Which are the lowest moment/point in careers of Big 3.

ForehandRF

Legend
I think it came as a shock to him that he was no longer the top guy anymore and there was this one guy he couldn't beat. At that point he probably did some internal searching: he either found a way to beat Nadal or never break Pete's record.

It's a shame Nadal had his issues later in 2009, because I would have loved to see how Federer would have responded to Nadal in the final stretch of his prime.
Of course his biggest mistake was letting Nadal get into his head, he didn't played freely against him after that RG trashing in 2008, then everything was like a domino effect.I would have loved to see a match at the USO, especially before the damage was done in 2008, but only Djokovic was there to face Fed during his reign.Playing his first HC slam match vs Nadal in 2009 and that at the AO, right after that Wimbledon loss, was the worst case scenario :D
 
Last edited:

Jason Swerve

Hall of Fame
Kournikova also cried
Can you believe it? An 18 year old girl cried to herself for letting her best friend down, the day after her best friend was ridiculed on the world stage.

Quite a bit different from a grown man tearing up because another grown man beat him at one too many Grand Slams.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Of course his biggest mistake was letting Nadal get into his head, he didn't played freely against him after that RG trashing in 2008, then everything was like a domino effect.I would have loved to see a match at the USO, especially before the damage was done in 2008, but only Djokovic was there to face Fed during his reign.Playing his first HC slam match vs Nadal in 2009 and that at the AO, right after that Wimbledon loss, was the worst case scenario :D
Yeah, true.

Still a shame we never got to see Fed's response to the Nadal threat. I think he would have surprised us somehow, especially since Nadal, even if he hadn't got injured, wouldn't have been able to maintain that insane level and intensity from MC 2008 to Rome 2009 :D
 

Jason Swerve

Hall of Fame
Yeah, true.

Still a shame we never got to see Fed's response to the Nadal threat. I think he would have surprised us somehow, especially since Nadal, even if he hadn't got injured, wouldn't have been able to maintain that insane level and intensity from MC 2008 to Rome 2009 :D
By retiring, certainly.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Of course his biggest mistake was letting Nadal get into his head, he didn't played freely against him after that RG trashing in 2008, then everything was like a domino effect.I would have loved to see a match at the USO, especially before the damage was done in 2008, but only Djokovic was there to face Fed during his reign.Playing his first HC slam match vs Nadal in 2009 and that at the AO, right after that Wimbledon loss, was the worst case scenario :D
At the USO when Nadal couldn't beat Murray and on Fed's best HC surface was the perfect time for Rog to face Nadal. At the AO when Nadal was fresher and the surface slower wasn't the best time :D
 

ForehandRF

Legend
At the USO when Nadal couldn't beat Murray and on Fed's best HC surface was the perfect time for Rog to face Nadal. At the AO when Nadal was fresher and the surface slower wasn't the best time :D
Exactly, not to mention that back then the USO was faster and perhaps even lower bouncing than Wimbledon in the second week.In reality, the USO was the fastest slam in mid 2000s and I remember commentators talking about this :D


Look at the bounce here :oops:
 

Jason Swerve

Hall of Fame
Nah, Fed is one of the greatest ever, he would have managed one big win one way or another. These guys don't run away from a challenge.
He was mentally tougher than Graf who stated she would retire if she lost the Wimbledon '91 where Sabatini nearly beat her. Regardless, Federer would have been a pigeon for certain.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
He was mentally tougher than Graf who stated she would retire if she lost the Wimbledon '91 where Sabatini nearly beat her. Regardless, Federer would have been a pigeon for certain.
Don't think he would have been a pigeon. If Nadal could figure out Djokovic, Fed could have done the same to Nadal.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Exactly, not to mention that back then the USO was faster and perhaps even lower bouncing than Wimbledon in the second week.In reality, the USO was the fastest slam in mid 2000s and I remember commentators talking about this :D


Look at the bounce here :oops:
Yeah, Wimb still remained slow, but I think in later years the bounce wasn't as high. It's a shame that by that point Fed was too old to take advantage :D
 

Jason Swerve

Hall of Fame
Don't think he would have been a pigeon. If Nadal could figure out Djokovic, Fed could have done the same to Nadal.
It would've taken him smartening up like he did in the early-'10s. He did not technically have the proper style to combat Nadal. If Nadal injured himself or W/O, another story.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
It would've taken him smartening up like he did in the early-'10s. He did not technically have the proper style to combat Nadal. If Nadal injured himself or W/O, another story.
He probably would have changed his game a bit if there really was no other way. The guy got complacent after winning RG and breaking the slam record.
 

ForehandRF

Legend
Yeah, Wimb still remained slow, but I think in later years the bounce wasn't as high. It's a shame that by that point Fed was too old to take advantage :D
I agree with this.For instance, Fed played his matches vs Djokovic in lower bouncing conditions compared to those against Nadal, especially in 2012 and 2019.In fact, I think the low bounce helped him big time in the 2019 match, with the slice especially, that coupled with Djokovic not being at his best.Shame for the result :D The difference in weather and balls used has surely made the difference at Wimbledon even after 2001.
 
Last edited:

mike danny

Bionic Poster
I agree with this.For instance, Fed played his matches vs Djokovic in lower bouncing conditions compared to those against Nadal, especially in 2012 and 2019.In fact, I think the low bounce helped him big time in the 2019 match, with the slice especially, that coupled with Djokovic not being at his best.Shame for the result :D The difference in weather and balls used has surely made the difference at Wimbledon even after 2001.
Yeah, hence Fed being unlucky that he was too old to take advantage of a lower bouncing Wimb after 2012 :D
 

Jason Swerve

Hall of Fame
He probably would have changed his game a bit if there really was no other way. The guy got complacent after winning RG and breaking the slam record.
Let's look at it this way. When Hingis changed her game, it was for the worse, and she had the best coach in the world for her. She was less arrogant than Federer at the time. I can see the guy changing his tune in a couple years of defeats but not in '09. Even if he makes a change, he doesn't have the resources and self-understanding that Hingis did, and he'd have screwed up his game even more.
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
But you know the crazy part about this thread?

The consensus lowest on court moments from the Big 3 (Roger Miami ‘09 interview from @ForehandRF , Djokovic vs Paire/Taro Daniel in spring 2018, Rafa mid to late 2016) all have something very important in common.They ALL directly preceded multi slam seasons and YE #1s.

How absolutely mind boggling is that?

Roger won the Channel Slam in ‘09, Nadal produced a GOAT level RG ‘17 and won USO, and Djokovic won 3 straight Slams from Wimby ‘18 on. All regained #1, each less than one calendar year from their lowest moments.

The ability to look at yourself at your absolute nadir and turn it around is the mark of true, undeniable greatness. And the Big 3 have each done it.. insane.

It's Nadal whose comeback in 2017 shocked me the most. I was convinced because of his physically taxing style he is done at 30. Nobody thought a grinder who hit his prime at 18 would be winning Slams at 34.
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
It's Nadal whose comeback in 2017 shocked me the most. I was convinced because of his physically taxing style he is done at 30. Nobody thought a grinder who hit his prime at 18 would be winning Slams at 34.

Exactly, everyone was sure he'd be done by 28 max. His longevity has been amazing :D
 
Top