Mens Tennis Forums banner

Is today's loss only an accident (like the one to Safin 05) or did his domination end

  • No, let's not get carried away

    Votes: 47 45.2%
  • Yes, Federer is not dominating anymore

    Votes: 57 54.8%
1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,144 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Now some people will diss me for making such thread, but I don't care. I also don't want it to be a bashing thread, but we'll see

Roger tried his best and lost. Bad luck? Not at all. Novak was looking more steady, solid and errorless during the whole match. It was visible like a black big dot on the sheet of paper that unless a turning point happens, nothing will prevent Djokovic from winning this one. I'm just surprised it happened in straights. Before this semifinal I was 75% sure Novak will win, so did some prominent users here (like scoobs for example)

Some people may make excuses... no proper preparation, virus, tougher oppostion, difficult draw, but that doesn't mean the goddamn thing. I believe something ends here. Roger's been winning Grand Slam and AMS tournaments. And he will continue to do so - maybe with even breaking Sampras's record of 15 GS won or 7 Wimbledons won - only this time he won't be winning them left and right, there will be no such domination over the next ranked players. Djokovic has been consistently raising his game - making it more multi-dimensional, cutting down UEs ratio, sharpening the backhand and so on. Now he's just collecting the rewards. And some others are waiting in line, constatntly improving: Murray, Tsonga, Cilic, Gulbis maybe, who knows, maybe Gasquet or Berdych will be late bloomers. There's alway Nadal waiting in the corridor, able to take advantage of the good draw on non-clay tournaments

What do you think, people?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,237 Posts
Last year definately foreshadowed that his dominance was ending but he'll definately still win grand slams.
 

·
Anastasia Komananov, KGB
Joined
·
53,509 Posts
To me he's now more Sampras-esque. A great player who will still win them - but is beatable on a given court on a given day.

The 2004-2007 era of virtual hegemony over the tour is just about over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
825 Posts
It's clear for me that Federer play worst in the end of 2007 that in the others years.
Youngster are not afraid of him and begin to find some keys, but if they win that's because he's not playing his best.
So yes could be the end of a dominance periode, if federer doesn't adapt to the new situation and work to have his best level back.

He will still be a GS winner and maybe n°1 but not so dominant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,816 Posts
Now some people will diss me for making such thread, but I don't care. I also don't want it to be a bashing thread, but we'll see

Roger tried his best and lost. Bad luck? Not at all. Novak was looking more steady, solid and errorless during the whole match. It was visible like a black big dot on the sheet of paper that unless a turning point happens, nothing will prevent Djokovic from winning this one. I'm just surprised it happened in straights. Before this semifinal I was 75% sure Novak will win, so did some prominent users here (like scoobs for example)

Some people may make excuses... no proper preparation, virus, tougher oppostion, difficult draw, but that doesn't mean the goddamn thing. I believe something ends here. Roger's been winning Grand Slam and AMS tournaments. And he will continue to do so - maybe with even breaking Sampras's record of 15 GS won or 7 Wimbledons won - only this time he won't be winning them left and right, there will be no such domination over the next ranked players. Djokovic has been consistently raising his game - making it more multi-dimensional, cutting down UEs ratio, sharpening the backhand and so on. Now he's just collecting the rewards. And some others are waiting in line, constatntly improving: Murray, Tsonga, Cilic, Gulbis maybe, who knows, maybe Gasquet or Berdych will be late bloomers. There's alway Nadal waiting in the corridor, able to take advantage of the good draw on non-clay tournaments

What do you think, people?
No, Federer did NOT try his best (and I'm not saying if he did he would've won). Sampras has 14 Slams.

To answer the question, I don't think it's fair to cite this as "the end of an era". Federer is getting older, the "young guns" are maturing and their game is developing well. I can still see him finishing the year as world #1, winning Wimbledon and the USO as was the case in 2005. The only difference here would be that he won't win with AS MUCH EASE as he used to. It's a combination of many different factors, some of which are beyond Federer's control, others are only part of the natural process. You can only stay on top for so long. So in a way, yes he won't dominate as profoundly as he used to, and it's only normal, on the other hand if we look at the bigger picture in terms of W-L ratio, GS, AMS, tour titles, ranking, etc... he will still be on top in most departments. It depends on your perspective I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
677 Posts
I thought 10 straight slam finals was his greatest record, after the consecutive Wimbledon streak.
This ends that run, and he really didn't look like the better player at any time tonight.
Federer looked very average tonight. I would expect Blake or Baghdatis to lose like that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
This was the first time that I was able to see in Djokovic eyes the full determination and self confidence. He was so "I`m the best player in the world at this moment" lookalike. Yes, I think this is end of an era. If Djokovic keeps his physical strenght and keeps improving his technique (and there are a free space for that), he will be No.1 till the end of a year since mentaly he is completely ready.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,144 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
No, Federer did NOT try his best (and I'm not saying if he did he would've won). Sampras has 14 Slams.

To answer the question, I don't think it's fair to cite this as "the end of an era". Federer is getting older, the "young guns" are maturing and their game is developing well. I can still see him finishing the year as world #1, winning Wimbledon and the USO as was the case in 2005. The only difference here would be that he won't win with AS MUCH EASE as he used to. It's a combination of many different factors, some of which are beyond Federer's control, others are only part of the natural process. You can only stay on top for so long. So in a way, yes he won't dominate as profoundly as he used to, and it's only normal, on the other hand if we look at the bigger picture in terms of W-L ratio, GS, AMS, tour titles, ranking, etc... he will still be on top in most departments. It depends on your perspective I guess.
1) Fed gave the best he could give today - that's what I meant
2) You're writing exactly what I wrote :)
 

·
RAJ KAREGA KHALSA
Joined
·
9,981 Posts
I would way rather see a triumvirate than a hegemony, so I hope you're right. I won't downgrade him to "Sampras-esque" yet, though.

To me he's now more Sampras-esque. A great player who will still win them - but is beatable on a given court on a given day.

The 2004-2007 era of virtual hegemony over the tour is just about over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,619 Posts
What Fed has done the past few years is amazing and it was always going to end at some point.

I still see him taking about one slam a year though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,894 Posts
Roger still has one slam a year left in him for quite a few more seasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,530 Posts
Novak played well I'm not taking anything away from him...but SO FARRoger of 2008 doesn't look remotely like the roger of 2006 or 2005! so yes it looks like federer's skill is wayning...never had I seen Roger rely so much on his serve in a grand slam...hope he picks it up in time for the clay season!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
The king will be back. He'll win more slams for sure.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
95,412 Posts
Not the end because i feel his form right now is not where it can be - if it was these young guns just having bigger and better weapons than him maybe, but no way is that the case

he should have kept improving and not gone backward like he did in this Championship - he looked half a step slower to me as well

but he'll realize that now
 

·
RAJ KAREGA KHALSA
Joined
·
9,981 Posts
No, that was Roger trying (in vain) to bring out his "A" game. There's a difference.

It's not the end of the world. He'll have every meaningful record before he retires. Just concede that he was, as Mary Carillo put it, "comprehensively beaten."

did he? was that roger bringing out the A game?
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top