Pivotal / Lucky moments that swung Slams

I was thinking of what moments have driven Slams either way, so here's a list of what comes to mind. I've put ones that gained a Slam as well as those that lost them, and since only 4 people ever win these things nowadays (apols, JMDP) it's just on those four.

Federer

Gains:
1. Andy Roddicks awful high backhand volley miss that would have put him two sets up, most probably won Federer the 2009 title. He didn't get his first break until almost midday Monday so it's hard to argue he'd have won from two down.
2. In the 2009 French Open Roger was the new favourite after Rafas defeat. Surely Tommy Haas couldn't stop him? But at two sets down and serving at 3-4 Federer faced 30-40. His serve was returned deep and he stepped wide and planted a forehand onto the side line. Haas would have most likely served the match out and Roger wouldn't have his career Slam. Phew!
3. Hard to call a 6-2 set tight, but twice Federer faced break points early in the 5th set of his Wimbedon final with Nadal in 2007. In the second such game he was pulled very wide and hit a miraculous recovery, but Nadal had a makable drive down the line. It went wide, Federer recovered and ran away with it.
4. Yet again at Wimbledon! Federer had lost the 1st set in 2012 to Andy Murray and was on the receiving end in most of the 2nd. He'd scraped to 6-5 having staved off break points (pivotal moments themselves?) but at 30-0 a tie break looked certain. Suddenly good play by Federer and errors by Murray set up 30-40; a great rally followed culminating in a wonderful wickedly sliced backhand volley drop shot that even the speedy Murray couldn't reach. The match was suddenly even and though much remained to be done the momentum stayed with Federer.

Losses:
1. in 2008 at Wimbledon they played on into the gloom and against protests from Federer who claimed he was having difficulty seeing clearly. Maybe he had a point as he dropped serve soon after, with an easy forehand driven long. Ironic to think that just two years later the roof would have been closed after the 4th set and given common perception of their indoor prowess Federer would probably have stolen it. Then again, he did only escape to the 5th with a crazy backhand on mp down that might otherwise have made this list.

Nadal

Gains:
1. The 2008 Wimbledon above.
2. In the 2013 French Open Rafa was returning from injury and carrying all before him on clay.... except he'd been beaten up badly in his favoured Monte Carlo by Djokovic. Their semi-final meeting went the (long) distance of course, but Djokovic was poised to win at 4-2, deuce in the final set. An easy putaway at the net beckoned. He put it away all right.... then inexplicably hit the net! I firmly believe that changed the match, and it was something Rafa had no control over, except to point it out.

Losses:
1. In the 2012 Australian Open Rafa had Novak on the ropes after they'd set about breaking every record for longest this or that in Slam finals. finally, he had his man cold. An easy backhand down the line awaited and he'd be in the closing straight........ but he pushed it wide!!!!!
2. The 2007 Wimbedon final described above. It's said he cried in the dressing room after the match, no doubt that break point was a principal cause.

Djokovic:

Gains:
1. In 2011 in the USO semi v Federer he was match point down. A desperate forehand - nicknamed 'The Slap' by tennis fans - saved the day. It was followed by a Federer forehand into the net on the 2nd match point - an aggressive shot to be fair -  but then a df for the break. All brought about by that one moment? Possibly. In nine parallel realities it flew wide, in this one he won the title. I have not included this as a lost title event to Federer as a very tough final still awaited.
2. The 2012 AO, as described above.
3. In 2013 Novak faced Murray in a repeat of the previous Slam. Andy was a set to the good but knew after his tough 5-setter with Federer he couldn't afford this to go long. He won the first set and stood 2-2 in the 2nd set tie break. Just as he was about to send his crucial secondserve down......... a feather descended and he waited for it to clear! It was as if the Gods themselves had decided to intervene for Novak. A double-fault followed and a critical moment had passed.

Losses:
1. The 2013 French, described above.
2. The US 2012, described below.

Murray

Gains:
1. In 2012 Andy Murray had come closest to breaking his Slam duck at Wimbedon but another chance beckoned at the US. In windy conditions some have said helped him he took a two sets lead. Surely he'd win now? But Djokovic came back, and by the 4th set Murray looked weary and was telling his box his legs were weak. The momentum was with Djokovic as they entered the 5th. One last stand for Andy? He engineered a break point in the first game and a backhand helpfully clipped the net. The tightly sprung US net didn't let it drop dead, but Djokovic was discomforted enough to net his shot. The momentum turned and Murray ran away from a dispirited Djokovic. Without that clip who knows?

Losses:
1. Could he have turned it around in 2008 at the USO, when Federers long forehand at bp down in the 2nd set was called in and Murray played on? Maybe. Probably not, but nonetheless he may then have squared the match and gone on against Federer in his Annus horribilis. I'm not putting this in Feds 'Gains' column as its a touch speculative.
2. Wimbledon 2012, described above.
3. Australian Open 2013, described above. "The Feather from Belgrade"


Anyway, I'm sure there'll be disagreement. Any ones to add?

Nice article, very good choices.

Do not know if I would quite add them to your list because they were not really as "lucky" as the ones you have, but I would give honorable mention to two more for Fed (one each way):

2005 AO against Safin.  Fed was oh so close to a victory - including a match point on his own serve in the 4th set TB.  But agree this might not be quite worthy of your list because the match point was lost fair and square, and because Hewitt was waiting in the final, and even though Fed had by then turned around their H2H match up, it was not quite a given at that time that Fed would have beaten him.

2007 Wimbledon against Rafa.  With the drama and heroics of 2008 overshadowing this one, it is easily forgotten how close it really was.  For most of the match, Nadal actually looked more likely to win.  By early in the fifth set, Roger was barely hanging in, and, if I remember correctly, he had to come back twice from 15-40 before he finally broke Rafa.  If Rafa had managed to break on one of those two occasions, it would arguably have been very difficult for Roger to come back.

PS.  This is nitpicky but I think Rafa sent his DTL BH in the 2012AO final wide rather than netting it.

Excellent article.

There is a postscript to The Shot though (which, in what I'm sure can only be a typo, you've called 'The Slap' ). Fed double-faulted the game away. How often does that happen?! The Shot at least had the 'virtue' of being a shot Novak hit. But the opponent double faulting on a vital break back point? When that opponent has one of the great serves? A total gift.

Also, the Rafa one was AO12 and, as summerblues said, he hit it wide.

Great article.

The points where someone has made an unforced error you can definitely say the victor had a bit of luck. I'm not sure I'd call the ones that were winners (Djokovic forehand against Fed, Fed's winner BP down against Haas) lucky. Risky and brave yes, but not lucky.

One to add for Murray... In the opening game of the 5th against Novak last year at US open he manufactured break point with some great aggressive play, but on that break point his backhand slice clipped the net which threw Djokovic who could only net the return.

That was the momentum shifter, and had it not gone his way.., who knows!!

I would add Murray at the US Open against Djokovic 11-10 in the first TB and he found a flat first serve to seal the set. Absolutely pivotal he got off to a good start and sealed the first set.

Federer I would say his TB 4th set over Benneteau at Wimbledon in 2012. Absolutely key winning it 8-6 to then see the match out. Also those 2 points against Murray on the Murray serve in the 2nd set of the final. Swung the match in Federer's favour when a TB seemed likely.

Nadal v Petzschner Wimbledon 2010. The MTO. I know many question his MTO's, but for me that was pivotal for Nadal in getting through in 5 sets.

Djokovic I agree with the above.

Excellent recollections BB

If you remember, Murray also failed to challenge a call in the second set of the 2008 US final, which I think would have given him a break (might have been break point) of the Fed serve - they were on serve at the time

I never thought anything of it, Fed totally outplayed him - but then the following year DP followed Murray's 'plan' it was uncanny, i.e. nervous first set, hanging on grimly in the second. But the key difference was that DP controversially challenged a call the (again my memory is hazy) that Fed argued he had no chance of getting to and then the match turned

It shows that even in a thrashing you never know how a match might have gone if different decisions had been made

Danny_1982 wrote:Great article.

The points where someone has made an unforced error you can definitely say the victor had a bit of luck. I'm not sure I'd call the ones that were winners (Djokovic forehand against Fed, Fed's winner BP down against Haas) lucky. Risky and brave yes, but not lucky.

One to add for Murray... In the opening game of the 5th against Novak last year at US open he manufactured break point with some great aggressive play, but on that break point his backhand slice clipped the net which threw Djokovic who could only net the return.

That was the momentum shifter, and had it not gone his way.., who knows!!

And Danny what about Andy's easy miss in the 2nd set of the Wimby Nadal match of 2011     

If I'm correct, wouldn't he had been a set and a break up? It was the only time, I'd ever agree that he 'bottled it'

I am in awe of all of your memories!

It is very interesting how a key point can change a momentum in a match, when you can visibly see self belief return to one player.

One other one

In the Wimby SF of 2009, A-Rod mishit a volley in one of the tiebreaks and it went in. It turned the match as Roddick went on to win the tie break and go 2-1 up (again memory a bit hazy). Amazing when you consider the bad luck Roddick had in the final (see BB article)

I actually privately believed that 2009 was a year of significant missed opportunities by Murray - whether it be the only Verdasco defeat at Australia (OK he had a virus) but certainly this Roddick loss as I think he could have beaten Roger. Then he goes and have a wrist problem for his tame, only defeat, against Cilic

Ah the only other one.

Nadal v Djokovic French Open 2012. The rain. Djokovic had swung the match around and I think had the rain not come would've taken all the momentum and won that match IMO.

banbrotam wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:Great article.

The points where someone has made an unforced error you can definitely say the victor had a bit of luck. I'm not sure I'd call the ones that were winners (Djokovic forehand against Fed, Fed's winner BP down against Haas) lucky. Risky and brave yes, but not lucky.

One to add for Murray... In the opening game of the 5th against Novak last year at US open he manufactured break point with some great aggressive play, but on that break point his backhand slice clipped the net which threw Djokovic who could only net the return.

That was the momentum shifter, and had it not gone his way.., who knows!!

And Danny what about Andy's easy miss in the 2nd set of the Wimby Nadal match of 2011     

If I'm correct, wouldn't he had been a set and a break up? It was the only time, I'd ever agree that he 'bottled it'

That FH against Nadal would have given him 3 break points, and had he taken one yes he would have been a set and a break up. The most disappointing thing about that was not the miss (although it was an awful miss) but the way he completely crumbled from that point onwards.

A fragility which, thankfully, has now long since gone.

Federer at Wimbledon 2003-2006 and USO 2004-2008 and Aus 2007, Nadal at RG 2005-2008, 2010: turning up at the gate on the first day of the tournament.

Thank you all. I will make corrections as advised, to answer a few first;

1. Summerblues - I got that 2007 match in there.

2. Murdoch - AO corrected. Shurly shome mistake on the Shot?

3. Banbrotan - I mentioned it but got the year wrong! Corrected.

Bogbrush - have I not convinced you with the Murray v Djokovic US open gain?

legendkillarV2 wrote:I would add Murray at the US Open against Djokovic 11-10 in the first TB and he found a flat first serve to seal the set. Absolutely pivotal he got off to a good start and sealed the first set.

Federer I would say his TB 4th set over Benneteau at Wimbledon in 2012. Absolutely key winning it 8-6 to then see the match out. Also those 2 points against Murray on the Murray serve in the 2nd set of the final. Swung the match in Federer's favour when a TB seemed likely.

Nadal v Petzschner Wimbledon 2010. The MTO. I know many question his MTO's, but for me that was pivotal for Nadal in getting through in 5 sets.

Djokovic I agree with the above.

I'd exclude the 1apst set TV as he may have won the set anyway, and it was the 1st, and the place will go nuts if I include an MTO!
Also, I think Fed was the likely winner of that tb anyway.

I agree on Fed / Murray; it's going in.

bogbrush wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I would add Murray at the US Open against Djokovic 11-10 in the first TB and he found a flat first serve to seal the set. Absolutely pivotal he got off to a good start and sealed the first set.

Federer I would say his TB 4th set over Benneteau at Wimbledon in 2012. Absolutely key winning it 8-6 to then see the match out. Also those 2 points against Murray on the Murray serve in the 2nd set of the final. Swung the match in Federer's favour when a TB seemed likely.

Nadal v Petzschner Wimbledon 2010. The MTO. I know many question his MTO's, but for me that was pivotal for Nadal in getting through in 5 sets.

Djokovic I agree with the above.

I'd exclude the 1apst set TV as he may have won the set anyway, and it was the 1st, and the place will go nuts if I include an MTO!
Also, I think Fed was the likely winner of that tb anyway.

I agree on Fed / Murray; it's going in.

As long as you don't mention "Strategic" we are safe I think

legendkillarV2 wrote:Ah the only other one.

Nadal v Djokovic French Open 2012. The rain. Djokovic had swung the match around and I think had the rain not come would've taken all the momentum and won that match IMO.

Dare I? Some believe it was the dampness that allowed Djokovic back into the match so can we really say for sure it hurt him?

Perhaps we should ask around? Socal?

OMG mention of the    Southern Californian has me considering whether Fogninis 2011 French Open withdrawal should go in Djokovic's loss list. Somehow I think it won't..........

I can't put the Murray miss v Nadal at Wimbledon. in because Djokovic was in the final in his Annus Mirabillis. I was at the match - it turned it unquestionably, but it didn't deliver or deny a Slam.

Dare I mention it? Last year.......better not.  

CaledonianCraig wrote:Dare I mention it? Last year.......better not.  

It's in!

bogbrush wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Dare I mention it? Last year.......better not.  

It's in!

Nah being totally honest now. It made no difference. Andy still never quite had that winning mentality/maturity call it what you will. The realisation (whatever the circumstances) came with Olympic Gold. Since then the winning mentality has been placed in the memory bank so to speak. That is how I see it.

Would you include Federer's missed drop shot at 5-2 set point up in the first set v Rafa of RG11?

If it had gone in, Fed would have taken that first set. As it was, it missed by a fraction and the momentum turned on its head, Rafa taking the set 7-5.

It's not a foregone conclusion that he would have won but, given that he won the third set and would have had the momentum after the first, he would certainly have had Rafa under pressure.

It's a great observation, but can I say the match would otherwise have been his? Ooh I think I want to, but do I really want to imagine it was that close? Arghhhhh! I'm going to wimp out unless others feel strongly.

This is a great thread.

I like that even dubious ones are included, as opposed to
People arguing "that didn't turn the match, leave my player alone!"

Speaking of dubious ones, how about the heavens opening and the roof closing at last years Wimbledon final? I wouldn't call it lucky, but I'd certainly call it pivotal.

I feel that wasn't "the" moment Danny; if you ever re-watch the early stages of the 3rd set, Federer was starting to assert. I always feel that while some may tire opponents with long rallies, Federer can do it with intensity and variety, and I suspect Andy was feeling it just a touch. Plus disappointment at being so close to 2-0......
The denouement of that 2nd set was key; we went from Murray having a break chance to serve for 2-0 to suddenly being all square, in a few points. Bugger of a scoring system isn't it?!

If we are going with really dubious ones, what about the feather that disturbed Murray's second serve in the tiebreak at this year's AO final? Murray faded at the end of the third set, his longer semi with Federer and more running in the final catching up with him, but if he'd been able to take a 2 set lead with that TB, who knows what could have happened in the third set? It is a bit dubious though.

What about the 2nd set break of serve by Andy against Roger at W12 that only Sue Barker saw?

Had the umpire, the players or, indeed, anyone else in the world seen it, Andy may have won.

Nah, the roof closing wasn't the key factor in last year's final. Murray missing a couple of routine shots at the end of the second set was the key factor. It gave Fed additional confidence and Andy also lost his way on both serve and forehand thereafter.

YvonneT wrote:If we are going with really dubious ones, what about the feather that disturbed Murray's second serve in the tiebreak at this year's AO final? Murray faded at the end of the third set, his longer semi with Federer and more running in the final catching up with him, but if he'd been able to take a 2 set lead with that TB, who knows what could have happened in the third set? It is a bit dubious though.

Yes, the feather! I'll second this one.

Once Novak got back on level terms, he started playing with much more freedom. I have doubts that he would have come back from 2 sets down.

It's not clear cut but this one gets bonus points for its surreal nature!

It's going in!

Yes, the feather is a belter!

And surely unique for any turning point in tennis history.

Novak didn't even thank the feather in his speech, which is frankly rude!

Right, I'm going for one so dubious that the word dubious doesn't really do it justice... But I'm going to say it anyway.

Wimbledon 2008, that tennis match that we all remember... Towards the end of the fifth it was getting really quite dark, but they wanted to finish the match so they played on.

Rafa as we know plays with heavy topspin and therefore a heavy margin of error in terms of how high over the net his shots are. Federer plays which a much lower margin of error due to his flatter shots. Therefore, poor visibility impacts his play far more than Rafa's.

During those last couple of games Roger hit several shots into the net, including match point. Without the darkness Federer's more aggressive and flatter game may not have faltered so significantly.

Therefore I am proposing the decision to play on in the relative darkness goes into Rafa's gain and Federer's losses.

It's not dubious, it's very much viable, and it's already in the article.

I contrast it with 2 years later, and the 5th set would have been played under the roof...... and we all know how those two like the roof closed.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Dare I mention it? Last year.......better not.  

It's in!

Nah being totally honest now. It made no difference. Andy still never quite had that winning mentality/maturity call it what you will. The realisation (whatever the circumstances) came with Olympic Gold. Since then the winning mentality has been placed in the memory bank so to speak. That is how I see it.

I think if it had stayed outdoors - Andy would have won. Psychologically few like playing Roger in an indoor final - Murray no doubt thought that everything was conspiring against him again.

Probably why he was fussing so much the other night as well!!

Oh it was already there? My apologies. Should read things thoroughly before commenting.

I think in recent times you pretty much have a full list now.

HM Murdoch wrote:Excellent article.

There is a postscript to The Shot though (which, in what I'm sure can only be a typo, you've called 'The Slap' ). Fed double-faulted the game away. How often does that happen?! The Shot at least had the 'virtue' of being a shot Novak hit. But the opponent double faulting on a vital break back point? When that opponent has one of the great serves? A total gift.

Also, the Rafa one was AO12 and, as summerblues said, he hit it wide.

"The Shot" turned the match. It's a rare case of genuine momentum swing as both players were affected mentally. Probably caused the DF in some ways.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Ah the only other one.

Nadal v Djokovic French Open 2012. The rain. Djokovic had swung the match around and I think had the rain not come would've taken all the momentum and won that match IMO.

Not sure I agree with that. Don't see the evidence that the match was swung around.

Henman Bill wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Ah the only other one.

Nadal v Djokovic French Open 2012. The rain. Djokovic had swung the match around and I think had the rain not come would've taken all the momentum and won that match IMO.

Not sure I agree with that. Don't see the evidence that the match was swung around.

Maybe when he won the 3rd set and was up a break in 4th IIRC

Danny_1982 wrote:Right, I'm going for one so dubious that the word dubious doesn't really do it justice... But I'm going to say it anyway.

Wimbledon 2008, that tennis match that we all remember... Towards the end of the fifth it was getting really quite dark, but they wanted to finish the match so they played on.

Rafa as we know plays with heavy topspin and therefore a heavy margin of error in terms of how high over the net his shots are. Federer plays which a much lower margin of error due to his flatter shots. Therefore, poor visibility impacts his play far more than Rafa's.

During those last couple of games Roger hit several shots into the net, including match point. Without the darkness Federer's more aggressive and flatter game may not have faltered so significantly.

Therefore I am proposing the decision to play on in the relative darkness goes into Rafa's gain and Federer's losses.

Perhaps the light was an issue although I recall at the time RF came in for a lot of criticism on the old baord leading to many saying he should have worn glasses or increased his carrot intake!

Let's not forget though that if not for the rain delay in the 3rd, Federer would probably have lost in straight sets. He was playing catch up right along. It wasn't as if each set went to the other. Had he won it, it would have been marvellous as 6 in a row would have been achieved and as he won in 2009 that would have been an outstanding record. But it was not meant to be light issue or not. He left the comeback far too late and had Nadal lost that match, it would have been a major injustice.

I think for me the most significant point was in the FO vs Haas. 2 sets to love down, 15-40 down and that point is in my minds eye. That was not only a game changer it was a career defining point.

bogbrush wrote:It's a great observation, but can I say the match would otherwise have been his? Ooh I think I want to, but do I really want to imagine it was that close? Arghhhhh! I'm going to wimp out unless others feel strongly.

I would have LOVE to have seen that shot go in. That would have been REALLY interesting. He played SO well that day.

But..we can't quite say it turned the match, Rafa was arguably still favourite if the shot had gone in, or 50/50. So I agree, not quite in the list. I must say I think you are being very fair indeed in your decisions.

Born Slippy wrote:Nah, the roof closing wasn't the key factor in last year's final. Murray missing a couple of routine shots at the end of the second set was the key factor. It gave Fed additional confidence and Andy also lost his way on both serve and forehand thereafter.

I think the roof was pretty key to be honest but it's not clear cut enough to be in this list.

Henman Bill wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:Nah, the roof closing wasn't the key factor in last year's final. Murray missing a couple of routine shots at the end of the second set was the key factor. It gave Fed additional confidence and Andy also lost his way on both serve and forehand thereafter.

I think the roof was pretty key to be honest but it's not clear cut enough to be in this list.

It is on the list

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Ah the only other one.

Nadal v Djokovic French Open 2012. The rain. Djokovic had swung the match around and I think had the rain not come would've taken all the momentum and won that match IMO.

Not sure I agree with that. Don't see the evidence that the match was swung around.

Maybe when he won the 3rd set and was up a break in 4th IIRC

2-1 with a break and then broke back in the first game the next day. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/18386271 Well you do have an argument then, although that's not how I remember it.

Henman Bill wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Ah the only other one.

Nadal v Djokovic French Open 2012. The rain. Djokovic had swung the match around and I think had the rain not come would've taken all the momentum and won that match IMO.

Not sure I agree with that. Don't see the evidence that the match was swung around.

Maybe when he won the 3rd set and was up a break in 4th IIRC

2-1 with a break and then broke back in the first game the next day. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/18386271 Well you do have an argument then, although that's not how I remember it.

I only put it there because I remember Rafa was quite animated that play had continued beyond the 3rd set when the heavens opened. I sort of feel that had play conitnued that Djokovic cetainly with the momentum had a chance to put the match into a deciding set. Yet as you say the next day he was broken and the rest is history as they say.

Federer

Gains:
1. Andy Roddick backhand volley 2009 title. Strongly agree
2. Tommy Haas 2009. Strongly agree
3. Nadal 2007. Debatable.
4. Wimbledon 2012 v Murray. Debatable, but I'll say no, I don't think there was one pivotal moment.

Losses:
1. 2008 Wimbledon gloom. I'm sure the bad light didn't make it easy to strike across the ball with heavy topspin. Tricky one but I'd say no.

Nadal

Gains:
1. The 2008 Wimbledon above.
2. In the 2013 French Open net touch. Sadly, I agree, without the net touch I think Djokovic was favourite to win the match from there had he avoided the net touch.

Losses:
1. In the 2012 Australian Open Rafa I agree. I think this was an important moment.
2. The 2007 Wimbledon final described above.

Djokovic:

Gains:
1. In 2011 USO "The Shot" I agree, classic match turning moment. As it happened on MP down there's almost no argument.
2. The 2012 AO, as described above.
3. In 2013 Novak faced Murray AO feather. Must admit I don't really  (maybe vaguely) remember this.

Losses:
1. The 2013 French, described above.
2. The US 2012, described below.

Murray

Gains:
1. In 2012 Andy Murray Djokovic US Open. Don't agree with this one. The final set wasn't that close, but I do think the first tiebreak, which was very tense and emotional, was quite key.

Losses:
1. Could he have turned it around in 2008 at the USO, when Federer's long forehand at bp down in the 2nd set was called in and Murray played on? Don't remember this, but sounds a bit speculative so I'll say no.
2. Wimbledon 2012, described above.
3. Australian Open 2013, described above. "The Feather from Belgrade"

Danny_1982 wrote:Right, I'm going for one so dubious that the word dubious doesn't really do it justice... But I'm going to say it anyway.

Wimbledon 2008, that tennis match that we all remember... Towards the end of the fifth it was getting really quite dark, but they wanted to finish the match so they played on.

Rafa as we know plays with heavy topspin and therefore a heavy margin of error in terms of how high over the net his shots are. Federer plays which a much lower margin of error due to his flatter shots. Therefore, poor visibility impacts his play far more than Rafa's.

During those last couple of games Roger hit several shots into the net, including match point. Without the darkness Federer's more aggressive and flatter game may not have faltered so significantly.

Therefore I am proposing the decision to play on in the relative darkness goes into Rafa's gain and Federer's losses.

Perhaps the light was an issue although I recall at the time RF came in for a lot of criticism on the old baord leading to many saying he should have worn glasses or increased his carrot intake!

Let's not forget though that if not for the rain delay in the 3rd, Federer would probably have lost in straight sets. He was playing catch up right along. It wasn't as if each set went to the other. Had he won it, it would have been marvellous as 6 in a row would have been achieved and as he won in 2009 that would have been an outstanding record. But it was not meant to be light issue or not. He left the comeback far too late and had Nadal lost that match, it would have been a major injustice.

I think for me the most significant point was in the FO vs Haas. 2 sets to love down, 15-40 down and that point is in my minds eye. That was not only a game changer it was a career defining point.

FedsFan. The inside-out forehand against Tommy Haas in the French in 09 is particularly memorable for me. I was very busy at work and just had a moment to check the scores and there was Fed two sets down, 3-4 down in the third and 30-40.
  I then saw he'd saved the BP and although there was still a mile to go I reckoned he would be OK. I think once Rafa went out at the French that year that Fed was under more pressure than he had been for years. He also trailed to del Potty in the semi but managed to get through. What if that BP shot against Haas had been a fraction out.....

sirfredperry wrote:FedsFan. The inside-out forehand against Tommy Haas in the French in 09 is particularly memorable for me. I was very busy at work and just had a moment to check the scores and there was Fed two sets down, 3-4 down in the third and 30-40.
  I then saw he'd saved the BP and although there was still a mile to go I reckoned he would be OK. I think once Rafa went out at the French that year that Fed was under more pressure than he had been for years. He also trailed to del Potty in the semi but managed to get through. What if that BP shot against Haas had been a fraction out.....

John Lloyd called it at the time - he said that would be the turning point in the match. I thought "paah", but I think he was right.

Fed's victory at RG 2009 was the closest parallel I can think of in the modern game to Murray's win on Sunday (although from an elevated position) - he's probably the only other guy playing presently who has experienced a similar weight of expectation and sense that his career could be defined by a victory in one particular slam. Djoko's desire to win at RG is bubbling along nicely too - if he comes into, say, the 2016 tournament still needing it to complete his set and as #1-3 he may have a similar feeling.

It was a horror match fred. Federer went to the 1st set tb having not dropped a point on serve at all, then I knew what would happen. Then in the second he blew a lead. Then the third...... well.

As soon as he held to 4-4 Tommy played a horror at bp in the next game and I felt Roger would be ok. But by God it was difficult!

Good comments by all. I acknowledge that had Federer won W 08 there'd be pivotal moments the other way (remember Rafa double faulting lamely in one tb with nerves?) but I stand by my assessment that, given the final set was so close, the roof and good light is logically enough to have tilted just that set the other way.

sirfredperry wrote:FedsFan. The inside-out forehand against Tommy Haas in the French in 09 is particularly memorable for me. I was very busy at work and just had a moment to check the scores and there was Fed two sets down, 3-4 down in the third and 30-40.
  I then saw he'd saved the BP and although there was still a mile to go I reckoned he would be OK. I think once Rafa went out at the French that year that Fed was under more pressure than he had been for years. He also trailed to del Potty in the semi but managed to get through. What if that BP shot against Haas had been a fraction out.....

SFP,

Thank God it was not! Maybe if there was hawkeye it could have gone either way as it wasn't full on the line. I agree, the minute Nadal lost all that pressure transferred onto Federer. Lets not forget less than 24 hours prior to Nadal's loss Djokovic lost too. Fed himself said he played with so much pressure as there was greater expectations. He said wherever he went, whether it was in restaurants or even when he was at traffic lights people kept saying its your year!

I recall Federer did not lose a single point on serve in that first set until he played the t/b. That is why it was even more astonishing he was down 2-0. Semis were also a horror film for a Fed fan. Federer losing the USO final to JMDP deprived him of holding all 4 slams at the same time but I would rather he lost that final and not the FO semi.

Speaking of game changing points, USO 09, didn't one call get challenged by JMDP long after what was deemed acceptable which prompted that argument with the umpire just before Fed was to serve for the 2nd set? I recall the heated exchange and code violation was followed by a break and the loss of the set. If not for the disputed call, Fed would have been up 2-0 and surely he would have closed the match out with a win.