Which Big 3 AO redemption story was the greatest?

Which redemption story was the greatest?

  • Total voters
    166
mike danny said:
Federer was also almost 38 years old and Tsitsipas was almost 21. The age difference was colossal.
Click to expand...

Ah there we go again, because the numbers is the be all and end all, you just spoke about level of play for a 35 going on 36 year old Agassi against the absolute peak version of Federer, but lets throw that out the window when comparing a 38 year Federer to a not even 21 year old Tsitsipas, who we both know is no where near his peak level of play.

I mean, how many wins did Federer have over Agassi at that age? What was he? 0-3?

This is where you and I have to disagree. Connors at 39 made the USO semi in 91 playing incredible tennis. Federer totally schooled Berrettini at W 2019 when Matteo was coming in with good form. You are making out that form must be completely ignored after a certain age. I ask you then, why the heck was Federer even playing if his form didn't matter at that age?
 
Hitman said:
Ah there we go again, because the numbers is the be all and end all, you just spoke about level of play for a 35 going on 36 year old Agassi against the absolute peak version of Federer, but lets throw that out the window when comparing a 38 year Federer to a not even 21 year old Tsitsipas, who we both know is no where near his peak level of play.

I mean, how many wins did Federer have over Agassi at that age? What was he? 0-3?

This is where you and I have to disagree. Connors at 39 made the USO semi in 91 playing incredible tennis. Federer totally schooled Berrettini at W 2019 when Matteo was coming in with good form. You are making out that form must be completely ignored after a certain age. I ask you then, why the heck was Federer even playing if his form didn't matter at that age?
Click to expand...
I'm just saying that a 21 year old beating a 38 year old shouldn't be considered a massive upset.

And besides, what is peak Tsitsipas exactly? The guy doesn't have a peak.
 
mike danny said:
I'm just saying that a 21 year old beating a 38 year old shouldn't be considered a massive upset.

And besides, what is peak Tsitsipas exactly? The guy doesn't have a peak.
Click to expand...

And I'm saying that you looking ONLY at age difference doesn't work for me. That's all you've got without even looking at anything else like form, level, how much tennis had been played prior, conditions. That is not how it works.

You're not really telling me that 20 year old Tsitsipas was peak? The guy didn't even have a slice of any kind at that time. His slice might not be Federer level now, but at least he has that shot in his arsenal.
 
Hitman said:
And I'm saying that you looking ONLY at age difference doesn't work for me. That's all you've got without even looking at anything else like form, level, how much tennis had been played prior, conditions. That is not how it works.

You're not really telling me that 20 year old Tsitsipas was peak? The guy didn't even have a slice of any kind at that time. His slice might not be Federer level now, but at least he has that shot in his arsenal.
Click to expand...
Like it or not, a 38 year old will be at a disadvantage against a 21 year old. Let's not ignore the elephant in the room here. It's just that people have forgotten about that. Fed's form wasn't that good anyway.

Tsitsipas wasn't peak back then, although 2019 was one of his better levels. Tsitsipas's slice is still not a weapon today anyway, so not sure how much it matters that he has it. And let's not compare Fed rising to peak to Tsitsipas doing it since here were are 4 years later and he still doesn't have a peak.
 
mike danny said:
Like it or not, a 38 year old will be at a disadvantage against a 21 year old. Let's not ignore the elephant in the room here. It's just that people have forgotten about that. Fed's form wasn't that good anyway.

Tsitsipas wasn't peak back then, although 2019 was one of his better levels. Tsitsipas's slice is still not a weapon today anyway, so not sure how much it matters that he has it. And let's not compare Fed rising to peak to Tsitsipas doing it since here were are 4 years later and he still doesn't have a peak.
Click to expand...

You are right, I don't need to like any of it. Because I think it is bit of a cop out that after some point, nothing matters. Federer's experience against Tsitsipas still being green behind the ears doesn't matter....Federer's game being better suited to the conditions doesn't matter, Federer's pinpoint accurate serve which helps bail him out of pressure situations doesn't matter, Tsitsipas clearly still developing his game doesn't matter...

Your whole stance is, well he is old. Sorry, if he is old, then why is he playing? Go home, play with your kids or go sit in a rocking chair and admire all those slams you won. Federer got to the semis of RG also that year, and went what was it? Six hours nearly against Djokovic in the Wimbledon final....how did he accomplish such inhuman feats at 38?

38 is of course not 28, but 38 for Federer is not 38 for someone else. Everyone is different. Federer has a first strike game, most aggressive game of all time, the court was fast and low bouncing, it suited him more than it suited the guy who prefers clay as his best surface, especially back then.

I get why you are defending Fed so much, you focus on devaluing every loss he had at that stage in his career, but the guy was a slam contender even then, whether you like it or not, and frankly speaking, the bullet that Nadal took in the AO final that year was meant for Federer. Did he play his best tennis in that match? Of course not? Was he on death's door the way you putting so much emphasis on it has to be all about age and nothing else in the world matters...not even close. Why was he still playing if he too old and no win against him means anything....you still didn't answer that question....so let me answer it for you....because he still felt he had the game to win big titles, regardless of what his age was.
 
Biotic said:
Can you blame him lol. 2022 AO would make anyone believe in asterisked majors, no matter how hard they tried to look the other way.
Click to expand...
You can put whatever you want to next to it lol :D

89226891.jpg
 
All the ********* crying about AO 22 and yet they fail to acknowledge the fact that Djokovic either knowingly spread Covid or faked his expemtion

I respect Djokovic for his personal opinion on vaccines but the above points still stand
 
ElChivoEspañol said:
So, the guy that got his bum handed to him on 3 separate occasions finally gets his nemesis back is the biggest redemption? lol

Nah, I'm gonna go with the guy that lost 4 finals there, 1 lost with a back injury and 2 being up a a break in the fifth to finally win it after being 2 sets to 0 and about to be broken in the fifth being down 0-40 vs the best HC player at the time, vs the same guy that spanked a 3 slams winning Djokovic a few short months prior in straight sets. All of these at the tender age of 36 vs a guy 10 years his jr.

Yeah, I'm gonna go with Rafa.
Click to expand...
Same.
 
Hitman said:
You are right, I don't need to like any of it. Because I think it is bit of a cop out that after some point, nothing matters. Federer's experience against Tsitsipas still being green behind the ears doesn't matter....Federer's game being better suited to the conditions doesn't matter, Federer's pinpoint accurate serve which helps bail him out of pressure situations doesn't matter, Tsitsipas clearly still developing his game doesn't matter...

Your whole stance is, well he is old. Sorry, if he is old, then why is he playing? Go home, play with your kids or go sit in a rocking chair and admire all those slams you won. Federer got to the semis of RG also that year, and went what was it? Six hours nearly against Djokovic in the Wimbledon final....how did he accomplish such inhuman feats at 38?

38 is of course not 28, but 38 for Federer is not 38 for someone else. Everyone is different. Federer has a first strike game, most aggressive game of all time, the court was fast and low bouncing, it suited him more than it suited the guy who prefers clay as his best surface, especially back then.

I get why you are defending Fed so much, you focus on devaluing every loss he had at that stage in his career, but the guy was a slam contender even then, whether you like it or not, and frankly speaking, the bullet that Nadal took in the AO final that year was meant for Federer. Did he play his best tennis in that match? Of course not? Was he on death's door the way you putting so much emphasis on it has to be all about age and nothing else in the world matters...not even close. Why was he still playing if he too old and no win against him means anything....you still didn't answer that question....so let me answer it for you....because he still felt he had the game to win big titles, regardless of what his age was.
Click to expand...
Regardless of his experience, 38 is a bigger disadvantage than 21. Even in this era. And even his level wasn't that good. How many BP he converted that day? 0.
 
mike danny said:
Regardless of his experience, 38 is a bigger disadvantage than 21. Even in this era. And even his level wasn't that good. How many BP he converted that day? 0.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with age. How many breaks points did peak Federer convert against Nadal at RG 2007? What was it? 1 out of 18? LOL

I don't agree with your - This one glove fits all hands approach....he lost? Yeah, must be solely his age.....
 
Hitman said:
That has nothing to do with age. How many breaks points did peak Federer convert against Nadal at RG 2007? What was it? 1 out of 18? LOL

I don't agree with your - This one glove fits all hands approach....he lost? Yeah, must be solely his age.....
Click to expand...
So now you're comparing peak Nadal at RG with....Tsitsipas?
 
mike danny said:
So now you're comparing peak Nadal at RG with....Tsitsipas?
Click to expand...

So wait, are you SERIOUSLY telling me that all those BPs saved, what was it? 17 of them was ALL Nadal? Come on, you are an intelligent tennis fan, don't drop this low to try to push that narrative that Federer performed poorly on BP because he was too old. If that is your case, seriously, you have none for me.
 
Hitman said:
So wait, are you SERIOUSLY telling me that all those BPs saved, what was it? 17 of them was ALL Nadal? Come on, you are an intelligent tennis fan, don't drop this low to try to push that narrative that Federer performed poorly on BP because he was too old. If that is your case, seriously, you have none for me.
Click to expand...
It's harder to convert BPs against peak RG Nadal than against Tsitsipas, right? Surely you can agree with that. And he still converted 1 BP as opposed to 0 against Tsitsipas. When Fed has trouble converting against far weaker opponents, it could be age-related, yes.

Tsitsipas wasn't gonna beat Fed even in 2017. Eventually age was gonna become an issue for Federer.
 
mike danny said:
It's harder to convert BPs against peak RG Nadal than against Tsitsipas, right? Surely you can agree with that. And he still converted 1 BP as opposed to 0 against Tsitsipas. When Fed has trouble converting against far weaker opponents, it could be age-related, yes.

Tsitsipas wasn't gonna beat Fed even in 2017. Eventually age was gonna become an issue for Federer.
Click to expand...

Harder? Yes. Not F'n impossible when you yourself are at your peak and you have 17 chances! LOL

Look, I know you want to devalue all of Federer's losses to protect him, I get it. It doesn't work for me, so do you want to keep going in circles giving me the same - He lost because he is old and I keep refuting it?
 
Hitman said:
You are right, I don't need to like any of it. Because I think it is bit of a cop out that after some point, nothing matters. Federer's experience against Tsitsipas still being green behind the ears doesn't matter....Federer's game being better suited to the conditions doesn't matter, Federer's pinpoint accurate serve which helps bail him out of pressure situations doesn't matter, Tsitsipas clearly still developing his game doesn't matter...

Your whole stance is, well he is old. Sorry, if he is old, then why is he playing? Go home, play with your kids or go sit in a rocking chair and admire all those slams you won. Federer got to the semis of RG also that year, and went what was it? Six hours nearly against Djokovic in the Wimbledon final....how did he accomplish such inhuman feats at 38?

38 is of course not 28, but 38 for Federer is not 38 for someone else. Everyone is different. Federer has a first strike game, most aggressive game of all time, the court was fast and low bouncing, it suited him more than it suited the guy who prefers clay as his best surface, especially back then.

I get why you are defending Fed so much, you focus on devaluing every loss he had at that stage in his career, but the guy was a slam contender even then, whether you like it or not, and frankly speaking, the bullet that Nadal took in the AO final that year was meant for Federer. Did he play his best tennis in that match? Of course not? Was he on death's door the way you putting so much emphasis on it has to be all about age and nothing else in the world matters...not even close. Why was he still playing if he too old and no win against him means anything....you still didn't answer that question....so let me answer it for you....because he still felt he had the game to win big titles, regardless of what his age was.
Click to expand...
Tsitsipas being green doesn't really matter as even now he is not much better.
 
Hitman said:
Harder? Yes. Not F'n impossible when you yourself are at your peak and you have 17 chances! LOL

Look, I know you want to devalue all of Federer's losses to protect him, I get it. It doesn't work for me, so do you want to keep going in circles giving me the same - He lost because he is old and I keep refuting it?
Click to expand...
I disagree that it was an otherwordly feat for Tsitsipas. The guy was 21. And I disagree age was not an issue.

I get why you want to defend Tsitsipas. Djokovic has dominated him and he was the best player at this AO that Djokovic faced. But let's stop the overrating. Tsitsipas wasn't gonna beat Fed even a year earlier.
 
Hitman said:
Doesn't matter because you say so? Despite the fact he made slam finals after AO 2019, won a couple of MC and even won the WTF.
Click to expand...
Won a couple of very easy MC titles in which he didn't face anyone, was fortunate to avoid his master Djokovic at the WTF and he couldn't even beat Nadal there and he totally fumbled his 2 slam finals.
 
mike danny said:
Won a couple of very easy MC titles in which he didn't face anyone, was fortunate to avoid his master Djokovic at the WTF and he couldn't even beat Nadal there and he totally fumbled his 2 slam finals.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, of course, of course, of course....
 
Federer is #1 because he had the only real "miracle story" while the other two were simply expected to win (Djokovic) or profited from irregular circumstances (Nadal).

Djokovic, as much as I despise what happened to him in 2022, was the overwhelming favourite.

Nadal may have lost to many other players before at AO, but he simply had to cash in on Djokovic's exclusion to keep his Slam race chances intact. He did what he had to do.
 
Hitman said:
You are right, I don't need to like any of it. Because I think it is bit of a cop out that after some point, nothing matters. Federer's experience against Tsitsipas still being green behind the ears doesn't matter....Federer's game being better suited to the conditions doesn't matter, Federer's pinpoint accurate serve which helps bail him out of pressure situations doesn't matter, Tsitsipas clearly still developing his game doesn't matter...

Your whole stance is, well he is old. Sorry, if he is old, then why is he playing? Go home, play with your kids or go sit in a rocking chair and admire all those slams you won. Federer got to the semis of RG also that year, and went what was it? Six hours nearly against Djokovic in the Wimbledon final....how did he accomplish such inhuman feats at 38?

38 is of course not 28, but 38 for Federer is not 38 for someone else. Everyone is different. Federer has a first strike game, most aggressive game of all time, the court was fast and low bouncing, it suited him more than it suited the guy who prefers clay as his best surface, especially back then.

I get why you are defending Fed so much, you focus on devaluing every loss he had at that stage in his career, but the guy was a slam contender even then, whether you like it or not, and frankly speaking, the bullet that Nadal took in the AO final that year was meant for Federer. Did he play his best tennis in that match? Of course not? Was he on death's door the way you putting so much emphasis on it has to be all about age and nothing else in the world matters...not even close. Why was he still playing if he too old and no win against him means anything....you still didn't answer that question....so let me answer it for you....because he still felt he had the game to win big titles, regardless of what his age was.
Click to expand...
tstisipas was surprisingly clutch in that match.. opposite of the recent final where he blew any advantage he had.

2019 fed was poor on the big points .. yes I do think it’s age related because he didn’t have the ground game or shot tolerance to reliably sustain rallies like he did when he was younger. It was almost error or winner
 
Hitman said:
Harder? Yes. Not F'n impossible when you yourself are at your peak and you have 17 chances! LOL

Look, I know you want to devalue all of Federer's losses to protect him, I get it. It doesn't work for me, so do you want to keep going in circles giving me the same - He lost because he is old and I keep refuting it?
Click to expand...
Nadal is clay god and can save as many break points as he likes. He was simply messing with Federer knowing he has no chance :P
 
mike danny said:
Am I wrong? No BPs in the last 3 sets in the RG final on clay and lost in straights at the AO.
Click to expand...

You're a decent guy, a lot better than most here IMO. But this is where it ends, adding you to my ignore list from now on, just not interested in going around in circles with anyone on this topic anymore.
 
Hitman said:
You're a decent guy, a lot better than most here IMO. But this is where it ends, adding you to my ignore list from now on, just not interested in going around in circles with anyone on this topic anymore.
Click to expand...
Ok, sorry, don't want to be on your ignore list. You're one of the good guys around :) Peace?
 
I know it’s fun to meme “Fed wins every poll” but you’re very silly if you think there’s an actually a debate here. This poll should serve as a nice little indicator of just how partisan some of the posters here are.
 
Third Serve said:
I know it’s fun to meme “Fed wins every poll” but you’re very silly if you think there’s an actually a debate here. This poll should serve as a nice little indicator of just how partisan some of the posters here are.
Click to expand...
Even if we assume it's true in this case, the reasons why some vote are not objective at all. Acting as if the reason of not facing Djokovic affects the difficulty of the draw is ridiculous.
 
Pheasant said:
The 2017 AO tops them all. I cannot think of a better comeback story in the history of tennis. This one even tops Muster’s Rome title after coming back from knee surgery as a result of getting hit by a car.
Click to expand...
If Fed had won SW19 in 2019, that would’ve easily been the biggest win of his career - to beat both Nadal and Djokovic back to back enroute to a Wimbledon title, a few weeks shy of 38.
 
Third Serve said:
I know it’s fun to meme “Fed wins every poll” but you’re very silly if you think there’s an actually a debate here. This poll should serve as a nice little indicator of just how partisan some of the posters here are.
Click to expand...
It’s nice in a way, you can just bookmark this thread and find a list of VB and ******** usernames to refer back to if need be
 
2017. I was also surprised the others got as many votes as they did. 2017 was one of the greatest years in tennis. Months prior to the AO Fedal was in rough shape, with injuries and they joked about playing an exhibition. The final was a gift, even non tennis fans felt the euphoric effect it had on the tennis world.
 
Ray Mercer said:
Quite simply anyone who doesn’t vote 2017 is a moron and should be banned.
Click to expand...
That literally makes zero sense lol. It's Federer on HC. If Nadal is half as terrible on HC as everyone acts, and he won against the last HC slam champion from 2 sets down, at a slam he hasn't won in 13 years, it's easy to see why he's getting votes. Novak on the other hand.........

CC_Express_20220205_1217420-1024x576.jpg
 
As a political / human interest story, Novak’s personal journey was huge. So much hard stuff for a world famous ATG athlete. But the sports part of it was almost a given, NID considering Novak at the AO and the competition.

In terms of sports? As a redemptive journey of an athlete finally facing down his demons in the context of the game, Federer’s match was bigger by a long shot.

6 months away with a bad knee
Down to #17 in the world for Fed?
3 X 5 setters
Facing 4 top 10s!
Down a break in the 5th to Rafael Nadal who he’d not beaten at a slam in 10 years.

Pretty insane sports story.
 
Last edited:
PRS said:
2017 >>>>>> Nadal > Djokovic

I put 2017 instead of Federer because Nadal also had a great comeback that year. They both had been off for months with injuries and had great comebacks to make the final. Obviously Federer gets the edge because he won the final and continued to own Nadal after that, but Nadal still had a great story. Many had thought one, even both, might be near retirement until this resurgence.

I give Nadal a slight edge over Djokovic for finally surpassing Federer in slams (breaking the 3-way tie at 20) and getting the career double slam after coming off injury again.

Djokovic's was still impressive, but he was coming off a somewhat self-imposed hiatus, rather than forced injury, so still great respect towards him, but he's gonna come in third.
Click to expand...
self imposed? follow our new rules of getting a vacks put in your body otherwise it's you doing this to yourself...? strange rhetoric
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
  • Poll Poll
Which Big 3 victory was more miraculous?
Replies
23
Views
705
SonnyT
S
Fedex
Which Single Slam Win was the Greatest Achievement?
2
Replies
51
Views
6K
SonnyT
S
J
2009 USO and 2014 AO parallels
Replies
2
Views
732
JMR
J
D
can Nole make history and win his 4th consecutive AO?
Replies
10
Views
1K
mightyrick
mightyrick
Krish872007
Redemption for Kevin Anderson?
Replies
7
Views
469
marc45
marc45
Back
Top