John Lloyd on AO 2013 Final

You get comments like this when you are blinded by patriotism and recent memory obliterates history.

John Lloyd on the AO 2013 final, "[Roger] Federer moved the bar, [Rafael] Nadal came in and now Djokovic has really raised the bar."

What are you smoking John?

Pete Sampras first set the bar of achievement , Federer raised it, Nadal moved it by his consistency.

Djokovic? He is nowhere near the bar.

So does this mean, that during 2011 and last year when all the Fed fans said he was playing his best stuff but stillstruggled to get to No.1, because of Nole they were fibbing?

I ask, because your last line is the usual "he's not worthy" nonsense

It's sad to see that the dominance of Fed/Nadal is over. That is for fans of these two, pseudo fans who think that Wimbledon is the most important Slam, pseduo fans who were surprised that Wawrinka is a decent player and of course those who wet their knickers

For consistent 30+ year fans, it's merely a slight regret. I was more cut up when it became clear that Mac no longer had it in him to win a Slam or when Agassi retired

I know the world has now stopped revolving, simply becase Roger is now clearly the 3rd best player on Hard Courts - but let's at least have the grace to give Novak his due

I was guilty of similar back-biting when Lendl took over from Mac, but I was an immature kid then

Excellent post banbro, we have seen the same thing over and over again. When you are the back to back year end #1 guess what you aren't close to the bar you are the bar. The top guys are planning and training to beat you and take your spot, so the idea that Djokovic is nowhere near the bar is ridiculous he is the lead dog at this moment and of course as we saw in those first two sets the margin between him and a ascendant murray is very thin. In 2011 Djokovic started the year 66-2 till injury hobbled him for the indoor campaign, to complete an 80 match season with less than double digit losses is a massive accomplishment. It is interestng how in 2011 a lot of federer fans were Djoko fans as well because was beating Nadal 7 times in row. Now that Nadal has been injured and Novak is the number 1 all of sudden Novak is terrible for the game and has become the focal point for a lot of this bizarre analysis.

It's the nature of the game that the next generation improve on the previous generation. In 20 years time the bar will be higher than Fed, Rafa, Djoko, whoever.
Whether the Djoko of now (or 2011) is better than the Fed of 2004 (or 2006) is a moot point, in a way.

Please list the Federer fans who thought he was at his best last year, bantroban.

I give the current guys their due now, I don't think Federer was at his best at 29/30/31.

banbro

As socal says good post ( from a Murray fan!)

Really disappointed re some of the posts from Sunday, and also last years USO.

This is a fairly small tennis forum and compared to the number of spectators who seemed to enjoy both Finals let alone the big world we shouldn't really take too much notice of them!

As has been said many times if don't like their style of tennis or the player you are under no obligation to watch, millions of others will, so you wouldn't be missed lol

bogbrush wrote:Please list the Federer fans who thought he was at his best last year, bantroban.


I give the current guys their due now, I don't think Federer was at his best at 29/30/31.

You were not one of them. But some did say "he actually playing better than ever" - this followed the Wimbledon win. I paraphrase of course, but there were those who said this on these boards

banbrotam wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Please list the Federer fans who thought he was at his best last year, bantroban.


I give the current guys their due now, I don't think Federer was at his best at 29/30/31.

You were not one of them. But some did say "he actually playing better than ever" - this followed the Wimbledon win. I paraphrase of course, but there were those who said this on these boards

Not me.

Not emancipator.

None that I can think of. Anyone saying that hadn't watched him closely over the last 10 years.

sportslover wrote:banbro

As socal says good post ( from a Murray fan!)

Really disappointed re some of the posts from Sunday, and also last years USO.

This is a fairly small tennis forum and compared to the number of spectators who seemed to enjoy both Finals let alone the big world we shouldn't really take too much notice of them!

As has been said many times if don't like their style of tennis or the player you are under no obligation to watch, millions of others will, so you wouldn't be missed lol

Here, here excellent post SL. I came in here to celebrate a slam final and you would have thought it was wake in here with all the mourning in regards to the state of the game, how boring everything is, how we need drastic changes. There is a changing of the guard and you must ask yourself are you a tennis fan, or just a roger or rafa fan. And there is nothing wrong with being just a fan federer. I know a lot people who aren't football fans they just love messi or love one club in particular. I am a big Djoko fan but like to watch a lot of other players and any good hard fought matchup. I mean the tone of people on sunday was to my thinking a bit mind boggling, you would have thought their dog died or something.

I think the most amazing thing was all the fuss over volleys. How many there were is irrelevant as such is the court speeds it is not condusive to serve/volleying. Stepanek tried adopting serve/volley tactics against Djokovic and lost in straight sets in the Australian Open. If you give the guys faster courts you will see more volleying and Djokovic and Murray are the most adaptible players in the game today and if need be I am certain they could adopt that type of game.

The position of many was that they found the match unsatisfying as fans of tennis.
I put a link up the other day of a random Edberg / Henman match. That's what I'd prefer to watch, and Federer wasn't in it.

Socal

If anyone should have been disappointed it would be the Murray fans but judging from their responses I haven't seen anything negative from any, there is always the next time which sadly that may not be the case for some.

Absolutely Craig, both guys are completely different animals than what they were a few years. Being coachable, adapatable and able to learn and execute different techniques is really what has allowed Andy and Novak to separate themselves from the rest of the also rans on the tour who have not been able to adapt or develop. I mean the opinions that we see on this site and a few other sites is simply not reflected by the average tennis fan or the average sports fan. The game is financially healthy and growing again, which has not always been the case in recent memory.

Yes, SL, the murray fans were very gracious as Andy was. This shows the big divide out there, many of those who talk about the need for drastic changes and how boring the game is just happen to be Roger fans, I think this isn't a coincidence. This conditions are too slow argument really started to pick up steam, I mean there was some of it before, but it really picked up steam after Nadal beat federer at wimbeldon. Then it just reached fever pitched levels on sites with a lot of federer supporters, we heard terms like green clay all of sudden become common place.

I'm pretty much numbed by the last 24 hours to the negativity of some toward Novak now but this is an odd comment.

coolpixel wrote:Pete Sampras first set the bar of achievement , Federer raised it, Nadal moved it by his consistency.

Nadal moved it by consistency? In the space of three names, the point has mutated from achievement to consistency! I know posts can sometimes wander but in the space one sentence?

There were very few who called for drastic changes. I seem to recall lydian prosposing changes that he considered to be relatively small, but which socal considered would have more far-reaching effects.
But regardless of who was correct, lydian's intent was not to make drastic changes.
Most posters, including most Fed fans, were just saying things very similar to what Djoko and Murray were saying.
I don't really recall anyone saying they wanted all courts speeded up, just less homogenization - the convergence of the FO and Wimby, as compared to previous decades (i.e. not a total convergence), being a case in point.

How did Nadal move it be consistency?

His career has been ripped apart by injures, so that can't be the case.
He moved it by beating the players in his path- in slams he has a positive H2h against all players he has played more than 1 time.

Socal I respect your support of the Djok but surely it is obvious the game is calling out for a little more variety - I believe Novak himself agreed to reduce homogenization.

It wouldn't be a return to the 90s - racket technology is too advanced, surfaces like Cinci, Dubai and Queens are few and far between.

Julius I am not talking about specifics I am talking more about a general negative outlook that belies what we are actually seeing. I get that a lot of people miss S and V and miss the tennis of their youth. I don't miss it I like the modern game and have always enjoyed baseline play. But I have no problem in some modest changes in and around the edges more to the balls and courts than to technology, and I mean incremental type of changes. I actually have little or no fear that Novak can play and succeed even in those conditions. But I just don't see the crisis state that other posters seem to think the game exists in. Yes, Roger is getting old and when he leaves the game will take a bit of hit, you can't replace a federer. But I think people do enjoy the gladitorial aspect of it as Henman Bill I believed called it. I know I like to see these tense and tough 5 set matches, I mean it isn't like these guys are doing it every single match. But Djokovic's victory was pretty much treated with mourning and anger, while Djokovic's victories over Nadal in early 2011 were treated with almost euphoria by fed fans.

theslosty wrote:Socal I respect your support of the Djok but surely it is obvious the game is calling out for a little more variety - I believe Novak himself agreed to reduce homogenization.

It wouldn't be a return to the 90s - racket technology is too advanced, surfaces like Cinci, Dubai and Queens are few and far between.

I disagree, if you go even a little too far you will see tennis way worse than the 90s. The players on average are taller, more built and more advanced technically than the 90s. Take Dubai by far one of the most boring tournaments last year I have ever witnessed. There wasn't a single competitive match in any of the later rounds of the tournament, Cincy is another snoozer of a tournament partially because of the attrocious humidity of that part of the country in August. Another fast court tournament that is usually duller than crap is paris. With fast court tournaments you get a lot of quick points and lot of close sets but very few close matches. The guy who hits bigger usually wins 7-6 6-4 and that is the end of it. Take a look at wimbeldon in the late 90s, if Pete broke his opponent in the first service game of the set and went up 1-0 you were better off just turning the channel and coming back to watch the second set. I don't know maybe it is a matter of preference but I find nothing as dull as a quick succession of 40-0 and 40-15 service games.

But as i said if you want to modestly increase the speed of courts or balls at a few tournaments go ahead, lets see if the fans like it, my gut instinct is they won't. Ask yourself how often do fans step up and applauded a two shot rally, but you routinely see these athletic rallies of 20-30 shots getting standing ovations from the people.

I can understand the idea of tennis as a business and money-making, bums on seats industry - and hence the idea of producing tennis primarily for the masses to cheer.
But even if the fans who prefer other styles of tennis are in the minority, it would be nice if there were conditions and tournaments to cater for them.
From what I saw of Dubai, for example, the fans there loved it.

I am a Federer fan and I think 2009-2012 Federer is about the same level as 2004-2007 Federer. If we include non-Federer fans in the debate, then it's clear that there is very divided opinion on this.

Arch Federer fan Tenez (and former Bogbrush ally?) also did a thread on this in 2011, and argued heavily in favour of 2011 Federer being better.
https://www.606v2.com/t14760p500-was-federer-better-in-2006-poll-added
Some of you will remember this thread even now. There are a ton of for and against argument on this thread.

Comments saying Federer 2006 was better (12)
"Chadfazzer commented that "I've gotta say that I disagree with people saying that any aspect of Federer's game now is better than it was 5 years ago ".
Emancipator jumps in "Tenez, Are you and Wilander the same person by any chance? You two must be the only two people in the world who think Fed is a better player than he used to be in his heyday",
Socal "Fed was better in 2006. But not by that much"
Bogbrush "He's half the player"
Jarvik "if Fed now played Fed of five years ago the younger man would win comfortably"
Barrystar "I can't believe that it's higher overall now than it was in 2006. "
Lags 72 "it is simply not feasible that Federer could be expected to perform in 2011 at a higher standard and/or level of consistency than he did in 2006"
Mad for Chelsea "I'd still say he's less consistent than he was in 06 though, he loses far more matches now to players he would have beaten back then"
Caledonian Craig "The fact remains in any case that his two catastrophes (by his standards) this season came at Wimbledon (a surface he used to own) where he lost a match against Tsonga after leading 2-0 and similarly at the US Open (hard court) when he had match points. Why is that the case if he is better now than in 2006?"
Fedex the Best "Tenez, if you are really interested in knowing our views, take a poll and I am sure most will click on ‘strongly disagree’."
Kernet "Roger is still very, very good, but not the same player as he was in 2003-2007."
Reckoner "Personally, I'm of the opinion that Federer has not been the same player since 2008 and I haven't seen much in the way of results or play to change that view. "

Comments saying Federer 2011 was better (8)
"Was Federer better in 2006...I don't think so". Tenez
"I think his BH is pretty similar now to what it was in 2006. His FH looks a lot stronger now though." Liam Main
Nole is the Best commented that "his tennis actually better now".
Break in the 5th "I was already persuaded that Fed's best was better than before but I guess today confirmed it" (changed mind during article, but this was final opinion)
Manochandra "Hats off to you Tenez. I agree with most of what you say."
Lydian "I'm of the opinion the years Federer, particularly over the past few months, is a better all round player than previous years"
Spdocoffe "Federer has never been better."
Roger Federer ""I think as time goes by, as much as you practice, actually the matches make you a better player," explained Federer" (he was quoted on the thread (via link) so I am counting it!

Comments saying that they were about the same (3)
Raiders of the Lost Ark "he doesn't play much different"
Sir Fred Perry "You could argue that he IS playing as well as four or five years ago and that the only reason he's fourth and not first is that the others have improved."
ME! "Tenez talks a huge amount of sense for me. The Federer decline has been exaggerated for some time now and it wouldn't be far from the truth to call it a myth". That was my first ever post, by the way!

So it's clear that there was very divided opinion. Some comments were made following Federer's US Open loss to Djokovic. Some comments were made after a strong finish to the year including the WTF - as the thread ran for 2-3 months. However it was also made at a time when he had gone almost 2 years without a slam, certainly well before he got back Wimbledon and #1!

Yes, it was a long time ago, but since then we haven't seen a better thread and not much has changed. Many have those posters have left leaving Federer fans Bogbrush and Emancipator to continually push the argument that Federer had declined over and over again without adding much new to that thread. But presumably you wouldn't seek to disguise the fact that people are actually very divided on this question, it's just that you two post the most on the subject.

Even Bogrush on that thread argues that, taking physical conditioning out of the equation 2011 Federer is "of course" better; and that peak 2011 Federer is better than peak 2006 Federer, (but Federer's 2011 worse is much worse than 2006 worse).

Actually there is a little bit of evidence, with Federer finally giving up his WTF crown on his last "owned" surface and big tournament and then a sub-par performance against Murray at the AO, that the real decline is just now starting. But we will see. Insufficient evidence to be sure.

Wow, Henman Bill this is obviously a good discussion maybe you should make it a separate thread of its own. I think in some respects in terms of the consistency of his backhand and his ability to come over the ball he is better. But I do believe from watching his footwork on particularly the inside out forehand he is not as good. But at the same time I think people over estimate his physical decline, the fitness and speed of a man 32 and a man lets say 27 is not that much different. I mean just six months ago the man was putting bagels on Djoko ( which he has never done before) and winning almost everything he possibly could win during the summer.

I think one factor that people don't talk about a great deal is that I honestly think Federer isn't as hungry or focused anymore. How could he be with all the money he has made all the trophies he has won and with two young kids at home. With all things he has on his plate and all he has accomplished I think a lot of it comes down more to mental fatigue and weariness than to physical issues. I mean look at the footwork issues with his forehand it isn't a question of speed it is a question of desire and focus to do the baby steps around the ball right and do it all the time. That kind of footwork is just tedious its not like easy balls are finding there way through his defense, he is getting to the ball in time he just isn't consistently doing the hardwork of getting his body adjusted t the ball.

I had a front row seat to see him in November, and it struck me that is looking old. His legs look worn. I can just imagine the frustrations if he goes into really serious decline. I think he would struggle to acccept his declining play and can you imagine him battling it out with the likes of Berdych and Ferrer for quarter final wins to get the #4 or #5 ranking. Ugh, it is not right. I wonder whether a certain number of defeats in a row against Murray or Djokovic and a certain length of time without another slam and he might just start to think about retirement in a year or two. But.. he has to get worse for that to happen. At the moment he is still good enough to beat Murray, a fit Nadal and Djokovic at least 1 in 3, Tsonga, Berdych, Del Potro at least 2 out of 3, and most other players probably at least 9 out of 10.

That is a very fair assessment, I think physical degradation is part of it and the other part of it is mental fatigue or complacency that eventually sets in for someone asked to go through the gruelling travel and competition that the modern champion has to. But I basically agree with your assessment on his chances against other top players.

I don't think John has been on the #

Djokovic at this moment in time physically is a mile in front of the field. Seriously someone that got as beat up as he did in his match with Wawrinka and still look fresh as a daisy come the final is beyond the logic of biology!

I don't think it is such a long shot for him not to win another 6-7 slams given his form at this moment in time.

John has a point. Who can live with Novak at the moment.

socal1976 wrote:That is a very fair assessment, I think physical degradation is part of it and the other part of it is mental fatigue or complacency that eventually sets in for someone asked to go through the gruelling travel and competition that the modern champion has to. But I basically agree with your assessment on his chances against other top players.

"It aint the years pal*, it's the mileage."

* better to say 'pal', than 'honey'!