Support NeoGAF

[miserable]

So after Doha, Novak has made at least the finals of every single tournament he has entered

QF - Doha
F - AUSTRALIAN OPEN (won)
F - Dubai
F - Indian Wells (won)
F - Miami (won)
F - Monte Carlo (won)
F - Rome (won)
F - ROLAND GARROS
F - WIMBLEDON (won)
F - Montreal
F - Cincinnati
F - U.S. OPEN (won)

no matter how you slice it, that's very impressive

 

[Faith]

Remember last year before Wimbledon when Djokovic had 6 GS titles? Crazy how fast things can change.

 

[Simply Sami]

People don't like Novak Djokovic cuz watching him play is boring as fuck.

I wish Nadal was still alive. Not even that big of a fan but he always brought the best out of everybody else.

What are you talking about?

Djokovic has had some of the best ever matches in recent time. The French opens classics against Nadal and a few against him at the US open. Also the Australian open final.

He's had legendary matches against Del Potro, Wawrinka, Murray and Federer over the last 7 years or so.

Really odd statement to make.

 

[Diamond]

yeah i'm sure djokovic was crying on the inside...come on now. lol although maybe the intention was to turn a tribute to djoker into a tribute to federer (like someone said in that thread)

I think it IS hard for Djokovic, his reaction, for instance, at the French Open this year and last year when the crowd cheered him showed that he craves for more support. At the same time, as Wilander said, when the crowd is against you, you can build strength from it, and I think this is what Nole is doing. So I wouldn't be too dramatic about this either, it could very well be a factor in favor of Novak's success. I get that it's hard for his fans too though (people don't like what I like, etc.).

I wonder how long Djokovic-Federer will last as the big rivalry in men's tennis. Both look like they could play at this level for years.

if novak keep up this level for another 4 years he could catch up to federer's 17 GS titles, remember that at the moment theres no one that can give the guy a good fight on GS, if nadal doesn't recover the level he had we're in for a long novak era

After big wins/seasons, it's easy to imagine it will last, but tennis changes fast. Last year people were saying Nadal and Djokovic would dominate for years. This year it's Djokovic and Federer. Could be other guys next year. I'd say Novak seems to have the personal discipline to last at the top, but he's not exactly young and his game, like Nadal, relies heavily on his physical condition. Witnessing how long he can keep up at this rate will be interesting.

These results do make me question how strong Fed is relative to the All Time Greats in mental toughness + clutchness.

Fed was really clutch against Rafa in 08' Wimby final in that 4th set tiebreaker, despite losing the match, the man was amazing.
Also quite clutch against Roddick the next year, though he owned Roddick so much I suppose he felt supreme confidence that there's no way he'd lose.

But being dominated by Rafa since 2008, crying after the 2009 Aussie Open final, getting tight on big points against Djokovic as Djoker has hit his prime the past 5 years, interesting stuff.

He was so dominant and invincible from 05-07 (outside of lights out Safin in Australia and Rafa on RG) that to his credit, never really faced that many pressure packed moments.

Makes me think Pete beats Fed peak for peak at Wimbledon (with the faster grass).
Slower grass, perhaps Fed gets an edge, but man could Pete hit some clutch 2nd serve aces when he needed to.
(yes I'm aware Fed beat Pete in their only match in 01 Wimbledon).

Also think on the fastest hard courts, Pete would have an edge.

Lastly, wonder what would have happened in the 05' US Open final had Agassi found a way to win that 3rd set.
Agassi was up a break 4-2, ended up losing the 3rd set in a tiebreaker.
Fed eviscerated him in the 4th, but if Agassi had held on and won that 3rd set, and the match had gone to a 5th set......
Could have been a Steffi/Hingis 99' French moment (wish fulfillment perhaps on my part as a die hard Agassi fan but let me have this alternate universe pontification).

IMO Federer can be subject to mental problems, but against very specific adversaries and in specific match configurations. In general I wouldn't say he's bad mentally speaking, but Nadal and Djokovic definitely managed to exploit a crack in the armor. It remains unknown if Sampras would have been able to do the same.
I'm a big Agassi enthusiast too, but I wouldn't say he was the clutchest player either (as in he was good mentally, but not the best). He had definitely some chances against Fed that he didn't manage to take, for instance in the crazy 2004 USO QF.

People don't like Novak Djokovic cuz watching him play is boring as fuck.

I wish Nadal was still alive. Not even that big of a fan but he always brought the best out of everybody else.

Being boring is a critic which was used against Nadal a good number of times, so I guess it depends on people. But it's true Djokovic, by being one of the most all-around players ever, hasn't a specific part of his game that stands out and could create a clear identity, whereas Federer is the mega-talented guy and Rafa the ultimate defender.

 

[Dispatch]

People don't like Novak Djokovic cuz watching him play is boring as fuck.

I wish Nadal was still alive. Not even that big of a fan but he always brought the best out of everybody else.

I have to agree. I appreciate Novak's game, but it's not as flashy as some of the other greats. Arguably, his greatest asset is his return of serve. He hits it with a lot of depth right at the feet of the server. But, that's the problem. He often hits it right at the feet of the server, not for a clean winner. That's just not as exciting as a passing shot. I'm going purely on memory here, but if felt like Agassi hit more clean winners on his return of serve.

 

[TJ Verboten]

IMO Federer can be subject to mental problems, but against very specific adversaries and in specific match configurations. In general I wouldn't say he's bad mentally speaking, but Nadal and Djokovic definitely managed to exploit a crack in the armor. It remains unknown if Sampras would have been able to do the same.

I'm a big Agassi enthusiast too, but I wouldn't say he was the clutchest player either (as in he was good mentally, but not the best). He had definitely some chances against Fed that he didn't manage to take, for instance in the crazy 2004 USO QF.

Yeah the wind in that 04 U.S. Open quarter was unreal, that's why I was hoping Agassi could get him the next year.
Playing 5 sets against Ginepri on Super Saturday the day before taking on peak Fed probably hurt his chances as well.
Though physically, Agassi looked fine against Fed in the final.

Agassi's clutchness is interesting, Pete seemed to be the one that could get in his head a little, but I think that came down to Agassi feeling like he might get one good look a set at a break on Sampras's serve, thus feeling the pressure of those few BP opportunities.

Agassi also had some crazy losses, Courier at the French early in his career when he was ahead, then the stoppage, then losing (with the coaching Courier got in between the stoppage).
Agassi's loss against Rafter in the 01 Wimbledon semifinal was crushing, he was a point from being up double break in the 5th set, Rafter's ball goes a foot out, and somehow the ump missed it, Rafter ended up holding and coming back to win the 5th.
Then Rafter lost to Goran in that great final.
That was Agassi's best shot for a 2nd Wimbledon.

Then that one French Open quarterfinal match I think against Grosjean when Agassi was up, Bill Clinton comes into watch part of the match, and he starts playing poorly.

Of course the best match he was ever a part of was the 01 US Open quarters against Sampras, 4 tiebreakers, wish we could've seen a 5th set there.

Then you throw in the whole doing meth at 27, which should've been his peak season athletically.

8 Grand Slams and a Gold Medal is still tremendous, but as an Agassi fan, I can't help the feeling that he should've ended up with at least 10 slams.
4 Aussie's make sense, to only have 2 US Open titles given that hard court was his best surface is annoying, lost so many semis and finals at the US Open.

 

[Diamond]

Yeah the wind in that 04 U.S. Open quarter was unreal, that's why I was hoping Agassi could get him the next year.
Playing 5 sets against Ginepri on Super Saturday the day before taking on peak Fed probably hurt his chances as well.
Though physically, Agassi looked fine against Fed in the final.

Agassi's clutchness is interesting, Pete seemed to be the one that could get in his head a little, but I think that came down to Agassi feeling like he might get one good look a set at a break on Sampras's serve, thus feeling the pressure of those few BP opportunities.

Agassi also had some crazy losses, Courier at the French early in his career when he was ahead, then the stoppage, then losing (with the coaching Courier got in between the stoppage).
Agassi's loss against Rafter in the 01 Wimbledon semifinal was crushing, he was a point from being up double break in the 5th set, Rafter's ball goes a foot out, and somehow the ump missed it, Rafter ended up holding and coming back to win the 5th.
Then Rafter lost to Goran in that great final.
That was Agassi's best shot for a 2nd Wimbledon.

Then that one French Open quarterfinal match I think against Grosjean when Agassi was up, Bill Clinton comes into watch part of the match, and he starts playing poorly.

Of course the best match he was ever a part of was the 01 US Open quarters against Sampras, 4 tiebreakers, wish we could've seen a 5th set there.

Then you throw in the whole doing meth at 27, which should've been his peak season athletically.

8 Grand Slams and a Gold Medal is still tremendous, but as an Agassi fan, I can't help the feeling that he should've ended up with at least 10 slams.
4 Aussie's make sense, to only have 2 US Open titles given that hard court was his best surface is annoying, lost so many semis and finals at the US Open.

Nice post, so much memories with Agassi, so many great matches, won or lost. I was rewatching highlights of his last US Open the other day. I remember I stayed up late in the night to see the Baghdatis match, it was crazy. And that farewell speech two days after...
The 2001 Sampras match is actually one of the first USO matches I was able to watch, hadn't cable TV before, and to this day it stays as one of my references in terms of quality of play.
The Clinton match is also interesting, here in France it's remembered fondly by a lot of fans, because it allowed Grosjean, our best player at the time, to go into the semies. Journalists often talk about this during Roland Garros.

He sure could have won more slams but his career story is part of the character and what makes him maybe a more significant figure, in tennis' history, than guys with more titles than him. He's truly unique.

 

[TJ Verboten]

Nice post, so much memories with Agassi, so many great matches, won or lost. I was rewatching highlights of his last US Open the other day. I remember I stayed up late in the night to see the Baghdatis match, it was crazy. And that farewell speech two days after...
The 2001 Sampras match is actually one of the first USO matches I was able to watch, hadn't cable TV before, and to this day it stays as one of my references in terms of quality of play.
The Clinton match is also interesting, here in France it's remembered fondly by a lot of fans, because it allowed Grosjean, our best player at the time, to go into the semies. Journalists often talk about this during Roland Garros.

He sure could have won more slams but his career story is part of the character and what makes him maybe a more significant figure, in tennis' history, than guys with more titles than him. He's truly unique.

Well said.
Agassi Sampras 01 was the best tennis I'd ever seen (no breaks of serve, phenomenal shotmaking of the highest quality all 4 sets) until the Rafa/Fed 08 Wimbledon final.
Two classics.

Baghdatis match was a great last moment for him, then losing to B. (damn you Bori...wait) Becker unceremoniously in a day match but his speech after was so moving.

That reminds me I still need to read Open, supposed to be a really good, + honest autobiography.

 

[Diamond]

That reminds me I still need to read Open, supposed to be a really good, + honest autobiography.

You absolutely should, it's a great book.

 

[Dispatch]

You absolutely should, it's a great book.

I second that. It's a highly appropriate title, very raw and completely candid.

 

[Twenty7KVN]

I remember Agassi getting flack for saying he didn't like tennis in his autobiography.

 

[Diamond]

I second that. It's a highly appropriate title, very raw and completely candid.

Yeah, it's fascinating to discover what was really going on between (and even during) the matches we all watched. It's well written too, thanks to J.R. Moehringer involvement.

I remember Agassi getting flack for saying he didn't like tennis in his autobiography.

Yeah, and the reaction was a bit stupid because when you read the book you realize it's way more of an ambivalent and complex relationship with the sport, which changed a lot during the course of his career.

 

[Twenty7KVN]

Yeah, it's fascinating to discover what was really going on between (and even during) the matches we all watched. It's well written too, thanks to J.R. Moehringer involvement.



Yeah, and the reaction was a bit stupid because when you read the book you realize it's way more of an ambivalent and complex relationship with the sport, which changed a lot during the course of his career.

Yea one of the many reasons i stopped watching espn especially mike&mike.

 

[TJ Verboten]

I second that. It's a highly appropriate title, very raw and completely candid.

On my list, looking forward to reading it.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

Sorry for the bump. Rafa=FedKilla said he might be interested in this fencing/tennis article I was writing on the SABR, although I got to it a lot later than I wanted to:

https://fencinguniversity.org/what-can-fencers-learn-from-tennis-champ-roger-federers-sabr-shot/