasquet and Dimitrov are not "like Fed", there is probably some player who hits his forehand like him. That doesn't mean they are as good as Fed.
If a player were to go on a tear after beating Thiem, for example, that would be "like Fed". And we can't rule Med out. He's only played one Slam since he won. Fed didn't win the next Slam he entered, either.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
We don't know. He didn't get the chance.
BorgTheGOAT
Legend
Well this is true and maybe we should wait and see what happens. Maybe this win at the USO was a long necessary trigger for Med to now start winning on a regular basis. As useless as he is on clay and grass I would however not expect him to do anything of worth before the USO.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
I agree. And that's where the talent comes in. Fed is clearly an all-surface player. Med is not even close, so far.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Oh, but he did. And he choked.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
So now we're changing the goalposts, I see.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Nadal is not on the level of Mark P. If you don't believe me, go ask Fed.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
Like Fed is not the same as Is Fed.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
I don't need to ask Fed since he wouldn't lose at his best to a mid 30's Nadal.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
But he would lose to a 17-year-old Rafa. Even James Blake didn't do that.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
The argument was that "young player X just needs a big win and the floodgates will open, like it did with Fed".
Now, suddenly, it's ok that Med didn't win the next slam as Fed himself didn't.
That's true, but Med reached the final and choked it away. Fed won his next slam final.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
One meaningless loss in an early round in a masters. He's not losing a slam final to 35 year old Nadal.
Aabye5
G.O.A.T.
He would in his current condition. Not to mention that that loss was a harbinger for their rivalry throughout their careers.
But there are players other than Federer and Nadal. And the comment was about if they played some non-big 3 player. Med has not had this opportunity.
ElChivoEspañol
Hall of Fame
Djokodal and up until 3 years ago Fed also prevented the younger guys from breaking through.
Breaking news: Up until 3 years ago, we had the 3 best players ever to pick up a racquet competing in almost every single tournament, now there’s 2 left.
Why is this so hard to compute?
Breaking news: Up until 3 years ago, we had the 3 best players ever to pick up a racquet competing in almost every single tournament, now there’s 2 left.
Why is this so hard to compute?
Similar threads
