Was The Key To The Season In 2012 And 2013 The French Open?

I wrote this as a comment on my article about some of the idiosyncrasies of the ranking system but thought it was off topic there.


I thought Djokovic's loss at the FO impacted on his play at Wimbledon. I also thought Rafa had timed his comeback to peak at RG. He did so whilst playing under enormous pressure not only at RG itself but in the clay tournaments leading upto it. Defending all those points, defending his incredible record on clay and having to do so without help from a high ranking. Talk about pressure! But he did it. Two weeks later Rafa arrived at Wimbledon playing for the first time with little pressure. Tired, flat, not 100% physically and perhaps more aware of pain so much so that he was not good enough to beat Rocus...

IMO Wimbledon took place too soon after the fight for "the holy grail" for both Djokovic and Nadal. On reflection I think the same may have been true last year as everyone knows what the effort did to Nadal at Wimbledon in 2012... and Djokovic was thrashed by Federer at Wimbledon after thrashing him a couple of weeks previously at the FO. If either player could have chosen the FO or Wimbledon in both years I'm pretty sure they would have chosen the FO.

Did Djokovic's loss to Nadal at the FO affect him when he faced Nadal at the US Open? Probably. But as I wrote BEFORE the US Open final their match there was just a minor battle compared to the war that took place at the US Open

https://www.606v2.com/t47843-rafa-and-novak-in-new-york-and-paris

I think the key to the season in both 2012 and 2013 was the French Open   No disrespect intended to any players not involved in this particular war. Any player with any interest in preserving their body or their peace of mind would be well advised to steer well clear... Next year there will be a battle for the AO of course but already I'm a little scared about next years war...

If I may I would like to borrow a line from another poster - PS If you wish to offer constructive criticism then that is fine but if you are on the wind-up please do me a favour and others looking for sensible conversation and take your remarks to another thread.

It could just as easily be hypothesised that the key to the season in 2012 and 2013 was Wimbledon.

In 2012 it was won by Roger Federer (perhaps signifying his last ever slam win) and beat Andy Murray. For Murray though it was something of a breakthrough as he won his first set in a slam final and he was to use it as a springboard to end the year with great success winning the Olympics and his first slam in the form of the US Open.

In 2013 Andy Murray became the first British man to win the Wimbledon singles title in the modern era and beat world No.1 Novak Djokovic in the process. The defeat was to further demoralise Novak perhaps, a blow to his confidence and unshakable self-belief that carried on into the US Open where he lost the final to Rafa Nadal.

Sorry HE but do you see how easy it is to put importance on each slam win? In reality they are all as important and relevant to each and every other slam ever played.

I think Rafa was certainly impacted by not having played on grass for a year. He looked uncomfortable and like someone who had never played on the surface before, when of course we all know he can play fantastic on the surface.

As for Novak, he looked great all through Wimbledon but got outplayed in the final. Having reached the final, would his level or intensity or mentality be in any way diminished because of a defeat over a month before, to a different opponent? Not in my opinion.

If you'd offered him the choice of which slam he could win before the season, would he have chosen the French? Definitely. It's the one he hasn't yet won. But I think having reached the final of Wimbledon so impressively he was 100% determined to win on that day.

Whilst I'm not saying that you are trying to do this, I don't think Murray's Wimbledon win or Rafa's New York win should be in any way diluted by the suggestion that both were only won because Novak wasn't fully invested mentally or physically. He wanted both titles desperately.

The key to 2012 was probably the Australian Open exploits of Novak. Whilst he came through the wars with Andy and Nadal he seemed to then struggle to match that intensity for the rest of the season. In particular, I thought he struggled on the clay getting nowhere near the level of 2011 and that led to a disappointing mens final at RG.

For 2013 its more difficult. Fed and Murray's respective back issues have clearly played a part in weakening the hard court field. Novak has also looked short of his best since the Wimbledon final having played well during the tournament.

Is there a possibility that Djokovic wins Wimbledon if he won RG? Yes, but its not an exact science, is it? For all we know he could have then gone a Gluten-binge and ended up eliminated 1st Rd. As I see it, while a win would have propped him up... Hes lost at the French Open so many times that I cant see it emotionally crushing him....

2012, well he hadnt won a set off Nadal on clay that year And apart from an eight game blitz, didnt stand a chance, why that would hurt him? I know not.

I trust everyone knows what I mean by "key". It was a pivotal moment and the result went on to affect the big matches later in the season.

On a similar theme I can remember writing an article way back in March when IMO there was a momentum change between Djokovic and Nadal. Of course I can't see into the future and there was no guarantee that this perceived shift in momentum would continue. I could have got things completely wrong but I felt the signs were strong enough to comment on...

As it is I got things spot on  But read through the comments and abuse I got for sticking my neck out   I wasn't just told I was wrong I was ridiculed. Including one mischievous poster threatening me by claiming other posters would steer clear of 606v2 because of what turned out to be my remarkably insightful observation (cough!).

https://www.606v2.com/t41992-atp-race-nadal-vs-nole-momentum-change

Tennis is made up of match ups even at the very top. How these play out can affect a whole season. There is quite a lot of evidence that for both Djokovic and Nadal there was more resting on the FO in both 2012 and 2013 than just one match... even a match that would either determine the winner of a slam or the likely winner. In addition both players had proved they were capable of winning Wimbledon but the French/Wimbledon double is perhaps the trickiest thing in tennis to pull off. Even more tricky after an emotionally exhausting FO. At the very top of the game perhaps the biggest difference can be a mental one. Not that I'm implying this is a small thing as it isn't. It is perhaps the most difficult thing in any pro sport. So picking things like key matches or momentum swings can be an excellent way of spotting what might happen in future matches.

Your thesis seems to suggest Djokovic's results are relative only to ... Nadal. As though this essentially accounts for whatever it is you think Djokovic isn't doing as well as he was before. Or something. It has nothing to do with Nadal per se. Djokovic in 2013 is just losing more often, period. His loss at Wimbledon this year was thanks to the brutal SF against Del Potro, and in the US Open that long SF with Wawrinka was another gut buster. It was these types of matches he didn't have at his apex in 2011. His confidence was so off the charts back then - and for the whole year - that he was able to play out of this world tennis. But that spaceship has long since come back down to earth. Djokovic has lost this year to Del Potro, Haas, Dimitrov, Berdych, Murray, Isner in addition to Nadal 3 times.  Going to Wimbledon 2012, Djokovic had to face - for the only time in his career - Federer on grass, in the Wimbledon SF. This is a bad matchup for Djokovic simply because Federer's wicked Slice was always negating the Djokovic BH. When Federer plays that well, it's not because of a loss at RG that Djokovic doesn't manage to win. On grass, Federer even at 85% capacity is too formidable for Djokovic.

To build a case that Djokovic somehow has been demoralized by losses to Nadal at RG doesn't take into account the fact that Djokovic is just losing more often to a lot of other players now than he was at his peak. He's lost 5 times to Nadal at Roland Garros - and so has Federer, by the way. To say losing to Nadal there is mentally crippling is just a stretch too far. This simple truth is Djokovic has just tailed off from his epic 2011. His Forehand isn't hit with as much abandon - he's hitting it much more cautiously now because the errors off that side were piling up. His 2nd Serve isn't as reliable as it was; and even his BH is starting to leak errors. A lot of this is actually due to his footwork having tailed off - he's catching a lot more balls late now than in 2011, so he's having to defend more. The one thing having kept him in most of his matches this season is his Return. But it's harder to win matches with only that part of your game at optimum. What was clear in this year's US Open Final was an exact reverse of the 2011 US Open Final: this time is was the Djokovic Groundstrokes landing shorter and shorter as the match went on, and it was Nadal who was consistently getting great depth on his groundies. That made the difference, and that's why Nadal won. For Djokovic, none of this is a surprise. After over two years of some sublime tennis, the Djokovic body - from all that grinding - is starting to wear a bit. He's not going to see another season like his 2011 for the rest of his career.

The very top guys don't let defeats demoralize them. If they did they wouldn't be tops guys for very long. Instead they use them to spur them on. If anything, Djoko's loss at the FO would have made him even more determined to win Wimby - to show that he was still the best and, having reached the final, to stop the further emergence of Murray following his USO win.
I saw no evidence to suggest the FO loss affected Djoko in any way.

Equally, there's no evidence to suggest that Rafa was tired after the FO - he's done very well at Wimby in the past after winning the whole clay court season and the FO - or that his knees were playing up - they haven't bothered him before or since.

To suggest that the FO somehow affected the rest of the season under-estimates what is required to be at the very top of tennis - something both Djoko and Rafa have plenty of experience of.

Lemme put this way then, the Key to all the issues was USO, in 2011 when Novak Nailed USO he assured himself as the boss of the tour until this championship he himself wouldn't be sure how good or how great he is, now the world started to take him seriously they started seeing him as a dominant champ, then comes fluctuating 2012 and comes USO 2012, he lost a key battle here to Andy Murray [losing to Fed and Nadal was ok as he has lost to them before] which his ego could just not take it and Andy's confidence went up sky level and when they clashed again in Wimbledon Novak played as if he wanted to prove a point and ended up messing several in 2nd n 3rd set when he was in the lead.

Now comes USO 2013, all his lost pride and ranking could be restored in one shot if he could beat Rafa in the finals, he knew that well that everything was on stake for him, he played with too much pressure and once again crumbled under it. He clearly looked the dejected man at the trophy presentation.

2014 will be a make or break year for Novak for sure, even if Novak loses AO since the momentum is with Rafa, even if he lose FO coz Rafa is the GOD of clay, even if he lose the Wimbledon coz he suck at that surface compared to the other players in top 6 ,if he could some how win the year end slam in USO it will rejuvenate him for a brighter 2015.

In Rafa's perspective, winning USO 2013 would have given him a lot more pleasure coz he won on alien conditions than his bread and butter clay, 50% Rafa could win most clay tournaments where as even 100% Rafa is not assure of a USO crown, so winning USO should have mean't a lot for him, now he has 2 slams in a GS of 3 different surfaces.

So for me USO played more importance than FO.

Djokovic 2011 isnt, really that much better than Djokovic 2012, or 2013 for that matter. I remember the stat being laid out that in 2011 he won 56% of his points, vs 55% in 2013. So in an average five setter, say 380 points, he is only losing 3.8 points less. And yet 2011 saw 10 Titles five masters and three slams, vs Three titles one masters and a Slam. Ive never bought that his level in 2011 was otherworldly. His confidence, and ability to convert chances were. Even when he beat Nadal seven times in a row... His two clay wins all came with breaks in the last game of each set, and all but one of his hard court wins went the distance... Fine margins rule tennis. Even Nadal's first round Wimbledon defeat went 6-7 6-7 4-6, broken only once, lost two tie breaks... On another day he could have taken one of the tie breaks and ran away with it. No clue if his knees affected him at SW19, but in the end it doesnt matter does it? If Nadal could brush off a straight set defeat round one at the biggest stage of them all, Im sure RG didnt quite kill Nole.

antonico wrote:Your thesis seems to suggest Djokovic's results are relative only to ... Nadal. As though this essentially accounts for whatever it is you think Djokovic isn't doing as well as he was before. Or something. It has nothing to do with Nadal per se. Djokovic in 2013 is just losing more often, period. His loss at Wimbledon this year was thanks to the brutal SF against Del Potro, and in the US Open that long SF with Wawrinka was another gut buster. It was these types of matches he didn't have at his apex in 2011. His confidence was so off the charts back then - and for the whole year - that he was able to play out of this world tennis. But that spaceship has long since come back down to earth. Djokovic has lost this year to Del Potro, Haas, Dimitrov, Berdych, Murray, Isner in addition to Nadal 3 times.  Going to Wimbledon 2012, Djokovic had to face - for the only time in his career - Federer on grass, in the Wimbledon SF. This is a bad matchup for Djokovic simply because Federer's wicked Slice was always negating the Djokovic BH. When Federer plays that well, it's not because of a loss at RG that Djokovic doesn't manage to win. On grass, Federer even at 85% capacity is too formidable for Djokovic.

To build a case that Djokovic somehow has been demoralized by losses to Nadal at RG doesn't take into account the fact that Djokovic is just losing more often to a lot of other players now than he was at his peak. He's lost 5 times to Nadal at Roland Garros - and so has Federer, by the way. To say losing to Nadal there is mentally crippling is just a stretch too far. This simple truth is Djokovic has just tailed off from his epic 2011. His Forehand isn't hit with as much abandon - he's hitting it much more cautiously now because the errors off that side were piling up. His 2nd Serve isn't as reliable as it was; and even his BH is starting to leak errors. A lot of this is actually due to his footwork having tailed off - he's catching a lot more balls late now than in 2011, so he's having to defend more. The one thing having kept him in most of his matches this season is his Return. But it's harder to win matches with only that part of your game at optimum. What was clear in this year's US Open Final was an exact reverse of the 2011 US Open Final: this time is was the Djokovic Groundstrokes landing shorter and shorter as the match went on, and it was Nadal who was consistently getting great depth on his groundies. That made the difference, and that's why Nadal won. For Djokovic, none of this is a surprise. After over two years of some sublime tennis, the Djokovic body - from all that grinding - is starting to wear a bit. He's not going to see another season like his 2011 for the rest of his career.

What a great knowledgeable post. I can only agree with much that you've said as far as the analysis of Djokovic's game goes and you've pointed out things that I haven't noticed but will watch out for next time I see him play.

Djokovic made it plain this year even when he had just won the AO (when he was literally holding the AO trophy in a post match interview) that his focus this year was the French. At that time Nadal hadn't returned from injury and not even the wildest speculation had him returning so soon and so well. Djokovic must have thought at the time that his chances of winning in Paris had never been so good. Then winning in Monte Carlo must have raised his hopes even higher. He did keep losing to players other than Nadal but in best of 5 on clay he is tricky to beat even if he's not playing at 2011 levels or rather getting 2011 level results. And he was very tricky to beat even by Nadal.

After setting such a goal and talking about it so publicly I think he must have been disappointed. I think maybe even a little demoralized considering his history at RG and his history against Nadal. After all despite losing to Nadal 5 times at RG as you point out he has beaten Nadal on clay in fact he's beaten him pretty much everywhere but not at the one major tournament missing from his CV. Like you say Djokovics results aren't just about Nadal. I'm sure he would have been happy not to have to face him in order to win there and if he lost to someone else that would have been painful.

But my reasoning that this match was key was not just because of how it may have affected Djokovic but how it affected Nadal. He has won the FO Wimbledon double before but in 2008 and 2010 he didn't have quite the same pressure as he did in 2012 and 2013. By comparison his FO wins were relatively straight forward in the years he did the double. Also like Djokovic he had timed his comeback to peak for the FO. I can certainly see reasons for his dip at Wimbledon in these circumstances. But when Nadal resumed play on the hard courts he appeared to carry the confidence from winning his 8th RG rather than any disappointment from Wimbledon. When he face Djokovic in Montreal it showed and after beating Djokovic there he just went from strength to strength. Despite what you say about Djokovic not playing well this year he played well in this match. If he had somehow scraped a win against Nadal in Paris maybe well enough to beat him? And if he won there who knows how it would have affected them both.

I do realize that there are players other than Nadal and Djokovic but these are the top two players jostling for top position and are the two players that have my interest at the moment. Particularly when they meet at the FO. It has the sort of dynamics that Nadal and Federer's meetings at Wimbledon between 2006 and 2008 had (but not quite of that quality  )

There's a possible case for it in 2012. I don't think Novak handled the pressure of going for Grand Slam well. He looked unhappy for all of that clay season, smashing rackets, showing bad temper etc. And then I think losing in the final knocked him a bit too.

I don't see RG as a factor in 2013 though. Novak's form nosedived after Dubai. I really don't know why. His match record post-Olympics through to Dubai was 42-3. So he was looking very good, dominant even.

But then the wheels fell off. I don't know what caused that but I can't see a strong link to RG or Rafa.

Do not think so, as Djoke was looking of fire in Wimbledon up to the final, so to blame an even a month ago for his loss imo is a bit a stretch

There have been two articles on tennis.com this week about Nadal and Djokovic and where they stand in relationship to each other at this point. I don't agree with everything in them but found them both interesting with lots of good points.

This one about Nadal

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/09/rafa-explains-it-all/49248/#.UkGg2D8QPH0

And this one about Djokovic

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/09/worst-great-year/49239/#.UkGhCz8QPH0

The article about Djokovic contains some speculation that made me sort of laugh. Just because I can imagine the reaction if I had pondered such a thing here on 606v2. It would have sent sensitive Murray fans rushing towards a cliff lemming like in their haste to desert this place... ;)Not to mention calling for me to be banned...

I also think he’s a genuinely nice guy with many of the rough edges you might expect to find sanded down. Not to get too mystical here, but it occurred to me during the Wimbledon final that some men seem destined to stand in the way of history, or to spoil what might be an enchanted moment; others gracefully yield to it with a kind of “old soul” wisdom. Djokovic, contrary to what his struggle as an outsider who rose to the top suggests, may be the latter type of man.

Just to be clear. I didn't say the above Peter Bodo did!

hawkeye wrote:It would have sent sensitive Murray fans rushing towards a cliff lemming like in their haste to desert this place... ;)Not to mention calling for me to be banned...

And you say you're not a WUM?

Point is I suppose, key to WHOSE season. Its key to Djokovic and Nadal, Murrays key was wimbeldon in both years. For reasons HE must know despite claiming not to watch them.

falzy21 wrote:Point is I suppose, key to WHOSE season. Its key to Djokovic and Nadal, Murrays key was wimbeldon in both years. For reasons HE must know despite claiming not to watch them.

Of course Murray's win at Wimbledon was the high point not only of his season but of his career but do you think it had far reaching consequences on the rest of the season beyond that isolated win. Maybe it could have affected Djokovic? But I'm not so sure a win against Murray would have helped his confidence when facing Nadal in Montreal and the US Open. When he saw Nadal at the other side of the net his memory would have been on their last meeting. Djokovic is for the number one player and Nadal has won practically every tournament he's entered. They are the two top players this season.

Julius. Please stop saying I'm a WUM. I was making a point about how some should be more tolerant about different views. The illustration I used was from an article by Peter Bodo. I don't agree with a lot of the stuff he writes too. In fact believe it or not I don't always agree with everything that is written here but I'm not ego centric enough that it's written purely to annoy me. What did you think of the Peter Bodo articles?

hawkeye wrote:Julius. Please stop saying I'm a WUM. I was making a point about how some should be more tolerant about different views. The illustration I used was from an article by Peter Bodo. I don't agree with a lot of the stuff he writes too. In fact believe it or not I don't always agree with everything that is written here but I'm not ego centric enough that it's written purely to annoy me. What did you think of the Peter Bodo articles?

No, you weren't - you were making a WUM statement against Murray fans. Stop trying to deny it or make excuses. There was no need to bring Murray fans into the post at all, except to wind them up.
If the shoe fits....and most people know that it fits you.

hawkeye wrote:

falzy21 wrote:Point is I suppose, key to WHOSE season. Its key to Djokovic and Nadal, Murrays key was wimbeldon in both years. For reasons HE must know despite claiming not to watch them.

Of course Murray's win at Wimbledon was the high point not only of his season but of his career but do you think it had far reaching consequences on the rest of the season beyond that isolated win. Maybe it could have affected Djokovic? But I'm not so sure a win against Murray would have helped his confidence when facing Nadal in Montreal and the US Open. When he saw Nadal at the other side of the net his memory would have been on their last meeting. Djokovic is for the number one player and Nadal has won practically every tournament he's entered. They are the two top players this season.

Interesting that the article suggests that the Wimbledon loss had an effect on Novak at the USO but doesn't mention your pet theory about Novak's loss in the FO affecting him at Wimbledon. Did you miss that bit.

You have to read Djokovic’s own comments to see the extent to which the loss at Wimbledon pre-figured the failure against Nadal a few months later at Flushing Meadows:

“The bottom line is that he was a better player in decisive moments,” Djokovic said in his presser. “In both second and third sets, I was four-two up and dropped the serve in those games and just allowed him to come back for no reason. . . He played fantastic tennis, no question about it. Me, I should have played better in the decisive moments. I haven’t. I believed I could come back. I really fighted. It wasn’t my day.”

Btw the articles are both fine but just standard stuff which don't really throw up any thoughts which haven't been covered before.

Still not sure that article on Djoker agrees with your point - are that you should feel that Murray fans should jump like lemmings, as all you have quoted is that Murray was able to handle the pressure of the Wimbledon final better than him

Not that he was burnt out, or did not care because of the French losr

I think his own words sum it up best



"The bottom line is that he was a better player in decisive moments,” Djokovic said in his presser. “In both second and third sets, I was four-two up and dropped the serve in those games and just allowed him to come back for no reason. . . He played fantastic tennis, no question about it. Me, I should have played better in the decisive moments. I haven’t. I believed I could come back. I really fighted. It wasn’t my day.”

Agree with Calder and Risky - there was nothing in there that suggested the FO final affected Djoko for Wimby or anything that Murray fans would have a hard time with.
Hence no need for the WUM comment that HE included in her post.

Not sure about the point of the article. If it is to say the FO was the key to Djokovic and Nadals season, this is a good, and likely correct thing to discuss. If its to somehow suggest it was the key to the whole season, that is to say it somehow affected the destination of other key titles, well then its clearly a wind up trying to denegrate other peoples achievements.

She should know much better than that by now, to think thatll slip past us if she just acts all innocent

Of course my point was that the FO final affected Djokovic and Nadal. How could it have affected matches they were not involved in?

I liked the Bodo articles but as I said I didn't agree with everything in them. I posted them as they made an interesting read and they were talking about the two players that I was. Not because I thought it necessarily backed up my theory.

Sometimes I think people look for ways to be wound up. There are many comments that I disagree with but instead of accusing the writers of trying to wind me up if I'm interested enough I argue my point. My point here was about the importance of a trophy that both Nadal and Djokovic IMO wanted more than any other played this year (including the AO, Wimbledon and the US Open). And of course I mean wanted MORE and not that they wouldn't have liked to win them all.

None of which explains this comment :-
"The article about Djokovic contains some speculation that made me sort of laugh. Just because I can imagine the reaction if I had pondered such a thing here on 606v2. It would have sent sensitive Murray fans rushing towards a cliff lemming like in their haste to desert this place... ;)Not to mention calling for me to be banned..."

There is no speculation in Bodo's article regarding anything that plays down Murray's achievement, and even if there were, I see no reason for the wum comment re: Murray fans theoretical reaction to it.

^ Julius. You should understand I'm being defensive. I'm the one that gets mocked and called a WUM just for giving my views. And since you said that the reason why I was banned was because my comments were leading to some posters leaving 606v2 there have been quite a few posters who have taken to threatening to leave because I've said something they disagreed with. I thought by drawing attention to it with my reference to lemmings it would show what a ridiculous threat it was.

I don't think I'm saying anything that is too controversial. IMO Federer and Nadal are the two best players I've ever seen but if forced to choose I would say Nadal might just be slightly the better player. Djokovic is a great player and has made things interesting by putting up a fight to be right up there with them. The rest are just the following pack. As I've described it many times this golden era is just gold plate. I am well aware that some want me to include Murray at the very top but I don't. That's not to say he isn't a very dedicated and talented professional and that winning Wimbledon wasn't a great achievement for him  That is my opinion. That does not make me a WUM. So stop calling me one.

Again, none of which addresses my point, and again, if the shoe fits...

Your opinion is this "It would have sent sensitive Murray fans rushing towards a cliff lemming like in their haste to desert this place."

My opinion is you are a WUM.

Are you saying you're entitled to your opinion, but I'm not entitled to mine?

^ Please stop calling me names! No I don't think your entitled to do so. I come here to discuss tennis not get involved in personal insults.

If you come here to discuss tennis why say things like "It would have sent sensitive Murray fans rushing towards a cliff lemming like in their haste to desert this place"

Why not just post the links and discuss them?

Why not discuss the questions other posters ask you instead of ignoring them?

If you don't want to be called a wum, don't act like one, and then deny that you have.

Julius. I want to discuss tennis but when I express my views they are met with insults. Lately a few posters have taken to threatening to leave 606v2 because they don't agree with me! By saying this they are making out that what I say is so controversial and upsetting that they can't bare to look. Passive aggressive I would say. What I said about lemmings was to point out how ridiculous that line of attack is. And it is an attack. I am the one being attacked and bullied not the other way round. You often join in and in some cases are the ring leader.

I've made it quite clear what my views are in a previous comment here. They are hardly controversial! All the stats back me up.

hawkeye wrote:Julius. I want to discuss tennis but when I express my views they are met with insults. Lately a few posters have taken to threatening to leave 606v2 because they don't agree with me! By saying this they are making out that what I say is so controversial and upsetting that they can't bare to look. Passive aggressive I would say. What I said about lemmings was to point out how ridiculous that line of attack is. And it is an attack. I am the one being attacked and bullied not the other way round. You often join in and in some cases are the ring leader.

I've made it quite clear what my views are in a previous comment here. They are hardly controversial! All the stats back me up.

No-one's threatening to leave 606v2 because they don't agree with you - that's not the reason. It's not even Murray fans who tend to complain, nor even people who overly disagree with you. It's just regular posters who get bored and frustrated by the same old way you twist facts etc in your anti-Murray agenda, especially when they raise points which you then totally ignore, as if once you've made your statement you are not willing to discuss it further. To say they find it "so controversial and upsetting that they can't bare (sic) to look" is yet again a total misrepresentation of the truth and it could be argued that such a statement is passive-aggressive on your part.

I find nothing controversial in your views, but much of the Murray-related opinions I find simply ridiculous with no basis in truth (wumming, in fact)- when I, or others, point out why, in reasonable terms, we never get a response (because you don't want to genuinely discuss it, which is another wum tactic) - hence I resort to taking the mick.

BTW, Homogenized used to say the same thing - he reckoned he was never being aggressive and always saw himself as the victim.

HE - Most of us Murray fans would agree that Murray is not as good as the top 3, that Nadal and Fed are the two best and Djok is slightly behind and Murray behind them all

We all know that and are ok to admit it

What gets people annoyed is you start a discussion, and regardless of the topic, tend to poke at Murray fans, however unrelated to the discussion

Your two quotes here are imo only designed to annoy Murray fans, and have nothing to do with the debate

"It would have sent sensitive Murray fans rushing towards a cliff lemming like in their haste to desert this place"

and


It would have sent sensitive Murray fans rushing towards a cliff lemming like in their haste to desert this place... ;)Not to mention calling for me to be banned...



These had no relation to the discussion and added nothing to the debate - but were only there imo to wind people up

I'm not sure about the knock on effect from RG affecting the US open, rather than just Djoko's record in US open finals. When Murray beat him last year he had won one, but lost the in the final to Fed, Nadal and Murray. Now hes lost 4 of 5, with 2 of 3 to Nadal. Theres no reason to think Djoko would be confident in a US open final given his loses there.

With AUS open it totally different, he has won 4 out of 4 finals and is king. I think it will take a lot and be more significant for him personally if he were to play well enough to be in the final, but get beaten on that stage in 2014/15.

As for wimbledon i don't think he has ever considered himself strong on grass and so this year when he seemed to start grasping about tactically vs. Murray i would not be surprised if he was low on confidence as the match went on.

Djokovic is a confidence player through and through. All player's games can suffer through lack of confidence, whereas for Djoko its amplified imo, as his top gears come on so strongly with confidence it takes him to a level quite a long way above his 'norm'

Tom_____ wrote:I'm not sure about the knock on effect from RG affecting the US open, rather than just Djoko's record in US open finals. When Murray beat him last year he had won one, but lost the in the final to Fed, Nadal and Murray. Now hes lost 4 of 5, with 2 of 3 to Nadal. Theres no reason to think Djoko would be confident in a US open final given his loses there.

With AUS open it totally different, he has won 4 out of 4 finals and is king. I think it will take a lot and be more significant for him personally if he were to play well enough to be in the final, but get beaten on that stage in 2014/15.

As for wimbledon i don't think he has ever considered himself strong on grass and so this year when he seemed to start grasping about tactically vs. Murray i would not be surprised if he was low on confidence as the match went on.

Djokovic is a confidence player through and through. All player's games can suffer through lack of confidence, whereas for Djoko its amplified imo, as his top gears come on so strongly with confidence it takes him to a level quite a long way above his 'norm'

Good summary