When you think about it,was Djokovic's return in the US 2011 SF the most history-altering shot ever?

VoightKampff

New User
If he missed that return, Fed would have likely gone on to lose to that Rafa. Then in the AO 2012, Rafa would be much more confident and likely would have beaten Nole in the 5th set instead of dropping serve while a break up. Then, going into Wimbledon 2012 he would have 3 slams in a row, and I doubt Rosol would have beaten the supreme form of Rafa. In the final we'd have another Fedal matchup, and potentially Rafa with 4 slams in a row.

So, in the end, Djokovic's shot prevented Rafa from having three potential extra slams, with him ending up on 17 slams and Fed on 16. The most vital shot in tennis history? I think so.

I think the only other history-altering shot on the same scale was the net miss at RG 2013; Nole winning that point and potentially the match, and then having the confidence to win Wimby 2013 and USO 2013 from having beaten Rafa on clay. But there's no guarantee that Rafa wouldn't have broken while Nole was serving for the match, so I still think the USO 2011 shot was more vital.
 
Last edited:

BVSlam

Professional
You can never tell. It could also have had the effect that Rafa (had he indeed won that hypothetical final against Fed) wasn't as motivated as he looked at the AO 2012 and wouldn't have won it either way. Or, since there's quite a big gap between the USO and the AO and Djokovic is confident at the AO, it wouldn't have mattered if Rafa was "more confident" and Djokovic would have won either way. Or he would have been even more motivated to start the year fresh regain his slam winning ways.

The problem with hypothetical situations like these is that they are based on what would logically have happened considering what has actually transpired or what we'd expect would happen mentally within a player (more confidence, mental block against someone etc.), but a different outcome can lead to multiple different other outcomes, not just one, and it's certainly not always the logical one. We will only ever get to see a single outcome, with everything.
 

VoightKampff

New User
You can never tell. It could also have had the effect that Rafa (had he indeed won that hypothetical final against Fed) wasn't as motivated as he looked at the AO 2012 and wouldn't have won it either way. Or, since there's quite a big gap between the USO and the AO and Djokovic is confident at the AO, it wouldn't have mattered if Rafa was "more confident" and Djokovic would have won either way. Or he would have been even more motivated to start the year fresh regain his slam winning ways.

The problem with hypothetical situations like these is that they are based on what would logically have happened considering what has actually transpired or what we'd expect would happen mentally within a player (more confidence, mental block against someone etc.), but a different outcome can lead to multiple different other outcomes, not just one, and it's certainly not always the logical one. We will only ever get to see a single outcome, with everything.

That's a good point. But the fact that the shot creates so many hypothetical scenarios does kinda prove that it affected history the most.
 

BVSlam

Professional
That's a good point. But the fact that the shot creates so many hypothetical scenarios does kinda prove that it affected history the most.
It is true that it affected the outcome of that US Open. Had he missed that, the US Open 2011 winner would have been Federer or Nadal, instead of Djokovic. But that is the only outcome it directly affected. Everything else after that is hypothetical, because you never know what direct effect it could have had.

Had Nadal finished off Federer in Miami 2005, maybe the H2H would have been even worse for Fed, or he would have done more to adopt a better strategy against Nadal. Had Nadal won Miami 2011 against Djokovic, a very close match, maybe it would have been enough to stop the onslaught completely. Had Federer made the dropshot at 5-2 setpoint in the RG final of 2011, he would have won the set 6-2 playing great aggressive baseline tennis with a backhand holding up well. Who knows how he would have played the match then. Maybe he'd get his first win over Nadal ever at RG, entered Wimbledon with full confidence and have a two- or three-slam winning season in 2011, making it one his best seasons. Or what if Fed made one of the matchpoints in USO 2010? Maybe Djokovic's 2011 would never happened like it did. You never know, and there are so many important shots and moments in the history of tennis that could have changed a ton hypothetically, not just this one. This shot is just remembered more because it was a fairly aggressive return while facing matchpoint, and it was Federer who held the matchpoint, a very popular player whom many wanted to win that match.

And to bring up the direct effect of that match that actually happened: despite Nadal's loss streak against Djokovic, he still fought his *ss off in the AO 2012 final, played great and managed to turn around a 2-1 set deficit into a 4-2 30-15 lead in the 5th, missing an easy backhand pass for 40-15. Maybe his confidence was just fine, but was just slightly outplayed in the end, and he did go on to absolutely dominate the clay season with some spectacularly good tennis, beating Djokovic three times. And then in three more slam matches in 2013/2014, not losing to him in slams until Djokovic beat a Nadal at RG 2015 who had far more problems on court than just Djokovic then.
 

Fedeonic

Hall of Fame
I insulted left and right that day, not because Nole came back after a 0-2, but mainly of his (yet again) annoying personality. But also prevented Nadal to reach 11, the things happen for a reason, I guess.
But also I'd call the missed smash at 4-4 15-15 in the 5th by Federer at Wimbledon 2014 vs Djokovic, another lose in a final by Nole and he'll have crumbled and his great 2015-1st half of 2016 wouldn't have happened. Maybe Fed would have retired in that year in full glory with the YE#1 after his bad 2013.
 

JoelSandwich

Hall of Fame
I still think that had Djokovic put away Nadal at the French he would've won the Us Open that year. And done a little better at the French Open from then on, because he wouldn't have had the added pressure of never winning it. But all of this is hypothetical and we will never truly know.
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
If he missed that return, Fed would have likely gone on to lose to that Rafa. Then in the AO 2012, Rafa would be much more confident and likely would have beaten Nole in the 5th set instead of dropping serve while a break up. Then, going into Wimbledon 2012 he would have 3 slams in a row, and I doubt Rosol would have beaten the supreme form of Rafa. In the final we'd have another Fedal matchup, and potentially Rafa with 4 slams in a row.

So, in the end, Djokovic's shot prevented Rafa from having three potential extra slams, with him ending up on 17 slams and Fed on 16. The most vital shot in tennis history? I think so.

I think the only other history-altering shot on the same scale was the net miss at RG 2013; Nole winning that point and potentially the match, and then having the confidence to win Wimby 2013 and USO 2013 from having beaten Rafa on clay. But there's no guarantee that Rafa wouldn't have broken while Nole was serving for the match, so I still think the USO 2011 shot was more vital.
No.
 

VarmasPermo

Semi-Pro
Wawrinka's backhand. Saved tennis again and again from mindless pushers' moonballs and also punished the MTO abusers and cowards who resort to gamesmanship when facing defeat.

It also proves single handed backhand is not dead and actually one of the most lethal weapons in tennis.

thebackhandshiversdownthespines_copy.jpg
 
Last edited:

nadalfan2013

Professional
If he missed that return, Fed would have likely gone on to lose to that Rafa. Then in the AO 2012, Rafa would be much more confident and likely would have beaten Nole in the 5th set instead of dropping serve while a break up. Then, going into Wimbledon 2012 he would have 3 slams in a row, and I doubt Rosol would have beaten the supreme form of Rafa. In the final we'd have another Fedal matchup, and potentially Rafa with 4 slams in a row.

So, in the end, Djokovic's shot prevented Rafa from having three potential extra slams, with him ending up on 17 slams and Fed on 16. The most vital shot in tennis history? I think so.

I think the only other history-altering shot on the same scale was the net miss at RG 2013; Nole winning that point and potentially the match, and then having the confidence to win Wimby 2013 and USO 2013 from having beaten Rafa on clay. But there's no guarantee that Rafa wouldn't have broken while Nole was serving for the match, so I still think the USO 2011 shot was more vital.

And you forgot that Rafa would have been 10-2 in slams vs Federer. La Decima.

But either way, the reason why Rafa lost in the USO 2011 final against Nole is because he was not 100% healthy. But even a 50% Rafa would have still managed to beat Federer so credit to Nole on taking advantage of Rafa's health issues and somehow managing to score the win.

Edit: I forgot to add that healthy Rafa is undefeated.
 

DreddyTennis45

Hall of Fame
You could say the Same for other shots, for example Fed's inside out forehand against Haas 4-3 down at RG 09. Or *that* missed backhand from Nadal at AO 2012 or *that* overhead from Novak at RG 2013.

There are so many shots like that and so many interesting hypothetical situations we can think up which is what makes tennis so great.
 

DreddyTennis45

Hall of Fame
And you forgot that Rafa would have been 10-2 in slams vs Federer. La Decima.

But either way, the reason why Rafa lost in the USO 2011 final against Nole is because he was not 100% healthy. But even a 50% Rafa would have still managed to beat Federer so credit to Nole on taking advantage of Rafa's health issues and somehow managing to score the win.

Edit: I forgot to add that healthy Rafa is undefeated.

Dude shut up
 

KINGROGER

G.O.A.T.
1. You know who was waiting for him in the final, right?

2. 20 slams? Ummmm....no.

Fed most likely beats Rafa on the faster US open hard courts. Rafa only usually ever beat Fed on the painfully slow Plexicushion or Clay surfaces.

20 slams? Yes. + 1 for 2011 US open. He also likely wins 14 Wimbledon and another somewhere down the line.
 

VoightKampff

New User
You could say the Same for other shots, for example Fed's inside out forehand against Haas 4-3 down at RG 09. Or *that* missed backhand from Nadal at AO 2012 or *that* overhead from Novak at RG 2013.

There are so many shots like that and so many interesting hypothetical situations we can think up which is what makes tennis so great.

The reason I'm hesitant to mention shots like RG 09 and RG 13 is that it would still be possible for Fed and Rafa to break when Haas and DJoker were serving for the match, but the US 11 shot is a match point
 

ABCD

Hall of Fame
Rationally thinking that shot shouldn't had any significance as it was 5:3, 40:15 (40:30 after that). Thus, it was another match point on serve, plus deuce, plus much to play for later. However, it psychologically broke Federer for some totally irrational reasons.
 

Tshooter

G.O.A.T.
If it were not for his arrogant personality, Federer would be my favorite player, as his is my favorite game style today.

I guess we see what we want to see.

I don't see that arrogance. That he knows even as his age now he's better than the vast number of players doesn't per se make him arrogant. In fact, adjusting for his career accomplishments he may be the least arrogant player in the history of the game.

In any case, there is always at least one thread running on his alleged arrogance, if that is your thing. It's one of the moderator approved topics.
 
Last edited:
Top