When a semi-final was like a final.

Nadal's and Djokovic's upcoming match reminds me of the time when they played in the Olympics. They played in the semi-finals with Nadal winning 6-4 1-6 6-4. The other semi-final was Gonzalez (12) and Blake (8). Virtually everyone expected the winning of the Nadal(1)-Djokovic(3) match to take the gold and the loser to take the bronze and that's exactly what happened (in straight sets).

This leads me to claim that the real final was the Nadal-Djokovic semi-final, as the two best players in the event (in most people's opinion) were in this match. Do you agree with this? What other occasions do you think there were by far the best two players in one semi-final (or even quarter-final or earlier)? I can think of two other examples, the 2005 Australian Open and 2005 Roland Garros.

In the 2005 Australian Open one semi-final was Safin-Federer and the other was Roddick-Hewitt. I believe that Safin would've won against Roddick and Federer (had he made the final) would've beaten both Hewitt and Roddick. The 2005 Roland Garros semi-finals were Federer-Nadal and Puerta-Davydenko. Again I think that Nadal would've beaten Davydenko as well and Federer would've beaten both other semi-finalists.

You are so right. This semi final being in fact a final and played like one happens on a regular basis.

I think it has to do with the DRAW being fixed in the big events. I know everything is supposed to be fair and square but I really doubt that. :rolleyes:

You are so right. This semi final being in fact a final and played like
one happens on a regular basis.

I think it has to do with the DRAW being fixed in the big events. I know everything is supposed to be fair and square but I really doubt that. :rolleyes:

It's true though.. The semi finals/quarter finals are usually more fun to watch than the finals. Well, at least that's how it's been for the last few years. I really hope today is the exception :)

BTW, you are allowed to call the tournaments draws fixed or whatever. Truth be told, they have rules they have to follow. If anyone is to blame here it's obviously the ATP who needs to change the rules, don't you agree?

Nadal's and Djokovic's upcoming match reminds me of the time when they played in the Olympics. They played in the semi-finals with Nadal winning 6-4 1-6 6-4. The other semi-final was Gonzalez (12) and Blake (8). Virtually everyone expected the winning of the Nadal(1)-Djokovic(3) match to take the gold and the loser to take the bronze and that's exactly what happened (in straight sets).

This leads me to claim that the real final was the Nadal-Djokovic semi-final, as the two best players in the event (in most people's opinion) were in this match. Do you agree with this? What other occasions do you think there were by far the best two players in one semi-final (or even quarter-final or earlier)? I can think of two other examples, the 2005 Australian Open and 2005 Roland Garros.

In the 2005 Australian Open one semi-final was Safin-Federer and the other was Roddick-Hewitt. I believe that Safin would've won against Roddick and Federer (had he made the final) would've beaten both Hewitt and Roddick. The 2005 Roland Garros semi-finals were Federer-Nadal and Puerta-Davydenko. Again I think that Nadal would've beaten Davydenko as well and Federer would've beaten both other semi-finalists.

the 2009 semi final of roland garros. soderling vs gonzalez....man that was an epic...last set-sod down 4-1 and wins 6-4!

This is only going to get worse, the top is very competitive.

Roger, Djoker, Nadal, Murray, Soderling can all beat one another. The problem is there is always going to be somebody in the semi-final or even Quarter-final who can cause problem. We might see ALOT more Nadal-Federer semi-finals now. with the #1 and #3

Madrid 2009 SF Rafa-Nole was the real final.

AO 2009

Verdasco-Nadal

AO 2009

Verdasco-Nadal

Bullshit. The AO final was very tight and aside from the Federer serving tank either play could have won.

Nadal not one of the best two? :o

AO 2009

Verdasco-Nadal

agreed.

federer was violated in the final

I don't think a lot of people are understanding this thread. Whoops.

Anyway, OP, is it important that the fact that it was "the defacto final" was known at the time? Because, in that case, I'm not sure that Federer/Safin really was that match, only because I don't know if everyone would have assigned to Safin, upon beating Federer, the definite notion that he would beat Hewitt or Roddick, at least at that time. Especially when Hewitt was so steadily doing excellently against pretty much everyone but Federer.

well verdasco wouldn't have beaten federer, but he played a better match against nadal imo.

Andre Agassi's GS semi"finals"

1988 FO
1990 USO should've been with teen Pete
1992 FO Courier
1994 USO Todd Martin
1996 AO should've been with old Becker and as defending champ
1999 FO
1999 USO AO champ Kafelnikov
2000 AO the best semi"final" of his career
2001 AO Rafter
2001 Wimbledon without Pete
2002 USO should've been with old Pete

2002 USO should've been with old Pete
Oh yes. Instead, he was having a stupid Saturday 3-hour date with then number one Hewitt.

And yes to answer the OP, as soon as he missed the easy overhead, he started crying as if he'd lost the gold medal.

USO 2010. Djokovic-Federer was the real final.

You mean RG 2005?

USO 2010. Djokovic-Federer was the real final.

Why? Do they play 6-match slams now?
Seems like you're terrified by the possibility that Rafa wins.
On my part, I think the odds are 2:1 favouring Nole.

USO 2010. Djokovic-Federer was the real final.

Obviously. Nole wins the final today without a doubt.:wavey: Bye Rafa.:wavey:

I don't think a lot of people are understanding this thread. Whoops.

Anyway, OP, is it important that the fact that it was "the defacto final" was known at the time? Because, in that case, I'm not sure that Federer/Safin really was that match, only because I don't know if everyone would have assigned to Safin, upon beating Federer, the definite notion that he would beat Hewitt or Roddick, at least at that time. Especially when Hewitt was so steadily doing excellently against pretty much everyone but Federer.

Yeah. The topic is about the best two players meeting in the semi-finals, not the semi-final being the best match.

I can think of two examples. The most recent one was Shanghai last year. One semi-final was Djokovic-Davydenko, both in great form, and the other was Nadal-Lopez. Given the form of the players involved, I think that the Djokovic-Davydenko match was the real final.

Also back in 2008 in Canada. The semis were Rafa-Murray and Kiefer-Simon. Obviously Rafa-Murray was the decider in that event. In that case more than the first I mentioned, the de-facto final was known at the time. Especially because Kiefer was over 30 years old and Simon wasn't top 20 yet.

Nadal's and Djokovic's upcoming match reminds me of the time when they played in the Olympics. They played in the semi-finals with Nadal winning 6-4 1-6 6-4. The other semi-final was Gonzalez (12) and Blake (8). Virtually everyone expected the winning of the Nadal(1)-Djokovic(3) match to take the gold and the loser to take the bronze and that's exactly what happened (in straight sets).

This leads me to claim that the real final was the Nadal-Djokovic semi-final, as the two best players in the event (in most people's opinion) were in this match. Do you agree with this? What other occasions do you think there were by far the best two players in one semi-final (or even quarter-final or earlier)? I can think of two other examples, the 2005 Australian Open and 2005 Roland Garros.

In the 2005 Australian Open one semi-final was Safin-Federer and the other was Roddick-Hewitt. I believe that Safin would've won against Roddick and Federer (had he made the final) would've beaten both Hewitt and Roddick. The 2005 Roland Garros semi-finals were Federer-Nadal and Puerta-Davydenko. Again I think that Nadal would've beaten Davydenko as well and Federer would've beaten both other semi-finalists.

Every sport with a "bracket" is susceptible to this. For years, the AFC (NFL) Championship game was the "real" Super Bowl. Then it shifted to the NFC Championship game. This accounts for all the lopsided scores in the Super Bowl, which is rarely competitive.

MLB has two leagues, the NBA, and NHL have two conferences. Tennis has two halves of a draw. By the time they get to the semis, it shouldn't be a surprise when one half is stacked and the other got blow'd up.

If shite like this didn't happen, you ass clowns wouldn't know what to do with all your asterisks.

agreed.

federer was violated in the final

yeaaaaah... that's why he won more points than nadal even after tanking the last set 6-2....

I get the feeling the Valencia semis this year fitted this criteria. Ferrer-Soderling and Granollers-Simon. I couldn't image either of the latter two beating either of the former two this week. Of course I'm wrong if Granollers defeats Ferrer in the final.

Haas - Safin 2002 AO.

Oh wait, Safin lost to Johansson :retard:

Garcia-Lopez vs Nadal in Bangkok :shrug:

recent Shanghai match between Fed and Novak.

recent Shanghai match between Fed and Novak.
Obviously not, since Roger lost the final :shrug:

Definitely the 2005 RG SF, Fed v Rafa.

Obviously not, since Roger lost the final :shrug:

Definitely the 2005 RG SF, Fed v Rafa.

The final was a better match.

The final was a better match.

Don't use such logic.

The final was a better match.
The thread isn't about quality of the match :confused: The winner of that SF was bound to be the champion of the tournament.

Haas vs Federer at Wimbledon.

The thread isn't about quality of the match :confused: The winner of that SF was bound to be the champion of the tournament.

Seconded.

The thread isn't about quality of the match :confused: The winner of that SF was bound to be the champion of the tournament.

You can't say that for sure. Whichever way you look at it its not good answer to this thread. Puerta arguably had the same if harder draw and gave a far better match against Nadal.

RG 2008 :p

Obviously not, since Roger lost the final :shrug:

Definitely the 2005 RG SF, Fed v Rafa.

Novak match was more important for Fed than the murray one. Murray needed the shanghai win more than Fed.

What about this year's Wimbledon? I'm sure Murray would also beat Djokovic/Berdych.

USO'03 Roddick vs Nalby semi was probably one of such things. Both seemed like favourites for the final..

What about this year's Wimbledon? I'm sure Murray would also beat Djokovic/Berdych.
Well considering Djokovic was more than capable of beating Murray and Nadal in the final and considering that Berdych had only beaten Murray a few weeks back I guess it wasn't. :shrug:

Nadal vs Djokovic RG 2008. Federer got a tennis lesson in final, it was an embarrassment for #1 to get a breadstick and a bagel. Looked like first round match.

You can't say that for sure. Whichever way you look at it its not good answer to this thread. Puerta arguably had the same if harder draw and gave a far better match against Nadal.

The Door wasn't seeded, so he played Ljubicic, Acasuso Cañas and Davydenko before reaching the final.

Buenos Aires 2007

Almagro vs Monaco
Di Mauro vs Hartfield


Las Vegas 2007

Hewitt vs Safin
Melzer vs Korolev


Rome 2007

Nadal vs Davydenko (Nadal barely won - 7:6 6:7 6:4)
Gonzalez vs Volandri

Haas - Safin 2002 AO.

Oh wait, Safin lost to Johansson :retard:

This is priceless. :lol:

Buenos Aires 2007

Almagro vs Monaco
Di Mauro vs Hartfield


Las Vegas 2007

Hewitt vs Safin
Melzer vs Korolev


Rome 2007

Nadal vs Davydenko (Nadal barely won - 7:6 6:7 6:4)
Gonzalez vs Volandri

Nice digs. Ferrer defeating Granollers solidified my point about the Valencia semis this year.

USO 2010. Djokovic-Federer was the real final.

This.

This.

Pity there was another player in the draw who was good enough to beat whoever won that SF.... and proved it! :cool:

Get over it.

Pity there was another player in the draw who was good enough to beat whoever won that SF.... and proved it! :cool:


Lucky Rafa, having to face his "greatest admirer" in that slam final, almost as tough as facing Almagro... Djoker seemed happier than Rafa about the result... :o :rolleyes: :zzz:

Lucky Rafa, having to face his "greatest admirer" in that slam final, almost as tough as facing Almagro... Djoker seemed happier than Rafa about the result... :o :rolleyes: :zzz:

So you haven't got over it.... :D

Puerta was good enough in that tournament to bother Federer. Not an easy one to call.

Roland Garros 2009
Federer-Del Potro (5 setter)


Vina del Mar 2008
Gonzalez-Cuevas
6-7(4), 7-6(6), 6-2

(literally the semifinal was the final since Monaco injured his anckle in the doubles final and had to give a walkover , gonzalez played an exhibition with ventura as a "final" but the title was in the bag)

It's true though.. The semi finals/quarter finals are usually more fun to watch than the finals. Well, at least that's how it's been for the last few years. I really hope today is the exception :)

BTW, you are allowed to call the tournaments draws fixed or whatever. Truth be told, they have rules they have to follow. If anyone is to blame here it's obviously the ATP who needs to change the rules, don't you agree?

so true the semis are more exciting and tense then the actually finals lol