Grand SlamsRoger FedererWimbledon

Djokovic Too Good for Federer Yet Again in Wimbledon Final

Another Wimbledon draws to a close with the same disappointing result as last year as Novak Djokovic defeated Roger Federer 7-6(1), 6-7(10), 6-4, 6-3 to win his third title at the All England Club.

Unfortunately Roger wasn't able to replicate his semi final form from 2 days previous; in part due to his own game not firing on all cylinders but primarily due to the relentlessness of Djokovic who was immovable from the back of the court and played the better tennis when it mattered most.

Quick Match Recap

Federer Djokovic Wimbledon 2015

Roger won the toss and elected to serve holding to love for a 1-0 lead. Djokovic then levelled to 30 but at 3-2 the Swiss made the first move, creating 3 break points and converting at the first attempt to lead 4-2. However Roger's serve let him down when trying to consolidate and he was broken back to 30.

Djokovic then levelled for 4-4 and looked to have stolen momentum but at 6-5 Roger created 2 set points on the Serbian's serve but couldn't convert. The set went into a tiebreak and Djokovic came up with an insane get on the very first point to take the mini break. That allowed him to run away with it with Roger only able to get 1 point on the board as Djokovic took the first set 7-1 in the breaker.

Into set 2 and after 4 quick games Roger again had break points at 2 all but Djokovic saved with them with clutch line finding balls. The next drama came at 4-5 with Roger double faulting at 30-30 and having to win his first point behind his second serve of the set to get out of trouble.

Just like set 1, the second went into a tie break and this time it was Roger who came up brilliance to win the opening point. Unlike Djokovic though he couldn't streak away, both guys swapping mini breaks before Djokovic moved clear 6-3. The Swiss wasn't going down without a fight though, saving all 3, and then a further 4 set points before finally taking it 12-10 with a fine serve / volley play behind a second serve. 1 set all.

With momentum now on Federer's side he pulled off a huge hold at the start of the third saving 2 break points before having a break point of his own which wasn't converted. At 1-1 40-15 we had the key turning point in the match where Djokovic won 4 straight points to break after Roger missed a routine forehand on break point. The break was consolidated and at 3-2 there was a 20 minute rain delay. Upon resumption Roger had half a chance at 15-30 but nothing materialised as Djokovic continued to hold serve to take the set 6-4.

With Roger never having beaten Djokovic over 5 sets things didn't look good and they got a whole lot worse at 2-2 in set 4 as Roger was broken to 30. Djokovic quickly consolidated and Roger was under pressure on serve again saving break point to stay in touch. The Swiss then had 0-30 on the Djokovic serve but again Novak came out firing, holding to 30 for a 5-3 lead and then playing a stunning return game to break and take home the title.

Match Stats

ACES 13 14
1ST SERVES IN 95/145 (66%) 94/141 (67%)
WIN % ON 1ST SERVE 70/95 (74%) 70/94 (74%)
WIN % ON 2ND SERVE 30/50 (60%) 23/47 (49%)
RECEIVING POINTS WON 48/141 (34%) 45/145 (31%)
BREAK POINT CONVERSIONS 4/10 (40%) 1/7 (14%)
NET APPROACHES 20/34 (59%) 42/58 (72%)

Thoughts on the Match

Federer Wimbledon Final 2015

So where to start with this one… my main takeaway is that Federer played the better tennis in the tournament but Djokovic played the better tennis in the final and unfortunately it's the latter that gets the job done.

In terms of the match I don't think Roger played poorly but his level was way off his semi final win against Murray and I think he played better in last years final despite looking in better form this tournament on the whole.

The two big big moments were Roger not winning the first set after going up a break and then the regulation forehand in set 3 to get broken. Roger got pretty lucky to win the second set breaker after saving 7 set points with some real gritty plays but then flopped in the third to let Novak take control and basically run away with the match without ever being under too much pressure.

In my notes midway through the third set I wrote that the match was becoming way too much of a left to right baseline contest which Roger simply can't win and that's exactly what happened. Here's where I think it went wrong:

  • Didn't put more than 70% of first serves in play
  • Failed to keep the points as short as possible (sub 4 shots)
  • Couldn't prevent Djokovic from winning over 50% of points behind his second serve

But how could Roger have done better? Djokovic was really just a man on a mission – putting a ton of pressure on Federer's serve and taking too many rallies over 4 shots which meant he was able to blunt Federer's offense and then either force the error or tuck away the short ball. The first 2 sets took 2 hours too which didn't help Federer's cause and some of his movement looked a bit sloppy towards the end. He probably knew that first set was going to be key for him which won't have helped him mentally when he knows he's up against a guy at the peak of his powers with seemingly infinite amounts of energy reserves.

The only thing you can really say is that he could have served a little better and then maybe things might have opened up for him more than they did. It was one of the few things he could fully control and it wasn't quite ‘On'.

You could also say he needed to come into the net more regularly (which he did after the rain delay clearly due to Edberg suggesting it, but he reverted back to the baseline before too long) but again that's easier said than done when you're up against a machine landing balls on your baseline time and time again.

As for Djokovic (strictly in tennis terms) you just have to say too good. Too solid, too many returns in play and better on the big points. All the talk is usually of Djokovic's backhand but they key shot for him today was his forehand. From both defensive and offensive positions he was able to consistently hit with depth which pushed Roger way back behind the baseline and either forced him to produce weak defensive shots or attempt to hit an aggressive shot from a position of weakness. Just not a recipe for Fed to get it done or be able to get on the front foot.

Final verdict? Same as last year: good tournament on the whole, disappointing result but one you can't really argue with. This morning I thought I'd be pretty pissed off if Federer lost but the only time I felt annoyed was the failure to consolidate the break in set 1 and that abysmal forehand in set 3. Once the final point played out the only thoughts I had were I'm glad this guy is still plying his trade and mixing it with guys smack bang in their primes. What more can you ask for?

P.S. Was this the worst trophy ceremony in the history of Wimbledon? Complete anti-climax having to wait for the roof to come on and the players leaving the court for about 10 minutes. It felt more of a chore for everyone involved because of that and it also meant the crowd were as flat as pancake (they were already flat because 99% wanted Fed to win). Bad idea!

Onto the hardcourts πŸ™‚


Huge fan of Roger Federer. I watch all his matches from Grand Slam level right down to ATP 250. When I'm not watching or writing about tennis I play regularly myself and have a keen interest in tactics, equipment and technicalties of the sport.

Related Articles


  1. “Once the final point played out the only thoughts I had were I’m glad this guy is still plying his trade and mixing it with guys smack bang in their primes. What more can you ask for?”

    Indeed. I’ll take whatever comes. Fed is turning 34 in a few weeks is still showing up on most occasions and giving himself a chance.

  2. Everyone needs to take some time off. Is dere anything else in tennis to look forward to this year ? So, it’s confirmed, Novak ends the year as world number 1?
    Does this feel like deja vu or jst worse ?
    US Open is up for grabs…I’m very optimistic . No matter how impossible it may seem.
    And if dt doesnt happen, I Wil do what Stefan did, abandon everything about tennis and retire.

  3. Yeah, I feel the same, He just didn’t play as good as he had to to beat Djoker. He had too force too much which produced the errors, but a tad more regulation shots that he screwed up.

    Oh well, as long as we see him play, I’m content πŸ™‚

    Good write up J πŸ™‚

  4. Hi. Long term lurker, fed fan from the beginning. Great site Jonathan, thanks. Live close to Wimbledon so been many times. Saw Roger v Groth this year, but saw 2008, 2009 and 2012 finals live. I feel sad after today, as I really feel it was legs/energy/strength that lost this because he had the form and the belief. Arriving at the 3rd set, no matter how we got there (agree really should have consolidated the break in the first), it was game on and with momentum, but from there he just looked so flat, slow, energy less and resigned to defeat. I agree Djokovic is supreme, but I thought he (Djokovic) was overall more consistent last year, and yet Roger came so close but didn’t quite have the belief , confidence and form then. It seems Roger battled beyond the two set/ two hour mark. He looked powerless like v Cilic at the U.S. last year but without the reason he had then. My feeling is that age has truly caught up re competing at Slams and 17 is where it ends.

    1. I don’t know about that. Clearly, he’s still got a chance to add at least one more. I don’t think it was a great final, and I think Fed was a bit annoyed at his overall play, especially on the break point chances and going a break up in the first set, and after the rain delay as well. Disappointing overall, but at number 2 in the world if he can keep that up surely he has to break the drought sooner or later.

      1. Just curious, where do you see Federer winning at least another slam? USO? Where it’s even more physically demanding to do well, where he hasn’t won for 6 years? Where he couldn’t win without having to beat any of the big 4? This Wimbledon was his best chance, and he yet again failed to play his best in the final. Federer seems to be incapable of playing his best in the biggest matches. He beat Djokovic im Shanghai and Dubai, but lost the biggest matches in IW/Rome and obviously Wimbledon 14/15 (He would’ve also lost WTF 2014 most likely)…

      2. That’s why, despite being at 20-20 in the H2H, I can now conclude that Djokovic well and truly owns this rivalry. That’s the brutal truth.

      3. Fed does have a tiny shot at USO if he can take the heartbreak of this loss and turn it into gold. He is playing a lot better than last year but on hard courts with higher bounce- tough ask. Sid is right though, accept 17.

      4. Yeah but adding to 17 has always been unlikely for the last 2/3 years. Slim chance he can get another but not impossible.

        @Sid – I think it’s unfair to say Djokovic own the rivalry. they are from a different generation. Djoker didn’t break into the top 10 until 2007. Fed had been on tour 9 years by that point.

        Does Fed own Sampras? πŸ˜†

    2. If Fed had consolidated the break in the first set and won it 6-3, I feel Novak would’ve dusted it off and come back anyway. The fact that Fed had break points at 6-5 and DF in the tiebreak really was his undoing.

      1. Impossible to say, Fed is a decent front runner. Looked to me like he dwelled on the first set loss and then the joke fh / rain delay was the nail in the coffin.

  5. [At 1-1 40-15 we had the key turning point in the match where Djokovic won 4 straight points to break after Roger missed a routine forehand on break point.]

    That’s exactly what went through my mind when he missed that put away. The final was decided there, right there. The longer Federer would’ve continued holding, the more bitter Djokovic would’ve felt.

    Djokovic clearly went out there, and won those two points with Federer at 40-15. In my opinion, the deuce point was the one that turned the course of the match completely. Watch it again if any of you get a chance. That pressure, then led to that amateurish miss on break point. I think Djokovic thoroughly deserved it. If you put the disappointment of missing out on seven potentially match winning set points behind you, then win four points on your opponents serve like that, you have mentally subdued your opponent. From that point on, they were merely completing the formalities.

    Those who say that Federer should’ve won the first set need to understand that he had no business winning the second. And if you thought Federer brought his C game, then you don’t understand that your opponent forced you into it. Regardless of how your reached the final, as Jonathan said in one of his earlier comments, it starts again a 0-0/

    Call me what you want, but I never believed Federer would overcome Djokovic in the final, if they were both to make it. I have said the before. What I saw in Rome scared me, where Djokovic had Federer’s game figured out.

    Federer now has a final shot at the US Open. I have resigned to the fact that 17 will be the final number. Have you?

    1. Yeah. I think so Sid. Amazing number. Great great athlete. Beautiful GOAT game. Absolutely Total class act. Don’t need to ask for more from what is essentially a ball game. Need to be content and not demand we get to deify the guy.

    2. YEP. You like Novak a lot more than Nadal… is Novak more cerebral? how has he figured out Fed’s game? There’s only so much you can do tactically against novak on these courts without serving impeccably well.

      1. This has got nothing to do with me liking Djokovic more. Under the current court conditions, given how much it debilitates Roger’s ability to be aggressive, Djokovic has figured out a solution for Roger, is what I meant.

    3. Federer wining the USO would be way more impressive than Wimbledon. A lot will have to go right for Roger to do it.

    4. Sid, I agree that there were key points in the match and you have correctly identified some that proved crucial. In hindsight, there were others. But it wasn’t just that Roger didn’t play the big points well. His game overall was well down on what it had been in the semifinal. This wasn’t simply due to Novak’s play either – which gained in strength throughout the latter stages of the match, and particularly the quality of his return. But that also says something about the drop in level of Roger’s serving.

      Make no mistake, Novak played an outstanding match of counterpunching tennis. In so doing he must have come to the net as few times as I can count on the fingers of both hands. He defended incredibly well. He hit with great depth and frequently overpowered Roger. It wasn’t really grass-court tennis as I remember it. It’s the metronomic baseline style to be found on all surfaces now.

      But it wasn’t just that Roger’s serve let him down. His groundstroke game frequently lacked power and penetration; he was unable to trouble Novak in the way that Anderson had done earlier in the tournament and Wawrinka had done extraordinarily well at the FO; Roger’s forehand broke down under pressure and his backhand was easy picking. Overall, his game lacked power as well as consistency. It harked back to the Rome final earlier this year – as Sid has pointed out – where Roger showed that against Novak he was unable to hold his own from the back of the court. In my view, that’s where the rot starts for Roger against this modern generation of brick-wall defensive players. It is not the Roger we typically saw in his prime 2004-7 (so long ago now!) and for a brief glorious moment reminded us in his match against Murray. That is the Roger I well remember from nearly a decade ago – now rarely seen at that level.

      I don’t think that in the final Novak played so much worse than Murray. But Roger only occasionally rose above the level of ordinary – for him – and was sometimes – in the key moments – downright bad. That wasn’t going to get it done against Novak. Yet, I couldn’t help but reflect how in his better years Roger was so clearly a level above the Serb. Novak is 28. I would put money on the Roger of the same age showing Novak who is the greatest grasscourt player of all time. But then, Novak never made a Wimbledon final in those years. That says something, too, doesn’t it?

      1. * Oops. Correct myself: I don’t think that in the final Novak played so much better than Murray.

      2. “But it wasn’t just that Roger didn’t play the big points well. His game overall was well down on what it had been in the semifinal.”

        Yes, what we saw (or the little of it I’ve actually *seen* so far, anyway) was more like the Federer who lost in straights to Tsonga at FO 2013, or the one who showed up in the last game in last year’s final, or the one of the Olympic final. Or, for that matter, the Djokovic who lost in straights to Murray in 2013. I’m starting to wonder whether this is somehow a extension of the “plucky outsider puts out top seed then gets knocked out him/herself in the next round” phenomenon. You put in a phenomenal effort to win a match, and then slump in the next one. Was that masterclass he gave on Friday somehow more demanding than we think?

  6. Hello! I have been reading this blog for a while now and I am glad that you were able to write this post so quickly after obviously a bitter disappointment today.

    My feeling is that basically Roger was not at the same level as he was 2 days ago. It almost feels like he was in God mode for 3 sets and then that lasted until that 4:2 in the first set. Had he consolidated, he might have still lost but probably in 5.

    We shouldn’t forget also that after being broken he had another 2 set points at 6:5 and failed to take those as well.

    That was the match right there. Roger has been average and subpar in tie-breaks this year so taking the first set would have calmed him down. It’s funny but in their meetings, whomever takes the 1st set, almost always wins the match. And to take that set with literally no effort would have been key. What a missed opportunity!

    Obviously his serving was no where near where it was against Murray. Even if his first serve percentage dropped, his serving out wide was very ineffective. Almost no aces down the T – pretty much not good enough.

    We knew that from the back court it was always going to be difficult. His second serve win percentage was also below 50% so he just either had to have it on the serve or lose the match.

    I almost wish that he had this performance against Murray and somehow etch that in 5, only to produce the masterclass that he produced on Friday, today.

    Djokovic is a mental giant and I think that is where Roger’s age has shown the most vulnerability. Roger was so focused and so clutch against Murray and he had so many chances in the 1st set (before the tiebreak) that it was a real shame,

    Also, after stealing the 3rd set, which he had no business in winning, instead of “taking the bull by the horn”, he gave the match away again.

    That was so disdaining. He has just gutted Djokovic in the 2nd set Tiebreak, saved 2 break points on his serve, is serving first, has a break point to go up 2:0 in the third, and choked again. And then dumped serve after leading 40:15.

    It’s almost like he didn’t want to take the lead. How can you be leading in the set and give it away?! Just horrible.

    Obviously from then on it was a straight affair and I was shocked that Roger couldn’t even make it more exiting even though he was serving first again in the 4th.

    I get it about the baseline. I also get it about the mental lapses. But his serve / if it was Sampras like – like it was on Friday, could have kept him in the match no matter how poor he was playing. And that’s what’s frustrating. Djokovic played solid and was more clutch on the key points. But Roger also gave him so much by his decent but not amazing serving.

    I agree that this was probably his last chance to win a major. So many things need to happen for him to win another that it’s more likely than not that he’ll win but it is what it is. Last year he was spent physically at the U.S. Open and this year he peaked in the semis. Sad, but true….

    1. Cant have expectations on the return if Fed aint holding serve quickly- not to mention Novak is very very clutch- probably most impressive thing about him in the match. Not much you can do there.

    2. Roger may peak again. I’m sick of all you clever guys commenting “sad, but true” about Roger’s failing for this and that. Looks alike the many years of writing him off because of age and so on. And every time Roger came back, creating new ways. Latest match is not the truth forever! Roger’s fantastic cruise until final is as merry a truth, and bodes very well. – Interesting this about “comfort zones” – I’m sure that Roger’s team will think about a new strategy for beating Novak (and others). Cheer up!!!

    3. Cheers for the comment Vily. I agree with all you said. Had Fed served a little better the match could have been closer, a few quicker holds or cheaper points and things can start rolling…

  7. You’ve got it right Jonathan. When he was up a break in that first set and lost it, my heart sank. Bottom line, Djokovic is much better than Murray on serves – particularly 2nd serves – and returning possibly also. Once Feds lost that break he was constantly under pressure. If he’d got the 1st set, that might have given him confidence, and of course it would have been done in 30 mins. But dragged to a tiebreak (and an hour of play) completely dominated by Djokovic knocked his confidence *and* sapped his energy. It took phenomenal physical and mental energy to take that tiebreak in the second set, and thereafter Feds started to look tired.

    It’s still amazing that less than a month short of 34 he’s reached the final of a slam. And that semi final will remain the jewel in my mind from this Wimbledon.

    Sid said there would be grumpy faces; sadly he’s right but I’m sure he takes no pleasure in this. πŸ˜‰

    Sad, really sad this time. πŸ™

    1. Nah, no pleasure I take from our collective grumpy faces. I was prepared for this result, and that helped. At one set all, my hopes were up, but I knew that Djokovic will solve the problem.

      1. He was just stronger mentally. Anytime you have changes and squander them, you pay for it. As soon as Roger lose that first set, all the stats were pointing towards a Novak win. Yet, after the miraculous escape by Roger in the 2nd set, you had to think that this would be the time to strike. And he couldn’t and didn’t. I am sure that there were many things that Novak was doing well and that there were things that Roger was doing well. But to not take those few chances when they were presented just speaks volumes of how fragile Roger was mentally – today. And he was so clutch the whole tournament.

        I suppose Djokovic is truly a great Number 1. In the past, it was Roger who was perhaps stronger mentally. But as he is getting older, it seems that Novak has surpassed him in this area.

        If Roger was clutch to close the first set or at least taken the lead in the 3rd , it might have been different. He missed on 2 different occasions and that was the match right there.

        If he was 2:1 sets up, I am sure that Novak would still force a decider but then you never know. Now, he basically beat Roger in 4, and perhaps should have in straights.

      2. It’s not just mental imo, Djoker’s game is just like playing against a wall: everything comes back, with more on it. I also though during the match that Fed should come in more, but then you look at how the match is playing, and it’s hard to hit a meaningful approach when everything is landing on your toes.

        Novak played a terrible game to gift Fed the break, and Fed played and bad game (as well as some good resilience from Novak) to get it back, so we’re “even” there, and Roger had NO right to win that second set ^^

        Djokovic is number 1 and just that touch in front of everyone right now, gotta play like Stan to get it done ^^

      3. I guess you are right. It seems that you get some chances and then unless you take them if just gets even harder. But there was this sense of inavitability. The rallies were almost always going for Novak.

        I agree and notice that Novak clearly knows two weakness in Roger’s game -?attacking Roger’s forehand wide and putting pressure on Roger’s backhand. And what was frustrating that even the slice of Roger wouldn’t change anything. Anytime Roger sliced, Novak would pick it up and attack the backhand wing again. It’s shocking but Novak was winning about 58% of the rallies and Roger only about 42%. That was almost exactly the same as last year.

        Shockingly, Roger served way better in the final last year. This year he served amazing in the tournament and just ok in the final. It’s not just the percentages. It’s the effectiveness – it wasn’t great. Not too many free points, almost no aces.

        It was basically not a fair fight. I feel that if Roger from Friday had shown up. He would have won. What we got instead was a bit of a underpar Roger. Decent but not anywhere hear a masterclass.

      4. I agree with you Vily about how Novak exploited Roger’s two weaknesses especially on his backhand which Roger would slice more often than not and parrying the exchanges allowing Novak to dictate the next shot. But that is how the dynamics of a single backhanded shot is. Against a lesser player, Roger would have started the ensuing battle of groundstrokes at an even level but not against Novak who is a supremo in groundies.

        Given that Novak has the ability to serve as well as Roger (which he did yesterday), if by the third shot after the serve by either player and the point hadn’t been won, than Novak wins 60% of the ensuing groundstrokes which Jonathan also observed in his Thought on the Match. Roger’s insurance was either an ace or a serve that would end up in a one-two (or one-three) combination that would win him a point. And it is not realistic to expect him to do that all the time in the match.
        My point is that Novak is except for the serve, the better player in all aspects. His volley skills may not be as good as Roger’s (we see that Roger’s points-won-at-the net stats is better) but then again Novak need not have to venture there as he is so efficient hitting his groundstroke from the baseline.

        Roger is still very good but not good enough to beat Novak on a given day.
        These facts are hard to swallow for Roger fans but I think we can’t deny them.

      5. Agree Simon. Novak is a wall. Even on grass which is unbelievable. Fed trying to take the offense to him but Djoker is so good at turning defense into aggression and moved Fed around the court- was never winning on the baseline. Another thing is Fed coming into net- Novak can’t lob but he was standing a foot behind the baseline- difficult to come in on that and risk getting passed.

    2. Good point about Fed being emotionally drained after second set- was so close to being two sets to love down. Unfortunate that it hindered him rather then remain with the momentum in the third.

  8. Too good? That is not what I saw. Roger cracked under pressure. He blew simple shots. Stopped playing his tennis in the middle of 1st set. After that, it wasn’t even his C-game. Simply tragic.

    1. Agreed. Really poor performance from Fed here. He was extremely nervous from the first point and could never let it go, stop thinking and play freely. So many mishits and free UEs, not only on major points but all the way down basically. He has been lucky to be able to stick around thanks to rare moments of light but he was never there.
      A lack of confidence of what ?I don’t know what it is problem but once again he choke big time. Let’s face it guys!

      1. A less than c-game? with 58 winners? What are you guys up to? Easy for you to win the match in the sofa!

      2. Granted, I was somewhat surprised to see the stats I have to admit. However, so many shanks, simple balls into the net. At some point I could not watch anymore. I’ve read what Sid wrote afterwards (July 12, 2015 at 9:25 pm) and sure, there is some truth to that but I don’t think it is the whole truth. The mental game is part of tennis. Perhaps Roger simply has been so outstanding technically that his mental game is not on par with the best. He perhaps has made up the deficit with pure talent.
        Last year I thought his chances were worse and yet he made a better match of it. This time it was just pure pain to watch. Perhaps the match against Andy raised the expectations too high.

  9. Really is terrible to see how he let the Grand Slam disappear from his hands. Novak played so good yes, but Roger didn’t take the luck in his opportunities to break. So sad

    1. I am gutted too. What can you do? This is Djokovic’s era right now. Roger played an amazing memorable semi and simply an average final. Not good enough.

  10. Thanks Jonathan for the usual excellent recap. For me, this one is particularly hard one to respond. Roger set himself up so well for this final. IMO, pressure simply crushed him even before the first ball was hit. Roger’s mental strength and concentration seemed to have never been there, as if they were stuck at the starting block. This was reflected through his very weak clutchy play – the worst I seem to remember and UFEs, which flew in from all aspects of his play, FH, BH, I simply could not believe it. How many times did Roger hit racket frame? propabbly half a dozen times. His match stats do not tell the story at all – they are not bad, taking them out of context. However, when he needed to bait himself out at the tight situations today, his first serves were not there often enough to divert the pressure. The next big culprit was his serve returns – very weak today. I was totally baffled as for why Roger wanted to block so many Novack’s average serves beyond the baseline? That over aggression was totally unnecessary. Or at the other extreme, Roger seemed to be unable to read Novack serves down the T from Ad court, giving Novack tons of points.
    Roger’s impression was one of suffering. Even after wining the 2nd TB, that did not pump up Roger at all. I was just completely lost. Novack did a decent job but did not quite impress me. This was a match that Roger simply lost because he did not play well enough.

    1. I had the exact same perception. A mental choke. What a pity! With all his experience, how come he is more prone to stress over the years? Sad really

    2. I believe that the the loss occurred today also because of the mental pressure. Novak knows that even if he lost he’ll have many more chances in the next few years. For Roger, every GS final is like a huge opportunity and when they come almost once a year, maybe even once every two years, it puts so much more pressure on him to do well. And unless things fall exactly where they need to, he just won’t win. I could see him win the first, lose the second, somehow win the third set and still lose in 5. He didn’t have the ultimate believe. It is hard.

      And Novak is playing like a World Number 1. He reminds me a bit of Roger in his prime. Roger would also somehow struggle early in the slams only to pick up his game in time for the finals and deliver time and time again.

      Jonathan put it best – Roger played the better tennis throughout the tournament but Novak played the better tennis in the finals. It is as simple as that.

      I don’t know where Roger goes from here. I know that he won’t defend his 1600 points from the upcoming hard court events. I don’t see him getting up for them. He’ll give it a go in New York but I could see Novak, Andy, possibly even Nadal doing damage there. Roger will need like a dream draw will all contenders to be knocked out and still he might not win. At the end of the day, I suppose we should be happy with Roger’s 17 majors. Nadal hasn’t won any this year so that’s ok. Roger is just not there consistently against Novak. I know that he has enough to produce 1 GREAT match in a Grand Slam event but it seems to me that it always occurs in the quarters or in the semis. I wish he would cruise to the final playing with his B level game and then produce a masterclass in the final. But with the level of the man’s field, this is simply wishful thinking. Roger has to play his A level game almost every match to conserve physical energy but when the finals and sometimes semis come around, he arrives exhausted MEnTALly and has nothing. I thought that this year he came in to the finals as best as he can even arrive into a Final. And it proved that it doesn’t matter.

      Last year he arrived into the finals with a breeze and the match he played in the finals was better than this year. So many ifs and buts. It’s exhausting.

      Maybe we should just settle at 17 and enjoy the rest of his days….

    3. Federer could’ve easily given up after the first set after having so many chances and gone down two sets to love. But no, he hang in there saved 7 set points and took a set. Fed mentally went walk about in the beginning of the third set and it cost him the match but you’re not giving Novak enough credit. Fed hit so many shanks because timing wasn’t right- due to Novak’s amazing defense.

      Also Djoker is the most clutch player ever along with Nadal. For Fed to be successful on the return, gotta be serving comfortably too which he never was after he was broken back in the first set.

  11. So Close yet So far….

    1st and 2nd sets are were Roger had some chances….That Volley he missed in 15-0 on 2-3* on first set eventually caused the break back.. Right there Roger also lost some self belief on his service game…..3rd and 4th set Novak one step ahead especially on returns…couldn’t believe how many of them landed right on line……

    Yeah, most of us know Novak might win, but fan inside of us kept believing that Roger could make upset, but Novak too strong…So Now Nadal and Novak both won 2(or more) slams against Roger….two tough loses in Wimbledon….Hard not to feel gutted…

    Hope he still plays with same passion, and there will be another chance eventually somewhere…

    1. Novak in strong contention to catch up to Rafa and Fed if he keeps playing like this for the next few years barring the depth of the ATP continues to be poor outside the top guys.

  12. Feeling absolutely gutted. Hard to find words now. Two weeks of nail biting, dreaming of one last major, only to wake up by a cold hard shovel smacked in the face. I found it so hard to cope with last year’s result, feeling like that was the last chance for a major. Then Roger worked so hard to revive the hope only for it to be shattered once again. It’s gonna take some time to digest this, but your match analysis and the community on this blog is the best therapy. Actually I already feel a little better, but there’s no denying that this is going to linger in the back of my head for some time.

    I guess I can only congratulate Djokovic and his fans. He reminded the tennis world why is ranked nr. 1. It is not a surprising result at all. He is in his prime and can keep a more consistent level than is reasonable to expect from a player at Federer’s age. I feared that Roger would burn out a little bit after that performance against Murray, as is natural at this point in his career, and that is exactly what happened. Djokovic’s match against Anderson was probably a key match. When he turned that match around from 2 sets down I had a gut feeling he was going to take the title here.

    1. Hi, Bjorn. I feel gutted too but as you said we have to look at it wish some perspective.

      The match against Murray proved that WHEN on his game. Roger CAN still bear Anyone.

      I have absolutely 0 doubt that if Roger played against Novak the way he did against Murrat he WOULD have beaten him. So the positives are that he can still do it.

      The key is that those performances will occur rarely, and they can occur only once in a Grand Slam tournament. That is the reality. Now, if somehow, Roger can still maintain a decent ranking and if somehow he lucks out and has to play only one – either Murray or Djokovic and THEN produces that exact same performance – he can win.

      A lot of iffs or buts. But it is possible. Probably not going to happen and we have to accept that but if the “stars align” it can happen, as we clearly saw from the Murray match. So we can still believe. I am not sure if this is the end. If it is, I’ll be ok. It felt like coming back to the Wimbledon final had a “destiny” written all over it but that’s a bit of our imagination as well. Clearly, Novak has been the best player in the world and he deserved to win. Maybe one day he’ll have an off day and Roger will have one of his Great days and he can pull it off. Time will tell! πŸ™‚

      1. Well said, Vily. The way he played in that match against Murray is the reason we are fans. We are lucky that we can still enjoy watching him play at that level, even if only sporadically.

      2. Sure if Roger could’ve played like he did in the semi- he would’ve beaten Roger. But you have to be devil’s advocate and say the reason Fed can’t play like that against Novak is because he is a much better player than Murray and is a different matchup.

    2. Yeah Djoker is streets ahead of Murray – better in virtually every area and even the ones where Murray maybe has a slight edge they are not required skills to win slams in this era.

      And cheers Bjorn. Wimbledon loss will be all forgotten in a couple of weeks I’m sure. Might rear its head next year assuming Fed is at SW19 again but hopefully there’s more to cheer about before then.

  13. Thanks Jonathan for the write-up. Great analysis everyone. I know what you mean Sid, after Rome Djoker seems to have his number. Thinking 17 might be the end but grateful to see him still playing.

    Wonder if Djoker will be #2 in 6 years time vying for the title? That will be interesting to see.

    My bloody new pvc deleted the semi and final. Pissed off about that. Grrr.

      1. Haaa. Now the matches reappeared….or IΓ¨m losing my mind…or both. So, happy I can rewatch the semis again.

  14. Another title for a champion that nobody cares about? ? Just like when I Lendle was winning everything. The who CC were on Feds side apart from the Djokers camp to Boris ‘ the sign language illegal coaching” Becker. What a f##ked up end to the Championship. It wouldn’t of been that bad if it was Fed losing to someone else but no matter how times Djokovic beats Federer he will never be liked. Last year was worse because the Serbian wasddoing his fng under hand cheating! !! Lol The champion who is only loved in Serbia and hated all around the world. Whereas Federer loved by all and all over the world. Long live the GOAT.

    1. Fed more loved than the champion is always guaranteed which is pretty remarkable. Novak wins the trophies but never the people. The ceremony was poorly done and very awkward- Sue interrupting the applause for Fed for the interview too was annoying. Loved seeing the crowd cheeer for Rog as he walked around CC whilst Novak was posing for the pics (with the trophy the wrong way around mind you). Roger transcends tennis itself.

  15. Yes, disappointing. No, to never. Never say never. Roger’s TRANSCENDENCE may come again. MAYBE no more slams, but MAYBE still the chance. Djoko deserved the win this time, he was playing fantastic. But Roger had many many magic shots as well. Don’t write him out, just because you cannot stand some possible disappointments. CHEERS to ROGER!!!!

    1. I always like your musings Muser πŸ™‚ Like you say ‘MAYBE no more…but MAYBE still a chance.’ That’s why we watch tennis – and I shall continue to hope, even though the chances are diminishing.

      Djokovic did deserve the win: he is functional, efficient and very effective, but there’s no stardust in his game and it will never give you goosebumps; that’s why he’ll never, ever, get the love that Federer gets.

  16. As much as I wanted Federer to win, looking at it objectively there was no way he could have scraped through. Too many problems with his game and execution – serve wasn’t as solid as it was against Murray, movement around the court deteriorated as the match went on (many of his shanks appeared to be because he got to the ball a fraction of a second too late), returning was average at best (why does Fed think those chip “nothing shot” returns are a good idea), and of course numerous unforced errors for no obvious reason.

    Clearly, Djokovic brought his best game and that played a role as well. The Djoker’s returning was excellent as usual, serve was much better than expected, and in rallies he always was in control, and was aggressive as possible while staying on the baseline.

    Comprehensive and well deserved win for Djoko. No shame for Fed in losing this match. The effects of age on his game cannot be denied anymore. Djokovic meanwhile is a world number 1, clearly in his prime.

    1. Two things much different than Murray:
      1. Fed’s first serve was under so much pressure because of Novak’s immense return that he over played it and had to rely on his 2nd which Novak won majority of the points of.
      2. Novak’s 2nd serve so much better than Murray’s. Higher kick to Fed’s shoulder hence can’t return on the BH as cleanly.

      As you said though, Roger’s movement went away in the last two sets- part of the reason his FH got broken so much was the footwork- took wider steps and ended up spraying an error.

    2. Good comment Sridhard, agree on the movement causing shanks. Wasn’t at the bus stop on time for some shots. Fatigued? Just a bit hesistant thinkng shots too much? Harder to play on instinct when you;re seeing some of your best balls come back with interest.

      I wonder why Fed struggles with Djok serve so much? I agree Djoker gets more work on the ball than Murray Alysha but in the final he invariably served flat deep into the backhand corner of the service box on 2nd serves, won him a lot of points. Surprising Fed couldn’t pick them up.

  17. I hate to say I agree with Sid, but the crux of the match was losing his service from 40-15 up at the beginning of the 3rd – from that point his goose was cooked.

    He was lucky to get away with the second but any chance that he would then run away with a win was quickly snuffed out

    I dont agree completely with those saying he brought his C game or choked. I think what happened was that he simply could not believe that Novak was getting some of his best shots back. He was literally having to do 3 or 4 or more winning shots just to win a point. That must eat away at you. We all know that Roger is at his best when he is imperious and that wasnt happening today. He couldn’t reproduce the serving exhibition from 2 days earlier, no doubt because it was Novak down the other end, and of course he had to go for more on his serves and groundstrokes which meant he was forcing them and making errors. Its not surprising that he looked increasingly flat and dint have the bounce and swagger from Friday

    Its harsh to say but to beat Novak in a slam you have to make him doubt himself (as Stan did) and Roger never managed that today and never to be honest looked like it.

    At the end of the day the best player in the world beat the second best player.

    Its odd comparing it to last year – then Roger was a real underdog but we hoped. Today expectations going in to the match were higher (Sid apart) but once it started he always seemed to playing catch up.

    I didnt enjoy watching it live and dont think I could bring myself to watch it again but I do think back to some of the miraculous shots Roger hit and think how lucky we are to see him playing at such an incredible standard even if it was not quite good enough.

    Onward to the US Open where even if we wont admit it we will scrutinise the draw and see if there is any possibility of him pulling off a miracle and if not relish all the straightforward wins and perhaps even another Murray type rout.

    1. I was supremely confident Federer was going to win Wimbledon last year. I gave him a 100% chance of winning. Which means, if I were a betting man, I could’ve put my entire savings into it. Glad I didn’t. And sadly, Federer didn’t make it. This year, I never thought it would happen, keeping in mind that Federer is a year older, and Djokovic winning their last to fixtures.

      Also, Federer barely spent enough time on court in the matches leading up to the final. Somewhere in the third set, he hit the longest time spent on court. That makes a difference in my opinion. The second factor was Djokovic’s win over Anderson. Dodging a bullet like that not just prepares you, but gives you belief. Federer was barely tested. In hindsight, a tough QF, or SF would’ve better.

      1. This is what has bothered me in the past – and doubtless will again: too easy, and little challenge on the way to the final (in fact, that’s exactly what I said last year, too). OTOH, we’ve also seen what happens when he gets *too* much of a challenge, like in the USO last year with Monfils. It’s a very fine dividing line, I think. Is it significant that the last time he actually *won* Wimbledon he came close to losing in an early round, I wonder?

        I did do a great big post elsewhere, but the site seems to have lost it, and I’m too tired to redo it.

      2. Do you think if Federer had another Benneteau episode on his path, it would’ve spurred him on much like Anderson to Novak? I don’t know about that. I think Federer had the perfect road to the final- beating Murray so comprehensively could’ve only made his confidence sky high but obviously only set him up for more pressure in the final. It is what it is, Novak played the better tennis on the day and won the match.

      3. I am not sure about this one. Roger was extremely tested last year at the U.S. Open against Monfils, barely survived that one and yet was straight setter the next match.

        I just think that he peaked in that semi. He showed no emotion in that win either which was shocking to me. Maybe he thought that keeping that fire inside would help him in the final and maybe it would have since he started so well. He was just to careless at 4:2 to allow to be broken again.

      4. Impossible to say whether a tough match in an earlier round would have solidified his chances. Like Alison said, very fine line between struggling to recover and being tested adequatly.

    2. Big like for this Ian πŸ™‚ I don’t think he choked either. It was as you said; he was always playing catch up and Djokovic was just too good on the day. Federer needed his A+ game to win, anything else was just not going to cut it. Djokovic brought his best to the final, as one would expect from the clear No1.

      1. After 1 set a piece I do wonder why Fed played the third set with such low intensity and to get broken up 40-15 was mind boggling. He was probably aware that he never beat Novak after losing the first set in slams and his mind lingered to the missed chances in the 1st set.

    3. Rod Laver said it best that players aren’t machines. Everyone chokes/succumbs to the pressure- which Federer definitely did at 4-2 up in the first set. However, the difference is that you don’t panic. Which Fed didn’t. The fact that he stayed in it after losing the first after so many set points, and then saved so many in the second set is a testament to his grit.

      Expectations were higher because of that Murray match I feel and because Novak struggled coming into the final. But Fed’s serve + FH broke down in the key moments of the match and without that, Djoker is too good of a defender on the baseline.

      USO is a long shot. But nothing is impossible- take the positives from Wimbledon and try again.

  18. Another heartbreaking loss at Wimbledon. Federer failed to bring his A game to the most important match of the tournament once again.. He played great throughout, including the great SF, amd instead of peaking for the final match, his level dropped.
    Honestly, from now on, I’d prefer him losing in the first round of a slam to having to watch another bitter final defeat. I think number 18 might officialy be out of reach now. Federer simply keeps missing his chances, starting with Wimbledon 2014, then screwing his US open 2014 by playing a pathetic QF/SF, and now finally plays another average final after being amazing in the match before.
    Also, he keeps losing to Djokovic in the biggest matches (W 2014, 2015, WTF 2014, IW 2014, 2015), which is infuriating after seeing Federer beat him in smaller tournaments like Dubai/Shanghai -_-

    Just hugely disappointed with Federer amd don’t see any positives from Wimbledon 2015…

    1. That’s crazy that you’d rather Fed lose in the 1st rd than in the final of Wimbledon. I think people are forgetting that Novak is in the peak of his career and is world #1- the fact that Roger played the in form tennis that he did at his age and made the final to challenge him speaks a lot about him as a tennis player and a person. After Wimbledon 2012, Roger could’ve walked away on a high. After 2012, Roger could’ve walked away after a season where he struggled immensely. After this year, Roger can walk away because he’s never going to win a major again.

      But no, Roger loves tennis more than winning. As long as he is playing in the sport, everything is infinitely better. There, that’s 1000 positives from Wimbledon 2015.

      1. I think there is merit in both points of view really. I agree with Leon in some aspects and Alsyha in the others.

        Hard to take a positive from a loss, but the tournament was 7 matches played, won 6. It’s not a disaster by any means.

    2. [ I’d prefer him losing in the first round of a slam to having to watch another bitter final defeat.]

      It can’t get any more selfish than that, Leon. True glory hunter. πŸ™‚

      1. It’s not glory hunting at all. It’s the thing that Fed keeps giving us hopes of No.18 (which he of course isn’t obliged to win) with his game throughout the tournament (and his pre tournament interviews. Stuff like “I’ve never been more prepared for Wimbledon”…), and then fails again in the biggest moment. He played an ultra clutch final in Dubai, and he failed to bring that kind of mentality to the biggest match of the year. That’s the problem with him for the past couple of years. He plays great in the smaller tournaments, but for some reason cannot do it in slams.

        Also, it’s much easier emotionally to accept an early round defeat than another heartbreak to Djokovic for the umpteenth time in the final.

        If I’d been a glory hunter, I would have left this site a few years ago…

      2. Leon you can’t be comparing Dubai and Wimbledon in sense of the occasion and the surface. Fed managed to make the final so he did deliver on his pre-game hype that Wimbledon was a big goal of his. Just a pity he couldn’t walk away as the last man standing.

        Of course losing in the final where you win 6 matches means you were so close to the title in comparison to the first round but Fed wouldn’t be playing if he was consistently getting knocked out early in slams. The reason his legacy is still building is because he still managing to make such ends long after his peak years. Win or lose in the final, that says a lot.

    3. Goodness, you’re expecting a lot from a man who will be 34 in less than a month! He didn’t actually ‘lose’ WTF 2014, he pulled out if you remember. He ‘might’ have lost of course, but we shall never know. Shanghai is not a ‘small’ tournament, it is a Masters 1000. There’d be a few guys on tour who would give their right arm for just one of Feds’ years on tour.

      Djokovic is the World No1 for a reason – and is far ahead of the pack. He had the RG title which he had fought so long for whipped away from him by Stan – did you think he was going to roll over and miss out on Wimbledon too? He’s a champion for a reason whether we like him or not. As No1 and six years younger, Djokovic *should* be winning these matches. If Federer starts losing in the first rounds of major tournaments, he will retire. But whilst – as Muser said – he still has a good chance, then he should keep right on playing, and I will be happy to watch. He had a great tournament, and we were treated to some fantastic matches – particular the SF jewel; that’s reason enough for me to keep watching, despite him not lifting the trophy. I can hardly believe how judgemental some people are. It is not easy to win a slam, period. And for someone who most people would consider well past their prime – special as he is – even more difficult.

      1. I’m not expecting anything less than Fed himself. Federer still has the game, but mentally he keeps failing in the biggest matches. That’s what’s so frustrating to me. He played a beautiful final in Dubai, incredibly clutch, saving breakpoints with great serving/play (Similar to Wimbledon 2007 final). And what does he do in 2015 W final? Serves OK at best, has a mental lapse just when the match was starting to turn to his favor, and completely disappears after that. It’s annoying because it turns out he played a better final last year, when he wasn’t really THAT impressive throughout the tournament. This year, he played great from the beginning, schooled Murray with a near vintage serving performance, and then played a worse final than last year…
        I love watching Roger play, but I hate seeing him being so powerless and almost schooled by Djokovic several times in a row. It was fine in IW/Rome (those surfaces favor Djokovic and don’t play too well with an almost 34 yo), but this is Wimbledon we’re talking about. Roger’s best surface, a surface tailor made for him, and it didn’t make a difference. The IW final was as close as Wimbledon final and the conditions were much much slower there. I really don’t know if Fed can beat Djokovic in a slam ever again. He just mentally cannot bring his best to the major finals (evidenced by Wimbledon 14/15 in comparison to Shanghai 2014 schooling or Dubai 15 final)…

      2. Dubai (like Shanghai) is up to 3 sets, not up to 5, a totally different animal. With the bye you play only 5 matches, and usually for Federer that means 2 sets. For a slam, you’re talking 7 matches of at least 3 sets and possibly more. In a slam, he needs to conserve energy as far as he can – at his age now, even at Wimbledon, he cannot afford to involve himself in lengthy matches. He accomplished this last year and this to get himself to the final where he faced the No1 who is six years younger, and that’s the main difference. IMO he expended an enormous amount of physical/mental energy to win that second set, and the match by then was already 2 hours long. And Djokovic was playing well – serves/returns/hitting those lines. As he gets older – and Navritlova said this also – the bad days happen more often. You can be great one day, and not able to find your A game the next. I’m puzzled as to why you cannot understand this?

      3. Yeah, I like the question, posed elsewhere, of “why didn’t Fed get 33yo opponents when he was 28?!”

  19. Heartbreaking- don’t know about you guys but I do think that was Fed’s last chance at a major. Have accepted this fact after last year’s USO but Fed just been working so hard for it especially after the 2013 season, it’s a difficult pill to swallow.

    After that special semi-final performance against Murray of all people, pressure was on for Roger to deliver. I don’t believe Fed peaked too early like others are saying- combination of the occasion getting to him and Djoker being too solid. Fedberg both pointing to that 4-2 hold in the first set that changed the match but I don’t entirely agree there. I think the third set was where the match was lost just like last year. Roger had the momentum after an epic tiebreak and lost the intensity when it mattered most. That botched FH on the break point was eerily similar to the Djokosmash in the 5th in 2014. Speaking of FHs, Novak broke down Roger’s FH while executing his own. On grass nonetheless. Fed was never winning this match unless the Serve + FH combo were on fire and unfortunately after a very good tournament with both these in the artillery, Fed was firing blanks today.

    Rogers serve dictates how he plays. Fed was not winning the first point of his serve alot and that means he ends up playing catch up. For him to work on the return, he needs to get away on the serve. You see that 2nd serve points won stat for him and it tells the story of the match right there. Novak is world #1 for a reason. The guy is so good on big points and that is what’s going to separate the winner. Gotta tip your hat to him for coming back like this after the French and that Anderson match.

    It’s pretty obvious how sucky this defeat is. The starts were aligning after Halle, Fed played 6 perfect matches all to repeat last year’s result to the same person. I mean what else can you say? All I can really say in such a tough moment is that at nearly 34 years old, it’s still unbelievable how this man is putting himself into contention for the most important titles in the sport. Seeing the crowd trying to rally him to his fairytale ending is still fascinating. You look at Serena and Novak accomplishing huge things this year but Roger is still the talk of the town yet again and building his legacy. GOAT.

    Despite the result I have to agree with Fed- a good tournament. He defended his points and took it to his contemporaries yet again. Wimbledon was always the goal for Roger this year so how he responds to yet another loss here will be important heading into the hardcourts- sometimes the best things happen when you’re not expecting them. Thankyou Jonathan for a great few weeks on the grass, appreciate your efforts and logic in such moments- Fed very lucky to have someone like you and the rest of the people on this site on his side.

  20. Can someone please tell me why I get this uncontrollable urge to go punch Boris in his nose? Trust me, it’s got nothing to do with Federer losing in two finals. πŸ™‚

    1. I agree. I remember especially at one point. I think it was exactly at 1:0 30:40 3rd set when Roger has that break opportunity and then Nivak passed him or something. Boris got up and clinched his fists and bit his teeth. I was like – “you a**hole!” But it is what it is.

      I know that a match is decided on a few points. I know that Roger can’t hang at the baseline with Novak on a consistent basis. Two Wimbledon Finals in a row and Roger is only winning about 40% from the baseline vs 60% for Novak.

      I would love to see numbers from his Dubai and Shanghai wins and also from his Wimby win against him in 2012.

      I actually want to know if this is something that’s the norm now or did Roger beat him in Dubai and Shanghai despite of it?

      1. If I remember correctly, the baseline numbers didn’t matter at Shanghai, or Dubai, as Roger got it done in the front court. Shanghai was a pure front court experience.

      2. For me, it’s at the beginning of the match, the camera zoomed in on him, he’s fluffing his hair with both of his hands. I wanted to punch him already.

      3. Yeah I’m with Sid, in those matches Roger negated the baseline game, which is effectively what he had to do to win yesterday but he couldn’t find a way. Pinned back on his own baseline. Maybe if he’d served a little better things could have opened up.

    2. Yep, can happily say how irritating Boris is in the box. The weird thing is he hasn’t really helped Djoker’s net game on the grass but he still comes out on top.

      Also how devastated did Edberg look? I have accepted Fed never winning another major but I would’ve really loved to see Fedberg do it together- not meant to be. Either way, Edberg has really added a tonne to Fed’s game and allowed him to get back to the top after 2013. Federer definitely redefined his game with Stefan and although they haven’t been successful at a major, their partnership is still considered a success for me.

      1. Yeah Edberg did look a bit sad about the loss. Expected I guess.

        I don’t have much of an opinion on Boris, just supporting his charge. But not the most likeable character. The amounht of times BBC showed tha documentary thing about him too, jeez, on every 2 seconds.

    3. On another site someone named him ‘the Pork Butcher from Hamburg’ which I thought was both apt, and very funny. Just picture him with a butcher’s hat every time and turn irritation into hilarity. πŸ˜†

    4. Me too Sid… Boris is sooooo annoying and now that his face is all bloated it looks more like a punching bag. Lol I was getting angry at him jumping up and down every time djokovic won a point. What a plant pot Boris is. The guy has no charisma and elegance at all. Just the same cocky character like Nole which makes them the ideal bum chum couple.

  21. bad result again but i’m still happy roger still play tennis and can make a final or win some tournament next upis us open hope roger to do greater than last year

  22. A heartbreaker in a nutshell. Djokovic certainly played his part, but I still feel like the match is Roger to lose. His trademark variety vanished from nowhere, only constantly trading topspin forehands and backhands all the time. Still, what I appreciate him the most is his determination to move on and work hard again. My faith on him never fades.

    Somewhat I had a feeling that if he adds some unorthodox elements like Brown’s shot-making in his game, it may surprise and outwit Djokovic.

    Hope he will step it up in the hard court swing!

    1. Not sure it was Fed’s to lose – in quicker conditions maybe.

      But the surface was a little slower than it had been all week due to the temperature, along with the grass not being as quick made it very hard for Fed to really find a way through.

      Combine with that Djokovic’s supreme movement and solidity on both wings it prevented Fed from playing on his terms. Djoker just got back to neutral in a high % of rallies and then got the errror or got on the front foot himself.

      If the match was played with all gut strings and wooden frames, then Fed would have got it done πŸ™‚

      1. I agree. The conditions were similar to Indian Wells.

        Roger could have definitely served better but the conditions didn’t help either.. Oh well.

        Roger’s game depends so much on his serve nowadays. But there is hope.

        I think that against anyone else Roger would have won. Djokovic www just too good on that day.

  23. Even though Federer lost, his 2nd set TB win was one of the most tense, dramatic moments I’ve been through watching a Federer match. Those saves from 3-6 TB down was epic and really exemplifies that after all these years and his success, he is still hungry and motivated for more. Until next time Roger! He will stand strong once again. πŸ™‚

    1. Yeah that was the best part of the match. 3rd and 4th sets were kinda flat. Crowd couldn’t get into it much either from that point on. Flattered to deceive.

  24. “So I will wait, and pray, and hope, and believe, for this is all I can do. I will do this for as long as it takes. Through every loss and every win, because regardless of whatever changes, one thing stays the same. Roger Federer is the only Tennis Player I have ever seen that can inspire me with such ecstasy, such agony, such profound depth of feeling that makes defeat seem heroic, and paints so bitter a loss in such a beautiful light.” Homer Mendoza – 2008

    I copied the above from Rogers’ website after his loss to the Spaniard in 2008.. That was how I felt then and how I am still feeling.

    Thanks again Jonathan for this site Good therapy for sure. You are the best.

    1. Thanks for that Maxi – everyone who loves Federer and his tennis will agree with every one of those words. πŸ™‚

  25. Guys, you know what I was thinking.

    Clearly Roger is one of a kind. His game is really amazing and what’s even more amazing is that he’s putting himself in position every year to win majors. He’s 34 years old and his movement is still there. His serve has improved. His forehand is improved. His backhand is solid. And he can beat 99% of the guys on tour. So, with that I was thinking – if you can’t beat them, can you outlast them?!

    It is clear that Nadal was beating Federer, but Roger is almost 5 years older than Nadal and he is outlasting him. Roger is at Number 2 and Nadal at Number 10 right now. Djokovic is on top but how long can he stay there? Another couple years at most, right. And obviously one of the youngsters will come up and take the reigns – but there will be a void and maybe Roger can sneak in and win one. Why not? He’s been doing great against so many players. I am not saying that it will happen but it can. Novak played great in 2011 and is looking great this year. But I doubt that he can replicate the same form next year. And definitely not in 2017. He’s a physical guy, like Nadal and a lot depends on his legs.

    He is not as efficient and economical like Roger and I don’t see him contesting finals 34-35-36 years of age. That’s for sure. I believe that the next 5 years will be sporadic with different champions at all Majors. And if Roger sticks around as he just eluded to after Wimbledon – why not? If he is motivated and keeps a hold of his ranking or near it, you never know. Just saying! πŸ˜‰

    1. He could potentially outlast Nadal, but no way he can that with Djoker.
      Dull’s game is to stay 50m behind the baseline, run ragged left and right, and hit the ball as hard and with as many revs as possible.
      Novak on the other hand, is almost as close to the baseline as Roger, is absolutely unbelievable. It’s more reflexes and elasticity than pure strength and power. I’m not saying Novak will play till 34-5, but he’s gonna last more than the spaniard imo.

      And I’m not at all convinced about the young guns… Kyrgios needs to mature a huge amount, Raonic doesn’t have enough outside of the serve, I’m not going to say anything about Dimitrov otherwise it’ll get ugly xD, and Nishikori is too often injured… It really feels like once these guys are gone, there’s gonna be no depth in the game ^^

      1. Agreed. Djokovic plays very close to the baseline. At times, nearly as much as Federer. Federer, from what I’ve observed, does have problems against opponents who take the ball early. Take Nishikori for example.

        There’s a reason Djokovic is so good indoors. His playing style is somewhere perfectly between Nadal and Djokovic.

        Kyrgios is just an Ausshole.

    2. Wishful thinking I think Vily. Djokovic will be around for a while assuming he stays injury free. You do lose some flexibility though so his sliding style might not be as good / effective as he ages.

      Rather than outlasting them, I would think Fed’s best shot at slams or big events is when the draw opens up courtesy of an upset etc.

      1. It seems like the hope is on Djoko somehow getting upset or weaker – to be understood, but I think he might keep himself fresh some time still, viewing his healthy diet, zen meditating and God knows what. I think Fed has to come up with something new invincible, like getting his serv even more consistent, finding a way to push the opponent out of comfort zone, being able to go to own strong zones most times, or being stronger on baselines. And don’t say he is too old, – no, not yet!!!!

  26. World dreamed the day
    whatever experts did say
    Be18evers believed in him
    to bring another delight to them

    The day didn’t come yet this year
    The iron man won again we hear
    Our man was beaten
    Our hearts were broken

    But the joy is to see he’s still out there
    playing, enjoying, being the ruler
    fighting against men younger and fitter
    refining his excellence even higher

    The King never dies
    Because his heart never dies
    The King is always the King
    Joker never be the king

      1. I’ll tell you what, Wanda’s poem beats Murli’s in straights. πŸ™‚

  27. Hi Folks, many many thanks for all of your insightful comments and analyses, Alysha and Vily and all others. The biggest thanks goes to Jonathan of coure. I will make three final points, as I’ve got two trips coming up and may not be able to contribute before USO.
    (1) this fortnight has been amazing because of Roger’s excellent play and as fan that has been more than what we’ve wished for. Clearly, we wished for more, that is slam title wise.
    (2) Roger’s game is still very good and his body can sustain a campaign of a slam without doubt. To me, now the biggest problem is his mental aspect and how to deal with pressure, especially how to turn the nagetive pressure into a positive. I laughed when I heard that Novack visited a Budist temple and Andy has been talking to a shrimp. Now that might make some sense. I won’t repeat all the techanical, tactic and interactive aspects of final anymore, the biggest problem that Roger exposed in final was that Roger crumbled under pressure from the word go. Roger fogot about it only for a short while at 3-6 down in the 2nd TB. Boy, that was one of very best Federer fights. Then after the set break, he was engulfed quickly again by the same pressure, lack of intensity and lack of concentration. I can recall why I’ve had this eerie feeling everytime when I hear Roger saying that Wimble is my best chance and … preparing for Wimble … and I never read newspapers … . This basically confirms that Roger agreed with pundits’ and tennis journalists’s predictions and is afraid of pressure. I thought that was just a terrible mistake. That just unnecessarily piles up lots of unnecessary pressure on himself. His final performance disappointing, absolutely, surprised, perhaps not.
    (3) FedBerger team. I agree with all others. Had Boris Becker sat next to me on my lunge, I could have punched him as well. Having said that, what they’ve done so far is working but it has absolutely nothing to do with technical aspects, volleying, how many times did Novack volley in final? Instead, Boris did lots of trash talking, that perhaps diverted some attention away from and thereby took some pressure off Novack. Therefore, I wish and hope that Stephen should come out talking a bit more, not necessarily better representing Roger but could act a shield and takes some pressure off Roger. I feel particularly painful to see Roger feeling so lonely and helpless on court, crumbling became the only outcome. True, as some already mentioned, it could be a bless in disguise, if no one talks about Roger’s chances at USO. That might bring out some fire and intensity to prove that he is still good enough to win with a lesser pressure. Everyone still believes Roger when he says that he still loves to play. Then when Roger plays, what’s so wrong to scream, shout louder, pump his chest? Roger showed the none of those – little passion.
    As a fan, I am content with what Roger has already accomplished – the 2nd to none. However, I still believe that he could achieve more. Time will tell. Have a good summer everyone. Jonathan, you deserve a good holiday more than anyone at this site – have a smashing summer πŸ™‚

    1. Cheers Gang.

      I agree with some but not all of your points.. first Fed crumbling under pressure from the word go – not really – he came up againt Djokovic who was just relentlessness. It was even for the first 2 sets but after the break / rain delay Djokovic came out with way more intent and spanked his forehand. It was very hard for Fed to play his style with any success.

      I also disagree about Fed not reading press being a bad thing, it has nothing to do with not piling up pressure. It makes sense to block out external sources that are nothing but a drain on energy. Imagine if Roger read every comment here before his matches? πŸ˜† does Roger really want to read about his day out in the park with his kids in a tabloid written with zero research or fact checking? Nope.

      As for Edberg coming out and talking more. It would acheive very little. Talk is cheap.

  28. Well-balanced view of the final, excellent Jonathan. Many thanks for the great job throughout the tournament.
    Have a nice break!

      1. I suspect he won’t, although it may depend on the Davis Cup situation. I assume that’s what he’s waiting for before he confirms his schedule.

      2. If he won, the answer would be easy – no.

        Last year he played both Toronto and Cincy and even though he did amazing, he was a bit tired at the U.S. Open and it cost him.

        I would trust that his game is good enough and probably just play Cincy.

        The ranking situation is tight though. Murray is coming and 1600 points are a lot to defend. Historically, Roger hasn’t done well in Montreal since conditions are slower than in Toronto.

        We’ll see. I suppose he needs to listen to his body and it will tell him what’s best.

        I think that he should make the U.S. open semis without too much problem but you never know.

  29. Before I wrote this, I actually searched back Jon’s last year entry and trying to draw comparison. All stats are almost similar exception to UEs. Last year over 5 sets Roger only clock 28 UEs vs this year 35 UEs in 4 sets. He did improve on 2nd server points but UEs hurt him the most. A few questions pop to my head – did Roger just peak too early during Murray’s match, is age is catching up and outcome of energy zapping 2nd set TB. Just some after thought since I was a little gutted after such a JesusFed performance in the semis.

    As for Djoker, since Dubai lost he has been very determined to beat Roger at all matches and wants badly to be loved by general population. You can see it in his eyes, almost scary to look at. Now that dust has almost settle, I am trying to be proud that at 33 Roger is still in the mix as other players would have faded into sunset. Its difficult but will continue to hope he will get to no18 when all stars are aligned for his one last GS win. God please let that be soon, father time is such a b****!!!

    1. Interesting I hadn’t compared the numbers.Need to see Djokovic’s too. Different match on a different day of course.

      First 2 sets were pretty close tbh but after that Fed just tailed off. Djoker looked like he was up for winning no matter what.

    2. Djoker is having a 2011 season right now- let’s see if Fed can get into the same position he did at the end of that year and turn the tables.

  30. Poor old Novak. He just can’t win, can he? Anyone else seen the front page of today’s Daily Telegraph? πŸ™‚

    1. Djoker’s fan base can only really subside from here tbh, never going to grow significantly as he just doesn’t have the appeal of some of the other guys on tour.

  31. I think we should expect him to lose in US Open, that way, if he wins, we won’t feel bad. Hahaha!!
    Damn, I’m hurt!!!

      1. The wise might say, don’t expect neither loss nor win, just enjoy…but that’s easy to say!

  32. Please someone confirm for me before I down more tequila shots…How many finals is it now that we have lost since our last grandslam?
    Do we own that record πŸ™

  33. Hi, Jonathan and everyone!
    So disappointing. It’s always the same from last few years. Roger plays great the whole tournament, but when it is time for the final (and particularly against djokovic) he can’t keep the level of play he showed in previous matches. Examples: WTF 2012, IW 2014, Wimbledon 2014, IW 2015, Rome 2015… It’s all in his mind.
    Hope this changes! Regards!

    1. Maybe but I think it’s more a case of a past prime player going up against younger opposition at the peak of their powers in the era of baseline tennis.

  34. Some perspective for those of us who are feeling a bit too down about Federer’s loss – Roger Federer has made the most money playing the game of Tennis in history. He has won the most number of Grand Slams, and holds numerous other records that will stand the test of time. He has truly led a blessed life. If he never lifts a racket again, his place in history is already secure. Let’s just enjoy the rest of his time on the tour until he retires. Even if he just wins a few 500s, and a 1000 or two each year for the next couple of years, who cares? I would rather still see him play, don’t get those he say he should retire now since he’s not winning slams anymore.

      1. hilarious J.

        Poor Fed.

        How will he be able to encourage his many home staff member’s assistants???

        I mean, the top level Federer home staff probably know how to handle this by now. But their assistants – it’s those I worry about. Like the assistant home chef – probably too young at this point to weather it well.

        And who will not only help them through, but give them the guidance they need to speak to their drivers? Like the Assistant Home Chef Chauffer??!! That guy is gonna be toast.

  35. Really!!! Does Boris Becker have to make himself a hero here????? A pity he couldn’t help Djokovic win the slam he wanted most…French Open! Smh

  36. BTW, Jonathan, doesn’t your title suggest that Novak has beaten Roger 3 or more times at Wimbledon if it says “yet again”? Shouldn’t it just be “again”?

    1. I was wording it more along the lines he has denied Federer many times in the last few years at various tournaments. He was too good in IW and Rome so far this year.

  37. Here’s something I’d like to put forward for consideration. It’s been bugging me for about the last 9 months. Is Roger’s current world ranking actually disadvantaging him against Djokovic? If they meet, it can currently only be in a final, by which time Djokovic is all fired up and focused on the trophy. Is he more vulnerable in semis? After all, that was where Roger beat him so beautifully in Shanghai last year. Obviously I’ve no recent statistics to back this up, given that they’ve been Nos. 1 and 2 for a good while now, but it is something I frequently wonder about.

    1. Yes Roger should forfeit his number 2 ranking and swap with Kevin Anderson. That way he can meet Djokovic in the fourth round of slams and win. Great idea! πŸ™„

      1. Oh dear God! So now his number two ranking is a bad thing? πŸ™‚

        Alison, don’t think too much about it. Just read Wanda’s poem and you’ll be just fine.

      2. πŸ˜€ Jonathan! Still Alison, I want our champion to prevail an even up-fired Djoko – will be (more than) difficult, everybody knows that, but Roger has done the difficult before…

  38. @smaldunk

    Although slams are 7 BO5 matches, there is a day off before every match. In MS1000 you have to play 5 bo3 matches in 5 days which is also very physical.
    It’s just frustrating seeing Fed lose to Djokovic again and again (especially in slams).
    Fed choked the 3rd set away. That much is a fact. That easy FH put away miss was pathetic. He didn’t make mistakes like that in Dubai or Shanghai and it has nothing to do with being tired/fatigued. It was a mental error aka choke.
    Djokovic could have still won even if Fed had held there, but it also could have made a difference.

    1. You could say the same for Djoker in the second set tiebreak but you don’t because he ended up being the winner. Close margins and Djoker just puts so much pressure, felt like he had to go for something extra. The longer the match goes, the less confident Fed gets. If Fed had held there, it still wasn’t a guarantee he would’ve won the set or the match. The time for saying what if is well over.

  39. We should really cheer up a bit.
    I, for one, was unfortunate enough to start paying close attention to RF’s game way too late (no tennis on public TV here besides the local Estoril Open) and he lost all finals I dared and had the opportunity to watch, which was really heartbreaking.
    But, come on. As time goes on, we’ll have more and more of these moments, wins will rarefy and his time will pass. Realistically, what we can hope are a few more tournaments, possibly including some ATP 1000 and still quite a lot of brilliant and inspired moments, regardlessly of the match outcome. As for majors, I think not. If it happens, great, if not, that’s OK. And that’s OK to be OK. Let’s consider ourselves fortunate enough to have had the privilege of watching the best tennis ever produced, by Roger and his incredible role as the unique catalyst that made the others raise their game level, as the Joker rightfully keeps reminding us (and many others omit)…

  40. I feel it so disappointing that you clever guys now let sunday’s disappointment make Federer suddenly a surely disappointing fellow suddenly playing his c-game or less, suddenly only winning a few tournaments and never more likely to win a major, – after many a praise up in heavens for his TRANSCENDENT (your word for it, Jonathan) performance vs. Murray, and his securely dismissing the earlier opponents in this Wimby. It’s up and – less up, he is not a machine, – and yes – Djoko is making truly solid at the moment. What makes me excited is Roger’s new discoveries with the racket, making his serve so improved – except yesterday unfortunately. About future? We can only guess, and this is surely waste of time imo. Who knows all facts and circumstances and what comes from that? REALLY?

    1. Not everyone thinks he brought his C game Muser. Basically he didn’t play as well as he did against Murray, and No1 Djokovic is a much more tricky opponent. He had a fantastic tournament and reached the final again, and despite all our hopes, wishes, and excitement that he might just do it this time, it wasn’t to be. All I know is that he fought as always, but just didn’t have enough in the tank to pull it off. A younger Federer would have had no problem.

      Interesting piece of Djokovic the Cyborg:

      1. Slamdunk and Muser – well said!

        Rogers own musings on his performance, the outcome and his future were thoughtful considered.

      2. Yes, thanks, Slamdunk – also for the link – I like Brian Philip’s writing. Yes, maybe a younger Federer would have had no problem winning this time. Still I think he seems to run about the court without (much?) age-symptoms. Djokovic has improved his wall-competence, also seen awesomely in Rome. That makes it 2 times lately Djoko has prevailed convincingly and crushed our hopes. A big challenge right now for our Roger. HE TELLS HE LOOKS FORWARD TO IT! Yes – he likes to win – but he positively likes to be challenged as well, keeping his motivation burning – much more encouraging than clever guys writing him out (have been for many years now?). PreWimb Brian made another fine article

      3. Yeah, saw that one Muser – I really like the Grantland pieces: well written, well researched, and thought provoking. πŸ™‚

  41. Wanda, awesome. Been quite down since last night. Your poem very cheering.

    And Jonathan, I am not retiring, at least till Fed doesn’t and thats not gonna happen soon.

    Rejoice rejoice, you have no choice but to carry on – as Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young sang

    As Fed moves on to thirty-four
    There are better things in store
    He will come in from the cold
    And will win that elusive gold

    1. Which gold you referring to- The pineapple trophy or the Olympics? I have actually forgotten about the latter. Will be very interesting to see how Fed performs there seeing as it’s not on the clay.

  42. With the air clearing a little bit emotionally… I think it’s a fair argument to say that if the Roger who played Andy can show up in a GS final in NY – instead the one who played Novak – then Roger can win #18 in what’s less that two months.

    It’s not probable IMO, but it’s far from impossible and worth rooting for without feeling like you have to have yourself committed.

    Go Fed, go get 18!
    #stubborn # healingfast #thickheaded

  43. Mr. Sid The Cookie Thief
    Interesting how he thinx
    He has this strong belief
    That numbering is a jinx

    Thanks Wanda, Muser and yes Alysah, referring to the Olympic Gold. Earlier, many of the experts like McEnroe said that Nadal is the GOAT as he has won Davis Cup also which Fed never won. Now after that has been taken care of John Mac had to eat his words. But coem 2016, these guys will talk about Olympic Gold. Thus if Fed wins that it will shut their mouths forever as he would have both singles and doubles gold.

    Personally, I think no one will come close to 17. Rafa is finished. Djoker cannot keep up till 2017.

    So my sights are set on that Gold ( as would Fed too ).

    Of course meanwhile no harm in picking one or two more majors to keep well ahead.

    1. Thanks again to Wanda and Murli making our days more shining. So that’s Roger’s inspiring game also – I wonder how much poetry those others not so poetic sports stars have got out from fans…

  44. If I might make a few final observations following Wimbledon – because everyone has said so much – it is, firstly, that Roger was a gracious loser and that I also felt Novak was a magnanimous victor. You could see the disappointment in Roger but nothing like what he showed after his loss to Nadal at the AO in ’09. I think that at 34 he is a more mature person now; he has much more to his life than tennis – and always will, I would think. Courtside, he was generous in his remarks to Novak, and I admire him for that. Novak, for his part, did not rub his victory in Roger’s face and showed him considerable respect; I am sure after his defeat to Stan at the FO he knew how hard it is to receive the runner-up trophy in a match like this. Indeed, it was Novak’s response to that loss and the accolades from the crowd that impressed me the most about him. He can accept his losses well – as tough as they are. (Imagine if he had lost again on Sunday. It would have been devastaing for him.) I respect Roger for showing the same attitude at Wimbledon this year. He hasn’t always done that very well.

    Because of the undoubted support Roger has on this blog there is an unmistakeable partiality to his team and a corresponding dislike of some of his opposition and their teams (as well as some of the former champions who are now commentators.) But I might say this. Whatever the animosity towards Boris personally here he was nonetheless a great player in his day and a champion. He changed the sport in his era. Edberg (and others) would not have been as great without the test that Boris presented. Clearly, as a coach he has added something to Novak’s self-belief. Ask Novak if that is important. Edberg has no doubt contributed to Roger’s game also. I have a similar regard for other former champions like McEnroe and Wilander. They have been near-iconic figures in the sport. I remember them as the great players and competitors they were in their heyday. (Along time ago!) I still find their insights on the game interesting but I don’t expect any of them to be perfect or wonderful human beings. They are who they are, and they are part of the whole tennis experience. As we sometimes say here, the game is always more than being about one player.

    1. Yes, I’d meant to say, Novak didn’t go clambering up towards his box this year, did he, or did I come in too late and miss it? If so, that’s a significant change over last year.

  45. Excellent write-up Richard. Novak has matured no doubt. Was quite a cocky guy and still is at times. But he is making that effort which is commendable. His ambition is not just to be appreciated for his game but also for an emotional connect to the crowd which happens very rarely. Tough to see it happening much but there could be an improvement over the years probably after Fed calls it quits.

    Becker too had the same problem and thus if I remember rightly, the crowd was always for Edberg. Becker has mellowed no doubt.

    Great tennis players there have been galore and more will come, but as Keats says – A thing of beauty is a joy for ever. Thus Edberg & Federer will always stand out amongst the multitudes of racket-wielders of all sizes.

    Unless, some one new comes along ( along the same Keats’ lines ) which I doubt, but I was wrong before and thus could very well be wrong now too.

    1. I have the impression that Novak desperately craves for crowd sympathy.
      The ironic thing is that the more he tries to conceal it, the more it shows. And there’s nothing wrong with that. Human complexity is a wonderful thing!

    1. Thanks Wanda – great highlights. It’s for these moments – and we get them in almost every match he plays – that keep us watching, wishing, and hoping. πŸ™‚

  46. Thanks Murli for great poems. If he could win just one more slam and the Olympics (yep, still greedy) – that would definitely put the icing and the cherries on the cake!

    Just catching up on Guardian reading and this was a fun article from G Dyer, whether or not you agree with his comments on Wimbledon whites or Kyrgios. But it was the last sentence in particular that had me hooting with laughter.

    ‘…it’s a slight shame that we still get to see so much of the front of Boris Becker. On the evidence of this tournament, his coaching signals to Djokovic – another slight controversy – amount to no more than, β€œI am turning into a human sausage, please prick me.”

  47. I’s not easy to treat Triumph and Disaster the same, Mr. Kipling. (Yes, easy when Fed is the right side.)

    So I’m grateful to be part of this great community. Wouldn’t have survived alone emotionally, so thanks Jonathan for building this cool fanbase, thanks everybody for being part and contributing to it.
    Let’s look forward to the hard court season. Have a good summer!

    1. That’s what we are here for. To share the joys and to take a part of the load on our shoulders when things look grim. And laugh at it all at the end.
      Have a nice holiday, if that’s the case. Go outside, run, cycle, play whatever pleases you. Mens sana in corpore sano.

  48. And what was that thing of Joker eating grass? Lots of animals that eat like that. A goat, for example… Do we see here some subliminar message? Nah, I’m hallucinating. Time for holidays.

    1. Ha ha ha good point. I think by eating grass he is trying to tell himself that he is the Goat. Which will never happen even if God forbid, Djokovic were to surpass Rogers record. And just like Uncle Knob head mafioso Toni, he wanted his nephew to keep winning and to overtake Rogers record. This is exactly what Boris the illegal coaching Becker wants for Novak. Man a life during the final when I saw Boris jumping up and down and his face going bright red beetroot colour. Boris had a face as if he sucked 20 lemons n limes all scrunched up and his eye lids not blinking as if the final was a UFC heavyweight championship match. Instead of a Wimbledon Tennis Final match. Lol so many times I wanted to smash Boris face in. A guy with no class at all.This reminds me when he used to commentate Federers matches, even then you could hear the jealousy of breaking Boris 6 finals as Fed made 7 consecutive Finals. Boris just hated him that Federer was in a class of his own. Anyway what goes around comes around.

  49. One thing people are mentioning that Fed and Novak are more matured than before. I can see that Novak is trying so hard to feel appreciated by the crowd. The way 99% were all on Federers side. A word of advice to Novak if forsome reason if this message does get to Novak is….
    Federer the great champion he is. He gained extra emotional support from the crowd by not just winning 5 titles consecutively but by actually losing the 2008 Wimbledon final to Nadal. Therefore in a funny way to this day people talk about his 17 titles yes, but the memory of a fantastic final that Federer lost is cemented in the public and Centre Courts mind. Now if Djokovic actually lost this final I am not saying he should tank the final but the millions watching would be more empathetic towards Djokovic and would be respected
    more as a champion. You see when you have someone like Federer who has already cemented his greatness if you keep beating him and winning the trophys, no public and supporters like great champions losing all the time. What Djokovic doesn’t realise is sometimes when you win, you actually lose. Sometimes when you lose you actually win. For Djokovic he got more support when when he lost RG. Its just not about winning all the time. This is why around the world the public adore Federer as not only has he won but losing certain titles makes Federer the undisputed GOAT.

    1. I agree, Serajul – and I think Djoko knows – trying to imitate on loss at RG Roger’s graceful and hearty way… still I’m not seduced – Djoko seems so artificial to me, except when angrily appealing to the crowd…and when joyfully winning matches and titles of course

      1. Yes, I’ve seen and said it time and again: joker is a poser and a humourless joker. Yo, bro.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button