Will tomorrow mark the end of Fedal dominance at all slams if Djokovic wins?

A lot has been discussed about how much is riding on the outcome personally for Djokovic and Nadal tomorrow. A key aspect which hasn't been commented on (as far as I seen) is that should Nadal fail to retain his RG title, then for the first time Fedal (Federer and Nadal) will hold none of the current grand slams for the first time since June 2003. Continuous Fedal dominance @ Wimbledon was ended last year which was the joint longest (2003-2010) whereas the French has been from 2005 so tomorrow could mark the shift away from Federer and Nadal if Djokovic wins.

Could tomorrow mark the end of Fedal dominance? I feel it will if Nadal loses. Certainly I feel he will win another slam @ RG, however dominating these slams once they been lost is difficult. Fed proves the point aptly, lost Wimbledon in 2008, regained it once more in '09 but hasn't done so since. Aussie Open he lost in 2008 and the following year he lost to Nadal but then recaptured in 2010 but hasn't won it again. USO he lost in 09' and despite being close to getting to the final twice, has never regained it. Nadal lost RG in 2009 and he has won it again twice however, should he lose it tomorrow, will it be so easy to regain? History with Federer and Sampras suggests not. Of course Nadal has age on his side (unlike Fed in those situations). I realise Nadal is 26, however he will be 27 when he competes again for RG and then 28 in 2014 and on a surface like clay you can only imagine the surface being more unkind than on other surfaces. Does this perhaps underline how crucial it is for Nadal to hold onto his clay citadel from Djokovic's siege tomorrow?

Tomorrow will be historic in many ways regardless of who wins, however the Fedal duopoly that has dominated tennis may lose it's final bastion tomorrow and that in itself could be historic. Federer and Nadal may win slams again (should Nadal lose) but will they be a force? History doesn't seem to suggest so (barring injury) so Nadal has real impetus tomorrow.

Good point, but I think "Fedal" ended a while back.

Nadal will win tomorrow I believe, but the end is coming. Eventually some young player has to step up. The game needs it, desperately.

bogbrush wrote:Good point, but I think "Fedal" ended a while back.

Nadal will win tomorrow I believe, but the end is coming. Eventually some young player has to step up. The game needs it, desperately.

Young player to step up -> Andy Murray perhaps?

bogbrush wrote:Good point, but I think "Fedal" ended a while back.

Nadal will win tomorrow I believe, but the end is coming. Eventually some young player has to step up. The game needs it, desperately.

I agree they ended at most slams a while ago for Fedal, although not at RG, which is sort of what I mean. Will tomorrow mark the end at all of them? It does seem rather difficult that once your dominance ends on your favourite surface, that you manage to still win slams on your weaker surfaces.

I'm not sure it ended a while ago as such, it was only last year at Wimbledon, the main slam Federer and Nadal have owned.

I'm not convinced Nadal will win as easier as his scoreline in his matches @ RG suggests. It will be a tough fight and naturally, Nadal has a lot resting on winning tomorrow, unlike Djokovic who already holds 3/4 slams.

Yes, I think Fedal ended a while back. Fed is going to have a hard time holding up his end as he is now in his early thirties. People keep talking about a young player stepping up. That young player has already stepped up and his name is Novak.

The Fedal dominance ended a while beck in the days of yore when the billabong sang and the mome raths outgrabed.

lol socal, 25 is not young, that's usually considered your peak years.

Please, enough with your Djokovic lovefest, I barely see any weakness acknowledged by you in Djokovic and all players have them, which does make some of your posts rather sycophantic. Please, enough is enough!

I think the point is being missed in the question I posed....will dominance be ended at all slams.

I've already agreed it ended at most slams. That's not what the question is posing, it's asking if it will be over at all of them, including the French which hasn't been won by another without the name Nadal or Federer since 2004. So please guys, read the question a bit more carefully....

socal1976 wrote:Yes, I think Fedal ended a while back. Fed is going to have a hard time holding up his end as he is now in his early thirties. People keep talking about a young player stepping up. That young player has already stepped up and his name is Novak.

How is he young? Young is a 19 year old Federer usurping the Wimbleon great, or a 17 year old Becker winning Wimbledon, or a teenaged Wilander, Chang or Nadal winning Roland Garros.

Djokovic is part of the establishment, someone who stood at the door for a number of years waiting for his predecessor to age to the point where he could get in.

Edit: gboycott - Murrays not young either. Think Raonic or younger.

luciusmann wrote:I think the point is being missed in the question I posed....will dominance be ended at all slams.

I've already agreed it ended at most slams. That's not what the question is posing, it's asking if it will be over at all of them, including the French which hasn't been won by another without the name Nadal or Federer since 2004. So please guys, read the question a bit more carefully....

Since I think Nadal will win, it has to be a 'no'.

bogbrush wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Yes, I think Fedal ended a while back. Fed is going to have a hard time holding up his end as he is now in his early thirties. People keep talking about a young player stepping up. That young player has already stepped up and his name is Novak.

How is he young? Young is a 19 year old Federer usurping the Wimbleon great, or a 17 year old Becker winning Wimbledon, or a teenaged Wilander, Chang or Nadal winning Roland Garros.

Djokovic is part of the establishment, someone who stood at the door for a number of years waiting for his predecessor to age to the point where he could get in.

Edit: gboycott - Murrays not young either. Think Raonic or younger.

Did he wait around for Nadal to age, looks to me like he took the crown from nadal at what should be his physical peak. And by the way Novak won his first slam at 19 years old and at age 18 beat the world 1,2, and 3 player in the world on successive days. No shortage of great performances for teenage Djokovic. He might be excused of being dominated by federer when fed was at his physical peak and Novak was a teenager. In fact, I think Novak was either the same age or younger than fed when he won his first slam. As usual BB most of your posts are nonsense but I am interested in reading them because they accurately lay out the topography of your warped view of tennis.

socal1976 wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Yes, I think Fedal ended a while back. Fed is going to have a hard time holding up his end as he is now in his early thirties. People keep talking about a young player stepping up. That young player has already stepped up and his name is Novak.

How is he young? Young is a 19 year old Federer usurping the Wimbleon great, or a 17 year old Becker winning Wimbledon, or a teenaged Wilander, Chang or Nadal winning Roland Garros.

Djokovic is part of the establishment, someone who stood at the door for a number of years waiting for his predecessor to age to the point where he could get in.

Edit: gboycott - Murrays not young either. Think Raonic or younger.

Did he wait around for Nadal to age, looks to me like he took the crown from nadal at what should be his physical peak. And by the way Novak won his first slam at 19 years old and at age 18 beat the world 1,2, and 3 player in the world on successive days. No shortage of great performances for teenage Djokovic. He might be excused of being dominated by federer when fed was at his physical peak and Novak was a teenager. In fact, I think Novak was either the same age or younger than fed when he won his first slam. As usual BB most of your posts are nonsense but I am interested in reading them because they accurately lay out the topography of your warped view of tennis.

Yes, he sneaked past a mono-stricken Federer in 2008, then............. we waited a long time.

Certainly we waiting long after it became possible to refer to Djokovic as 'young' in this sport.

Did Fed have mono in the summer of 07 when Novak beat his ass, Nadal's, and then #3 roddick on successive days? Which teen sensation now has done that? Like I said your posts and logic are devoid of reason and blinded by your worship of his highness Roger. Roger is great no doubt. Despite your attempts to throw cold water continually for years on Novak's accomplishments stand on their own. And despite your dislike of nationalism and his cheering he will long be remember in this game and will accomplish much more. But your portrayal of him just waiting around for his success is a bit one sided and divorced from his track record and from the fact that he crushed a 25 year old Nadal who you are fan of all of sudden.

The past two and a half years (last ten slams)
Player ......... ............. number of slam finals
Roger Federer ............ two
Andy Murray .............. two
Novak Djokovic .......... six
Rafael Nadal .............. eight

Robin Soderling .......... one
Tomas Berdych .......... one

Nadal is only a year older than Djoko.

Let me put this differently: Djoko is only a year younger than Nadal.

Yes.

Hopefully Fedal retire at the end of this year.

They need to realize they are over. They are obsolete and a non factor in the Nole era. Nole looks poised to win all the slams in 2012.

The question is if Djokovic beats Nadal tomorrow both Nadal and Federer will win no more slams? Mmmm... so who will win them all Djokovic? Based on this one match both Nadal and Federer will become easy pickings for the rest of the ATP? Ha ha! I think I will have to answer no!

hawkeye wrote:The question is if Djokovic beats Nadal tomorrow both Nadal and Federer will win no more slams? Mmmm... so who will win them all Djokovic? Based on this one match both Nadal and Federer will become easy pickings for the rest of the ATP? Ha ha! I think I will have to answer no!

Well, there is the indian astrologer that predicted Nole will win more than 15 slams. So, yes, Nole will win them all.

Hawkeye it is about Fedal's dominance at slams being over. If you mean the combination of the two well Fed has been down in the last two years in terms of winning and reaching finals of slams. And Nadal has lost 3 in a row to Novak. So it is a pertinent question when it phrased around the dominance of fedal at slams.

Looks like Nole will become the GOAT.

https://www.606v2.com/t29791-indian-astrologer-predicts-nole-will-win-more-than-15-slams

Good grief! Not this spammed rubbish again. I'm off...

If Fed wins Wimbledon next month, that will be his 17th major. He will also tie with Sampras for the most Wimbys. If he can do it, that will be a good time to retire, or maybe after US Open.

Leff wrote:If Fed wins Wimbledon next month, that will be his 17th major. He will also tie with Sampras for the most Wimbys. If he can do it, that will be a good time to retire, or maybe after US Open.

Fed has not made it past the qf of Wimbledon in the last 2 years! Wimbledon is his worst slam now. Wake up.

Fed is done winning slams.

The past two and a half years (last ten slams)
Player ......... ............. number of slam finals
Roger Federer ............ two
Andy Murray .............. two
Novak Djokovic .......... six
Rafael Nadal .............. eight

Robin Soderling .......... one
Tomas Berdych .......... one


Now that is interesting. A lot of people have been saying its a top 3 not a top 4, but based on the last ten slams its a top 2, then another 2, then the rest. That's only the present of course, historically Fedal are in a league of their own followed by Novak and then the rest.

Anyway, is it the end if the Fedal? As a twosome yes. But Rafa will win many more I'm sure. Roger may nick another but the dominance is over. The two finalists are the new Fedal, and unless Murray or someone else (unlikely) steps up it looks that way for the foreseeable.

Where the bloody hell is the next generation? Raonic looks promising, but that's it!

jersey wrote: Fed has not made it past the qf of Wimbledon in the last 2 years! Wimbledon is his worst slam now. Wake up.
Fed is done winning slams.

Sampras won the US Open in 1996, could not win the title between 1997 and 2001, and managed to win again in 2002. There was 5-year gap there. I believe Fed can (albeit difficult) still win Wimbledon again, notwithstanding his QF losses in 2010 and 2011.

Leff wrote:

jersey wrote: Fed has not made it past the qf of Wimbledon in the last 2 years! Wimbledon is his worst slam now. Wake up.
Fed is done winning slams.

Sampras won the US Open in 1996, could not win the title between 1997 and 2001, and managed to win again in 2002. There was 5-year gap there. I believe Fed can (albeit difficult) still win Wimbledon again, notwithstanding his QF losses in 2010 and 2011.

Sampras' older years were in a clown era with the likes of Johansson, Costa fluking slam wins 10 years ago. Now we have Nole and Nadull. Really hard for Olderer to pull a Sampras in this really tough era. Sampras at 31 did not have to deal with all time greats in their mid twenties like Nole and Nadull.

No chance for Olderer. We are not in 2002 anymore.

Nole and Nadull are super consistant and reach all the slam finals these days.

Nope. No chance for Olderer.

All he needs to win W or US is a fit body and a decent draw. After that, why not?

bogbrush wrote:All he needs to win W or US is a fit body and a decent draw. After that, why not?

And Nole and Nadull to be abducted by aliens.

Get real.

Sampras was seeded #17 when he won the US Open in 2002.

Federer is still among the top three players. I understand that the competition is tougher now, but it is not an impossible task.

Leff wrote:Sampras was seeded #17 when he won the US Open in 2002.

Federer is still among the top three players. I understand that the competition is tougher now, but it is not an impossible task.

Only if Nole and Nadull are abducted by aliens.

At Wimbledon Olderer has to avoid ballbashers like Berdych and Tsonga. He can't even reach SF there anymore.

No chance.

jersey wrote:

Leff wrote:If Fed wins Wimbledon next month, that will be his 17th major. He will also tie with Sampras for the most Wimbys. If he can do it, that will be a good time to retire, or maybe after US Open.

Fed has not made it past the qf of Wimbledon in the last 2 years! Wimbledon is his worst slam now. Wake up.

Fed is done winning slams.

Ready to eat your words?

I think this article by Lucius may have been a clever ploy.
After writing this Nadal wins FO and Federer wins Wimby.

It Must Be Love wrote:I think this article by Lucius may have been a clever ploy.
After writing this Nadal wins FO and Federer wins Wimby.

Indeed, couldn't be happier!

I'm very sorry for Murray, it meant so much to him, the turning point was that second set which Fed took out of nowhere. I really thought Fed was going to lose the match until the end of the second set!