Originally Posted by HKz
Naw, in terms of quality I thought Australia was better. Even Wimbledon 2007 had a higher quality of play for a longer duration than 2008.
2008 had arguably the most drama by far, especially since so much was on the line for both of them (6 in a row for Federer, perhaps retain #1 ranking, Rafa going for channel slam first since Borg, Rafa becoming #1 for the first time, etc) so much hype and talk for that particular match, which is why a large amount of very casual tennis fans also look at that match as a fantastic one. Rafa could have beaten Federer in straight sets as he had his chances, and he should have beaten Roger in 4. However, he got tight. Federer played great in some moments, but overall his game was pretty lackluster and Rafa was clearly in his head.
Hmm I value your opinion highly but I thought overall that Australia 09 was good quality wise until the 5th set. The 5th really made the level of quality of the whole match dip dramatically. In my opinion of course. If Fed had maintained his previous level up until the 5th I'd have agreed. Serve aside, Fed was really playing amazing until that 5th set. His movement was perhaps the best I've seen from him. Matching Nadal in that area.
2008 had IT in my opinion. The overall factor. So much tension, drama, tennis in that match.
Rafa failing at Wimby and the burden he felt going in that match, like you said his nr.1 goal, back 2 back first player since Borg to win RG-Wim. Federer going for his own records, his H2H with Rafa getting in his head, the devastation at RG against Nadal in the final, the motivation going in this match.