S
Sirius Black
Guest
Is this still about Berdych?
How convenient of you to forget that surface makes a difference. Their grass results before and after show that it was a 'fluke' after all. Federer and Djokovic were both in poor form.This should show that Berdych's win at Wimby 2010 wasn't a fluke, he just had Fed's number at that point and could challenge him anywhere.
Nadal peaked during those months in 2010, just like he did in 2008 and later 2013. Fedovic's poor form throughout the mid-season allowed him to pace himself, which enabled him to win three majors, rather than win two and then burn out / injure himself from the strain of playing peak tennis.True - Federer and Djokovic were both well off-form at that Wimbledon and Berdych was playing some good tennis - and he still got dismantled in the final by Rafa
How convenient of you to forget that surface makes a difference. Their grass results before and after show that it was a 'fluke' after all. Federer and Djokovic were both in poor form.
2012 USO QF wasn't a fluke, since on hardcourt Berdych could really consistently bother Federer during those years.
Yes, as soon as Federer bought a larger, more forgiving frame, more appropriate for his stroke ability, his performance improved drastically.Fed made a smart racket upgrade.
'Fault' and 'fluke' have no correlation whatsoever. A flukey win is a win over an opponent whose performance was unusually abysmal. It's still a legitimate win. The point of classifying it as a fluke is to point that it has no relevance to the question of who is generally the better player at the tournament, since some people like to derive such conclusions from H2H, while in actuality silly numbers like Federer's 0-1 against Berdych at Wimbledon or Nadal in Cincinnati don't mean anything like that.No win is a fluke. It's not Berdych's fault that Federer was bad.
'Fault' and 'fluke' have no correlation whatsoever. A flukey win is a win over an opponent whose performance was unusually abysmal. It's still a legitimate win. The point of classifying it as a fluke is to point that it has no relevance to the question of who is generally the better player at the tournament, since some people like to derive such conclusions from H2H, while in actuality silly numbers like Federer's 0-1 against Berdych at Wimbledon or Nadal in Cincinnati don't mean anything like that.
It's not about the concept of 'deserving'. If you win something, you must have deserved it.And Nadal played his best ever Cincy tournament and deserved the win - doesn't matter if it was in 2013 or not.
Berdych is old and past his prime. His peak years were 2010-2013, that's when Federer started to decline. Yes Federer is also past his prime, but Berdych is not an ATG and he needs to be at peak level to beat someone like Federer.From 2009 - early 2014, barring one match, Berdych consistently gave Federer trouble. Almost of their matches went the distance with Fed winning, or ended with Berdych winning. The only match that Fed won easily was Paris in 2011.
2014 Dubai F: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 3-6 6-4 6-3
2013 Dubai SF: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 3-6 7-6(8) 6-4
2012 US Open QF: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 7-6(1) 6-4 3-6 6-3
2012 Madrid Masters F: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 3-6 7-5 7-5
2011 Paris Masters SF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-4 6-3
2011 Cincinnati Masters QF: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 6-2 7-6(3)
2010 Canadian Masters QF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-3 5-7 7-6(5)
2010 Wimbledon QF: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 6-4 3-6 6-1 6-4
2010 Miami Masters R16: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 6-4 6-7(3) 7-6(6)
2009 Australian Open R16: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 4-6 6-7(4) 6-4 6-4 6-2
Berdych won 5 of these matches. Fed won 4.
Then, from post Dubai 2014 on, Fed hasn't lost a single set against Berdych. In fact, only one match had a tiebreak, and that was this year's AO.
2016 Australian Open QF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 7-6(4) 6-2 6-4
2015 ATP World Tour Finals RR: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-4 6-2
2015 Rome Masters QF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-3 6-3
2015 Indian Wells Masters QF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-4 6-0
What changed?
This should show that Berdych's win at Wimby 2010 wasn't a fluke, he just had Fed's number at that point and could challenge him anywhere.
Federer became better. Much better.From 2009 - early 2014, barring one match, Berdych consistently gave Federer trouble. Almost of their matches went the distance with Fed winning, or ended with Berdych winning. The only match that Fed won easily was Paris in 2011.
2014 Dubai F: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 3-6 6-4 6-3
2013 Dubai SF: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 3-6 7-6(8) 6-4
2012 US Open QF: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 7-6(1) 6-4 3-6 6-3
2012 Madrid Masters F: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 3-6 7-5 7-5
2011 Paris Masters SF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-4 6-3
2011 Cincinnati Masters QF: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 6-2 7-6(3)
2010 Canadian Masters QF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-3 5-7 7-6(5)
2010 Wimbledon QF: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 6-4 3-6 6-1 6-4
2010 Miami Masters R16: Tomas Berdych d. Roger Federer, 6-4 6-7(3) 7-6(6)
2009 Australian Open R16: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 4-6 6-7(4) 6-4 6-4 6-2
Berdych won 5 of these matches. Fed won 4.
Then, from post Dubai 2014 on, Fed hasn't lost a single set against Berdych. In fact, only one match had a tiebreak, and that was this year's AO.
2016 Australian Open QF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 7-6(4) 6-2 6-4
2015 ATP World Tour Finals RR: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-4 6-2
2015 Rome Masters QF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-3 6-3
2015 Indian Wells Masters QF: Roger Federer d. Tomas Berdych, 6-4 6-0
What changed?