Which final was played at a higher level, 2009 or 2012 AO?

[robthai]

Two of my favorite finals of the Australian Open. 2012 was a marathon slug fest with lots of changes in momentum between who wanted it so bad, their legs started to give. 2009 was the perfect mesh of two distinct styles that brought out all angles and dimensions of the court. I appreciate the tennis more in the 09 final. Some of the shots both players hit. Especially Nadal, he hit some outrages passing and shots, and who could forget that one point, fed hits an incredible defensive squash shot, Nadal somehow gets it back with a defense slice while sliding on a hardcourt as if it were clay, then finishes the point with a forehand dtl forehand . Shame Feds level dropped so the 5th set was a disappointment.

2012 final was high quality but it was more about the drama, much the same way the wimbledon final gets overrated quality wise. If im watching the full match live, then 2012 final was a better experience because of the intensity in the 5th set. In 2009 you knew once Fed screwed up all those earlier break points and Nadal broke straight away in the 5th, it was over . I believe that Federer did not have the belief he could beat Nadal anymore if matches went to a 5th set. I think that he still had the belief that his peak level was enough to beat Nadal, but that he would not be able to keep it up in a 5th set due to the intense physical style of play Nadal employs. I go with 2009 for the higher quality of tennis, but if you factor in qualities like drama and momentum, 2012 was a better match. In 2012 it was about who wanted more in the end, and Djokovic prevailed with his pre- Pepe Imaz mentality. I thought for a moment when Nadal was able to make Djokovic collapse out of exhaustion, that he would outlast Djokovic.

 

[NatF]

2017 > 2009 > 2012

 

[robthai]

2017 > 2009 > 2012

only because of the outcome lol

 

[Vanilla Slice]

2012 by a hair.

Overall quality throughout was higher in my
Opinion.

 

[JackGates]

Fed and Rafa hit more winners and their average stroke speed was higher, so 2009 and not even close. Also 2009 contained much more variety, which is harder.

 

[augustobt]

How can anyone say that 2012 is even ON PAIR with 2009? The first 4 sets were simply the highest level of Tennis I've ever seen, it's a crying shame that Federer simply folded on the fifth.

2012 was really boring, a pure grindfest.

 

[JackGates]

How can anyone say that 2012 is even ON PAIR with 2009? The first 4 sets were simply the highest level of Tennis I've ever seen, it's a crying shame that Federer simply folded on the fifth.

2012 was really boring, a pure grindfest.

Yeah and the stats easily confirm that. More winners, faster stroke speed, more variety.

 

[tennis_pro]

Would've been 2009 no doubt if the 5th set didn't suck.

 

[King No1e]

Haha is this even a question? 2012 AO beats any other match, even 08 Wimbledon final.

 

[JoelSandwich]

2009 hands down

 

[JackGates]

Haha is this even a question? 2012 AO beats any other match, even 08 Wimbledon final.

Djokovic never won a slam without losing a set.

 

[FiReFTW]

Haha is this even a question? 2012 AO beats any other match, even 08 Wimbledon final.

Unlucky for you stats don't back this up, 2009 had way more winners, much faster hit balls. by 2012 Fed and Rafa both declined already.

 

[FHtennisman]

2009.

 

[metsman]

2009 was way better than 2017 or 2012 even with the trash final set.

 

[abmk]

2009 > 2012 (even with the final set of 2009).
If 2009 had a final set like the 2017 one, it'd be an absolute absolute no-contest.

 

[JackGates]

There you go abmk has spoken, he is the biggest expert here in evaluating the level of play, nobody comes close.

 

[BrokenGears]

2012 by a hair

2017 is overrated

 

[MeatTornado]

2009 was the highest quality shot making I've ever seen.

Even if 2012 was more impressive because of the physicality, I have to give 09 the "higher level" tag.

 

[Steve0904]

In this instance I'll give it to 2009 despite the result. The first 4 sets by itself are absolutely amazing from a shot making perspective. That doesn't mean 2012 was boring. It means I prefer the 2009 final.

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

By outcome, 2017>2012>2009
By tennis quality, 2009>2012>2017
By historical importance, 2017>2009>2012

 

[AiRFederer]

2009. Although unexpectsdly enjoyed 2012.

 

[zagor]

I think they're a bit too different too compare, fans of different type of tennis will appreciate one over the other.

2009 is definitely more entertaining for me gamewise (it was much more of a shotmaking contest) but 2012 had a much better 5th set and a much, much better outcome.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Fed played liked total garbage in the 2009 AO final. Along with the 2009 USO, one of his worst chokes in a major final. Nadal played brilliantly, but it takes two to tango. Since both Djoker and Nadal played great in 2012 (except that one forehand DTL from Rafa in the fifth), the nod should go to 2012. But that final was 2 hours of actual play and 3 hours of ball bouncing, toweling off and time wasting.

 

[King No1e]

Unlucky for you stats don't back this up, 2009 had way more winners, much faster hit balls. by 2012 Fed and Rafa both declined already.

1. We are talking about the final. Between Nadal and Djokovic. The greatest match ever played. Not the semifinal, although the Fedal SF was pretty high quality too.
2. By 2012 Rafa already declined?

 

[King No1e]

By outcome, 2017>2012>2009
By tennis quality, 2009>2012>2017
By historical importance, 2017>2009>2012

By outcome 2012>2009>2017
By significance 2017>2012>2009
By quality 2012>2009>2017
I put 2012 ahead of 09 in significance just because of the sheer greatness and unprecedented level of physical endurance. While in the end it was just another AO win for Djokovic, it goes down in history not for the result but for the match itself. 09 was more significant as Nadal won his only AO and first HC Slam, but even that IMO doesn't beat playing the GOAT tennis match.

 

[TheFifthSet]

2009 was better aesthetically, with the contrast of styles. I could watch it all day.

In terms of quality, I could see arguments for either. Federer had one of his worst ever serving days in a big match, and capitulated in the fifth. If the final stanza was even an average one, I’d have given 2009 the advantage in every regard.

 

[Raining hopes]

By shotmaking and overall skills displayed I.e level 2009 Ao

I love Novak truly but nothing absolutely nothing compares to the first four sets of the 2009 AO if we only talk about GS Fs.
Fraud and Rafa played mythically in the that stretch.I was left staring blankly at the screen after so many rallies.

People preferring 2012, you are either biased or haven't rewatched 2009

 

[tarutani]

Djokovic is far better player than Federer on Plexicushion.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Yeah and the stats easily confirm that. More winners, faster stroke speed, more variety.

more winners is a useless stat in this context. The matches were played in totally different styles.

 

[FatFedererFanTurnsSlim]

Scientific studies have shown that watching the 2012 Australian Open final has the same effect as swallowing 15 sleeping pills. High likelihood of death from overdose.

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

By outcome 2012>2009>2017
By significance 2017>2012>2009
By quality 2012>2009>2017
I put 2012 ahead of 09 in significance just because of the sheer greatness and unprecedented level of physical endurance. While in the end it was just another AO win for Djokovic, it goes down in history not for the result but for the match itself. 09 was more significant as Nadal won his only AO and first HC Slam, but even that IMO doesn't beat playing the GOAT tennis match.

2012 was not of as high quality as 2009
Grinding and Error fest
Just the longest

 

[MichaelNadal]

How can anyone say that 2012 is even ON PAIR with 2009? The first 4 sets were simply the highest level of Tennis I've ever seen, it's a crying shame that Federer simply folded on the fifth.

2012 was really boring, a pure grindfest.

Exactly, easy question to me, 09 was crispy as tennessee chicken.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Djokovic is far better player than Federer on Plexicushion.

Far more boring too.

 

[KINGROGER]

How can anyone say that 2012 is even ON PAIR with 2009? The first 4 sets were simply the highest level of Tennis I've ever seen, it's a crying shame that Federer simply folded on the fifth.

2012 was really boring, a pure grindfest.

Sad day for tennis that Federer lost in 2009 but a great match regardless.

 

[Rafa the King]

Fed played liked total garbage in the 2009 AO final. Along with the 2009 USO, one of his worst chokes in a major final. Nadal played brilliantly, but it takes two to tango. Since both Djoker and Nadal played great in 2012 (except that one forehand DTL from Rafa in the fifth), the nod should go to 2012. But that final was 2 hours of actual play and 3 hours of ball bouncing, toweling off and time wasting.

AO 2009 is Roger's best slam performance against Rafa groundstrokes wise. He served poorly but excelled at all other aspects tenniswise.

 

[Deleted member 512391]

Always prefered the Fedal matches because they are simply the best shotmakers on Tour and thus make the matches more entertaining. The 2009 final, however, had too many ups and downs (even if we exclude the fifth set) for my taste.
For example, Federer was broken three times in the first set against a player who isn't exactly someone who puts a pressure on your serve, which was odd. Nadal was broken twice as well, but won the set eventually.

Regarding 2012, while I respect both guys and their war of attrition on the court, I was never a big fan of their games. I like Novak's game in 2007/2008, but never really liked Nadal's.

 

[Hawaiian grip]

It‘s 2009 and it isn‘t even close. Shotmaking quality was off the charts.

Always prefered the Fedal matches because they are simply the best shotmakers on Tour and thus make the matches more entertaining. The 2009 final, however, had too many ups and downs (even if we exclude the fifth set) for my taste.
For example, Federer was broken three times in the first set against a player who isn't exactly someone who puts a pressure on your serve, which was odd. Nadal was broken twice as well, but won the set eventually.

Regarding 2012, while I respect both guys and their war of attrition on the court, I was never a big fan of their games. I like Novak's game in 2007/2008, but never really liked Nadal's.

Nadal doesn‘t puts pressure on your serve? What? His first return of serve might not be the most aggressive shot on tour, but if anything has always worked for Nadal, even in his worst years, it has been his ability to break his opponents‘ serve. He breaks A LOT. Unsurprisingly in 2009 he ranked second overall in % of return games where he broke, being first on clay and second on HC.

 

[Deleted member 512391]

It‘s 2009 and it isn‘t even close. Shotmaking quality was off the charts.


Nadal doesn‘t puts pressure on your serve? What? His first return of serve might not be the most aggressive shot on tour, but if anything has always worked for Nadal, even in his worst years, it has been his ability to break his opponents‘ serve. He breaks A LOT. Unsurprisingly in 2009 he ranked second overall in % of return games where he broke, being first on clay and second on HC.

He doesn't put the pressure on your serve as those aggressive returners who takes it much earlier and more offensive, that's what I meant. Sure he has the ability to break serves thanks to his superb defense and groundstrokes, but it's still Federer, a guy who won the tournament three times prior to the Nadal match and who was one of the best serves on tour and arguably the greatest hc player, not some journeyman. I don't think Nadal ever broken Federer's serve three times in a single set after that match (maybe in 2013 Rome final).

 

[Hawaiian grip]

He doesn't put the pressure on your serve as those aggressive returners who takes it much earlier and more offensive, that's what I meant. Sure he has the ability to break serves thanks to his superb defense and groundstrokes, but it's still Federer, a guy who won the tournament three times prior to the Nadal match and who was one of the best serves on tour and arguably the greatest hc player, not some journeyman. I don't think Nadal ever broken Federer's serve three times in a single set after that match (maybe in 2013 Rome final).

I know what you mean, but it‘s still the wrong way to look at it IMO. Nadal is a great returner overall. Always been. It doesn‘t matter if he needs five minutes instead of two to break.

Also, 2008 RG final off the top of my head.

 

[Deleted member 512391]

I know what you mean, but it‘s still the wrong way to look at it IMO. Nadal is a great returner overall. Always been. It doesn‘t matter if he needs five minutes instead of two to break.

Also, 2008 RG final off the top of my head.

I said after the AO match, but anyway...these two matches (2008 and 2013) were on clay, Nadal's return is much more effective on that surface and it's harder to hit through his defense with the very first shot after the serve.

On hard court, however, I don't expect a player like Federer to be broken so many times in a single set against someone who returns serves rather conservatively and who definitely gives you more time and space to go for your shots (regardless of his high-quality defense). It tells me that his level wasn't very high.

 

[Hawaiian grip]

I said after the AO match, but anyway...these two matches (2008 and 2013) were on clay, Nadal's return is much more effective on that surface and it's harder to hit through his defense with the very first shot after the serve.

On hard court, however, I don't expect a player like Federer to be broken so many times in a single set against someone who returns serves rather conservatively and who definitely gives you more time and space to go for your shots (regardless of his high-quality defense). It tells me that his level wasn't very high.

I‘m telling you Nadal was second in return games won on hardcourt that year. Check the ATP site if you don‘t believe me.

Federer didn‘t serve well but played very well from the baseline that match.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

This is very similar to the Wimbledon 2007 - 2008 comparison

The first match has the better tennis quality, in this case AO 2009. The second match told a better story/drama and had a dramatic conclusion, in this case AO 2012.

 

[Plamen1234]

I didnt think there was so many Djokovic fans in this site.I mean there are 14 votes for AO 2012 final - this is a lot.To answer the question - 2009 without a doubt though Federer didnt play his best - should have done better in the 5th set.

 

[beltsman]

2009 AO F was Bull's best match.

 

[icedevil0289]

This is very similar to the Wimbledon 2007 - 2008 comparison

The first match has the better tennis quality, in this case AO 2009. The second match told a better story/drama and had a dramatic conclusion, in this case AO 2012.

fed sobbing certainly made a story/drama of it. that was my first time into talk tennis atleast without just lurking and omg the posts after posts.

 

[BlueB]

2012 of course. Besides being the most epic slam finals of all times, 5 greatly competitive sets always beats few good sets + 1 garbage set...

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

 

[True Fanerer]

It's beyond me how anyone thinks the quality of play in 2012 was higher than 2009.

Only a match between Djokovic and Nadal can have a 6-2 set in a 5 set match and it still last 6 hours.

 

[zep]

First 4 sets 2009 by a country mile, 5th set 2012 easily.

 

[aman92]

2009 had a higher level but the tension in 2012 was definitely higher. It takes a different kind of pleasure to see 2 players almost kill each other which Nadal and Novak definitely did

 

[JackGates]

2012 of course. Besides being the most epic slam finals of all times, 5 greatly competitive sets always beats few good sets + 1 garbage set...

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

Competitive doesn't mean higher level. Even two 5.0 players can play close five setter, doesn't mean the level is higher when Fed double bagelled Hewitt even when the match wasn't competitive.