Tennis

[McNulty]

Anybody watch Tennis? I usually get into the majors. I especially dig the Australian Open since I'm usually up all night anyway.

[glenn__davis]

Love tennis, and as a night owl I love the Aussie Open. Unfortunately, we cut the cable cord about 6 months ago so I can't watch it this year.

If I ever sat and made a sports bucket list, the Australian Open would be on it.

[DuffMan]

Didn't see the match but Djokovic just beat Nadal in the 3rd straight final at a Major! This one lasting almost 6 hours, they are saying it may have been even better than the Nadal/Federrer match at Wimbledon a couple of years ago. Pretty impressive win for DJokovic considering he was coming off a 5 hour semifinal match against Murray!

[Sports Guy]

I saw the ending of the Nadal/Djokovic match.

Man, what a match.

Can you imagine playing for 6 hours? Wow.

[ccbird]

Watched it all but IMO didn't top Federer- Nadal from Wimbledon. Last 2 sets were amazing stuff but just not as consistently good throughout the whole match like Fed- Nadal.

I'll say this, I'm not particularly a Djoker fan but that man is amazing. Just so mentally tough and physically is a beast as well. Consider he played Murray in a 5 hour semis match and he was able to come back 2 days later and take out Nadal, the guy who thrives in long grueling physical matches, in a 6 hour match. Amazing stuff. Note that Nadal had also had an extra day off as well. If Nadal couldn't get him in this final it's hard to see him getting him at all, even on clay at the French. Djoker owns Nadal as much as Nadal owns Federer.

[McNulty]

I still say Roddick/Federer was a better match than Nadal/Fed. I'm not sure why everyone forgets that one.

[Sports Guy]

Watched it all but IMO didn't top Federer- Nadal from Wimbledon. Last 2 sets were amazing stuff but just not as consistently good throughout the whole match like Fed- Nadal.

I'll say this, I'm not particularly a Djoker fan but that man is amazing. Just so mentally tough and physically is a beast as well. Consider he played Murray in a 5 hour semis match and he was able to come back 2 days later and take out Nadal, the guy who thrives in long grueling physical matches, in a 6 hour match. Amazing stuff. Note that Nadal had also had an extra day off as well. If Nadal couldn't get him in this final it's hard to see him getting him at all, even on clay at the French. Djoker owns Nadal as much as Nadal owns Federer.

I hate these comps.

Nadal came into his prime as Fed was out of his...I would expect the younger, more in prime player to beat the older, just out of his prime player.

Djokovic has become a beast but it has also come at a time where Federer is near the end of his rope and Nadal is constantly battling knee injuries.

A few years ago, he couldn't do much against Nadal and Fed.(Nadal is still 16-14 vs him in their careers and that's with Novak "owning him" the last year or so.)

[DuffMan]

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...ian-open-final

[Nigel Tufnel]

I hate these comps.

Nadal came into his prime as Fed was out of his...I would expect the younger, more in prime player to beat the older, just out of his prime player.

Djokovic has become a beast but it has also come at a time where Federer is near the end of his rope and Nadal is constantly battling knee injuries.

A few years ago, he couldn't do much against Nadal and Fed.(Nadal is still 16-14 vs him in their careers and that's with Novak "owning him" the last year or so.)

Yeah, I agree. I think it's fair to say that Nadal has always owned Federer on clay, but in Federer's prime, that's mostly the only surface they played on. At that time, Nadal wasn't good enough on other surfaces to get to the point in the tournament where he'd play Federer. Even now, they've played 27 times, and 14 of those meetings have been on clay. Nadal leads the series 18-9, but he's 12-2 on clay and 6-7 on other surfaces.

[DuffMan]

I hate these comps.
Nadal came into his prime as Fed was out of his...I would expect the younger, more in prime player to beat the older, just out of his prime player.
Djokovic has become a beast but it has also come at a time where Federer is near the end of his rope and Nadal is constantly battling knee injuries.
A few years ago, he couldn't do much against Nadal and Fed.(Nadal is still 16-14 vs him in their careers and that's with Novak "owning him" the last year or so.)

To be fear Novak has won 7 straight against Nadal including the last 3 finals in Majors, both are fantastic players but Novak clearly has had the edge recently. Nadal (25) is only a year older than Djokovic (24) and yes he's had some knee problems, but both players should be considered to be in their primes. At 30 years old I wonder if Roger is done winning majors. Since the start of the 2005 calendar year there have been only 2 majors not won by the big three. It will be interesting to follow seeing who winds up with the most majors when all is said and done.

Australian French Wimbeldon U.S. Open
2005: Safin Nadal Federer Federer
2006: Federer Nadal Federer Federer
2007: Federer Nadal Federer Federer
2008: Djojovic Nadal Nadal Federer
2009: Nadal Federer Federer Del Potro
2010: Federer Nadal Nadal Nadal
2011: Djokovic Nadal Djokovic Djokovic
2012: Djokovic

[mweb]

Yeah, I agree. I think it's fair to say that Nadal has always owned Federer on clay, but in Federer's prime, that's mostly the only surface they played on. At that time, Nadal wasn't good enough on other surfaces to get to the point in the tournament where he'd play Federer. Even now, they've played 27 times, and 14 of those meetings have been on clay. Nadal leads the series 18-9, but he's 12-2 on clay and 6-7 on other surfaces.

Exactly! It amazes me how people fail to acknowledge this when they're talking about their rivalry. Now it's to the point where some are saying Fed can't be considered the best ever because he wasn't he the best in his era and/or his rival owned him. Just wrong.

[McNulty]

I hate these comps.

Nadal came into his prime as Fed was out of his...I would expect the younger, more in prime player to beat the older, just out of his prime player.

Djokovic has become a beast but it has also come at a time where Federer is near the end of his rope and Nadal is constantly battling knee injuries.

A few years ago, he couldn't do much against Nadal and Fed.(Nadal is still 16-14 vs him in their careers and that's with Novak "owning him" the last year or so.)

This is inaccurate. Djokovic's game these days gives Nadal tons of problems. Nadal's game gives Federer problems too. The only way Nadal can beat Joker is to have his first serve working really well. It hasn't been doing that for a year now. Look up the speeds, first serve % and % of first serve points won. Another example - Nadal hits some balls that need to be returned from a very high strike point. Federer struggles with it, Djokovic excels at it. Djokovic's serve gives Nadal all sorts of fits.

Nadal on the other hand runs down tons of balls that normal Fed opponents don't get to. I agree the comp is lazy, but there are natural matchup problems that exist. Nadal is adapting to Djokovic and came REAL close to breaking through this time. The real test will be on clay, where Nadal has a decided advantage.

[Nigel Tufnel]

Exactly! It amazes me how people fail to acknowledge this when they're talking about their rivalry. Now it's to the point where some are saying Fed can't be considered the best ever because he wasn't he the best in his era and/or his rival owned him. Just wrong.

I guess I can see why people say that, because on the surface it's exactly what happened - every time they played, even in Federer's absolute prime and especially in majors, Nadal seemed to win. You have to look a little closer to realize that in the early years, just about all of Nadal's big wins were on clay. And it's also hard to accept that you're past your prime at age 27, even though in tennis you absolutely are.

This really is a great time in men's tennis, though, with Nadal and Djokovic at their peaks, Federer in his "still" phase, and Murray, even though he's only 4th best, good enough to beat any of the top 3 guys.

[mweb]

I guess I can see why people say that, because on the surface it's exactly what happened - every time they played, even in Federer's absolute prime and especially in majors, Nadal seemed to win. You have to look a little closer to realize that in the early years, just about all of Nadal's big wins were on clay. And it's also hard to accept that you're past your prime at age 27, even though in tennis you absolutely are.

This really is a great time in men's tennis, though, with Nadal and Djokovic at their peaks, Federer in his "still" phase, and Murray, even though he's only 4th best, good enough to beat any of the top 3 guys.

I can why they say that, but I think it's lazy thinking.

[Nigel Tufnel]

I can why they say that, but I think it's lazy thinking.

I agree - to correctly judge it you have to think about the things that weren't happening (meeting on surfaces other than clay) and not just the things that were (Nadal winning on clay).