Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by ahand » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 00:49:15


Surely the Djoker would have beaten Nadal at the French Open the way
he has been playing.  Awesome first two sets.  The highest quality
tennis I have seen in a while.  He has now got to be the favorite for
the U S Open.

Since I am a huge Federer fan I have always been tense whenever
Federer played Nadal :-).  Watching today was a lot of fun to see
Nadal dismantled the way he was in the first two sets.

 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by ulys.. » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 01:00:15

I agree with both your points. I firmly believe Djoker would have
dismantled Rafa in the FO, but what's past is past.

Nadal is now 2-3 in Wimbledon finals. Not exactly up to Fed's sublime
6-1 record. Nadal's peak is past and Nole is just entering his peak.
Result? Very few slam wins for Rafa in the future. Boo hoo. 16 is safe
for a long, long, long time to come.

 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by steve jaro » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 01:17:27


Quote:
> Surely the Djoker would have beaten Nadal at the French Open the way
> he has been playing.  Awesome first two sets.  The highest quality
> tennis I have seen in a while.  He has now got to be the favorite for
> the U S Open.

> Since I am a huge Federer fan I have always been tense whenever
> Federer played Nadal :-).  Watching today was a lot of fun to see
> Nadal dismantled the way he was in the first two sets.

Today's result does make Fed's win over Joker at the FO stand out even
more.

--
Why the industrial revolution was delayed until around
1800 is the great and enduring puzzle of human history.

- Gregory Clark

 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by Manc » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 01:18:14

Yup the only man to beat Djoker in 2011 = Federer.
 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by Vlad » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 01:35:18


Quote:

> > Surely the Djoker would have beaten Nadal at the French Open the way
> > he has been playing. ?Awesome first two sets. ?The highest quality
> > tennis I have seen in a while. ?He has now got to be the favorite for
> > the U S Open.

> > Since I am a huge Federer fan I have always been tense whenever
> > Federer played Nadal :-). ?Watching today was a lot of fun to see
> > Nadal dismantled the way he was in the first two sets.

> Today's result does make Fed's win over Joker at the FO stand out even
> more.

> --
> Why the industrial revolution was delayed until around
> 1800 is the great and enduring puzzle of human history.

> - Gregory Clark

not really because Nole was rusty and got cheated . Fed just served
great
 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by nick » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 01:14:16


Quote:
> I agree with both your points. I firmly believe Djoker would have
> dismantled Rafa in the FO, but what's past is past.

> Nadal is now 2-3 in Wimbledon finals. Not exactly up to Fed's sublime
> 6-1 record. Nadal's peak is past and Nole is just entering his peak.
> Result? Very few slam wins for Rafa in the future. Boo hoo. 16 is safe
> for a long, long, long time to come.

Yes, Nadal may well end up to be the only 10+ slam winner who never
really owns an "era".
 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by Superdav » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 10:07:50


Quote:

>I agree with both your points. I firmly believe Djoker would have
>dismantled Rafa in the FO, but what's past is past.

>Nadal is now 2-3 in Wimbledon finals. Not exactly up to Fed's sublime
>6-1 record. Nadal's peak is past and Nole is just entering his peak.
>Result? Very few slam wins for Rafa in the future. Boo hoo. 16 is safe
>for a long, long, long time to come.

forever. from rafa anyway.
 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by Whispe » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 19:21:41


Quote:
> I agree with both your points. I firmly believe Djoker would have
> dismantled Rafa in the FO, but what's past is past.

No, Rafa would have won FO regardless who he played.

Quote:

> Nadal is now 2-3 in Wimbledon finals. Not exactly up to Fed's sublime
> 6-1 record.

Or Sampras' perfect 7-0.

Quote:
> Nadal's peak is past and Nole is just entering his peak.
> Result? Very few slam wins for Rafa in the future. Boo hoo. 16 is safe
> for a long, long, long time to come.

You sound desperate....?

I never thought Rafa would get to 13 slams, but who knows he can still
do it in theory.

 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by Whispe » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 19:41:31


Quote:

>> I agree with both your points. I firmly believe Djoker would have
>> dismantled Rafa in the FO, but what's past is past.

>> Nadal is now 2-3 in Wimbledon finals. Not exactly up to Fed's sublime
>> 6-1 record. Nadal's peak is past and Nole is just entering his peak.
>> Result? Very few slam wins for Rafa in the future. Boo hoo. 16 is safe
>> for a long, long, long time to come.

> Yes, Nadal may well end up to be the only 10+ slam winner who never
> really owns an "era".

Rafa owned Fed though.
 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by Superdav » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 21:38:51

Quote:



>>> I agree with both your points. I firmly believe Djoker would have
>>> dismantled Rafa in the FO, but what's past is past.

>>> Nadal is now 2-3 in Wimbledon finals. Not exactly up to Fed's sublime
>>> 6-1 record. Nadal's peak is past and Nole is just entering his peak.
>>> Result? Very few slam wins for Rafa in the future. Boo hoo. 16 is safe
>>> for a long, long, long time to come.

>> Yes, Nadal may well end up to be the only 10+ slam winner who never
>> really owns an "era".

>Rafa owned Fed though.

Djokovic owns Rafa.

Fed owned Pete.

get used to it.

 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by RzR » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:01:05


Quote:


>>> I agree with both your points. I firmly believe Djoker would have
>>> dismantled Rafa in the FO, but what's past is past.

>>> Nadal is now 2-3 in Wimbledon finals. Not exactly up to Fed's sublime
>>> 6-1 record. Nadal's peak is past and Nole is just entering his peak.
>>> Result? Very few slam wins for Rafa in the future. Boo hoo. 16 is safe
>>> for a long, long, long time to come.

>> Yes, Nadal may well end up to be the only 10+ slam winner who never
>> really owns an "era".

> Rafa owned Fed though.

yeah just becayse fed was too good for his own good

or too lazy to figure rafa out

if there were only rafa and fed on tour, fed would own rafa handily on
all surfaces...you just cant outrun the talent...fed just couldnt be
arsed to dedicate way too much time to beat rafa the runner

 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by RzR » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:01:58


Quote:


>>> Surely the Djoker would have beaten Nadal at the French Open the way
>>> he has been playing.  Awesome first two sets.  The highest quality
>>> tennis I have seen in a while.  He has now got to be the favorite for
>>> the U S Open.

>>> Since I am a huge Federer fan I have always been tense whenever
>>> Federer played Nadal :-).  Watching today was a lot of fun to see
>>> Nadal dismantled the way he was in the first two sets.

>> Today's result does make Fed's win over Joker at the FO stand out even
>> more.

>> --
>> Why the industrial revolution was delayed until around
>> 1800 is the great and enduring puzzle of human history.

>> - Gregory Clark

> not really because Nole was rusty and got cheated . Fed just served
> great

shhh, and keep thanking the gods for tsonga beating federer
 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by RzR » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:07:10


Quote:

>> I agree with both your points. I firmly believe Djoker would have
>> dismantled Rafa in the FO, but what's past is past.

> No, Rafa would have won FO regardless who he played.

>> Nadal is now 2-3 in Wimbledon finals. Not exactly up to Fed's sublime
>> 6-1 record.

> Or Sampras' perfect 7-0.

you too should be thanking gods that goran was messed up in the head

otherwise 2 less wimbledons for sampras

its really sad that sampras had to rely on another players mental
instability to win

Quote:

>> Nadal's peak is past and Nole is just entering his peak.
>> Result? Very few slam wins for Rafa in the future. Boo hoo. 16 is safe
>> for a long, long, long time to come.

> You sound desperate....?

> I never thought Rafa would get to 13 slams, but who knows he can still
> do it in theory.

he should get to 14...that would shit on sampras so nicely, in the way
fed shit on him
 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by Whispe » Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:27:30


Quote:



>>>> I agree with both your points. I firmly believe Djoker would have
>>>> dismantled Rafa in the FO, but what's past is past.

>>>> Nadal is now 2-3 in Wimbledon finals. Not exactly up to Fed's sublime
>>>> 6-1 record. Nadal's peak is past and Nole is just entering his peak.
>>>> Result? Very few slam wins for Rafa in the future. Boo hoo. 16 is safe
>>>> for a long, long, long time to come.

>>> Yes, Nadal may well end up to be the only 10+ slam winner who never
>>> really owns an "era".

>> Rafa owned Fed though.

> yeah just becayse fed was too good for his own good

> or too lazy to figure rafa out

You think that's lazy, look at Roddick's record v Fed - lazy on steroids.
 
 
 

Federer spoilt Djoker's 2011 Grand Slam chances

Post by RaspingDriv » Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:27:29


Quote:


> > > Surely the Djoker would have beaten Nadal at the French Open the way
> > > he has been playing. ?Awesome first two sets. ?The highest quality
> > > tennis I have seen in a while. ?He has now got to be the favorite for
> > > the U S Open.

> > > Since I am a huge Federer fan I have always been tense whenever
> > > Federer played Nadal :-). ?Watching today was a lot of fun to see
> > > Nadal dismantled the way he was in the first two sets.

> > Today's result does make Fed's win over Joker at the FO stand out even
> > more.

> > --
> > Why the industrial revolution was delayed until around
> > 1800 is the great and enduring puzzle of human history.

> > - Gregory Clark

> not really because Nole was rusty and got cheated . Fed just served
> great

More importantly, Djokovic was unable to tap into Fed's relatively
weak back hand. Perhaps that was the reason why Fed lost at the
Australian Open.