For Fed, Rafa & Nole, Wimbledon is for all the marbles [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

For Fed, Rafa & Nole, Wimbledon is for all the marbles

MIMIC
06-17-2008, 09:15 AM
At the Australian Open, Djokovic was able to officially have his name added to the discussion that was dominated by talk of Federer & Nadal. The French Open was simply business as usual for Nadal. But Wimbledon seems to be where the stakes are at their highest.

Federer has had to fend off his many detractors that have proclaimed that he is no longer the "King" due to the increasing will and determination of his opponents. Young talents like Djokovic and Nadal have the ability to apply pressure to him, both having beating him this year en route to Grand Slam victories. Having only won two titles that many would consider minor, Federer enters Wimbledon as No. 3 in the ATP Race rankings. This leads to increasing skepticism as to whether he has the ability to reassert himself as the best out there. Federer's five consecutive victories make Wimbledon a second home. Will he be able to secure a victory and protect his territory? "The king is NOT dead" will be his declaration if he's able to defend his title. Winning will finally get the critics off his back. Succumbing to Djokovic and Nadal at the Australian and French Opens seemed to have been the unfortunate fate of standing in the way of his opponents' destinies, but losing at Wimbledon will be inexcusable. The king will have a grass tomb.

Much like Federer, Nadal is having to ward off the critics, too. The one-trick pony is what he's being called, with the trick being the ability to make anyone on clay disappear. While it's a tremendous feat to have such an remarkable record on the red stuff, Nadal is hungry for more. The gallant beast that dwells within Nadal is no longer satiated by clay alone. It wants a full course meal: clay, hard, and of course, grass. The Queens Club Championship title proves that he has the gift and the guts to win on grass, being the first to taste green victory before his new rival, Djokovic. It definitely sends a message to both Federer and Nole that Nadal isn't just a clay court specialist. His vast improvement on grass would culminate in a Wimbledon victory this year, allowing everyone to openly discuss his diverse playing style. Hmmmm...diverse. I'm sure Nadal would love that people are describing him this way. He will have hit the core of Federer and side-stepped Djokovic as the new leader of tennis. Not winning at Wimbledon will, however, prevent him from escaping the "only on clay" tag. He'll never be No. 1 is what they'll say.

The third wheel, Djokovic, added more tension and drama to the Federer-Nadal rivalry. Skyrocketing up the ranks, Nole has cemented himself into the conversation. When it comes to any Grand Slam now, Djokovic is always a factor; the Big Two has now become the Big Three, with more prospect being in favor of 2008's Aussie Open champion. But with the hype comes great expectations. Is Djokovic able to live up to his new name or will his stay in the Federer-Nadal conversation be a short stint? Being victorious at Wimbledon would be a one-two punch to his supposed competition. Not only will he have matured faster than Nadal on grass but he will have also delivered a knock out blow to Federer that would end his reign and put Federer in unfamiliar territory: the backburner. This coup d’état would erase Federer from leading the discussion and would turn speculation into realization. He would also become Nadal's new headache. Much will have been accomplished. But surrendering Wimbledon will only dim the glow of tennis's supposedly brightest star. He's not as great as we all thought he was.

Is the situation as dramatic as I make it appear? :wavey: :devil:

Mimi
06-17-2008, 09:39 AM
king roger must win wimby to justify his status as king :cool:

hiperborejac
06-17-2008, 11:16 AM
Is the situation as dramatic as I make it appear? :wavey: :devil:

No it is not.

Federer: Most dominant player in tennis history. He achieved so much that every player can only dream of. He is still King and will be by the time he retire. Eventually losing Wimbledon crown will not mean that is end of his records and his title of GOAT, but only losing his No.1. Even his best ages of tennis passed, he has enough motivation by chasing Sampras record. I think he will win two more Wimbledon and 1 hardcourt slam - predict last 15th title on 4. July 2010. and finally resign of tennis king. That will be best for him - resign with Wimbledon title.

Nadal: His recent form was impressive. Wining his last RG with some changes in play added this year - more aggressive play, improved serve, slice and volleys made his game even more suitable for grass court establishing him as not only one dimensional clay player. As for his style of play - it is not suitable for hard stuff and it will be best for him to concentrate on clay and grass. Pushing too hard on hardcourts may very hurt him (in long terms) and end his career. This Wimbledon is best opportunity to finally become No.1. and he knows it. Last 3 years he was challenging Fed but has no chance, partly cause of his style, partly cause he was only1 who could hurt him. Now when Djokovic is there he is not alone. So if he hurt Fed on grass, and Djokovic on hard there is his chance. Not wining Wimbledon is not catastrophe - I'm sure he will have chance in the future and win some. Time is ahead of him.

Djokovic: Last year he was rising star. Nowadays he is slam winner and slam contender. Many proclaimed him as Big Mouth because talked openly he wants to be No 1. one day. Last word is a key - one day. He had goals for every year and every year he surpass it. Last year he wanted to enter top 10 - was No 3. This year he wanted to win a slam - he already did it. So what else he could do. He is taking it slowly step by step like he said in numerous interviews. Beating Fed or Nadal in Wimbledon will be again achievement more for him. So not wining Wimbledon now is not a big thing for him. As Nadal he has a time ahead of him. And future will be ruled by these two.

goldenlox
06-17-2008, 11:34 AM
This is a big Wimbledon. Federer is going for 6 in a row. Never get another chance for that kind of streak.
Nadal still hasn't won a major outside Paris. So it's big for him.
Djokovic trying to prove it's a big 3 not big 2.

hiperborejac
06-17-2008, 11:49 AM
This is a big Wimbledon. Federer is going for 6 in a row. Never get another chance for that kind of streak.
Nadal still hasn't won a major outside Paris. So it's big for him.
Djokovic trying to prove it's a big 3 not big 2.

Yes it is. But also it doesn't guarantee anything. Only increasing chance - for Federer to save No.1, For Nadal and Djokovic to take No.1.
There is summer hardcourt season after it and then will be clear. This Wimbledon decide who is real No 2.

MaryX
06-17-2008, 12:17 PM
Djokovic trying to prove it's a big 3 not big 2.
It is proven already.

There is summer hardcourt season after it and then will be clear.
Agree, it isn't like Wimbledon will resolve everything for all times.

goldenlox
06-17-2008, 12:25 PM
It's not proven to be a big 3. Federer is already one of the greatest ever.
Nadal is one of the greatest ever on clay. Djokovic has one major, like Roddick.

hiperborejac
06-17-2008, 12:39 PM
It's not proven to be a big 3. Federer is already one of the greatest ever.
Nadal is one of the greatest ever on clay. Djokovic has one major, like Roddick.

It depends in which way you are looking on big 3. There is only Fed GOAT. Today Djokovic IS in big 3 (and is one of 3 men with 5 consecutive GS semis in Open era). Djokovic has more points then Andy ever had and Andy was No.1. So clearly in big 3 today because the gap from these player and the rest of field is huge. By the way what Djokovic has to do to become big 3 by your standards?

goldenlox
06-17-2008, 12:57 PM
He has to win more majors.
Federer is important historically. He matters in the history of this sport.
Nadal matters in the history of clay tennis. And 4 in a row at any major is significant historically.
Djokovic hasn't done anything that puts him with alltime greats.

hiperborejac
06-17-2008, 01:08 PM
He has to win more majors.
Federer is important historically. He matters in the history of this sport.
Nadal matters in the history of clay tennis. And 4 in a row at any major is significant historically.
Djokovic hasn't done anything that puts him with alltime greats.

Ok, if that is what you want. But as I mentioned when somebody say the big 3 then he thought on Federer, Nadal and Djokovic - on press, on forums... There is no big 3 in history of tennis, only by periods or decades.

Quadruple Tree
06-17-2008, 01:13 PM
Federer is only historically significant because he is the last major winner to use a one-handed backhand. Djokovic has shown us that the future of tennis is the two-handed backhand. Also, Federer is the last world No. 1 who wastes valuable practice time on silly things like volleys, overheads, and slice backhands. As the great Djokovic has shown us such skills will not be important in the future of the game.

Fumus
06-17-2008, 01:20 PM
Federer is only historically significant because he is the last major winner to use a one-handed backhand. Djokovic has shown us that the future of tennis is the two-handed backhand. Also, Federer is the last world No. 1 who wastes valuable practice time on silly things like volleys, overheads, and slice backhands. As the great Djokovic has shown us such skills will not be important in the future of the game.

:haha:

Post of the year! Repped.

hiperborejac
06-17-2008, 01:33 PM
Federer is only historically significant because he is the last major winner to use a one-handed backhand. Djokovic has shown us that the future of tennis is the two-handed backhand. Also, Federer is the last world No. 1 who wastes valuable practice time on silly things like volleys, overheads, and slice backhands. As the great Djokovic has shown us such skills will not be important in the future of the game.

:haha: :haha: :haha:

BigJohn
06-17-2008, 01:45 PM
Federer is only historically significant because he is the last major winner to use a one-handed backhand. Djokovic has shown us that the future of tennis is the two-handed backhand. Also, Federer is the last world No. 1 who wastes valuable practice time on silly things like volleys, overheads, and slice backhands. As the great Djokovic has shown us such skills will not be important in the future of the game.

:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

This is one hell of a post! Made my day.

MacTheKnife
06-17-2008, 02:04 PM
Federer is only historically significant because he is the last major winner to use a one-handed backhand. Djokovic has shown us that the future of tennis is the two-handed backhand. Also, Federer is the last world No. 1 who wastes valuable practice time on silly things like volleys, overheads, and slice backhands. As the great Djokovic has shown us such skills will not be important in the future of the game.

You must be pretty young. People were saying the same thing when Borg and Conners came along. Then along comes Samparas and Federer.. The one thing I've learned after all my years of playing and watching tennis is it's future is not predictable. That's what makes it such a great sport.
Who would have predicted that when Fed knocked off Pete in 2001 at Wimby, then lost at the next round, that 7 years later he'd have 12 GSs.
This is a wonderful sport, but no crystal ball has ever worked before. There always seems to be some fly in the ointment to most predictions.

hiperborejac
06-17-2008, 02:07 PM
You must be pretty young. People were saying the same thing when Borg and Conners came along. Then along comes Samparas and Federer.. The one thing I've learned after all my years of playing and watching tennis is it's future is not predictable. That's what makes it such a great sport.
Who would have predicted that when Fed knocked off Pete in 2001 at Wimby, then lost at the next round, that 7 years later he'd have 12 GSs.
This is a wonderful sport, but no crystal ball has ever worked before. There always seems to be some fly in the ointment to most predictions.

I'm sure he posted it like parody on Clay Death's thread :wavey:

Beforehand
06-17-2008, 02:14 PM
Oh, this Wimbledon.

Roger wins = "OMG. Expected result. So boring."
Roger loses = "OMG. He's pretty much never going to win another match ever again."

Go MTF!

habibko
06-17-2008, 04:18 PM
Oh, this Wimbledon.

Roger wins = "OMG. Expected result. So boring."
Roger loses = "OMG. He's pretty much never going to win another match ever again."

Go MTF!

:worship:

FedFan_2007
06-17-2008, 04:26 PM
Federer will have hundreds more opportunities to win 6 Wimblys in a row. No big pressure.

Clay Death
06-17-2008, 04:38 PM
At the Australian Open, Djokovic was able to officially have his name added to the discussion that was dominated by talk of Federer & Nadal. The French Open was simply business as usual for Nadal. But Wimbledon seems to be where the stakes are at their highest.

Federer has had to fend off his many detractors that have proclaimed that he is no longer the "King" due to the increasing will and determination of his opponents. Young talents like Djokovic and Nadal have the ability to apply pressure to him, both having beating him this year en route to Grand Slam victories. Having only won two titles that many would consider minor, Federer enters Wimbledon as No. 3 in the ATP Race rankings. This leads to increasing skepticism as to whether he has the ability to reassert himself as the best out there. Federer's five consecutive victories make Wimbledon a second home. Will he be able to secure a victory and protect his territory? "The king is NOT dead" will be his declaration if he's able to defend his title. Winning will finally get the critics off his back. Succumbing to Djokovic and Nadal at the Australian and French Opens seemed to have been the unfortunate fate of standing in the way of his opponents' destinies, but losing at Wimbledon will be inexcusable. The king will have a grass tomb.

Much like Federer, Nadal is having to ward off the critics, too. The one-trick pony is what he's being called, with the trick being the ability to make anyone on clay disappear. While it's a tremendous feat to have such an remarkable record on the red stuff, Nadal is hungry for more. The gallant beast that dwells within Nadal is no longer satiated by clay alone. It wants a full course meal: clay, hard, and of course, grass. The Queens Club Championship title proves that he has the gift and the guts to win on grass, being the first to taste green victory before his new rival, Djokovic. It definitely sends a message to both Federer and Nole that Nadal isn't just a clay court specialist. His vast improvement on grass would culminate in a Wimbledon victory this year, allowing everyone to openly discuss his diverse playing style. Hmmmm...diverse. I'm sure Nadal would love that people are describing him this way. He will have hit the core of Federer and side-stepped Djokovic as the new leader of tennis. Not winning at Wimbledon will, however, prevent him from escaping the "only on clay" tag. He'll never be No. 1 is what they'll say.

The third wheel, Djokovic, added more tension and drama to the Federer-Nadal rivalry. Skyrocketing up the ranks, Nole has cemented himself into the conversation. When it comes to any Grand Slam now, Djokovic is always a factor; the Big Two has now become the Big Three, with more prospect being in favor of 2008's Aussie Open champion. But with the hype comes great expectations. Is Djokovic able to live up to his new name or will his stay in the Federer-Nadal conversation be a short stint? Being victorious at Wimbledon would be a one-two punch to his supposed competition. Not only will he have matured faster than Nadal on grass but he will have also delivered a knock out blow to Federer that would end his reign and put Federer in unfamiliar territory: the backburner. This coup d’état would erase Federer from leading the discussion and would turn speculation into realization. He would also become Nadal's new headache. Much will have been accomplished. But surrendering Wimbledon will only dim the glow of tennis's supposedly brightest star. He's not as great as we all thought he was.

Is the situation as dramatic as I make it appear? :wavey: :devil:


excellent post. i enjoyed it.

its even more dramatic than some may realize. this is the most improtant Wimbeldon in years. there is so much at stake. and so much history.

MacTheKnife
06-17-2008, 05:12 PM
Federer will have hundreds more opportunities to win 6 Wimblys in a row. No big pressure.

Talk about irony, Pete lost his chance at 8 to Federer, and Pete never won another Wimby. Borg lost his shot at 6 in a row to Mac.
Now we have Fed in the exact same position as Pete in 2001. Only difference is there are no 19 year old phenoms around right now. Pretty good chance Fed won't lose it to a teenager..

Matt01
06-17-2008, 05:33 PM
king roger must win wimby to justify his status as king :cool:


Affirmative. (tribute to clay death. haha)

If Roger doesn't win Wimbledon this year, things are not looking very good for him and he will probably lose his #1 ranking soon. :eek:

Clay Death
06-17-2008, 05:40 PM
Affirmative. (tribute to clay death. haha)

If Roger doesn't win Wimbledon this year, things are not looking very good for him and he will probably lose his #1 ranking soon. :eek:


its "clay" death.

that said and out of the way, i would have to agree. this is his last stand at slams. it will be a devastating psychological blow to Fed if they gun him down here.

MacTheKnife
06-17-2008, 05:53 PM
its "clay" death.

that said and out of the way, i would have to agree. this is his last stand at slams. it will be a devastating psychological blow to Fed if they gun him down here.

Not sure I agree with this. It would not surprise me at all if Fed lost, to see it help him rebound for the next couple of years. It at least would take off that massive amount of pressure that comes along with being #1 for this long. That's exactly what happened to Pete. Once he fell from #1, it actually helped him play better and pick up a couple more slams.
Expectations are a funny thing and I just think that along with those expectations, the pressure, and the tougher competition, it has gotten to him.
He'd probably make a pretty tough underdog for the next few years and let Nadal or Djok deal with being #1 for a while. All the greats have said it's a lot tougher to stay there, than to get there.

Clay Death
06-17-2008, 06:08 PM
Not sure I agree with this. It would not surprise me at all if Fed lost, to see it help him rebound for the next couple of years. It at least would take off that massive amount of pressure that comes along with being #1 for this long. That's exactly what happened to Pete. Once he fell from #1, it actually helped him play better and pick up a couple more slams.
Expectations are a funny thing and I just think that along with those expectations, the pressure, and the tougher competition, it has gotten to him.
He'd probably make a pretty tough underdog for the next few years and let Nadal or Djok deal with being #1 for a while. All the greats have said it's a lot tougher to stay there, than to get there.

i think you have a valid point there mac the knife. however i do think that he has been on the top for a long time. it takes incredible mental and physical focus to achieve all that he has achieved. the weariness of it all showed so clearly at Roland Garros. he looked lost and out of confidence.

Borg finally caved in due to the mental burden. he of course had way too much on his plater as well. he got married and had mistresses going on the side and then those failed business deals.

Fed is free from some of that baggage but he still put way too much pressure on himself when he said that he wanted to be known as the greatest ever. this Wimby could be his undoing if he fails there. i am not sure he recovers if Djokovic slams him at the U.S.Open.

brent-o
06-17-2008, 11:09 PM
Oh, this Wimbledon.

Roger wins = "OMG. Expected result. So boring."
Roger loses = "OMG. He's pretty much never going to win another match ever again."

Go MTF!

:worship: Pretty much. No need to go into a three paragraph long analysis when this sums it up right here.

RogandyFan
06-17-2008, 11:22 PM
Talk about irony, Pete lost his chance at 8 to Federer, and Pete never won another Wimby. Borg lost his shot at 6 in a row to Mac.
Now we have Fed in the exact same position as Pete in 2001. Only difference is there are no 19 year old phenoms around right now. Pretty good chance Fed won't lose it to a teenager..

Errr isn't Ernest Gulbis 19? History could repeat itself.

Clay Death
06-17-2008, 11:24 PM
Errr isn't Ernest Gulbis 19?

i think Gulbis is 19 and Kei Nishikori might be 18. can somebody check on this?

Tnn74
06-17-2008, 11:30 PM
Federer is only historically significant because he is the last major winner to use a one-handed backhand. Djokovic has shown us that the future of tennis is the two-handed backhand. Also, Federer is the last world No. 1 who wastes valuable practice time on silly things like volleys, overheads, and slice backhands. As the great Djokovic has shown us such skills will not be important in the future of the game.

:haha: :haha: Thanks for the insight Sjrdan! :worship:

tskimny
06-18-2008, 07:12 AM
Great post!

Wimbledon is going to be truly exciting this year.

Roger, Rafa and Nole are the 3 faves to win Wimby. Excellent skills and mentally tough.

Can't wait for Wimby!

Fed is expected to win it based on his past Wimby crowns.
Rafa has been runner-up on several occasions.
Once again, Nole is the dark horse. In OZ Open, Fed was expected to win but Nole stole the show.

So, we'll see just wait and see.


I, of course, am rooting for the dark horse.... Go Nole!

bedfordfalls8000
06-18-2008, 08:22 AM
Once Federer win Wimbledon 2008, then US Open is the real marble of all....

BigJohn
06-18-2008, 12:24 PM
Once Federer win Wimbledon 2008, then US Open is the real marble of all....

Good observation. Federer wins Wimbledon and then the USO becomes the tie-breaker for the year... Now that would be something.

Tnn74
06-18-2008, 10:45 PM
Once Federer win Wimbledon 2008, then US Open is the real marble of all....

IF Federer wins Wimbledon... :p

Manon
06-18-2008, 10:53 PM
Good observation. Federer wins Wimbledon and then the USO becomes the tie-breaker for the year... Now that would be something.

I'm glad you're dreamer:wavey:

BigJohn
06-18-2008, 11:19 PM
I'm glad you're dreamer:wavey:

What?

That would be a dream scenario and make the USO extra meaningful.

Or better yet: Fed gets Wimbledon, then Davydenko or Nalbandian or Roddick pull the upset at the USO: showdown at the Masters Cup. That would be sweet.

What are you getting at? Are you also one of those who expect Nadal to win Wimbledon? ;)

Fedex
06-19-2008, 12:20 AM
Oh, this Wimbledon.

Roger wins = "OMG. Expected result. So boring."
Roger loses = "OMG. He's pretty much never going to win another match ever again."

Go MTF!

That pretty much sums it up.

Knightmace
06-19-2008, 03:56 AM
It's a triple threat situation.

Federer=God
06-19-2008, 04:22 AM
Federer better win. If he was to lose though, I pray it isn't to Djokovic. I am still reasonably confident Fed can take Djokovic on grass, but Nadal is now a grass monster as well.

MIMIC
06-23-2008, 03:21 AM
ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/wimbledon08/columns/story?columnist=garber_greg&id=3456010) pretty much echos my sentiments about how much is on the line here at Wimbledon.

This sure is gonna be one exciting Slam :)

fedexdelivers
06-23-2008, 03:43 AM
Federer will have hundreds more opportunities to win 6 Wimblys in a row. No big pressure.

Not hundreds but one more opportunity. He will start the streak again in Wimby 2009 and achieve his 6th Wimby in a row in 2014 when he is 32. I would even go so far as to say this is likely.