It will be a rematch of one of last year’s most memorable Wimbledon moments when Roger Federer and Marin Cilic meet again on Sunday at the All-England Club, this time with a Grand Slam title at stake.
In a 2016 quarterfinal contest, Cilic led Federer two sets to love only to see the Swiss storm back for a 6-7(4), 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(9), 6-3 victory. That extended Federer’s head-to-head series lead to 6-1 and they have not faced each other since. If the former world No. 1’s 2016 Wimbledon comeback was impressive, Cilic’s lone win over him was nothing short of remarkable. In the 2014 U.S. Open semis, the Croat was just about unplayable in a 6-3, 6-4, 6-4 romp that led to his first major triumph two days later.
Both men have been close to if not at their absolute best throughout this fortnight, to the extent that they are clearly the cream of the crop on grass right now–at least given the physical problems of Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic.
For the third time in his career, Federer is through to a Wimbledon final without dropping a single set. The 35-year-old erased Alexandr Dolgopolov (via second-set retirement), Dusan Lajovic, Mischa Zverev, Grigor Dimitrov, Milos Raonic, and Tomas Berdych to reach his 11th Wimbledon final overall. He is 30-2 this season with titles at the Australian Open, Indian Wells Masters, Miami Masters, and the Gerry Weber Open in Halle.
Given his own current form and his draw (with Murray ailing and Rafael Nadal having struggled mightily at the All-England Club dating back to 2012), Cilic was always a serious contender to be the top-half finalist. That turned out to be exactly the case, starting with convincing blowouts of Philipp Kohlschreiber, Florian Mayer, Steve Johnson, and Roberto Bautista Agut before tougher victories over Gilles Muller (five sets) and Sam Querrey (four). The sixth-ranked Croat is 22-5 since beginning the year with an alarmingly poor 7-8 record.
“It’s a nice change,” Federer said when asked about facing someone other than Murray, Nadal, or Djokovic in a major title match. “But it doesn’t make things easier, in my opinion.”
Cilic went up against Kei Nishikori in his only previous slam final and dominated 6-3, 6-3, 6-3. It goes without saying that a date with a red-hot 18-time Grand Slam champion will be a much tougher proposition.
“I believe this is his home court, (the) place where he feels the best and knows that he can play the best game,” Cilic said of Federer. “Obviously I’m going to look back 12 months ago…. I was one point away from winning a match over here against him. Definitely I believe in my own abilities to get through and to win it.
“But I still know that it’s a big mountain to climb. Roger is playing maybe one of his best tennis of his career at the moment; having a great season. It’s going to be a huge challenge.”
Cilic at his peak is one of the few players who can trouble Federer right now, and the underdog can do it even on grass. His serve, when it is firing on all cylinders like it did three years ago in New York, is one of the most dangerous in the sport. Cilic can also take time away from Federer because he hits so big off both wings from the back of the court.
That being said, Federer has been just about flawless this fortnight. These are the seven-time Wimbledon champion’s unforced error totals in his six previous matches: seven, 15, seven, 10, nine, and 19. Cilic got away with some breakdowns off his backhand side against Querrey, but he will not be able to get away with any of that on Sunday–not against Roger Federer in a Grand Slam final.
Although this will almost certainly be Federer’s most difficult test of the tournament, it continues to look like nothing will stand in his way of another Wimbledon triumph.
Pick: Federer in 4
[polldaddy poll=9789001]
who ya got?
FED in 3 sets. # 19 is Federer’s
Fed in four
R.F in 4 , I am sure we will see thrilling match with tie breaks !!!!!!
I hope no tb. I want something similar with AO 2017 final, but Roger to close it in the 4th as he so many times could have done it in his career, instead of going to 5.
This is a very difficult match for Roger.
Yeah agree with you VR, hello. It’ll be a difficult match for Fed.
Fed had a cold and I saw him rubbing his nose during his matches, I wonder has he fully recovered by now. I think that might explain why he looked a bit tired in the third set against Berdy, as he had to run a lot during the match.
I think if Cilic can control his nerve and plays to his full potential, it’ll be very difficult to contain him. I think the match may go four or five sets, as Cilic is absolutely capable of getting a set at least.
I do not know whether a 35yo man recovering from a cold is able to play his best to contain an opponent who’s a good few years younger, fitter (at least without a cold) and who’s also playing some inspired tennis and in very good form.
Fed is still the favorite of course but he has to be really focused and plays consistently well to win this one.
Lucky, you say this as if the author of the article claims otherwise. It will sure be a difficult match. Cilic is one of the top 3 grass players in the world at the moment. He has his chance. Not only is he hitting hard and serving great, he also has a solid baseline game and good diversity. He definitely has his chances.
I hope Fed comes strong, inspired, mentally cool but at the same time concentrated. He serves great and returns what’s returnable from Cilic. He finds the joy of playing and the right attitude as in Halle final.
Let the best win.
Eugene, I was responding to VR’s post, what’s that got to do with you??
To do with me? Lucky how many times have you replied to a comment just because you want to add something, express your opinion or even argue. I am free to comment, especially that I am doing it without interfering with someone else’s rights.
Eugene, why don’t you pick on others and leave me alone?
What’s with all you Fed worshippers?Can’t you leave me alone to post what I want to post without harassing me? I’ve enough of it with that Mark fella, who’s so rude, don’t you be another one!
I didn’t pick on you luckystar. There’s no need to make a victim out of yourself. Believe me, I would have posted the same reply to anyone here. Nothing personal. You said yesterday you hope Cilic will win, not because you’re looking for the upset, but Cilic is your 2nd favourite player. I don’t think if Fed would meet Querrey or Muller in the final you’d prefer him to win. I think you’d be glad if he lost against anyone at this stage. And that’s fine. That’s too obvious you want him to lose. And that’s fair to some degree. You’re a rafan and want your guy to be the best.
Just because you had a negative experience with someone called Mark, it doesn’t put you in a position to call me a worshipper, since that’s not the case. I am a guy who supports Federer for the player and person he is, while I respect most of the other players on tour and give them credit when they play better and deserve to win. I could always draw the line between supporting him and going overboard. That being said, if on your scale I am a worshipper, you probably are the Queen of Nadal worshippers on this site. I don’t think that’s right. Just the scale is wrong. Needs to be recalibrated.
When Joe Smith or someone else thought that Nadal might have a difficult match against Wawrinka in FO final and you disagreed, he didn’t call you a worshipper did he? I think you are a nice person that loves Nadal very much. That’s excellent. Just treat EVERYONE ACCORDINGLY. Don’t do the mistake of treating every Fed fan the same. Some of them don’t really support anyone and don’t know much about sports. They just enjoy arguing about everything Fed, Nadal, Ronaldo, Serena, brexit etc They are worldwide experts.
Eugene, you made me feel that way, that you’re picking on me! Why you may ask, and that’s because VR was the one who posted the same thing, that it’ll be a difficult match for Fed. I was responding to him, basically agreeing with him. Yet, you just picked on my post and blah, blah, blah, as if giving me a lecture!
Please, stop doing this, I do not need you to lecture me! And you talked as if the Fed worshippers didn’t call me a Nadal worshipper! Please, if you’re here long enough, you would know that they’re not so kind with me!
And please, don’t fall into the same trap as Mark, who assumed that I’m thinking this or that, it’s the Fed worshippers that made others want to support anyone but Fed.
I don’t care about Fed, I just want Cilic to win, whether he’s playing against Fed or Berdy. Don’t think that it’s always about Fed. I also want a competitive final, and that’s why when Querrey gave Cilic a hard time, many of us felt that if Querrey were to be in the final, it would be a one sided affair. I think I won’t even want to watch the final if it’s Querrey who made it there.
I am very sure Federer is going to steamroll Cilic the same way Sampras did against Goran:
Head To Head Matches – Chat About The Roger Federer vs Marin Cilic Head To Head
Year Name Round Surface Winning Player Losing Player Score
2017 Wimbledon F Grass Marin Cilic Roger Federer Upcoming
2016 Wimbledon QF Grass Roger Federer Marin Cilic 6-7(4) 4-6 6-3 7-6(9) 6-3
2014 US Open SF Hard Marin Cilic Roger Federer 6-3 6-4 6-4
2014 Canadian Masters R16 Hard Roger Federer Marin Cilic 7-6(5) 6-7(3) 6-4
2012 Shanghai Masters QF Hard Roger Federer Marin Cilic 6-3 6-4
2011 US Open R32 Hard Roger Federer Marin Cilic 6-3 4-6 6-4 6-2
2011 Monte Carlo Masters R16 Clay Roger Federer Marin Cilic 6-4 6-3
2008 Paris Masters R16 Hard Roger Federer Marin Cilic 6-3 6-4
At most one tiebreak.
I am expecting a 6-2;6-1;6-0 demolition or at most 7-5;6-2;6-1 (or 6-0 demolition like Venus today)
Cilic in 4 meaning Rafa is number one, at the very least, until he ATP world tour finals
Querrey and Muller were in super form so Cilic has had the perfect prep coming into this match which will most likely go the distance. He’ll be battle hardened for a tough 4 or 5-setter whereas Fed hasn’t been pushed physically, mentally or emotionally, defeating opponents that are either historical pushovers or in poor career form.
Cilic has had 12 months to think about where he went wrong in his 2016 defeat to Fed when leading two sets to love and had match point and will be hungry to make amends.
As we have seen, Cilic is capable of redlining in big matches and proved this in their 2016 Wimbledon match and towards this 2014 US Open victory when he blew Fed off the court in straight sets.
This will be a close match because Fed is in super form but Cilic really should be 2:0 in their recent H2H and leading 6:0 in sets.
Cilic is also at the ripe age of 28 when most players perform at their peak during their careers. Cilic also has a 100% win record in grand slam finals.
Federer has a fairy-tale Wimbledon for a 35 year old and after a long break during the clay court season but tomorrow Cilic wins in 4, maybe 5 if Fed brings his best.
Cilic in 4
Querrey and Muller were in super form so Cilic has had the perfect prep coming into this match which will most likely go the distance. He’ll be battle hardened for a tough 4 or 5-setter whereas Fed hasn’t been pushed physically, mentally or emotionally, defeating opponents that are either historical pushovers or in poor career form.
Cilic has had 12 months to think about where he went wrong in his 2016 defeat to Fed when leading two sets to love and had match point , he’ll will be hungry to make amends.
As we have seen, Cilic is capable of redlining in big matches and proved this in their 2016 Wimbledon match and towards his 2014 US Open victory when he blew Fed off the court in straight sets.
This will be a close match because Fed is in super form but Cilic really should be 2:0 in their recent H2H and leading 6:0 in sets.
Cilic is also at the ripe age of 28 when most players perform at their peak during their careers and has a 100% win record in grand slam finals.
Federer has had a fairy-tale Wimbledon for a 35-year old and after a long break during the clay court season but tomorrow Cilic wins in 4, maybe 5 if Fed brings his best.
Cilic in 4
JC, I tend to agree with your assessment. Cilic has definitely a good chance, and Fed hasn’t been tested so far. One thing, though speaks very much against Cilic: he has an unfortunate tendency to collapse in big matches and squander a comfortable lead. There’s not just last year’s quarterfinal against Fed, there’s also his Daviscup final match against Delpo and another DC match where he lost after having a lead. A lot depends on how he copes with the pressure and if he can hold on to a lead. He’s not a mental giant.
I’m not too worried, he’s 12 months to assess where he went wrong and improve his game, Cilic is now a much improved mentally. This has been evident throughout the tournament also and in partcular against Muller when he steamrolled him in the 5th and against Querrey when he was down a break in the 4th and regained control the match. Cilic also said himself in the post match interviews he’s been very strong mentally.
I think a few people are in for a surprise, Cilic is in the zone.
Well JC,I certainly hope that you’re right about Cilic. He did falter now and then, hope he manages not to do that in the final
GOAT in 4.
Totally agreed w Jim Courier, he explained everything right. Cilic in 4, maybe even in 3, if he is totally focused all the time.
Fed in 3. I think Cilic will have a few mental lapses and his game will break down on his own serve a few times which is a few times too many against the greatest grasscourt player of all time playing some of the best tennis of his career.
I thought Berdych played a fantastic match in the semi final, and if Roger had been five percent off his game he might have lost it. Cilic will have to play a perfect match to beat Federer, and even then it may well not be enough, unless Roger’s level suddenly dips from where it’s been all fortnight.
You never know what can happen of course, and we all know how dangerous Cilic can be. But if the Roger we’ve been treated to recently turns up again, he’s surely going home with the trophy.
I would also just like to point out to JC and others that the Federer who nearly lost to Cilic twelve months ago was a far less impressive player than the Federer we are seeing today. And he still didn’t lose!
I would agree that the US open is proof that Cilic can catch fire and burn past almost anyone, but I would suggest that 2017 Federer on centre court at Wimbledon isn’t included in that.
That isn’t to say I don’t think Cilic can win, I just haven’t seen anything to suggest it is going to happen.
My take on the final: If Federer serves near his best, as he has for most of the tournament, he will win going away, possibly in straights. He has the better ROS, and the more consistent and varied game, with plenty of weapons. However, if Roger serves less well, like he like he did against Berdy, AND Cilic serves at his best, then it will be a close match, though I still give Fed the edge. For Cilic to win, three things have to happen. He has to serve lights out, hit winners like he did at USO ’14, and Roger has to serve less than his best. Federer in 4.
Agree Joe. The key is the consistency in his serve. No matter how well Cilic might play, just hold your serve. Sounds simple, but that’s why this is true for any game on any surface. And then he should put lots of pressure on Marin’s serve. Maybe even SABR just to confuse him a bit 🙂 He has to control the game mentally. His weapons will take care of the rest.
The Berdych match was tight enough , and Cilic is even better player than Berdych on grass,this one has the potential to be a five set classic.
But, my gut feeling is that it will be close and tense for a couple of sets, then Federer will get the momentum in the third set, and go on to win comfortably from there . Fed in four .
75 67 64 64
Fed knows what he’s in for… He said in press that the 2014 US Open beatdown by Cilic was the most helpless he’s ever felt in a match. He said that Cilic was just crushing returns, aces, and winners at will, and that he just completely took the racquet out of his hands. He’s not stupid- he knows very well this could happen again. All he can hope to do if that does happen is take care of his own serve and go for his chances in the tie-breaks. The one big difference between tomorrow and 2014 US Open, besides Fed playing better overall, is that prior to that match, Fed had played a draining 5-set epic again Monfils in the previous round and was completely drained. This time he isn’t worn out, at least not that extent. Either way, Cilic has the ability to blow anyone off the court on his day, and Fed knows that. He’s aware that he must bring his A game tomorrow. I hope for his sake that he does bring it. I don’t have any reason to think he won’t. It’s just a question of it will be enough if 2014 US Open Cilic shows up.
Kevin I remember the great semifinal against Murray at Wimbledon and then what followed after… This time is different. I think the match against Berdych was a wake up call for Federer. We might see the best version of Fed at this Wimbledon so far. Anyway, I hope he finds the inspiration to win. He has all the weapons.
Actually, what happened in that 2015 wimby final, imo, is that Fed tightened up and choked. He started beautifully, and was playing like he did against Murray, opening up a 4-2 lead. After that, he just choked. After a similar sub-par performance at the USO that year, I didn’t think he would win another major, but his win over Nadal in Melbourne cleared a major mental hurdle, imo. Right now, I think Roger is playing with so much confidence that I just don’t see him losing today.
Steve Tignor picked Cilic to win, so Fed has that going for him! 🙂
Ramara, Tignor has his outrageous picks sometimes, I don’t agree with him very often. We’ll see whether he gets it right this time. Fingers crossed.
Oh, the legendary and statistically well documented Tignor curse will strike again, lol! Cilic is doomed! Steve Tignor is an intelligent and highly knowledeable tennis expert. He is also a good writer, but he’s the unluckiest picker amongst all tennis journos with the worst percentage. I hope he isn’t into betting. He picked Rafa for the win before the AO final and yesterday he picked Venus ftw. Only when Rafa plays at RG he gets it (mostly) right. But it doesn’t count if you pick someone who has lost at a tournament only two times within twelve years 😉
So, hopefully Cilic isn’t supersticious.He most certainly does have a chance. Hopefully he manages to do better than Wawa against Rafa.
I changed my thought. Fed in 5 instead like 2009.
Those who were busy predicting loss for fed in one off the last 6 matches will now come up with a cupcake draw argument after today’s win.
Well, I can’t remember that anyone here seriously believed that Fed would lose the matches he has played so far. Feds draw didn’t want look easy, butn the way it played out Fed had a comparatively easy way into the final nevertheless. But the same was certainly true for Rafa’s path into the RG final. But just like Rafa against Wawa, Fed now faces one of the few candidates who could be seriously dangerous. Cilic on grass isn’t a cup cake. But it remains to be seen if he can do better than Wawa against Rafa.
Correction: I wanted to say:”Fed’s draw didn’t look easy at the beginning of the tournament…”
I just found this statistics: whenever a player reached a slam final without losing a set, this player won the final. Cilic would make history in many ways if he manages to pull the upset.
My heart wants Cilic but I wouldn’t bet money on it. My brain says Fed.
littlefoot, there were two exceptions. In 2008 Wimbledon, Fed didn’t lose a set to reach the final but he lost to Rafa in the final. In 2015 US, Fed didn’t lose a set to reach the final and he lost to Djoko in the final.
Thanks, I stand corrected! I didn’t thoroughly check that statement.
Interesting that both exeptions involve Fed at Wimby 🙂
No, it’s Djoko at USO2015! It’s interesting that both times, they involved either Rafa or Djoko.
Sorry, I’m just sca nning texts right now, since I’m busy 😉
I think it’s interesting because both times it was Fed, who lost the final after not having lost a set in six matches. Will it happen a third time today?
I think it’s noteworthy that Fed was involved because he always look very dominant against lesser players – until he meets a worthy opponent. The question is, if Cilic will be that worthy opponent.
Fed in 3 or 4. I don’t see him goofing this one. He knows this is very important to be undisputed leader in slam count and he does not have his regular opponents in the final, so he knows stars have aligned.
It’s a sensible assessment… those of us who aren’t Fed fans can only hope for the upset.
I really wonder why Tignor picked Cilic. Of course it’s not impossible but certainly unlikely.
I think Fed played a real solid SF against Berdych. I thought Berdych played a real aggressive match and still had nothing to show for it.
Fed in 3. What Fed is achieving at this age is sometimes beyond imagination and tennis fans all over the world will miss him and recognize once he bids goodbye.
I was rooting for Nadal-Fed final and Nadal to win. But its really difficult to play Fed is this mood with no mistakes, good service rythm and less mistakes from baseline.
Somebody just has to overpower him . Only Djoker of 2015 can give him a run for his money in this mood.
Can anybody interpret the below data and predict a winner for today?
2017 WIMBELDON ROGER CILIC CILIC
VS BERDYCH VS QUERRY vs MULLER
1st SERVE % 70/105 (67%)+2% 78/120 (65%) 102/157 (65%)-2%
1st SERVE POINTS WON 59/70 (84%) 69/78 (88%)+4% 86/102 (84%)-SAME
2nd SERVE POINTS WON 21/35 (60%) 28/42 (67%)+7% 26/55 (47%)-13%
BREAK POINTS WON 2/9 (22%) 4/14 (29%)+7% 3/10 (30%)+8%
TOTAL RETURN POINTS WON 46/128 (36%)+1% 53/151 (35%) 43/145 (30%)-6%
TOTAL POINTS WON 126/233 (54%) 150/271(55%)+1% 155/302 (51%)-3%
DOUBLE FAULTS 4 1(+3) 9(+5)
ACES 13 25(+12) 33(+20)
Sorry, the above data copied and pasted from MS Excel is losing its formatting!
Most of the stats above are favoring Cilic surprisingly!
I hope Ricky can add options to ATTACH FILES besides some EMOTICONS to our posts like most websites allow!
Nervous start by both players
Both players a bit tight at the outset, but the key so far is Cilic failing to get his 1st serve in. Fed with the first break; let’s see if he can consolidate.
Federer starting to feel it on his serve. Cilic has no chance if Fed serves above 70% 1st serves in.
37 mins. easy one
Fed with the first set in hand will be very hard to beat. Cilic has to raise his first serve % and play more consistently; otherwise this will be over pretty quickly.
cilic started to cry literally 😀
Yeah, I don’t think i’ve ever seen something like that. I feel bad for the guy; I hope he starts playing better, even though I dont’ think there’s much he can do when Roger is playing like this.
All over, Cilic didnt turn up. Enjoying Fed’s ceremony
Not quite true that Cilic didn’t turn up. Roger is just not letting him get into any rhythm. Cilic isn’t playing well, of course, but it’s at least as much that Roger is not letting him play well.
Fed’s winning it in 3 sets!
This will go down as one of Fed’s easiest grand slam victories.
Almost as easy as a walkover.
What is going on? Someone just told me that they let him call his doctor or something to calm down? I don’t understand- he seems to be moving just fine, so it doesn’t look like it’s physical… Maybe he has some kind of nagging injury, and he broke down mentally because he was fully there for the moment? I’ve never seen this before at a major, personally.
Something is wrong physically with Cilic. I can’t believe it’s this lop-sided.
Maybe the problem was there before the match and Cilic, not wanting to give a w/o to Fed and the fans, simply forced himself to play — but it’s sad, very sad. Dang it.
I dont’ think it’s physical, RC. And Cilic started to play better after he had a good cry; he really started to hit his 1st serve in. But Roger is just playing (especially serving) too well.
He called a trainer, Joe, and his big foot was being worked on…at least I give him that — something more than a low flying panic attack. Poor guy. Still, for anyone hoping for a competitive match in the Wimbledon final it’s a disappointment.
Maybe a miraculous comeback like Delpo 2009, US Open. Just kidding.
Fed is coasting and he is not in second gear. Reminds me very much of Roland Garros final.
Foot blister? I think he’s upset that in a Wimbledon final, he couldn’t give his best. Too bad for him, not going to win anyway, given the way Fed is playing, but at least hope to put up a good show and not embarrasses himself.
Actually, Lucky, Cilic is continuing to go for his shots; they’re just not working for him, and Roger has a lot to do with that.
I thought I said Cilic was upset that he couldn’t give his best in a Wimbledon final, hence the breakdown after set one?
What do you mean by “give” his best? He’s obviously not playing his best, but you seem to be suggesting that he’s not trying his best. If so, I disagree. I actually think he’s trying to play his type of game more than Stan did in the RG final, where he quit trying to hit winners after about the first 3-4 games. Cilic is trying, and he’s actually starting to play better now. But I don’t think it will be enough unless Roger’s level drops significantly.
It”s typical of a Fed fan to bring Rafa’s RG final into the discussion and try to trash it. As though Stan didn’t show up.
It’s really sad to see a Fed fans even going there. But not surprising.
NNY thanks for your post.
Lucky,
You are more than welcome! I know that you have been taking a lot of criticism from Fed fans, but to see Rafa brought into this with such a cheap and pathetic attempt to demean his great win at RG, is personally offensive to me.
Yep NNY, at least Stan didn’t suffer a nervous breakdown, or broke down and almost cried, unlike Cilic.
Poor Cilic, I didn’t expect him to break down (cried almost) like this; I mean it’s not like he’s not going to have other chances of winning here; he’s only 28 or 29!
I was thinking if it’s Delpo in this final, I doubt Delpo would be so nervous! Delpo would sure fight hard, to control his nerve and to make a match of it. Cilic simply looked resigned in the second set and lost quickly, at least he did fight in the third set and not getting bageled or breadsticked.
I bet he must be crying when he’s back in the locker room, poor soul!
Why sad? I’m pointing out that Lucky always focuses on Federer’s opponent instead of giving him credit first. You can go back and read my comment after Rafa won RG. It gave him credit for his brilliant play first and foremost. Lucky never does that. She focuses first on Fed’s opponent poor play, real or imagined.
My point was that if you’re going to say Cilic didn’t show up (which Lucky and others have done), you’re ignoring the fact that he never gave up, never quit going for his 1st serve (which improved markedly), and never quit going for winners (which unfortunately for him never started falling in to any significant extent).
In contrast, Stan in the RG final quit trying to play his game (by his own admission) fairly early in the match. By the 5th game or so, the velocity on his shots had declined to about 70%, and he tried to rally with Rafa, which spelt his doom.
Now compare what the Rafans like Lucky say about the two matches. At RG, the line was this: Rafa played outstanding, and didnt’ allow Stan to play his game. Even Stan said that, but -IMO- that was a bit of a cop out on his part, because he wasn’t literally prevented; rather, he quit trying to play his game, he gave up on it. At Wimby, obviously Cilic didn’t play his best. He particularly served terribly at the start, and then he had a breakdown on court.
But guess what? He never stopped trying to play the only game that was ever going to win for him, namely, blowing Federer off the court like he did at USO 2014. He took a little pace off his serves to get more 1st serves in (a smart move), but kept trying to hit winners when he had the chance. His shots just weren’t falling.
So, NNY: nothing sad about me making the comparison. What’s a bit sad is that you guys can’t give proper credit to Fed’s unbelievable play, which should be the main story here.
Joe,
Don’t insult my intligence with a response line that! I could have used other words besides “sad” if I chose to go so. I was restraining myself.
Stan himself said that when Rafa is playing that way, then there is nothing that can be done. Yet you have now on your latest comment, have decided in your infinite wisdom that it was a cop out! I don’t know whether to laugh or cry when I read something like that! So you are basically making up your own version of that happened in the RG final!
You brought Rafa into this for no good reason! It was a cheap shot and unnecessary. What I simply cannot understand about some of you Fed fans, is why you can’t just be happy for your guy and leave Rafa out of it! But you just can’t resist this need to somehow chip away at Rafa as a childish way of getting back at Lucky for things she says that you don’t like. But two wrongs don’t make a right. If you don’t like what Lucky says, then you are doing the exact same thing! You are now revising what happened with the RG final because you don’t like what Lucky said about the Wimbledon final!
If you think that was the best that Cilic could play, then you don’t know his game! Others can have their own opinion.
You did what other Fed fans have done too often in the past. You drag Rafa into it and try to find a way to trash what he has done.
I feel sorry for you because you can’t just enjoy Fed’s victory without resorting to cheap shots about Rafa. That is what is sad.
Such a shame.
Joe, go and read what Cilic said about his match, he said he was sad he couldn’t give his best. I was basically saying the same thing in my earlier posts.
I don’t see what’s the problem here; do you think Cilic was playing his best tennis?? He let the second set gone by so quickly, I thought he looked resigned. It was in the third set that he tried harder, at least still wanting to put on a good showing, as it’s a slam final after all.
Joe, I’m not a Fed fan, and I will never be, so naturally I’ll concentrate on his opponents, not on him, when I watch a match involving him, simple as that.
When I watch a Rafa match, I’ll concentrate on Rafa, because he’s my fave player; when I watch a Cilic match, I’ll also concentrate on him except when he’s playing Rafa. Isn’t it the same with you, a diehard Fed fan, that you always concentrate on Fed when he plays, and youre so concerned whether others are singing him praises or not?
Wasnt that good enough when during the match, I was saying Fed playing at that level, Cilic had no chance whatsoever? Or you want me to dig into the stats and reiterate what great numbers of winners, aces, first serve % and returns % that Fed made etc? I thought that job is yours to do, you being a die hard Fed fan?
NNY: I’m not making anything up about the RG final, though it if of course my own take on it. I think Stan was mentally weak in the final, and yes, I think it was a cop-out to say that Rafa prevented him from doing anything else.
The reason I brought it up at all is that, despite thinking the above, my first comment after Rafa won was to praise his incredible play and well deserved victory -which it was. I also said, and believe, that in that mode I doubted Stan could beat him even if he was playing his best game. That Rafa was a version I haven’t seen before. All of that is consistent with thinking that a more dialled-in Stan would have made it much more competitive -just as a similar Cilic would have made this final much more competitive.
Lucky, of course I recognize that you’re not a Fed fan, just as I’m not a Rafa fan. We’ll both naturally focus on their opponents. The difference, imo, is that I think you really have a blind spot where Roger is concerned, so that you actually don’t see that his play is a big part of what is causing his opponent problems (from his comments on this thread, I think the same about Jim Courier). Even I, with what I said above about Stan, can easily recognize that in the RG final Rafa was a huge part of Stan’s inability to play his game.
Maybe I missed or minimized what you said about Fed’s high level in the wimby final, that it wouldn’t have made a difference to the outcome regardless of how Cilic played. I just think you (and many others) have exaggerated how poorly Cilic played because of his emotional breakdown. I honestly think he played about as well as Stan did in the RG final, and showed more fight, given how he played the last set.
Joe it’s a matter of opinion, we’re not going to agree about Cilic in the final. However, I would say a Berdych not plagued by foot blisters, played the best he could, put up a better test against Fed, and Fed even though not playing as well as in the final, still managed to beat Berdych in straight sets.
Well done to Fed for the whole tournament. He’s truly the master on grass, I mean the current crop, including the big four, who could challenge him to win eight Wimbledon? None I would say, perhaps Djoko can or may win one or two more? But I doubt he can win another five! Likewise for both Murray and Rafa.
Since you talked about Rafa, I’m just happy that Rafa is the master on clay, and I doubt anyone can come close to his ten FO title record, and he may even win one or two more, if he’s motivated to continue playing.
I’ll would also say that Borg is the true master on both surfaces, could dominate on both surfaces at the same time and winning six and five titles respectively (4 in a row and 5 in a row).
Rafa could only dominate on one, and Fed too, but not both.
Maybe the most impressive part of Roger’s game today is his ROS. Absolutely incredible, and sending back 130 mph serves with interest.
Lucky,
I am sure that Cilic is devastated, not simply because of the loss. There is no shame in losing, especially to someone like Fed. But it’s the way he lost. That is the thing that will stay with him and be so difficult. If Cilic came out and played his best and lost in the end, at least he would have known that he gave it his all. You can live with that. But to play so poorly, nowhere near his best, well that is hard to take.
I hope that Cilic can put this behind him and look forward to the NA summer hard court season. But I do think he needs to deal with his lack of mental strength.
Cilic is such a humble and sensitive guy. I am sure he will win Wimbledon one day if he will work hard. He was emotionally overwhelmed today and I felt sorry. It’s not his fault. He did what he could, but anxiety took over and he coudn’t manage it as hard as he tried. Only way was to let it go and accept it until it melts down. I knew he would play better after crying and speaking to his staff. He just needed to take it out somehow and calm his nerves.
Next time he plays Wimby final, his mind and body will be ready. This kind of experiences makes one much stronger. He will roll as he did against Querrey.
I remember Cilic had a 134mph serve and Roger returned it and won the point. That was amazing.
Cilic is now playing a bit like he shouldve from the start. He broke down mentally in this match, forget the injury.
Cilic started really slow and carefully and it worked against him, he shouldve started all guns blazing.
He’s too nervous, JC. I’m a bit disappointed with him for feeling so nervous, well perhaps it’s the whole arena (except his team and some fellow Croats) against him, they want Fed to win his 8th Wimbledon.
It’s almost like a no show by Cilic, I pity those who pay so much for the tickets. Well perhaps they don’t mind as long as they can watch Fed’s historic win?
This match reminds me of the 2013 women’s final between Sabine Lisiki and Marion Bartoli. Lisiki just was so nervous ( a nervous breakdown perhaps) and lost so embarrassingly. Poor soul.
As usual, Lucky, you’re missing the main story in Fed’s matches, which is Roger’s incredible play. That’s what’s keeping Cilic so off balance and has messed with his head a bit. Cilic is not embarrassing himself any more than Wawrinka did in the RG final.
Please Joe, I’m not arguing with you about that, read my post again. Cilic can’t give his best and he got very upset (with himself!). He obviously was nervous PLUS the way Fed was playing, he had no chance! Didn’t I say it in my post ‘given the way Fed’s playing….’?
It’s always embarrassing when you have performance anxiety so bad that it interferes with how you can act and perform. Add a nasty niggle or foot problem and it’s depressing. I can’t help feeling bad for Marin. He couldn’t find his best.
But Roger didn’t let anything bother him…solid as ever. It just seems so easy for him. I know Berdych gave him the most competition. Dimitrov was terrible. I’m missing a good Fedole.
But it’s HIS – Congratulations Roger and fans on his 19th. Omg his kids are all so cute — especially the boys have grown up since I last saw them. His girls are old enough to understand the moment to a large extent and smiling. Congrats Mirka and Team Federer.
Yeah ratcliff, that’s what I meant when I said Cilic feeling embarrassed, of his anxiety, his breakdown when he almost cried. The foot blister is only a small problem, more like he couldn’t control his nerve, esp against a Fed playing so well.
The second set was poor by Cilic but he tried and played better in the third set but that’s not enough.
Commiserations, Lucky – it was tough to watch. But I really hope Cilic can win another GS and flush out all the ghosts of this Final experience.
I think you’re right, Lucky. It appears to me like he was overcome by the moment and the disappointment of not coming out playing his best in his biggest career moment thus far. I’m surprised as well because he has been in a major final before. But the Wimbledon final is what most players dream of more than anything, and he was probably shook over that. There have been plenty of guys who lost their first, or multiple, Wimby final and eventually won, so I believe Cilic will get it one day. He has really upped his game in the last year, making a major final and winning his first Masters over a good-form Murray last year. I really like Marin, I hope he gets this title one day.
That’s nice from you ratcliff. Thank you.
Fed should be starting to remember Delpo, US Open 2009. Cilic is suddenly playing well this third set 🙂
Ratcliff, Delpo played better vs Fed (in that USO final), with nerve of steel, than this Cilic who’s already a slam holder.
I wonder how is Cilic feeling now, poor soul. He must be very disappointed with this loss, and the one sided scoreline.
Delpo came out third set with some noisy crowd support and began completely wrecking Federer 😀
I wouldn’t say he had nerves of steel in the first set, Delpo, but he was able to grasp the moment, wake-up, and go for it! Was hoping Cilic would do the same — Cilic might not be as steely as Delpo but Marin can do much better — we’ve seen him.
Let’s go, Marin!
Too late I’m afraid! Fed is not going to let him have even a set. Cilic lost serve in the third set, it is finished.
Now Cilic is yelling after points like a fully healthy person lol
Even all guns blazing would not have been good enough. Federer is not even in second gear yet.
Hahaha, true.
Murray would give MUCH better speech, Im not sorry for Cilic….
Worst final ever, well done Fed!
Absolutely mind-blowing performance from Federer. Serving and returning as well as I’ve ever seen him. To not drop a set, less than a month shy of 36, is just hard to believe.
Fed will be winning grand slams for another 5 years.
I don’t know about that, but I would say he’s the solid favourite to win the USO next month. Who is going to beat him when he’s playing like this? If Rafa can translate his clay game to hard court, then at least it will be a contest. Those two players have dominated the year so far; it should be an interesting HC season.
Thats understandable, you can’t know everything but you can take my word for it, he most likely will if h’s still playing. Fed’s game revolves around timing, skill and craft and its most likely that will still be superior to other players when he is 40, especially on grass.
He looking good for the USO so glad we agree on something. See you next time.
Hello fans!
Just in to say that I’m doing well and to congratulate Myself on picking the last three slam winners in a row.
As it stands Roger is My early pick for USO. Rafa at the moment is the only guy to challenge him there but let’s see what comes in cincy and Montreal.
Fed playing better than ever with a chance for three slams this year.
Incredible!
Congrats to Me!
#TTFN
xxoo…happy you are back. Hawkstradamus!
Hawkeye, glad to see you again. I was wondering myself where are you, probably in the Honeymoon or something.
You decide to take 6 months brake? You think that will work for you too? 🙂
Oh hello Hawkeye! Well congrats to you for your pick. I’m disappointed with the way Cilic came out to play, almost a no show, perhaps having a nervous breakdown, almost. I couldnt predict a nervous breakdown could I?
Well at least Cilic reached the final, as I’ve predicted he’s the form player on grass who could go far at Wimbledon; too bad he couldn’t take the next step in the final.
Hawks! I’ve missed you dude! Hope all is well.
It is 2007 all over again. The guy is playing lights out. Only consolation is he is humbler than he was in 2007 but he may regress to his old ways if he continues his winning ways
Congrats to all the fed fans
The GOAT wins. Big congratulations.
Now his slam count equals Rafa + Wawa + Cilic, or Nole + Murray + Wawa + Cilic.
Very impressive for a man deciding to skip clay, aim Wimbly and simply just gets it without any other men challenging.
This is very weak competition on grass like Rafa also facing very weak competition on clay.
Federer first man to win Wimby without dropping a set since Borg in 1976. Roger hit 76% 1st serves in, which may well be the highest he’s ever hit in a slam.
Extraordinary. Congrats Joe!
No congrats to me are in order, Eugene! But I’m very happy for all Fed fans that their guy finally won another Wimbledon after so many close calls in recent years.
Maybe this is because English is not my mother tongue Joe, but I didn’t understand what you mean by saying: ‘No congrats to me are in order’
Just that Roger and his term deserves congrats, not me! I guess I did predict Fed would win, though my pick was in 4. But I understand and share the sentiment, so congrats to you, Eugene!
Thank you Joe. As a Roger fan I think you too deserve 😉
Borg? Wow, Borg is really something, not dropping a set at FO ( once or twice?) and once at Wimbledon? Real Goat of the channel slams!!
Yes, Borg is the GOAT of the channel slams for sure! People forget just how brilliant he was and this from someone who walked away at the age of 26! To accomplish all that at such a young age!
Yeah, what was so amazing about what Borg did was that back in those days, the difference between the clay at RG and the grass at Wimbledon was almost 100% different! Wimbledon was like an ice skating rink back then, and there was only like a week or something between the two slams. So the fact that Borg was able to do it multiple times when the two surfaces were so glaringly different is truly remarkable! Not so sure why he wasn’t as great on hard courts as he was on clay/grass. I consider Borg to be the at the top of the second tier of greats, after the 5-man Mount Rushmore of sorts that I believe includes (In no particular order) Fed, Rafa, Novak, Pete, and Laver. I often wonder what could have become of Borg’s career had he not lost the motivation to play at such a young age. I suppose it doesn’t matter because he obviously wasn’t meant to keep dominating after RG 1981, but it’s still fun to imagine what things would have been like in the early-mid ’80s had Borg not lost the interest and drive to compete. It was McEnroe’s time to take over the top spot, as well as for Connors to have his resurgence. It’s always bugged me, personally, how Connors won both Wimby AND US Open in 1982, but still ended the season second behind McEnroe, even though McEnroe didn’t win any majors that year! It would be one thing if Connors only had won one major that year, but he won two to McEnroe’s zero… Never made much sense to me. McEnroe obviously did very well in all the other non-slam tournaments. I felt similarly about Venus Williams in 2000 and 2001- she won both Wimby and US Open both of those seasons, but still didn’t finish #1. I understand that rankings are not just about the majors, but as I see it, I typically consider the player who ends the season with the most major titles to be the best player despite what their ranking says.
Borg really did not play much on hard courts. He seldom played in Australia, maybe once? (Australia may still have been on grass back then.) In his day the top players were not encouraged to play at the same tournaments outside of the slams. The pro tour was still building a fan base and wanted their top draws spread out. European tournaments were mostly on clay; hard was really a new surface back then. I think McEnroe and Borg played each other only 14 times.
Borg was a good hard court player though. He was finalist, losing to Connors in his last USO – he was playing with an abdominal strain, too. On clay Borg was second only to Nadal – Borg himself, bless him, places Rafa first. But, really, things were so different then, it’s as Laver says: you can’t compare across different eras. I can’t imagine Nadal playing back then. He’s no lone wolf, needs his team around him, needs contact with family and friends. They didn’t even have traveling coaches back in Laver’s day. Laver once said that they coached each other.
Borg was the first tennis love of my life. I do agree that he belongs at the top of the second tier of players, right behind the big five. I do agree with those big five!
The thing is we will never know what Borg might have done if he had not walked away in the very prime of his career. He was only one behind Roy Emerson, who held the record for slam titles at twelve. I have no doubt that he would have equaled that and most likely broke the record. Even if he was not st his best, he was still good enough to win slams. But it seemed like his great mental strength was gone. He lost the desire to compete, to win.
Borg was great on hard courts. He just came up against the one-two punch of Connors and McEnroe. I remember how Lendl had to battle to win the USO. He ended up having to beat both Connors and McEnroe to finally win it. If Borg had stayed in the game and kept trying, he might well have done it. Although Borg did try to win the USO. We forget that his career was cut short. He left when he was in his prime. For me it was absolutely devastating. Borg never talked to the media. It was only when I watched the documentary “McEnroe/Borg: Fire and Ice”, that I found out that Borg was struggling for a while and wanted out. I got some understanding of what he was going through. That’s why we have to appreciate these great champions while we have them.
I want to congratulate Fed and his fans on this historic achievement! Beautifully done!!
I was right to say Fed would face less competition in Cilic than Berdy although he destroyed both equally well! He sure is Maestro of Tennis! At his age this is just WOW!!!
That’s nice to hear from you Natashao. Cheers!
Too much was discussed about Cilic to give tough fight or infact win, but internally everyone was aware of this outcome. I can see many voted Fed to win in straights, unnecessary hype was created about Cilic.
Cilic was not hyped! The guy has won a slam. He’s had great results at Wimbledon. His game is ideally suited for grass. My issue with Cilic is his lack of mental strength. It’s his Achilles heel. That was obvious in the final. It’s something he has to work on if he wants to win another slam.
The idea that Muller would have made more of a match out of it is just pure speculation. It’s easy to second guess after the fact. But the truth of the matter is that Mukler had to use up everything to beat Rafa. He did not have enough left to outlast Cilic. That’s the way it works. Either you play well enough and are fit enough to get through to the final or not. Muller not ever having even played in a slam final much less won one, would not have fared any better.
Now at least some of them may agree had Fed and Muller faced each other what could have been the likely outcome.
Vijay, the likely outcome is a Fed win, but not necessary a straight sets win, my take.
Congrats to Hawkeye and the rest of the Federer fans here, i believe at the end of the year Federer will most likely have 20 GS , and probably win the WTF as well, the ATP seems to have gone from one player dominating to another player dominating, wherever is the competition ? ….
I think Rafa is going to have something to say about the USO. I think the disappointment of Wimbledon will only fire him up even more.
Novak and Murray are question marks right now. I heard on ESPN that Novak may be going to the states to have his elbow checked out and possible surgery. Murray is taking some time off to deal with his hip issue.
I think there should be some great competition during the NA summer season. Stan is defending USO champion. He will want to be in contention there. The young guys will be in the mix. Maybe Kyrgios will be healthy. Then there is Sascha Zverev and Thiem. Cilic could also be in the mix if he. SN bounce back from this loss.
I think we have a lot of great tennis to look forward to this summer.
NNY, you forget Delpo.
Stan has some knee issue during Wimbledon, I don’t know whether he will be ok in time for his USO title defense. As for Rafa, he has to continue with his more offensive play (like on clay this season) and good serving for the HC season. I think his ROS needs improvement.
I think the competition on the HCs will be keener, as there are more players who can play well on the HCs than on grass. I doubt Cilic could regroup from this loss so soon to do damage at the NAHCs, I think he needs time to get over this loss.
Lucky,
Don’t you think Cilic perhaps responds differently at US Open? He had no performance anxiety there in 2014. Also he was playing Kei, who had worn himself to the bone managing to make the final in 2014.
It would be tough to regroup from this loss — making the final at Wimbledon and losing so limply. It has to be devastating. But maybe as it’s as Kevin mentioned:
@ Kevin JULY 16, 2017 AT 3:11 PM
I think you’re right, Lucky. It appears to me like he was overcome by the moment and the disappointment of not coming out playing his best in his biggest career moment thus far. I’m surprised as well because he has been in a major final before. But the Wimbledon final is what most players dream of more than anything, and he was probably shook over that. There have been plenty of guys who lost their first, or multiple, Wimby final and eventually won, so I believe Cilic will get it one day. He has really upped his game in the last year, making a major final and winning his first Masters over a good-form Murray last year. I really like Marin, I hope he gets this title one day.
Wimbledon was where I first remember thinking wow, this guy Cilic will win a GS – 2009 Wimbledon. He was playing Tommy Haas in an early round and I was impressed with Marin’s mental fight (even tho he lost in 5 tough sets to Haas) and how well he moved for 6’6′. Much like Delpo, I remember thinking. Of course back then Gulbis was very much on my wish list. All of them being the same age.
But yeah this will be a hard loss to move forward from. Wishing a speedy recovery to Marin!
Ratcliff, after reading about what happened to him, I realized that it’s not exactly a performance anxiety. He was upset because he had a foot blister that hampered his movement, and he started crying during the changeover (mid of second set I think, couldn’t remember) because it’s a Wimbledon final and he couldn’t do better (and I feel he knew he had no chance of a win).
I really don’t think that he’s so weak mentally that he just had performance anxiety during a match when he’s fit enough to give it his all, and I’m glad that’s not the case. He said post match that he wants to put all these behind him (may not be his exact words but something to that effect) and gets ready for the rest of the season.
Thanks Lucky.
That’s why. He will be fine. I always thought he was mentally tougher than Berdych. He would have competed and fought hard, without his blistered foot.
Best of luck to Marin during NAHC season. Dang he needs a good blister prevention plan!!
Lucky,
Thanks for reminding me of Delpo! I can’t forget about him! But he hasn’t been playing that well lately. Msybe he will be ready at the USO. As for Stan, I did not forget about the knee issue. We don’t know how serious it is. But he’s got some time to recover.
I wonder how Goffin is doing. When will he be back? It’s true that there are more players who are good on hard court. If Kyrgios gets over his hip or whatever it is that has been bothering him, then he could do well. Then there is Tsonga and Monfils. I wonder if Querrey will be able to make another deep run.
As for Cilic, maybe it will be too soon for him to bounce back from this loss. It has to hurt. I already stated why I think it’s going to be hard for him to get over it. We will have to wait and see.
Nny,
Goffin is back playing in an Umag 250 clay tourny this week. I just filled out my TDC bracket and picked him to win!
Monfils is playing on the grass in Newport. I didn’t see Querrey, Tsonga, or Kyrgios on any draws.
They pulled out, because Tomic is playing. What’s the point of playing then… No chances against him.
Joking :))
Have you joined TDC yet Eugene?
This one: http://www.tennisdrawchallenge.com/
It’s the fun weekly picking group- WTA and ATP every week all season long. There’s no time to waste wondering about what coulda been at Wimby! lol..
When Bastad, Gastaad, Umag, Bucharest, and Newport are about to start!
Oh Thank you rc very much. I saw you guys talking about it, but was not sure how to particiate. Appreciate. I’ll give it a try 😉
After you register and join fill out your desired brackt(s) — Be sure and check out the drop-down for Groups, Eugene!
There are many groups to join but look for Jalep_wildguess, that’s where many of us are. Also there’s a Tenngrand group. Cheers, Eugene. You must be very happy about Federer winning another GS!
Yes. It feels amazing and peaceful at the same time. Thank you. I’ll register.
rc,
Thanks for the update! Great to know that Goffin is back and playing again!
Hi Alison. As far as know, hawkeye’s favorite player is Nadal. But all other Fed fans will appreciate your comment, I’m sure.
Hi i don’t post here but i read all the comments usually and LuckyStar NNY VR kevin are my fav posters, keep posting forever ? Congrats to Fed and i feel so sorry for Cilic, i believe his 2014 was not a fluke and after reaching Wimbledon final i feel he will definitely win more grandslams.
Fed deserves congratulations for this latest achievement. I certainly hope that Cilic can bounce back from this tough loss.
I’m sure he will. Stronger than ever. This is a turning point in his career.
Cilic will have more belief now that he knows he isn’t a one hit wonder and was a win away from another slam. Cilic will proabably win at least another slam in his career. I think he’s only 28 so he’s got a lot of time.
Hope your right NNY 😉
Alison,
I honestly believe it! I don’t think we have heard the last of Rafa. I think he is going to be very motivated to do well in the NA summer hard court season. He is healthy and playing well.
I don’t think that Fed is going to win the USO. I think Rafa is not done yet for this year. I also think that there are others who will make it interesting.
Nice to have you back!
?
Rafa will be a major force at the USO. He shouldve beat Fed at the Aus Open and USO courts suite him better. At this stage, he’s actually my pick to win it.
I agree with JC and the rest who believe that Rafa and Fed will be the major forces at the USO. The AO final was very close and the court there favored Fed slightly more as it’s quicker this year, even quicker than the USO court.
Though Fed won that one, he had to fight hard playing a few five setters, so on HCs, there will be more serious competition for both of them. Its unlike clay and grass, when Rafa and Fed are clearly a class above the rest on their respective dominant surface. So, no. 16 or no.20 may not come easily, or may not even come.
At this point I can’t see anyone other than Fed or Rafa winning it. I can’t believe I’m saying this I’m just so happy haha. #Fedal
Cilic might surprise. Zverev too. But I’d like to see a Federer-Nadal as US Open. That would be amazing.
Only thing I’m happy about is Fed winning his 19th. Other than that I’m sad for Marin not fully fit during the match and for it not being too exciting of a final. Super happy for Roger though ?
Congrats, Benny G. 🙂
Happy for ya, Benny! I was thinking about this the other day: If you think about it, Fed has sort of come full-circle since his landmark win over Sampras at 2001 Wimbledon. By beating Sampras that day, he himself prevented Pete from being able get that coveted 8th title. If only Fed knew that day that by beating Sampras, he was setting himself up to pass Pete for the title record 16 years later… He wouldn’t have believed it haha! Sure, Pete did play Wimbledon the following year, but he was in such poor form that there’s no way he was going to win it. In 2001, Fed seriously played possibly the best match of his career imo to beat the guy that almost nobody had been able to beat at Wimbledon. Personally, I don’t doubt that Pete would have won #8 that year had Fed not beat him. There is no way in hell that Tim Herman was beating him in the Quarters or Goran in the semis. It would have been a 2000 rematch with Rafter. Maybe Rafter could have beaten him the second time around, but I wouldn’t have put money on… Fed was punching way above his weight that day, and that was proven by his comparatively shitty performance against Henman in the next round. But in that one match against Pete, Fed showed that he was the Wimbledon player of the future. Looking back on it on this day, it truly was a passing of the torch from Pete to Fed. Fed just didn’t light his fire with the torch until 2003 haha! 🙂
Kevin, really enjoyed reading your comment. Cheers!
Benny, I am so happy too after Roger managed to win his 19th career slam. I was nervous before this final. 1 year ago, what if someone told us he will win AO and Wimbledon? I am so thankful right now. If I knew this is the last slam he won, that would be enough to feel the same.
People start talking about US Open 2017. Does anyone know what’s the seeds situation at this moment? Where are Rafa & Roger at the moment?
I feel the same, Benny. I’m a big Cilic fan and wouldn’t have been devastated had he won. It certainly would have been nice to have a better match, but I’m not sure who could provide that when Roger is playing like this, except maybe prime Nole.
Cilic in 2016 and Cilic today were like chalk and cheese in comparison and no it wasnt because of how Fed played. Cilic beat himself today.
Only to an extent, Jim. First, Cilic wasn’t beating himself in Fed’s service games, not when Roger was serving 76% 1st serves. After a nervous start, Federer wasn’t getting broken by anyone today.
In his own service games, Cilic was terrible at the start, but started serving much better after his breakdown. Yes, he made a lot of errors, but he was getting continuous pressure, even on his 1st serve and almost always on his 2nd. Again, Roger played a large role in how Cilic played.
No doubt Cilic today was a shadow of what he was in 2014. But Federer played a lot better today than he did in 2014.
So no, not a simple case of Cilic beating himself.
Fed had to do barely anything to win this match. Cilic was hitting mid court forehands in the net every 2nd shot. Even the commentators were saying how much Cilic had lost the plot but that’s OK, you believe what you want to believe.
I’m over and out.
Nice way not to answer my argument, Jim. I’ll believe what I think the facts support. I’m also not the one who has to rationalize a silly prediction about the match.
Do you think Roger serving at 76% first serves had nothing to do with winning the match? That’s half the games. In the other half, Cilic starting serving better after his meltdown. Against a lesser player, many of those serves wouldn’t have come back, or wouldn’t have come back nearly as hard/deep. Again, Fed had something to do with that.
To be clear, I’m not claiming that Cilic didn’t play badly overall. He did. But you (along with some others here) are making the much stronger claim that Roger had almost nothing to do with this win. That claim isn’t made more plausible by the fact that some commentators seem to agree with it.
Incredible really is the word attributable to what this man is doing. I could not watch much of Wimbledon and even the final as J was travelling back to London today after a nice summer vacation with my wife.
I read that Cilic was injured so feel bad for him. I am ahre it would have been tougher but the outcome would have been the same.
19th slam at almost 36 is INCREDIBLE. I can only admire what this man is doing.
Congrats to all the Roger fans. As for the USO, I see Fedal as the joint favourites. Yes I believe Rafa has a great chance to win his 3rd USO.
The race to no.1 is also between these two now obviously.
Really happy or Roger as well! The Wimby-US double is on the cards again. He’s done it a few times!
Watch the highlights, im sure it will be one the most boring in the history of Wimbledon. there’s was less than a handful of winners (not great shots) the whole match. It was a match of unforced errors by one player.
Cupcake draws, weak era, all go for a toss , when somebody @ 35 takes a break and wins 2 out of 2 Grand Slams, first one being outside top 16 and smearing through the draw and second one without losing a set. I think Fed is pushing the bar really high now. We want healthy Djoker back.
Ermm…I want to take this opportunity to give millions of congrats to my fellow Rog fans on here such as Joe Smith,Eugene,Benny,Big Al?..and whomever that i forgot to say their name atm….God!Roger are AWESOME!!!!…and u guys too!!….It’s a great feelings to experienced at this moment right??Enjoy it to the fullest guys!!….God knows,u guys deserve it as much as Rog!…
P/S….Sorry,a little late to give my congrats guys…i’m out of town and internet was sucks!!…
Thanks Mira.Yes I am a big Roger fan,but I also like Cilic,Murray,Nole and many others.A tennis fan first.
Hehe.yeah me too Big Al…I am a BIGGG Rafa fan…but i am also a Big fan of the Big 4 as well…To me,they’re all amazing..and everytime they play..it’s hard to ignore their ‘awesomeness’…i can’t help but respect their talent very much…
Thank you MA a lot 🙂 That feels special. So happy for fim and his family. Regarding Cilic, I think this experience will benefit him in the longterm. He will win Wimbledon one day, I hope.
Hehe…You’re most welcome Eugene!…I’m so happy for u guys!!…although feel a little bit disappointed because now it’s almost impossible for Rafa to at least be ‘near’ Roger[hahaha!]..but it is what it is…no need to be disappointed actually…i believe in this life,we’re all got our shares that was meant for us from the beginning…and Roger was meant to bagged his 19th for now…
As for Cilic…God knows i wish him win his 2nd slams in the future…Really really hope he’ll get it..but then he has to work very hard for it…but to get pass those mental barrier is really hard…that’s why we’ve only got a Big 4 and not Big 6,7 or 8 right Eugene?
Mira Andi (AT 12:41 PM),
Rafa will always have 5 years to close the gap between himself and Fed.:)
Thank you MA. I believe Cilic can win at least one more slam. Everyone has some barriers/challenges to overcome and if he will work on it and accept help from other people, he can definitely do it.
The gap between Rafa and Fed? Well they are both amazing. When I see their achievents and how much love they get from fans and their families, the gap is less important :)) I wouldn’t mind Rafa to close the gap, but that’s difficult. They have nothing to proof. After 30, tennis should be about enjoying. Fedal too serious :)))
Eugene says AT 3:26 PM: “After 30, tennis should be about enjoying.”
===
Rafa has always enjoyed playing tennis, he hasn’t been forced to play it.
@Lucky!!….Sorry on the behalf of Cilic…maybe he will have another chance..who knows…Wish him all the best in the future…Hope,he will take something positive from this painful encounter…
Thanks Mira. I feel so sorry for Cilic, to see him in tears like that. I really hope he can have a Wimbledon title in future, he’s clearly very good on grass. Hes really so happy that he finally reached the final this time, when in the past three years, he was stopped in the QF by either Djoko or Fed.
I also remembered Rafa in 2007, after losing the final to Fed, he cried in the locker room or in the hotel, and thought that he might not have a chance in the future to win Wimbledon. We are glad Rafa won it the following year and now he has two Wimbledon titles.
Yeah Lucky..I guess if i watch the match,i will cry too!…definitely!…yeah,i guess no one can escape from this situations..they will at least cry once in their professional life…just like Andy,Novak,Rafa and Roger too..remember AO 2009?I really really hope,this warrior will get stronger if they’ve get a chance to make things right in the future…God!it’s heartbroken to see a tough and macho guy cry like that…i wish i won’t have to witness something like this ever again…sooo heartbroken…
Lucky- I’m calling it right now- Marin Cilic will be the Wimbledon champion sometime in the future. And I look forward to enjoying the moment with you when it happens. 🙂 He’s an amazing champion at the highest level, and his game is just so great for grass. I like to believe that his experience in yesterday’s final will only serve to prepare him for the next time he’s in the Wimbledon final. He will surely take more steps from the beginning of the tournament to make sure that he can keep the blisters at bay as much as possible. And I like to believe that he will be less overcome by the moment next time. I’m obviously not a psychic, but I would be very surprised if Marin doesn’t at LEAST win one more major in his career, either Wimbledon or US again. Personally, I think it will be Wimbledon one day. And I’m going to remember this post for when it happens. 🙂
I didn’t think Cilic would do it because he is so prone to errors at crucial times. My only hope was that he did it at the USO so it was possible. Luckily, I wasn’t at home so didn’t watch it live but watching the recording, I am so glad I had something far more enjoyable to do on Sunday afternoon.
Fed’s matches are boring on the whole except when he is pushed or playing one of the BIG 4. If the casual tennis viewer thinks Federeris the ultimate tennis player, then tennis is being short-changed.
Haha Fed plays exciting tennis with a lot of aggression and winners and flashy shots. That isn’t boring. I think the boring ones to watch are Novak and Andy. Guys lie Stan, Rafa, and Fed aren’t boring. But of course you would say Fed is boring to watch as a Rafan.
Nah Benny, Djoko and Murray aren’t boring to watch. Murray was so crafty, esp in his match vs Stan at the FO. If Murray wasn’t crafty, he would have lost in straight sets to Stan. Of course if Murray comes out looking half dead and playing defensive tennis without any strategy, then yes he’s pretty boring.
Djoko can be awesome, no question about that, if he plays like he did vs Rafa at Doha 2016 final, and vs Fed at AO2016 SF. I do feel Djoko did play well on grass, his matches vs Delpo, Cilic and Fed at Wimbledon were some awesome tennis from him, to weather the storm against those very tough opponents.
I agree with you, Benny, especially about Murray. He may be an amazing player, and very crafty, but his often highly-defensive, long drawn out rallies get quite boring. Especially when he plays Novak. His game is just not classically pretty on the eyes, with the obvious exception of his backhand. His forehand has to be one of the ugliest shots I’ve ever seen, how he sort of leaps backward off of one foot. He is definitely crafty and can be cool to watch for a big tennis fan. But for people who don’t know much about tennis, he’s gotta be the most boring top player to watch out there…
Isner.
Yeah I mean I would definitely pay money to see Murray or Djokovic play and I don’t dislike watching them. I only think they are boring in comparison to Fedal. But I don’t actually think they are literally boring to watch in general. Sorry I said it like that
I’ve been curious about the very different reactions to this Wimby final vs. the RG final in June. The consensus -both on this site and in a few articles online that I’ve read- seems to be that whereas Rafa won his match against Stan by dominating him with excellent play, Federer won mostly because Cilic played so poorly he just gave him the match. That’s not at all what I saw, which were very comparable performances (near their very best) from Nadal and Federer, and very poor performances from Stan and Cilic. So I saw parity where others didn’t. As Lucky and others have said, it ultimately is a matter of opinion. However, it is interesting to compare the match stats, a relatively objective source of information which I think supports my take on things as against the consensus.
Start with the incredible performances of Nadal and Federer. Rafa hit 65% of 1st serves in, winning 83%. Federer hit 76% of first serves in, winning 81%. Both players had the same winner/UE differential: Nadal 27/12; Federer 23/8. Both dominated total points: Nadal 94/57; Federer 96/64. Nadal won 6/13 break points; Federer 5/10. Of course, both men won their respective tournaments without dropping a set. Very comparable performances statistically.
Now let’s compare Wawrinka and Cilic; this is where I think some people will be surprised. It was obvious that Cilic served poorly, especially at the beginning, but he actually served better than Stan. 1st serves in/won: Cilic 60%, winning 65%; Stan 58%, winning only 52%. (Stan won slightly more % of 2nd serve points: 44% vs. 39%). How about winners and UE? I’ve read one commentator: “Has anyone ever made more unforced errors in a slam final than Cilic did?” Well, yes actually: Stan made more last month at RG: 29 vs. 23 for Cilic. Stan did hit a few more winners (19 to 16 for Cilic), which means he had a lower differential of winners to UE: -10 vs -7 for Cilic. Finally, both men had just one break point chance, which they each failed to convert.
In short, Cilic played very badly yesterday, but so did Stan Wawrinka last month in Paris. Both things are compatible with their opponents playing lights out tennis, which they did. What explains the different way in which these matches have been perceived? Mainly, I think, that Cilic broke down sobbing on court (an unprecedented event mid-match in men’s open-era slam history, to my knowledge), whereas Stan remained fairly staunch and even said post-match that Rafa didn’t allow him to play his game. As I’ve said elsewhere, I think that was a bit of a cop-out from him, but to the extent that it is true, I think it’s equally true of Cilic. Had Stan broke down crying mid-match and then mentioned a foot injury, and Cilic remained staunch and praised Federer to the heavens after the match, I suspect the public reaction would be quite different.
In any event, the match stats support the view that these two performances (by Stan and Cilic) deserve to be treated as comparably bad; the two performances by Rafa and Fed, comparably good.
One can hardly compare matches on clay vs grass. Wawa was not at his best but did try the same tactics as with Nole to hit through Rafa…yet he was unable to do so because of Rafa’s extraordinary performance. Fed as well did great yesterday but Cilic was never to be dangerous IMO. He is weak mentally unlike Wawa who has bagged three GSs so far and who owns RG title unlike Cilic who has never reached the final at Wimby. It’s much easier to beat Nishi in the final than Fed, whereas Wawa has beaten red hot Nole to win two GS titles. The main variables are different to begin with so I do not see the point in comparing it rather than just to say that Wawa was favored in the RG final by many unlike Cilic for whom it was obvious he would end up losing…Cilic crying like a baby mid match was beyond comprehension no matter what the reason was behind it…it was pretty embarrassing but just proved how mentally unstable Cilic is…
I agree that it’s hard to compare clay vs. grass, but not impossible. Stan actually did hit through Rafa early on, and Cilic did a bit too yesterday. Some of the early rallies made me think that if he can stay consistent, Roger will have a hard time dealing with his power. The difference, imo, is that Stan gave up on his power game when he started missing and when some of his shots started coming back with interest. At that point I think he was sunk. Cilic, however, at least to my eye, didn’t give up on his game plan. He just couldn’t execute it, or even come close to executing it.
I personally thought Stan had a good chance before that RG final, but I was in the distinct minority. Rafa was the clear favourite in that final, and I couldn’t find a single tennis analyst who picked Stan to win. OTOH, a few high-profile writers picked Cilic, including Tignor and Bodo.
I see your point Joe. I think people wanted to be respectful towards Cilic and encourage him, that’s why the invoked the ‘injury’. I think there was not any injury at all. 100% mental anxiety. He was overwhelmed. Simple, that’s it. It can happen, especially when playing against Fed, Rafa or Djoko. They have a special ‘aura’; more than that playing on the central court. As I said yesterday he will return more solid as ever. I don’t know if that’s gonna happen as soon as USO 2017 or later. But this guy will win Wimbledon.
You are right Joe when you mentioned in one post that Cilic had nothing to do with Rogers amazing serves. You can’t influence that. I am just glad the Fed I wanted showed up yesterday.
Nats, right, there’re certain points I can agree with you, ie Stan, a former FO champion at RG final certainly was a tougher opponent than a Cilic who’s a first time finalist at Wimbledon, especially given that Cilic wasn’t mentally strong the way Stan was at a slam final.
I seriously think that a fit Cilic would at least play better and gotten a set off Fed, and pushed him harder. I’m not saying Cilic would win but at least he could play better.
You’re right that we can’t compare clay to grass; on grass the points are shorter and the margin for error is smaller, maybe just a good serve and a not so good return and the point is lost.
Both Rafa and Fed came out in their respective finals all guns blazing; Rafa didn’t allow Stan any opportunity to hit his powerful ground strokes; Fed otoh was serving well and returning well as he knew Cilic’s serve was his major weapon on grass.
I do believe Cilic is a better player than Berdy is on grass, with better court craft and is quicker around the court, so it’s not unreasonable to expect him to break Fed’s serve at least once to get a set. However Fed is far too experienced and steady and will remain calm under most circumstances and so will weather the storm to win. Of course if his opponent in the final is Rafa or Djoko playing at their best, then perhaps Fed would make more errors.
Lucky, I agree with you. I did think Cilic would play better than this but I knew he stood no chance due to his mental weaknesses… we Rafans know if any the mental part is crucial especially in the big matches against quality opponents…this is what makes the big 4 exceptional…
I was skeptical about Rafa’s chances on grass due to his recent history on grass, him not playing any worm up tournaments and also being emotionally spent from RG. However, I really think Rafa can win USO and will be the main competitor for the title along with Fed and Andy…don’t think Cilic will easily recover from this Wimby final… but I wish him all the best…
Honestly for me the last two slam finals have consisted of a great performance from the favorite and a subpar performance from the underdog. I don’t see why we are debating the finals. They were pretty similar lol and Fedal won them so that is pretty sick.
Nicely said Benny 🙂
We are debating it because that’s what a tennis forum is all about. Otherwise, why bother! If we all agreed then there would be nothing to discuss,
The only resdin that Rafa winning the final at RG even was brought up, Is because a Fed fan decided to make it an issue in response to some Rafa fans saying that Cilic played poorly. Which apparently is blasphemy to some Fed fans. Otherwise, there is no reason to try and demean Rafa’s win,
I happen to agree with both Nats and Lucky, I think they both made reasonable points about the difference between clay and grass. Also, the difference between Stan and Cilic. Stan as a three time slam winner who has beaten the top four to win slams and has shown himself to be much tougher mentally that Cilic.
Stats don’t tell the whole story. Only some of it. Joe has once again decided that Stan’s own comments about how Rafa did not let him play his game, are a cop out! So he is basically contradicting Stan’s comments and assessment after the match because he chooses not to accept it! Which I find rather shocking. But I guess if comments from the player himself do not support one’s rafter dubious argument, than one must rewrite reality. Because that is essentially what is being done.
For myself, I accept what Stan said. I see no reason why he would not be honest in saying what he believed.
I don’t necessarily blame Joe because Fedfans and Rafans will always naturally feel a need to defend their guy. In my opinion, the main difference between the two finals was that Fed didn’t put on quite the clinic that Rafa did in the final, not because he couldn’t but because he didn’t have to. Rafa was facing a guy who hadn’t lost a slam final, and he was absolutely clinical in that final. Fed was more clinical against Raonic then he was in the final. Raonic was not injured or suffering mental issues like Cilic was. If there was one guy Fed probably felt compelled to be clinical against, it would probably be the guy who beat him the previous year. But I think what Benny is trying to say is that these little details really don’t matter. They both faced great players on the respective surfaces, and didn’t concede a set to any of them. It’s definitely a little frustrating when people like Joe get defensive and struggle to be critical of their guy, but it’s not surprising. We see it all the time with Fedfans, Rafans, and Novak fans. It would be nice if everyone could totally objective, but that’s just not realistic…
Kevin,
My issue is the fact that Rafa was brought into a discussion about the Wimbledon final only after a Rafa fan said that Cilic played poorly. Only at that point was the RG final brought into the discussion. It was petty and mean-spirited. I have seen this tactic used by Fed fans too many times in the past. For example, Rafa has all these titles at RG but it’s clay. Fed has all these titles and it’s Wimbledon on grass! This is the kind of tit-for-tat that goes on.
Stan was not suffering from any mental anxiety that caused him to break down crying on the sidelines. Stan was not suffer no ftom a painful foot blister or anything physical. So that is an important difference. Apples and oranges.
The other issue is that many have assumed that It was simply anxiety and a mental collapse on the part of Cilic. I made that assumption myself. But he did have a blister and that can be quite painful. Maybe once he realized that the blister was acting up and sensed that he would not be able to play his best, that’s why he broke down. We don’t know for sure how much was the blister snd how much was just anxiety. Only Cilic knows for sure. But there was a problem.
Cilic said after the match that he did not play his best and was disappointed. Stan said after his match that Rafa did not allow him to play his game because he was just at a whole other level.
There are differences between these two slam finals. I simply do not see why Rafa’s final was brought into the discussion.
I don’t see why Fed fans can’t just be happy with his victory, no matter what the circumstances. No one is taking anything away from Fed. I think that Rafa fans for the most part have been very gracious about Fed’s victory. I don’t see the problem.
It’s just unfortunate that a Fed fan has to get his nose out of joint over a comment about Cilic playing poorly and then felt the need to drag Rafa’s final into it. It’s childish and petty.
I have congratulated Fed for his great achievement. There is no reason to take anything away from his victory and I don’t think that was the intention at all.
As far as bias and lack of objectivity, no one is immune to that. It’s part of the human condition.
I get it, NNY. It is definitely annoying. I was agreeing with you. It is very common for the fans of Fed, Rafa, and Novak to bring the other guys into a discussion in order to try to discredit them. This has been a complaint of mine for a long time. I’m just trying to say that it’s really annoying and disrespectful, but that it’s always going to happen. There are many fans of the Big 3 that just get very defensive when anything is said that isn’t a perfect compliment to their guy. And it’s not just in tennis, it’s in all sports. It might be more rampant in tennis just because it’s an individual sport, and people are so passionate about an individual being. And people should be calling people out for it, like you did. 🙂 I’ve noticed over time that when a fan such as Joe says things like that, they often either don’t want to admit that they were being salty, or they are so biased that they can’t even see how they are being salty/biased/disrespectful/whatever. Part of the problem is that it’s like a revolving door of bias and saltiness. Joe has probably heard many instances where someone brought Rafa into a conversation that didn’t involve him just to try to discredit Fed, so naturally Joe will feel a need to do the same back. That’s the unfortunate part. It would be best if people like Joe were able to stay humble and just ignore the people who disrespect his guy, but we are very defensive and protective as humans. So as annoying as it is when Joe says something like that, I try to remind myself that he has probably been socialized to say things like because people have probably done it to him before. That’s what I try to keep in mind. I don’t want to make it seem like I disagree with you in any way, NNY…
Kevin,
You can disagree with me all you like! That’s what it’s about!
I can see where something might have happened where Fed was brought into a discussion unfairly. I am sure it has happened both ways.
I still wish we could just celebrate these moments and be grateful that both Rafa and Fed are playing well and still in the game!
Nope, NNY, you’ve misunderstood. I didn’t object to Lucky and others’ claim that Cilic played poorly: I agree with that. Rather, it was the suggestion that Fed had little or nothing to do with Cilic’ poor play, that he didn’t have to do anything to win the match, etc. In short, it was minimizing the quality of Federer’s play in winning that match.
If you read my long post above again, you’ll see that I am making a comparative point: Cilic played about as poorly as Wawrinka did, as measured by relatively objective criteria. Likewise, Federer played about as well as Nadal did, again by the same criteria. There is nothing petty about making such a comparison, when the background is the attempt of some Rafans -explicit or tacit- to minimize Federer’s victory.
Thanks for the psychoanalysis, Kevin.
Sticking a bit closer to reality, you have to understand the context of my comment, which is Lucky and some other Rafans saying that Roger didn’t have to do anything to win this final, because Cilic played so poorly he just handed it to him (“he didn’t turn up”; “Roger had little to do with it,” etc.).
The larger context is the persistent theme amongst some Rafans that Fed’s slam count should be minimized because so many of his victories have come against inferior and/or under-performing opposition. The main sub-theme, of course, is that the majority of his slams came during the “weak-era”. But many fans of Rafa will take any opportunity to minimize the quality of Federer’s slam final opponents, and I think Cilic fits that trend.
As I said, I accept Lucky’s point that ultimately it’s a matter of opinion. That doesn’t mean there are no relevant objective facts, which is why I called attention to them. As I said, I think they support my claim.
Excuse me Joe, when did I say Fed didn’t need to do much to beat Cilic? Please don’t quote my name in vain! I didn’t say that at all!!! You’re getting unbelievable with your untrue comments!
You’re right, Benny. Both of them dominated their respective best major, neither of them dropping a set. Even if the matches in both runs were relatively one-sided, it’s simply a testament to the greatness of the two best to ever pick up a racquet. The both straight-setted arguably some of the best non-big4 players of the respective surfaces. It was never really in doubt that Fed was going to win that title, just like it was never really in doubt that Rafa was going to win RG. Even if the finals of the last two majors were one-sided affairs, I still personally love that Rafa and Fed both staked their claims and made history at their best majors. I think it’s only natural that people felt like the last couple finals were relative let-downs because the first major final of the year was comparatively epic. We never know how much longer those two guys will be around on tour, so I savor these moments where the run through the field. It’s what they always did when they were at their best! 🙂
NNY
“Cilic said after the match that he did not play his best and was disappointed. Stan said after his match that Rafa did not allow him to play his game because he was just at a whole other level.
There are differences between these two slam finals. I simply do not see why Rafa’s final was brought into the discussion.”
Fed fans simply can’t accept the facts and I agree that there is no need to compare Rafa’s win over Stan with Cilic behaving like a rabbit caught in headlights yesterday.
When you say ‘Fed fans simply can’t accept the facts’ you are not being more objective than those ‘fed fans’. You are generalizing. Exactly what I was discussing with luckystar a few days ago.
‘Some Fed fans’ would be a more appropiate statement nadline10, don’t you think? Or ‘a lot, a vast majority, a minority’. I don’t feek the need to compare those matches for various reasons. I just enjoy the moment.
Would be nice not to read so often ‘Fed fans’ think that or this or refuse to accept reality :)) as if they are all one and the same person.
Eugene, I thought I used the word ‘Fed worshippers’, not Fed fans in general. ‘Fed worshippers’ are one specific group of worshippers; I was being specific there!
And Eugene, I agree with NNY. She did mention ‘a Fed fan’, referring to Joe and his comment(s). The term the Fed fans was used because they the Fed fans (many of them if not all, and not necessarily in this forum only) did try to belittle Rafa’s achievements, saying they were only on clay, as if clay isn’t/wasn’t a legitimate playing surface. It’s the elitist attitude of MANY Fed fans plus the worshippers that made THE Nadal fans simply very fed up!
If you’re trying to be objective, then in future I hope you can also point out to those who used the term ‘the Nadal fans’ loosely, to be more specific and more objective.
Lucky, it’s not belittling Rafa’s achievements to say the vast majority of them have come on clay. That’s just stating a fact, which anyone with half a brain can recognize. Nadal is, far and away, the best ever player on clay.
Federer, on the other hand, is clearly the better player on all other surfaces. At least, that’s so if we measure according to overall performance in the biggest tournaments. I’ve spelt it out before, and to my knowledge no one has disagreed. So I won’t do it again.
Joe, it’s not just that, it’s the underlying tone of their comments that’s the problem! Perhaps you should visit the other forums, and see how nasty those people are!
It’s as if clay doesn’t count, that’s the issue, not about winning on clay per se. Its not difficult to see that, anyone with half a brain could see that!
lucky, those people are not Fed Fans for real. Not at all. A real tennis fan (no matter whose player) knows what respect is, that’s the fundamental value of any most sports, especially tennis. Also a real sports fan, can differentiate between facts and manipulative information. And he has integrity. Overall, all those put together can only make one feel amazed by Rafa’s achievements, especially on clay.
Well, I don’t visit any other sites other that the official ATP site. From what I can tell on there, there are nasty and in-civil comments on both sides.
For what it’s worth, I think clay counts just as much as any other surface. I think Nadal’s extraordinary achievements on clay (along with his impressive achievements off clay) put him into the conversation for greatest player ever.
I also think that if his clay achievements were at the same level as his non-clay achievements (for instance, if he was only as good on clay as his second-best surface, outdoor hard court), then he wouldn’t be in that conversation (because he’d have a total of 8 slams, along with another 8-9 masters; obviously very impressive but not GOAT-worthy).
And, most obviously, if his non-clay resume were as impressive as his clay resume, there would be no GOAT conversation, because he would clearly be it.
Joe, I wasn’t even talking about Goat!
Many Fed fans are eager to pronounce Fed as the greatest, but what if Djoko for example wins a few more slams, like one or two more FOs and one or two more Wimbledon, making his slam portfolio more balanced than Fed’s – 8 HC, 3 Clay and 5 grass court slams, don’t you find his portfolio more impressive as he’s able to win multiple slams on any surface?
Fed could only win one slam on his worst surface, so for me Djoko will be more impressive if he gets those numbers in future. It’s too early to pronounce anyone greatest ( not goat imo, but greatest of the era), if people are so obsessed with anointing anyone as greatest.
Or if Rafa gets two more AO, one more of Wimbledon and USO each, making his slam portfolio 6 HC, 10 clay and 3 grass court slams, won’t his portfolio looks more balanced than Fed’s too?
Why is Fed’s slams considered more balance when he only manages one slam on his worse surface? I would think it’s more likely for Djoko to win another FO and at least one of any other slam than Fed to win one more FO.
I think most of the Fed fans who talk down Rafa’s achievements do so in the context of a GOAT conversation; otherwise I don’t think they’d care much.
Why is Fed’s record more balanced? Because he has a great clay record! It’s just that he’s lost so many times to Rafa on clay (both at RG and in masters) that it gets lost that Roger is arguably the second best clay player (either him or Novak) of this era.
If Rafa and/or Novak racks up more GS titles, then of course things could change. At this point, however, it’s not clear that they will win more slams going forward than Roger will, the age difference notwithstanding.
Lucky, I observed that nny usde the term ‘a fed fan’ that’s why I didn’t leave a reply to her. Her messages are balanced and rarely you can argue. In the previous post I was reffering strictly to nadline’s comment.
I’m wondering why Cilic didn’t get a pain killing injection before the match since he knew he had a blister. I know from his book that Rafa got one in the sole of his left foot before the 2008 Wimbly final for “a blister and a swelling” around one of his metatarsals. Also in 2011 his foot was partially numbed during his matches due to a partial tendon tear incurred during his match with DelPo.
Ramara, Cilic probably did. He said he tried (or rather the doctors tried) everything possible. Maybe Rafa’s threshold for pain is higher and he’s one guy who can stay focused at the job on hand better than most people.
Cilic probably couldnt focus like Rafa and mentally ‘burdened’ by the fact that he had a foot blister. It might be something psychological that led him to believe as the match progressed, that his foot blister got worse. Who knows? Cilic is not known to be mentally tough, unlike Rafa.
I did not see Cilic moving badly. I did see Cilic hopping around for the whole match and looked more nervous than injured. I did see him doing a lot of serve and volley. In simple and plain terms, he lied that blisters pain was so bad that he just could not play his natural game. His post match speech was worst where did not even congratulate Fed and took the whole direction of conversation to his blisters.
Sometimes, its a foregone conclusion that Fed, Nadal and Djoker will be physically 100% all the time in every match. But they win those matches as well where they are less than 80%.
RT Austin Karp (Assistant Managing Editor at SportsBusiness Daily): “Federer fatigue? ESPN gets 1.1 overnight rating for Wimbledon final, new low for the network. 1.5 last year was previous low (Murray-Raonic)”
https://twitter.com/AustinKarp/status/886968430154444800
TV viewers are losing interest in watching Fed.
At last it’s beginning to dawn on people that Fed really is boring. I heard someone on the radio describe his match against Dimi as a yawn-fest.
Such a subjective statement. There are millions who would disagree with that statement. And I’m willing to bet more people think Nadal is boring to watch than Fed.
Er… probably it’s most of the Fed fans who think Rafa is boring, most of the non Fed fans think otherwise.
For Fed fans Rafa is boring, for Rafa fans Fed is boring. Fed has more fans than Rafa so the majority wins. For neutral fans both RG and Wimby this year was boring as one was heavy favourite before entering the tournament and he goes on to win without even dropping a set, at least in case of Wimby the possibility of upsets were more and there were upsets so there was a hope to watch Wimby though at the end it turned out the same like RG.
If we only talk about the finals then more or else it’s the same, Fed fans and neutral fans knew what would be the likely outcome but Rafa fans were hoping with the past statistics to expect an upset. Same with the RG with Fed fans expecting an upset. Even though I’m a Fed fan and like Wimby the most out of all grand slams but still I enjoyed AO compared to Wimby. I always wants Fed to win whatever he plays and also to win it comfortably and in that sense whatever I expected it happened the same in Wimby but then if everything what you expect if the same happens then there is no fun in watching.
I know Rafa fans will not agree when someone says RG was not interesting because they will enjoy their man winning his favourite slam but the same is true for Fed fans as well.
Same here, best player. AO was best slam this year in terms of exciting matches til the very end.
Best Player says AT 4:26 AM: “Fed has more fans than Rafa so the majority wins…”
===
Rafa has more fans than Fed on social media so the majority wins:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFAbQ_4WAAAXlOp.jpg
🙂
Again that’s such a subjective statement.
Wait a sec never mind you’re right most wouldn’t think Rafa is boring to watch FOR SURE. I find Rafa very exciting to watch and I’m a Fed fan.
Actually no one is boring, everyone has their own skills and tennis as a whole requires many skills to finally win a match. If someone develops his serve skills like Karlovic that doesn’t make him boring maybe for us it’s boring but for someone who is interested in these kind of game he will still find it interesting. Why I took this topic because someone mentioned that Fed game is boring just because they don’t like Fed. They simply wants to demean Fed’s victory.
I only find it boring when someone is not giving his best even if he is Fed because there is kind of a disappointment because you always know the match could have been better and because someone is not giving his best so you don’t feel like watching it anymore.
Good point.Im a Fedfan but enjoy some of NAdals shots,the forehand is a thing of beauty.
It’s getting rather boring reading this type of comment.
Very few players I find boring,even the Samprases and Karlovics.
Sorry best player, replying to Lucky Star
Sorry Big Al, you’re relying to me? When did I say any player is boring?? Did you get your comment directed to the right person??
You said it was probably Fedfans found Nadal boring,not all of them do !
Other example would be Borg-Mcenroe. I loved Borg,didn’t like Mac,but he had a much more watchable game .
Big Al, care to read my post again? I was responding to Benny’s post, who said that he bet there are more people who find Nadal boring to watch than Fed.
Why didn’t you pick that up in the first place. And, didn’t Ai say MOST Fed fans, not ALL Fed fans? See the difference?
Well,’most’ could be anywhere between 50 and 100 percent.I don’t know where you get your information .I can only speak for myself,I don’t find Nadal boring .
Big Al, could you respond to Benny please, on why he think more people find Nadal boring??
Most is < 100%, so don't know why you mentioned 'not all of them' when in the first place I didn't even say 'All' of them! And you don't find Nadal boring ( thank you because I'm a Rafa fan!), but how do you know that among the Fed fans, you are in the majority or minority who think so? And where did you find your info too, to support your case?
What’s my case? I said I can only speak for myself,I never claimed to have the information.
Bennys opinion was that more people would find Nadal boring compared with Federer.Highly subjective.I don’t agree or disagree.
I was just taking issue with your suggestion that such people are most probably Fedfans,almost by definition.
What about non-tennis fans who watch maybe two finals a year? A lot of them are going to be more objective ,since they aren’t a fan of either.
Why don’t we do a poll on who is more boring?
Big Al, do you represent all Fed fans? How do you know whether most Fed fans don’t find Rafa boring??? And I said PROBABLY those who find Rafa boring are mostly the Fed fans, unless you’re going to tell me for sure that non Fed fans also find Rafa boring.
Luckystar,agree there’s no way of knowing for sure.
At least you admit it was a bit of a sweeping generalisation.Some truth in both sides of the equation.
Exactly, I was responding to Benny, who said that he bet there are more people who find Nadal boring, more than they find Fed boring.
My response is, they are mostly the Fed fans, (I said most Fed fans, because given their respective fan base, Nadal’s is also a very big fan base, and so it’ll take most of Fed fans to find Nadal boring, to outnumber the Nadal fans). We do not know the neutral fans are finding Nadal boring or not, even though many may assume that most of the neutral fans don’t find Fed boring.
There’s two meanings there.
Most of Fedfans find Nadal boring
Most of who find Nadal boring are Fedfans.
The second one sounds much better, as you say,no way of knowing about the non-fans.
Big AL, you have to read and respond in the context of Benny’s claim (hence the response is your point no. 1)
If it’s just a general statement, that Nadal is boring to watch, then the response is your point no. 2.
Anyway, it’s just a pointless debate, don’t see the need to continue with it.
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2017/06/french-open-ratings-nbc-singles-finals-lowest-years/
Okay
So what does this mean @augusta ??
Could you and @nadline please care to explain.
I don’t think any players game is boring. Sports can never be boring. It’s just your taste for the game.
abhirf (AT 11:29 AM),
I wrote AT 8:28 PM: “TV viewers are losing interest in watching Fed.”
Here’s another confirmation:
https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2017/07/17/Research-and-Ratings/Overnights.aspx
It’s a testament to Roger’s dominance that extreme fans of other players find him boring at Wimbledon (no different than Nadal at the French Open). The boredom stems from knowing “the enemy” will win before the first ball is struck.
As fans of the sport, not just one player, we are capable of appreciating the brilliance of the big four, as well as the rest of the tour.
Those that can’t are victims of their own fandom that blind them from the beauty of the sport itself leading to these endless circular so-called “debates” pitting ever-hardening echo chambers against each other leading nowhere other than to preach to their own respective choirs in endless futility – extreme fan groups hating on each other, while the players themselves showing virtually zero animosity towards one another. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so ridiculous.
Anyone that can’t appreciate both what Nadal accomplished with ten French titles and what Roger is doing at 36 years old needs to have a long, hard look in the mirror.
abhirf, the low ratings at both the French Open and Wimbledon are based on the American audiences – that US interest in tennis continues to fade to black year after year is old news, especially with men’s tennis because the American audience is only interested in their own and they’ve had no great champion to back since Agassi.
Well said .
I know about that.
Apparently someone is hell bent on cherry picking things and making a news out of it just like the media guys.
I haven’t said anything about any player being boring or so.
I think it’s the American audiences who lost interest in tennis! I mean the last two years FO finals, between two of big four, and one of big four plus Stan, were still having poor ratings! I’m not surprised that the ratings of the Wimbledon finals suffered the same fate with the American audiences.
One should also realize that historically low television ratings are not unique to tennis or US audiences.
Television ratings as a whole pretty much worldwide for all programming tumbles year after year as technology continues to provide new alternatives to entertainment such as streaming, gaming and social media.
Traditional television ratings are not a good indication of player interest but it’s just more of the same – people reading what they want when it suits their argument, and equally dismissing what doesn’t.
True, agreed.
Exactly