Australian Open SF: Murray def Federer 6-4, 6-7(5), 6-3, 6-7(2), 6-2

I underestimated Murray, didn’t I? I got up at 2:30 am to watch this match, and had to work at 7 am the next day. And today. So I was too tired to make a post last night. These posts takes energy, believe it or not. I thought this was a great match, worthy of a final. The key to this match for me was the first set, not the third set like against Tsonga. Murray came out in dominant fashion, and after he won the first set Roger could never quite caught up. Murray drew first blood as he broke at 1-1 after a heavy forehand that Roger could not return. He was serving big and dominated from the ground. Roger could not break back and lost the first set. Murray was overpowering him and I felt he needed to use more variation coupled with aggressive play. He needed to break down Murray’s rhythm. He started doing that in the second set, slicing more off the backhand side.

It paid dividends as he broke the Murray rhythm and did some domination of his own. He could not break serve however and the set boiled down to the first tie break. I was nervous because I knew Roger had to win the set to stay in the match. As we know Roger 3.0, he was clutch in the breaker. At 5-5 he made a great defensive lob which Murray could not put away. Roger took the opportunity with both hands as he hit a delicious cross court backhand passing shot. The crowd roared and Roger pumped his fist. He had set point and after a Murray forehand sailed long he let rip with a loud ‘ALLEZ!’. The crowd roared again, because the match was tied up at a set all and it would go to four sets at least. Murray was starting with his negative body language again and I was wondering whether Roger was  starting to take control of the match.

It wasn’t to be. Murray broke at 3-2 and took a 5-2 lead. He then served it out at 5-3 with an ace. He was the dominant force again. Of course the third set was a pivotal set in the match as well, but it wasn’t really close. If it went to the breaker I’d be more inclined to say it was the key point in the match. But it had an air of inevitability about it after Murray dropped the second set. He just stepped it up and took control of the match again. In the fourth set Roger staged another comeback, as I was struggling to keep my eyes open. He broke at 2-1 and looked in superb form as he held serve to take a 4-1 lead. But at 4-2 Murray broke back. It was around this time that I drifted off into sleep. Things finally headed for the tie break once more. Would Roger hold off Murray this time? The answer is a resounding yes as he won the breaker by two mini breaks.

It showed great heart after gaining the momentum with a break and then losing it again when Murray broke back. In the fifth set Roger was still bravely fighting on but there was nothing left in the tank. Murray thoroughly dominated this set and broke Roger twice. Of course the result was a disappointment at first, but it didn’t take me long to get over it. In fact I soon started feeling very satisfied with Roger’s whole Australian Open performance. It was like winning another slam without the cup and the official title next to his name. I was really proud of the way he played this whole two weeks. He could not possibly have done better. I’ve heard many people say that he was not as his best against Murray. What these people fail to realize is that you play only as well as your opponent and conditions allows you to. Murray is a heavyweight now.

There can be no doubt about this fact. He is the real deal. Given the court surface that suits his game, you can now start to understand why I say Roger could not have done any better. Roger is 31 years old and played against a very talented player who is in his prime, on slow hard courts. Do you honestly think he could have done better? He was beaten by the better player. Simple as that. That doesn’t mean he can’t beat Murray in a slam. But as I said earlier this year I still think his best chances at a slam is Wimbledon or the US Open. Melbourne and Paris just doesn’t suit his game that well. If Murray beat him in Melbourne then Djokovic would probably have beaten him easier. The surface just doesn’t suit his attacking game as much. He doesn’t get enough free points off the serve against good returners like Murray and Djokovic.

Some people said the reason he lost is because his serve was off. Again I can’t agree. He was still serving at 61% first serves which is high. Murray is simply a very good returner and didn’t allow Roger to dominate with his serve as much. It’s not like this is the first time it’s happened. We have seen what happens against the likes of Nadal and Del Potro who put pressure on his serve. In those instances his serve actually started to fall apart. That was not the case against Murray. You see, people still want to believe that every match Roger plays the match is on his racquet. Well he is not in his prime anymore and the competition has caught up. Yes, the match may be on his racquet on fast hard, grass, or indoors, but that is not the case on slow hard and clay anymore. Not against the very best anyway. But this is really a minor.

I would be a really greedy and unreasonable fan if I still expect Roger to dominate the very best on every surface out there. That wasn’t even the case in his prime! At 31 years of age he is still right up there with Djokovic and Murray. How can I possibly ask for more? I am 100% satisfied with Roger’s performance in Melbourne, and I mean that when I say it. Towards the end of last year Roger was struggling somewhat due to tiredness. He ended the year well however by beating Murray in London and losing to Djokovic in the final, after he was up breaks in both sets. Now there was a match which you could say the match was on his racquet. And why was that? You guessed it – the surface. I think Roger raised his level since then, which is what I was hoping for. He is at his best possible level right now, which I didn’t feel was the case there.

He is playing with more confidence and assurance. So I have very high hopes for 2013. Roger 3.0 is here to stay. And Roger 3.0 is right up there with Djokovic and Murray. Make no mistake about it. They won this round, as they should on a surface that suited them. In the clay season it will be interesting to see if Murray can match Roger. We know Djokovic is a tough customer on clay, although Roger beat him in 2011 in that epic French Open semi. On grass I still very much like Roger’s chances against Djokovic and Murray. Same thing on the faster hard courts of the North-American swing and indoors. I don’t think Roger will win Wimbledon again this year. I think it will be Djokovic or Murray. I think his best chance for a slam title this year will be at the US Open. I just have a good feeling about it.

Yes, I do believe Roger has another slam left in him. He is just too good a player still. I like to see his slam count end on an even number, and he has some unfinished business in New York. Then I guess I have to address the issue of Roger’s swearing at Murray in the fourth set tie break. I won’t spend much time on it because I don’t view it as a big deal. There was a shot from Roger that was close to the line and Murray sort of stopped to see if the lines person is gonna make a call. When the call didn’t come he resumed play. Roger then said ‘Fucking stop!’ or ‘You fucking stopped!’ to Murray after the point, to which Murray made a face that can be translated as ‘Oh, so that’s the way it’s gonna be’. As usual some people are pulling this way out of proportion. If this stops you from being a Fedfan I have news for you: You were never a Fedfan to begin with.

This is sport for crying out loud. Sport is just a modern version of war. In the old days in Rome their sport was watching gladiators kill each other for entertainment. And not long ago Mcenroe and Connors was at each other’s throats. As an ex tennis player myself I enjoyed the moment, even though I didn’t see it live. It worked for Roger anyway, as he won the tie break. If you want to whine about how players conduct themselves on court then go whine about Nadal. I assure you there there are a 100 more things to whine about. And if you want tennis players to be angels then you should find yourself another sport. Or stop following sport altogether. It goes with the territory. Ok I think I have said enough about that. As for the final tomorrow I think Djokovic will win. He is the king of plexicushion and I think he will tie Roger and Agassi at 4 Australian Open titles tomorrow.

Nothing is set in stone but I think he does everything just that little bit better than Murray. It has been a fantastic Australian Open and a fantastic one for Roger as well. I hope you guys enjoyed it as much as I did and I look forward to a good final. I don’t think it will match the Roger/Murray match in terms of entertainment but it will be interesting nonetheless. I will make another post after the final.

Highlights:

Presser: http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/news/interviews/2013-01-25/201301251359121946973.html

Posted in Uncategorized.

22 Comments

  1. Hey Ru-an! I am so happy to see you back in action.

    Just to point out a couple of things.

    Roger got broken at 4:2 in the 4th but then at 5:5 he got broken again. You missed it. That’s why I was so amazed at his comeback.

    Murray was serving for the match!!! 6:5 – Murray serving! For sure it was over! For sure. Murray was serving lights out!

    Actually it was 15:0 and that’s when Roger swore at Murray (not in the tiebreak). Then the score was 30:15.

    You should really check out the highlights of this game if you can. Riger won the next like 3 points straight to force the tiebreak and returned like 2 huge Murray serves back in play. I mean at a desperate moment, Roger stepped it up like never before.

    I was as excited about it as I was when Roger beat Del Potro at the Olympics 19:17 in the third set.

    It was stunning to witness. But in any case, Murray showed that he is definitely a contender. I still think that he can beat Djokovic tonight. He pushed him to the brink last year. I think he can definitely beat him here…

    [Reply]

  2. Great post. I wasn’t too disappointed either, except for the fact that I cannot stand Murray. And people should really check out how Murray has bulked up and his endurance has improved since Lendl became his coach. Too me it just reeks of PEDs. A lot of times a new coach is a cover for that. Sure, he’s playing more aggressively, but that aggression comes from confidence knowing he’s got the advantage. Djokovic too. I mean his recovery after the Warinka match reeks. Roger’s breakdown in the 5th I do believe is due to natural human exhaustion going against PED enhanced stamina. Guys, don’t be fooled. Read those Lance Armstrong transcripts, doping is rife in all professional sports simply cause there is too much money to be had in it. Fed is a rare exception with godlike skills that was able to, for a long time, anyway, skirt the need for superhuman endurance. When Nadal came along and could chase down everything as his sole tactic everyone simply followed.

    I do hope Djokovic beats Murray for some reason. Something about Murray just grates. It’s going to be one of those 6 hour grindfests though. The future of tennis is bleak. And btw, I loved the curse at Murray. Fuck him, indeed. Fed showed true grit and heart and Murray was being a jerk stopping play.

    [Reply]

    Chris Reply:

    I agree with you completely!

    [Reply]

  3. Man, have you seen how many comments we desperately have been posting on your last blog, like crazy, just waiting for you to finally come and enlighten us with your analysis and to give us comfort. Had I known you were falling asleep during the match… ;-)
    Thank you once again for playing the tour guide for the bunch of us who want to travel through the tennis world and understand what these guys are doing out there. Reading your blog is such a big enhancement to the tennis fan experience, its almost like a PED for us die-hard Federer fans! Actually it is, your blog is addictive and following Roger Federer’s career without reading your blog is only half the fun. And I mean it, when you offline for some time I got frustrated, all these other bloggers out there can’t really replace you, so for some time I had stopped reading about tennis at all. Well, again, thanks for being back and making this effort, even staying up when having to work the other day. Much appreciated!

    [Reply]

    Chris Reply:

    Just checked the scoreline on the live-ticker, 6:7, 7:6… it feels like in the Asterix and Obelix stories when two guys fight against each other and both of them had been drinking the magical potion. Guess I’ll have to check again in 7 hours to know who won :-)

    [Reply]

    Chris Reply:

    OK, that was unfair from my side, after all they played pretty much according to my prediction, Murray winning only one game more that my guess, and only winning one set in a tiebreak…

    [Reply]

  4. I am eating my words now. Congrats to Novak! I don’t see a comeback here!

    The draw played into Novak’s favour. He deserves it and the Number 1 ranking. I guess overestimated Murray’s ability to recover for this one.

    It’s getting ugly!

    [Reply]

  5. The status quo remains!

    Roger has 17 slams, Nadal with 11 and now Djokovic with 6.

    All three have an all-around game but Roger’s best is Grass, Nadal’s is Clay and Djokovic’s is Clay!

    I still think that Djokovic might complete his Career Grand Slam this year also.

    He is worthy to be part of history. He’ll have some records of his own now. Good for him.

    The most impressive thing about Djokovic is his amazing ability to recover. Roger is still up there though and will have his chances at Wimbledon and the US Open.

    I would love to see them face up one more time at the US Open! Roger would love to win one more there.

    The year is just starting! :-)

    [Reply]

  6. Thanks for posting so soon, Ru-an.

    First I want to say this: at 31, neither Nadal nor Djokovic nor Murray will be giving it their all on the biggest stages the way Federer is. Not only will their bodies be unable to continue at this level, but they just don’t have the indomitable champion’s heart and fighting spirit that Federer has.

    Even after winning so much he still fights so hard to be the best and to raise his game still further. I don’t see that inner flame burning within any of the others. In their later careers, they’ll become lazy and complacent and walk away rather than risk losing and tarnishing their reputations. Nadal is already skipping out on most of the tour until clay season to avoid being beaten, and the others will no doubt eventually copy him.

    Federer is not the greatest champion just because he’s won the most, but because he keeps fighting just as hard, maybe even harder, even after he’s won the most. He puts his all into fighting even losing battles, whereas the others have even demanded that the whole tour be changed to suit them (two-year ranking system, threatening to quit Madrid unless the tour got rid of the blue clay).

    His heart is pure, untainted either by success or failure, and his love of the game and dedication continue to remain as strong as ever. Perhaps even Roger Federer cannot beat cruel Father Time, but he will certainly give him a mighty battle, and he will not succumb to fear or despair.

    This is why he’s not just a sportsman, but an icon and an inspiration to so many; for him it’s not primarily about the trophies or any other kind of material success, but the eternal struggle to create perfect tennis and surpass his own limitations.

    Anyhow, it’s not a bad result, considering he didn’t play a warm-up tournament before AO and had the toughest draw by far. Still he crushed them all until the quarters and then outlasted a red-hot Tsonga, and then took Murray to five tough sets.

    It encourages me that he schooled the young hotshots, Tomic and Raonic, along the way. The challenge of facing off against the younger generation clearly stimulates him, and that will encourage him to play longer.

    Because he didn’t play a warm-up, I think he didn’t know, after the lengthy layoff, how much his body could take. He had to play a really high level of tennis just to make the quarters, and then push himself to the limit to beat Tsonga. There was bound to be some kind of consequence from overstraining his body after coming in totally cold. He lost his serving rhythm and so his whole game went awry. But his grit and fighting spirit are intact.

    After the tournament, he said he had a better idea where his game was now. Now that he has some matches under his belt he should be in good trim for the spring hard-court run. This year there won’t be the Olympics, so he won’t be as fatigued by the grass-court season. He’ll have a proper balance of training and match play.

    I wouldn’t write off our man on the slower courts, either. It’s true that there are three players who can beat him there, and he will usually have to play two of them in a row to win a Grand Slam. But I think he can still raise his game to beat them, if not every time. If his serve had been on, he’d have had more confidence against Murray and been able to execute his game plan. Even with his B game he still forced a fifth set after Murray served for it.

    For me personally, I would love to see Federer dominate this clay season and win another title at RG, especially if he can beat Nadal. He still has it in him.

    This shows every sign of being another great year for Federer, as was last year. So go Roger!

    [Reply]

  7. Overall it was a very good tournament for Fed. He stayed clear ahead of the next generation by beating Tomic and Raonic, he survived a redlining Tsonga, and he took an in-form big-serving Andy Murray to 5 sets while not playing his best tennis.
    He effectively wore Andy out for the final. It happens so often where a guy empties his tank to beat Roger and has nothing left for the next match. Even though Andy was better all-round against Roger, he still needed every reserve he had, and he clearly ran out of juice in the second half of the final.
    2013 is shaping up to be just as exciting as 2012. I think Roger is going to have a strong spring just like he had last year and he now knows where he and the competition are at, and what adjustments to make. Wouldn’t shock me if Roger lays down a beating to Andy next time they meet just like he beat down Rafa at IW after the AO loss.

    [Reply]

  8. Everyone agrees that Federer at an age past his prime has succeeded in reaching the 10th consecutive semifinal at AO and in doing so has put a colossal effort. I donot know if anybody has talked how absurd it is that Federer had to face all the tough players from second round onwards while Djokovic and Murray did not have to play such tough opponents. Murray did not have to face a single mentionable opponent till the semifinal and Djokovic had a virtual walkover from Ferrer before the final. What a joke it is that the organisers try to preach on exercising the draw “fairly”. Shame on them.Further on I completely agree with Steve’s comments.

    [Reply]

  9. Here is another great article featuring Andre Agassi and his views:

    Federer the greatest, says Agassi

    From: AAP
    January 28, 2013 12:00AM

    Increase Text Size
    Decrease Text Size
    Print

    ANDRE Agassi believes tennis superstar Roger Federer must be ranked alongside the likes of Jack Nicklaus and Michael Jordan as one of the greatest athletes of all time.

    As happens with every rare Federer defeat, the doubters have been quick to relegate the Swiss master to yesterday’s hero following his five-set Australian Open semi-final loss to Andy Murray.

    But just as Murray and world No 1 Novak Djokovic were preparing to meet in a second straight grand slam final, Federer was plotting another successful season, unfazed by those declaring a changing of the guard in men’s tennis.

    “Nothing has changed,” the 17-time grand slam champion and world No 2 said before leaving Australia.

    “I’ve played these guys, what, 60 times? The three guys around me in the rankings.

    “So we know each other really well. We play each other very close, very often. Keep on trading wins and losses.”

    Digital Pass $1 for first 28 Days .
    . .
    Federer said Djokovic had done best at this, which was why he was ranked so highly.

    “I enjoy the matches with Rafa (Nadal), Novak and also Andy again (on Friday night),” Federer said. “It’s nice playing five sets against him. It was tough tennis. I enjoy that.

    “So I go from here with a good feeling for the year. I didn’t play a tournament leading in, so now obviously I know where my level is at.

    “Also knowing I have even more time to work on my game, work on my fitness this year — it’s something I’m excited about.”

    Regardless what the future holds for Federer, Agassi says the 31-year-old’s legacy as a sporting immortal is secure.

    Himself a four-time Australian Open champion like Federer, Agassi said the brilliant Swiss belonged in with Nicklaus, Jordan and company as one of sport’s greatest.

    “I’m biased in a sense that I think that tennis is one of the most comprehensive sports when it comes to endurance, when it comes to athleticism, when it comes to speed, when it comes to eye-hand,” Agassi said.

    “It engages every part of what an athlete needs to be and I think the standard of athlete in tennis is finally now starting to make that recognised by people in other sports.

    “So I am biased with what I think tennis brings to the table and I think what Roger’s done in tennis is as commendable as what we’ve seen with Nicklaus in golf, or what we’ve seen with Jordan in basketball. The guy has single-handedly separated himself from a world-class field year after year after year in a way that’s probably never been done.”

    Agassi, who was the sport’s oldest world No 1, said he had long given up being surprised about anything Federer achieved and believed that even at almost 32 he was at the top of his game.

    “I was ranked No 1 possibly even at 33,” Agassi said. “When I was ranked No 1 at that age, I felt better than when I was 25. I felt like I was a better player.

    “Given that, I would assume that Roger probably feels like a better player because he’s smarter.

    “He’s dealing with tougher competition. He might not win like he used to. But he himself (now) would beat himself (from back then).”

    AAP

    [Reply]

  10. I love how quickly Wikipedia is updating Roger Federer’s resume – updating now that he shares his AOs with Agassi and Djokovic and finally adding Murray as a formidable opponent!

    Roger Federer (German pronunciation: [ˈfeːdərər]; born 8 August 1981) is a Swiss professional tennis player who as of December 2012 is ranked world No. 2 by the ATP. Many sports analysts, tennis critics and former and current players consider Federer the greatest tennis player of all time.[a] He owns several men’s world records of the Open Era: holding the world no. 1 position for 302 weeks overall;[16][17] a 237-consecutive-week stretch at the top from 2004 to 2008;[18] winning 17 Grand Slam singles titles; reaching the finals of each Grand Slam tournament at least five times (an all-time record); and reaching the Wimbledon final eight times. He is one of seven men, and one of four in the Open Era, to capture the career Grand Slam, and one of three (with Andre Agassi and Rafael Nadal) to do so separately on clay, grass, and hard courts. Federer also shares the Open Era record for most Grand Slam titles at the Australian Open with Agassi and Novak Djokovic (4 titles), at Wimbledon with Pete Sampras (7 titles) and at the US Open with Jimmy Connors and Sampras (5 titles). Federer’s ATP tournament records include winning six ATP World Tour Finals, winning 21 ATP Masters 1000 titles (a record shared with Nadal), playing in the finals at all nine ATP Masters 1000 tournaments (a record shared with Djokovic), and being one of three players (alongside Agassi and Djokovic) to win seven.

    Federer has appeared in 24 men’s Grand Slam finals, with ten in a row, both records, and appeared in 18 of 19 finals from the 2005 Wimbledon Championships through to the 2010 Australian Open. He is the only man to reach at least the semifinals of 23 consecutive Grand Slam tournaments, from the 2004 Wimbledon Championships through the 2010 Australian Open.[19] At the 2013 Australian Open, he reached a record 35th consecutive Grand Slam quarter-final and a record 33rd Grand Slam semi-final. He has also won the most matches, 252, in men’s Grand Slam tournaments. He also won the Olympic gold medal in doubles with his compatriot Stanislas Wawrinka at the 2008 Summer Olympic Games and the Olympic silver medal in singles at the 2012 Summer Olympic Games. He spent eight years (2003–2010) continuously in the top 2 in the year-end men’s rankings and ten (2003–2012) in the top 3. His rivalries with Nadal and Djokovic and Murray making for a “Big Four”, are considered some of the greatest of all time, in what is increasingly described as a “golden era” of men’s tennis.[20] Federer has won the ATPWorldTour.com Fans’ Favorite Award a record ten times straight (2003–2012) and the Stefan Edberg Sportsmanship Award (voted for by the players) a record eight times (2004–2009, 2011–2012),[21] both being awards indicative of respect and popularity. He also won the Arthur Ashe Humanitarian of the Year Award in 2006. In 2011, in a South African poll, he was voted the second most trusted and respected person in the world, next to Nelson Mandela.[22][23] He was named the Laureus World Sportsman of the Year for a record four consecutive years (2005–2008).[24] Federer is at times referred to as the Federer Express,[25] shortened to Fed Express or FedEx, and the Swiss Maestro,[25] or just Maestro.[25][26][27][28]

    [Reply]

  11. I will be looking forward to your reviews on this Djokovic v Murray match, Ru-an.

    To me, it seems Murray was slightly the superior player until the 2nd set TB. He blew his breakpoints early in the 2nd set but he held serves easily. Djokovic was actually the one who looked more vulnerable. It’s tough to argue that Djokovic was superior during those 2 sets. If you’re a gambler and you saw the 1st 2 sets until before the 2nd set TB, you will logically pick Murray for the win, won’t you?

    But after that little feather thing, it seemed to fall apart for Murray. But one can argue that during those 2 sets, Murray was very strong mentally & slightly the better of the two slugfest masters. Had he played the 2nd set TB with the intensity as in the 1st set, he’d have likely gone home with the trophy. The big question is what caused him to fall apart in that TB. Is it mental, or could it be the blisters he was treated for after losing the 2nd set?

    And what do you think overall regarding his mental strength, Ru-an? He expressed lots and lots of bad body languages. But I think that’s his habit. He did that all the time, including in his greatest glories. So, I’d think that’s just him and it doesn’t say anything about his mental strength. You just can’t make everyone Buddha-like ala Lendl or Sampras.

    [Reply]

    Kyle Reply:

    The wear and tear from the Fed semi certainly showed in the second half. And I know Andy is one of the fittest players on tour, but his body seems to break down a lot easier than Djokovic, Federer, or Ferrer’s (at least within matches).

    [Reply]

  12. Federer these days a great clutch player: broke Murray when Murray served for the match in the fourth 30/30 all; two deep first serves from Murray, centerline and junction split and Federer won both points was the highlight of the match (superior hand-eye skills)

    That surface though…this is now Federer’s weakest slam surface, it favours players playing defence on Federer’s offence until the error…great playing field leveller…

    So this is a good sringboard to where Federer wants to be going into the faster stuff

    Agree with all you say apart from the Wimbledon comment; offence play isn’t negated there and hand-eye wins all; Federer is still the man to beat when there is less time to play the shot and the ball isn’t sitting up (relatively)
    Plus his warrior temperment is as good as anything you are likely to see looks still hungry to me. Why not?

    [Reply]

    Vily Reply:

    If you are right about the hand-eye coordination, I expect Roger to win Dubai this year. :-)

    We’ll see!!!

    [Reply]

  13. Ruan- another great post. I am obsessed with Roger but also a realist, and I like that you call it as you see it. That’s why I like your blog!
    I’d love Roger to win everything but that’s just not possible. So all we Fed fans can do is sit back and enjoy Roger’s beautiful tennis for as long as possible. There will be painful losses along the way, but just imagine when Roger retires, tennis will become this monotone grinding affair (as witnessed in the men’s final today) – so we really need to indulge in Roger’s poetry while he’s around!

    [Reply]

  14. Roger played patchy but very clutch during TB, heck 5-0 this year alone. Overall performance at AO is commendable considering he is playing at least 4 seeded players whilst Mugray and Djoker has canned tomatoes. However I still think he lost some zip in his serves since Tsonga’s match and it hurt him during Mugray’s match. Not taking anything away from Mugray, he was indeed the better player that night but Roger did pushed it 5 sets before he ran out of gas. This showed us how good a player Roger is and continue to amaze everyone even at ripe grand age of 32. Its amazing and I think he will have another good year with at least 1 more GS.

    [Reply]

  15. Great to see you posting on a regular basis again. Federer gave everything. That’s the spirit of a champion. Indeed he had nothing left in the tank in the 5th. However Murray had little left in the third and fourth set against Djokovic.

    If only Federer had returned a little better against Murray. Murray would not have gone for every shot not being able to rely on his free service points too much. Federer lost a little bit of his God mode tennis which showned up against Tomic.

    With that kind of performance he would have challenged Djokovic for sure.

    Anyways the draw decided the AO. Federer had a taff 5 setter against Tsonga (who played lights out). Murray had a taff 5 setter against Federer. Djokovic had a taff five setter against Wawrinka but he is just fitter than Nadal in his best times……his bunny Berdych and Ferrer offered a catwalk to the final and he took his chances there beating a tired Murray.

    Tennis is becoming an endurance sport. You can now beat talent with endurance on all courts not just clay which I don’t like.
    Look at Djokovic’s backhand slice. WFT is that? Even my slice looks better.

    The ATP or ITF should start to take blood doping tests otherwise tennis ends up like cycling…..I guess only Oparah likes that…..

    [Reply]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *