Welcome back to the top 10 Del Potro.

by Simple_Analyst Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:23 pm

It was a long wait but with a QF at the AO, Del Potro has returned to the top 10, where he rightfully belongs. A great talent to have and when match fit, easily a top 5 player.

Today was not a great match for him. Too many errors and failing to take his chances. A more match fit Del Potro would have won rather comfortably but the future looks good. Del Potro 2009 USO was one of the greatest performances i have seen and we need that level back to make this Golden Era of tennis even more better.

Welcome back.

by break_in_the_fifth Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:30 pm

He's done well to come back from injury and manage all that expectation. He is a unique talent as there are many subtle features to his game that make it great to watch as well as the obvious pace that he can generate.

by LuvSports! Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:36 pm

how is he not match fit???? please explain it to me

by Simple_Analyst Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:50 pm

How can i help when you cannot see for yourself?

by break_in_the_fifth Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:52 pm

He did look tired in that 3rd set and didn't chase as many balls.

by LuvSports! Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:56 pm

as somebody alluded to he played 66 matches last year and I said he had already played 6 or 7 matches this week in 2 weeks or so. What do you define as not being match fit? that he hasn't played enough five setters??? As i said this was a relatively short 3 setter and DP has played longer matches in two of the matches he played this tourney.
Please can you just explain it without being condescending as I cannot understand how you think he isn't match fit.

by Simple_Analyst Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:58 pm

But how can i explain when you yourself say you can't see?

by LuvSports! Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:02 pm

watevs fine then continue on your patronizing ways.

by Jahu Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:27 pm

Happy for Delpo to be back. Still he will not be able to beat top 4, but a worthy top 5 he is.

2013 should his & Murrays year once Fed quits, Nadal is out of top 10 and Djokos body crumbles.

by Guest Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:29 pm

According to Tenez, Del Potro is "already back", but the goal posts have moved further ahead. Also there was some doubt whether Del Potro could sustain his action physically without having to make adjustments.

by Tenez Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:30 pm

Playing Federer was a bad match up for him cause Federer plays fastand would certainly rush him into mistakes. His full potential woudl have been best expressed against the other top 4 players who would have given him more time to aim and pull.

That's why I woudl not pay too much attaention to his today's result regarding his level compared to the other 3.

by **laverfan** Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:39 pm

Good to see DelPo back.

Tenez wrote:...would certainly rush him into mistakes.

See Nore Staat's timing article. There was mention of the umpire asking him to speed up a bit during his match with Federer.

His 2010 was quite a setback, so good to see him reach QFs. Three more slams for 2012 to go. Cool

by break_in_the_fifth Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:41 pm

Maybe he'll still be in with a good chance at the French especially if the clay is faster than Davis cup.

by banbrotam Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:53 pm

Tenez wrote:Playing Federer was a bad match up for him cause Federer plays fastand would certainly rush him into mistakes. His full potential woudl have been best expressed against the other top 4 players who would have given him more time to aim and pull.

That's why I woudl not pay too much attaention to his today's result regarding his level compared to the other 3.

So despite Del Potro's horrendous head to head against Murray and Djokovic, he would have had more of a chance against them eh? He beats Federer at a Slam - has never beaten the other two, but strangely that's not factored in to your viewpoint

Yet again, the "other 3" not only continue to get damned by your dismissive description, but also becasue you choose to ignore the facts

Del Porto isn't up to the scrutiny of the Top 4, if they are playing well - simply because they all get him moving way too much for his comfort zone.

Forget those who think that FO of 2008, was Fed's biggest Slam let down, since his first win. Losing to Del Potro in 2009 at the U.S. easily eclipses this

by banbrotam Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:55 pm

Can anyone tell me how much more time we think Del Porto needs to get "match fit"?

Isn't his true position somewhere between No.5 and No.7 in the world, at best - i.e. more or less where he is now

by break_in_the_fifth Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:01 pm

Maybe Nadal should have taken care of him in the semi then he could have had his career slam a year earlier.

by Tenez Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:01 pm

banbrotam wrote:
Tenez wrote:Playing Federer was a bad match up for him cause Federer plays fastand would certainly rush him into mistakes. His full potential woudl have been best expressed against the other top 4 players who would have given him more time to aim and pull.

That's why I woudl not pay too much attaention to his today's result regarding his level compared to the other 3.

So despite Del Potro's horrendous head to head against Murray and Djokovic, he would have had more of a chance against them eh? He beats Federer at a Slam - has never beaten the other two, but strangely that's not factored in to your viewpoint

Yet again, the "other 3" not only continue to get damned by your dismissive description, but also becasue you choose to ignore the facts

Del Porto isn't up to the scrutiny of the Top 4, if they are playing well - simply because they all get him moving way too much for his comfort zone.

Forget those who think that FO of 2008, was Fed's biggest Slam let down, since his first win. Losing to Del Potro in 2009 at the U.S. easily eclipses this

??? H2H are bound to be unbalance when Delpo is the youngest. He aslo had a terrible H2H v Federer untill he scored 2 in a row. As far as I am aware Murray has teh upper hand but already then the scores were extremely close.

by banbrotam Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:13 pm

Tenez wrote:
banbrotam wrote:
Tenez wrote:Playing Federer was a bad match up for him cause Federer plays fastand would certainly rush him into mistakes. His full potential woudl have been best expressed against the other top 4 players who would have given him more time to aim and pull.

That's why I woudl not pay too much attaention to his today's result regarding his level compared to the other 3.

So despite Del Potro's horrendous head to head against Murray and Djokovic, he would have had more of a chance against them eh? He beats Federer at a Slam - has never beaten the other two, but strangely that's not factored in to your viewpoint

Yet again, the "other 3" not only continue to get damned by your dismissive description, but also becasue you choose to ignore the facts

Del Porto isn't up to the scrutiny of the Top 4, if they are playing well - simply because they all get him moving way too much for his comfort zone.

Forget those who think that FO of 2008, was Fed's biggest Slam let down, since his first win. Losing to Del Potro in 2009 at the U.S. easily eclipses this

??? H2H are bound to be unbalance when Delpo is the youngest. He aslo had a terrible H2H v Federer untill he scored 2 in a row. As far as I am aware Murray has teh upper hand but already then the scores were extremely close.

There's nothing 'closer' than beating your opponent. Yet, you'd have us believe that a Del Potro not as good as he was has a better chance against two players who more or less always beat him rather than against a player he beat at a Slam

I'm sure you'll have a logical explanation for this warped contradiction Doh

by Tenez Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:47 pm

banbrotam wrote:

I'm sure you'll have a logical explanation for this warped contradiction

Astonishing!!!

How do you explain then that Delpo beat Djoko last time they played?...Despite Djoko playing much better than when he used to regularly beat Delpo.

Why am I bothering?

by break_in_the_fifth Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:51 pm

I'd be interested to see Del Potro against Murray at a slam. At the beginning of the match Del Potro was reading some of Feds advanced plays and getting the better of him. Like at the beginning he read the acute backhand return towards the line and hit his own backhand down the line to get the better of Fed in that exchange.

by bogbrush Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:45 pm

JMDP is going to do it; he was close to unplayable at the end of 2009 and hopefully he's young enough to complete the climb back.

by consigliare Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:59 pm

Jahu wrote:Happy for Delpo to be back. Still he will not be able to beat top 4, but a worthy top 5 he is.

Oh dear, the same old traps being continuously fallen into still.

He can beat Murray. Murray shouldn't be included in the same catagory as the other 3.

by legendkillar Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:01 pm

People forget that Federers serve % in that final against Delpo was 50% first serves in. Not all inspiring statistic and certainly a large contributing factor to Federer's defeat. None the less Delpo was in tip top form. How far he could've gone if he hadn't got injured.

by legendkillar Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:02 pm

consigliare wrote:
Jahu wrote:Happy for Delpo to be back. Still he will not be able to beat top 4, but a worthy top 5 he is.
Oh dear, the same old traps being continuously fallen into still.

He can beat Murray. Murray shouldn't be included in the same catagory as the other 3.

Explain the H2H and we can go from there.

by consigliare Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:10 pm

legendkillar wrote:
consigliare wrote:
Jahu wrote:Happy for Delpo to be back. Still he will not be able to beat top 4, but a worthy top 5 he is.
Oh dear, the same old traps being continuously fallen into still.

He can beat Murray. Murray shouldn't be included in the same catagory as the other 3.

Explain the H2H and we can go from there.

All but one In those Micky Mouse trinkets Muzza likes collecting?

So then on that basis you'd rate Murray above Federer all time?

Explain Del Boy both thrashing Nadal and then later beating Federer in the final of a Grand Slam, and we can go from there.

by legendkillar Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:11 pm

consigliare wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
consigliare wrote:
Jahu wrote:Happy for Delpo to be back. Still he will not be able to beat top 4, but a worthy top 5 he is.
Oh dear, the same old traps being continuously fallen into still.

He can beat Murray. Murray shouldn't be included in the same catagory as the other 3.

Explain the H2H and we can go from there.

All but one In those Micky Mouse trinkets Muzza likes collecting?

So then on that basis you'd rate Murray above Federer all time?

Explain Del Boy both thrashing Nadal and then later beating Federer in the final of a Grand Slam, and we can go from there.

What does Delpo's results elsewhere have to do with that statement you made?

On that basis Hewitt is better than Delpo Non?

by Guest Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:13 pm

I disagree that JMDP was unplayable in 2009. Fed should have won that final, he just played with the wrong tactics. Today he used the perfect tactics, mixing it up, moving JMDP around and basically using a lot of variety. At the USO he tried to hit him off the court. Murray employs a similar strategy against JMDP and that's why he is so successful to date.

I'm not sure we'll ever see JMDP consistently challenging for slam honours. He may establish himself as the fifth man (or fourth when Fed retires).

by consigliare Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:16 pm

legendkillar wrote:
consigliare wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
consigliare wrote:
Jahu wrote:Happy for Delpo to be back. Still he will not be able to beat top 4, but a worthy top 5 he is.
Oh dear, the same old traps being continuously fallen into still.

He can beat Murray. Murray shouldn't be included in the same catagory as the other 3.

Explain the H2H and we can go from there.

All but one In those Micky Mouse trinkets Muzza likes collecting?

So then on that basis you'd rate Murray above Federer all time?

Explain Del Boy both thrashing Nadal and then later beating Federer in the final of a Grand Slam, and we can go from there.

What does Delpo's results elsewhere have to do with that statement you made?

On that basis Hewitt is better than Delpo Non?

Everything.

And Yep, well done. Fred Perry is better than Delpo too, is exactly what I'm saying.

by Tenez Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:19 pm

consigliare wrote:So then on that basis you'd rate Murray above Federer all time?

Ho you 'd be surprised. We have some interesting posters here whose faith in Murray can move mountains. Welcome back to the top 10 Del Potro. 810156456

Welcome back to the top 10 Del Potro. 810156456

Again, we might be disappointed by Delpo's today's performance and I agree it was not his best. But again, now that I have seen teh match, Fed played pretty solid rushing JM and moving him around. Will the other 3 could have done it moved Delpo around or would have JM got that extra split second allowing him to dictate those great "counter punchers"?

We don't know. But just based on what we saw in the DC where Nadal played on his best surface, v a crazy home crowd, we can notice it was much tougher for Nadal despite all teh conds favouring him than it was for Fed today on much more neutral grounds.

by legendkillar Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:22 pm

consigliare wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
consigliare wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
consigliare wrote:
Jahu wrote:Happy for Delpo to be back. Still he will not be able to beat top 4, but a worthy top 5 he is.
Oh dear, the same old traps being continuously fallen into still.

He can beat Murray. Murray shouldn't be included in the same catagory as the other 3.

Explain the H2H and we can go from there.

All but one In those Micky Mouse trinkets Muzza likes collecting?

So then on that basis you'd rate Murray above Federer all time?

Explain Del Boy both thrashing Nadal and then later beating Federer in the final of a Grand Slam, and we can go from there.

What does Delpo's results elsewhere have to do with that statement you made?

On that basis Hewitt is better than Delpo Non?

Everything.

And Yep, well done. Fred Perry is better than Delpo too, is exactly what I'm saying.

Ermmmmm not entirely. If I was playing someone, past glories don't have anything to do with it. Del Potro winning a Slam does not make him a better player. He has won sod all at Masters level.

Doesn't bear mentioning with the other 4.

by Tenez Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:25 pm

emancipator wrote:I disagree that JMDP was unplayable in 2009. Fed should have won that final, he just played with the wrong tactics. Today he used the perfect tactics, mixing it up, moving JMDP around and basically using a lot of variety. At the USO he tried to hit him off the court. Murray employs a similar strategy against JMDP and that's why he is so successful to date.

I'm not sure we'll ever see JMDP consistently challenging for slam honours. He may establish himself as the fifth man (or fourth when Fed retires).

Yes. How many times do we need to remind some that Federer was a point away from winning this USO in 3 easy sets, like today?

The difference is however not bad tactic but the stupid supersaturday that tired Federer physically and mentally as he lost a bit of focus when he got those 2 BPs to lead 5/1 in teh second. Then of course Fed being a step slower gave Delpo a huge boost and turned into the "dictator" after having been dictated.

I am still glad Delpo won though ...but we have to put this in perspective.

by banbrotam Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:52 pm

legendkillar wrote:
consigliare wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
consigliare wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
consigliare wrote:
Jahu wrote:Happy for Delpo to be back. Still he will not be able to beat top 4, but a worthy top 5 he is.
Oh dear, the same old traps being continuously fallen into still.

He can beat Murray. Murray shouldn't be included in the same catagory as the other 3.

Explain the H2H and we can go from there.

All but one In those Micky Mouse trinkets Muzza likes collecting?

So then on that basis you'd rate Murray above Federer all time?

Explain Del Boy both thrashing Nadal and then later beating Federer in the final of a Grand Slam, and we can go from there.

You have to understand LK, that for the Murray bashing slams are everything - so obviously Murray is inferior to anyone who has won a Slam. Strangely, for a supposedly intelligent forum, where we think beyond the headline and the stats - looking at a players overall career, heads to heads, all trophies won etc, doesn't seem to matter

So we have the situation where Del Boy is playing worse than before he last played Murray and the Scot is better - but of course the Argentinean is a dead cert to reverse the 1-5 head to head

What does Delpo's results elsewhere have to do with that statement you made?

On that basis Hewitt is better than Delpo Non?

Everything.

And Yep, well done. Fred Perry is better than Delpo too, is exactly what I'm saying.

Ermmmmm not entirely. If I was playing someone, past glories don't have anything to do with it. Del Potro winning a Slam does not make him a better player. He has won sod all at Masters level.

Doesn't bear mentioning with the other 4.

by **laverfan** Tue Jan 24, 2012 8:28 pm

Let me make the excuse for Nadal at USO 2009 being beaten by DelPo.

He had an abdominal muscle tear and had bandages and could not serve.

by Simple_Analyst Tue Jan 24, 2012 9:40 pm

So Federer got tired physically after winning in 3 sets against Djokovic? The comedy these Federer worshippers bring is priceless.
And no, he wasn't 1 point away from winning ib 3 sets. He was actually 2 points away from winning in 4 sets but Del Potro never gave up and stood up to Federer and we all knew it was a matter of time before he mentally crumbles and so it was in the 5th set. Infact Del Potro started slowly and nervously been a first time finalist but once he got into rhythm, even Hail Mary was not going to save Federer. Even if not for the hawk eye challenge drama which got Federer cursing and causing a scene, Del Potro would have won in 4 sets.

by bogbrush Tue Jan 24, 2012 9:57 pm

Well being tired after THOSE sets against Djokovic has somewhat more credibility than JMDP being tired after three quick ones today.
And the point made by Tenez wasn't that he walked on court tired, but that after 4 tough ones gainst Del Potro coming after he close semi was tiring.

But you already knew all that isn't you? Even you're not that thick.

by amritia3ee Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:02 pm

Del Potro wasn't tired today. He was totally 'match fit', don't know what some people are talking about there.

He hasn't returned to his best though, and he might never return to the level he was at. Only time will tell. Today he made too many errors at crucial moments and Fed took full advantage.

by banbrotam Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:11 pm

bogbrush wrote:Well being tired after THOSE sets against Djokovic has somewhat more credibility than JMDP being tired after three quick ones today.
And the point made by Tenez wasn't that he walked on court tired, but that after 4 tough ones gainst Del Potro coming after he close semi was tiring.

But you already knew all that isn't you? Even you're not that thick.

It's fantastic news to realise that tiredness is now an official reason for not winning a Slam final

This of course means that Murray's first effort has a big fat asterix against it and his second, when all during that fortnight he (and Nole) had to play his earlier rounds in the sweltering heat whislt Fed (being the GOAT) got the cooler night matches - has a smaller asterix against it

I must point out that I can't find an excuse under these new 'tired rules' for Murray's third failure Cool

After the event (Fed loss) I wrote an article stating that Fed lost because he lost his rag (2nd set) and then decided to get embroiled in forehand hitting competition - rather than continue playing his sublime stuff of the first set an a half. Amazingly hardly any of the Fed worshippers disagreed and none at the time put it down to tiredness

GOATs have been known to make errors / have a bad day at the Office - there really isn't the need to make daft excuses in protecting his name. He doesn't need it

by Jahu Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:18 pm

by Tenez Tue Jan 24, 2012 11:47 pm

Typical of those who have not played at a decent level of tennis. PLaying 3 tough sets v Djoko can indeed make teh following day tough on the body. Very tough in fact, especially at 28.

A young Nadal got crushed in teh final in Chesnay by Youzhny having played a tough 3 setter v old Moya in the semi. Nadal got beaten badly by Federer on clay in Madrid 09 cause nadal had a tough 3 setter the day before v Djoko. Nadal also got bagelled in Hamburg by Federercause he got a tough 3 setter v Djoko in 07,despite Nadal being pretty young.

Again we have the same posters with little undestanding of the game making the same ignorant comments.

3 sets at this level is tough....for everybody and having 5 hours less rest over 24h is huge...and that's teh disadvantage Fed had over Delpo who played an easy early semi.

Fed was was cruising until he hit the wall.

by Henman Bill Wed Jan 25, 2012 1:19 am

A more match fit Del Potro would have won rather comfortably
______________________

Hahaha! You're funny.

He won the one that really counted though. At one state during the 2009 US open final you could get 20-1 on Del Potro on Betfair but he pulled it out. Federer didn't play as well in 2009 as he did against Djokovic in the previous round, while Del Potro made some good shots. Remember watching the match on a succession of dodgy internet sites, so didn't have the best view. Much better today on Sky.

by Henman Bill Wed Jan 25, 2012 1:24 am

In 2009 Federer must have a disadvantage as younger Del Potro had the shorter match, and played first, but not sure it would have been that significant. As I said I watched the match on imperfect quality streaming but I'm not convinced tiredness decided it. Maybe a bit of raw nerve and guts and just an above average Del Potro vs a below par Federer. In fact, I think Federer himself made a relevant quote today. let me check.

Would be nice if they get rid of super saturday though. here at the aussie they give the players more rest at that stage.

by Henman Bill Wed Jan 25, 2012 1:26 am

Q. Are you able to compare those matches against Del Potro? You had some tough ones and that was so easy. Does that mean you are a little better? Is he a little worse?

ROGER FEDERER: Ah, I don't know. Look, it's just day form as well, exists as well. Sometimes I'm just playing well and he's maybe not, and then all of a sudden, you know, there is a combination of many things happening that you end up winning in straight sets.

by banbrotam Wed Jan 25, 2012 1:39 am

Tenez wrote:Typical of those who have not played at a decent level of tennis. PLaying 3 tough sets v Djoko can indeed make teh following day tough on the body. Very tough in fact, especially at 28.

A young Nadal got crushed in teh final in Chesnay by Youzhny having played a tough 3 setter v old Moya in the semi. Nadal got beaten badly by Federer on clay in Madrid 09 cause nadal had a tough 3 setter the day before v Djoko. Nadal also got bagelled in Hamburg by Federercause he got a tough 3 setter v Djoko in 07,despite Nadal being pretty young.

Again we have the same posters with little undestanding of the game making the same ignorant comments.

3 sets at this level is tough....for everybody and having 5 hours less rest over 24h is huge...and that's teh disadvantage Fed had over Delpo who played an easy early semi.

Fed was was cruising until he hit the wall.

Hilarious. So you admit that Murray was at an enormous disadvantage for the final the previous year. I mean Feds's "disadvantage" is nothing compared to the Murray playing the semi's second over two days against Nadal, with Fed having around 28 hrs more resting time

I await your total dissmisal of my 'sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander' comment with wry amusement

by Tenez Wed Jan 25, 2012 1:46 am

Henman Bill wrote:In 2009 Federer must have a disadvantage as younger Del Potro had the shorter match, and played first, but not sure it would have been that significant. As I said I watched the match on imperfect quality streaming but I'm not convinced tiredness decided it. Maybe a bit of raw nerve and guts and just an above average Del Potro vs a below par Federer. In fact, I think Federer himself made a relevant quote today. let me check.

Would be nice if they get rid of super saturday though. here at the aussie they give the players more rest at that stage.

Fed was playing superbly in that final. While I was watching I thought that's the best I had seen him play ever. double break point for a 5/1 lead? I can't see why nerves of a 15 slam champion would play up at that stage. The problem with Delpo is that if you don't keep him moving then you are in for a good run yourself. Just in the first 2 sets Fed covered lots of ground at a very fast pace to "contain" Delpo. The balance tilted cause Fed started to feel it in the legs, maybe it led to a loss of focus as he thought the second set was in the bag with those BPs.

Anyway, The fact is Fed played superbly at the beginning and was clearly a step slower in te 4th and 5th set.

I cannot see Federer losig this match had he had another day rest as you woudl expect before a slam final.

by Tenez Wed Jan 25, 2012 1:48 am

banbrotam wrote:

Hilarious. So you admit that Murray was at an enormous disadvantage for the final the previous year. I mean Feds's "disadvantage" is nothing compared to the Murray playing the semi's second over two days against Nadal, with Fed having around 28 hrs more resting time

I await your total dissmisal of my 'sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander' comment with wry amusement

What's hilarious is that you are like Don Quixote you see armies and knights when we there are only mills.

Who's talking about Murray's disadvantage the previous year? who cares bar you?

by CaledonianCraig Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:00 am

Tenez wrote:
banbrotam wrote:

Hilarious. So you admit that Murray was at an enormous disadvantage for the final the previous year. I mean Feds's "disadvantage" is nothing compared to the Murray playing the semi's second over two days against Nadal, with Fed having around 28 hrs more resting time

I await your total dissmisal of my 'sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander' comment with wry amusement

What's hilarious is that you are like Don Quixote you see armies and knights when we there are only mills.

Who's talking about Murray's disadvantage the previous year? who cares bar you?

I'd take that as an agreement with you then banbrotam minus the graciousness to admit it.

Anyway to Del Potro, he was match fit as far as I could see but perhaps a bit jaded as he had had the slightly longer and arduous matches going into yesterday's match. That is why I felt Del Potro had to win the first set to stand a chance as fatigue would creep in with him the longer it went. That is taking nothing away from Federer's display though who thoroughly deserved the win. Del Potro had his chances and failed to take them.

by bogbrush Wed Jan 25, 2012 7:55 am

banbrotam wrote:
bogbrush wrote:Well being tired after THOSE sets against Djokovic has somewhat more credibility than JMDP being tired after three quick ones today.
And the point made by Tenez wasn't that he walked on court tired, but that after 4 tough ones gainst Del Potro coming after he close semi was tiring.

But you already knew all that isn't you? Even you're not that thick.

It's fantastic news to realise that tiredness is now an official reason for not winning a Slam final

This of course means that Murray's first effort has a big fat asterix against it and his second, when all during that fortnight he (and Nole) had to play his earlier rounds in the sweltering heat whislt Fed (being the GOAT) got the cooler night matches - has a smaller asterix against it

I must point out that I can't find an excuse under these new 'tired rules' for Murray's third failure

After the event (Fed loss) I wrote an article stating that Fed lost because he lost his rag (2nd set) and then decided to get embroiled in forehand hitting competition - rather than continue playing his sublime stuff of the first set an a half. Amazingly hardly any of the Fed worshippers disagreed and none at the time put it down to tiredness

GOATs have been known to make errors / have a bad day at the Office - there really isn't the need to make daft excuses in protecting his name. He doesn't need it

It's even more fantastic to watch clutching at straws d tilting at windmills.

I didn't comment on the rights or wrongs, I simply explained to Simplistic that it was reasonable to say Federer would be tired after that match with Djokovic, then a few sets of the final. He had said that wasn't feasible (yet JMDP was one in after yesterday's short match).

What is it with some Murray fans? The desperation to rush to the guys protection when were not evem talking about him makes me wonder whether Judy Murray is on here, with multiple accounts.

by CaledonianCraig Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:03 am

And what is it with Fed fans for being so avertly hostile to other posters who are not akin to kissing the backside of Federer? It definitely happens and is why this place is now predominantly a Federer fan's only club.

As for fatigue issues - in my opinion it never remotely played a part in that US Open Final. Federer is the GOAT but even GOAT's do get beaten and his levels dipped in that match partially due to the pressure applied by Del Potro who hung in there so well. Same goes for Murray and his losses in finals. And lets just leave it at that.

by spuranik Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:08 am

bogbrush wrote:It's even more fantastic to watch clutching at straws d tilting at windmills.

I didn't comment on the rights or wrongs, I simply explained to Simplistic that it was reasonable to say Federer would be tired after that match with Djokovic, then a few sets of the final. He had said that wasn't feasible (yet JMDP was one in after yesterday's short match).

What is it with some Murray fans? The desperation to rush to the guys protection when were not evem talking about him makes me wonder whether Judy Murray is on here, with multiple accounts.

Mac,

Its not actually a defense of Murray... Well it is on the face but it is more of a thinly veiled attack on Federer.

Banbro is allergic to everything Fed... This started happening ever since Federer made a comment regarding Andy that he needs to be more aggressive. Since that day Banbro brings in Federer in every debate possible. Sad really...

by bogbrush Wed Jan 25, 2012 8:09 am

There's no surprise in finding a lot of tennis fans who admire Federer over others. It's because he plays breathtaking tennis, not because we chase others off forums.

by Sponsored content