Umm, when he beat Sampras in 01 he was already a previous junior champion at Wimbledon, he'd won his first tour title, played well in the davis, and come 4th at the olympics. For a 19 year old that aint bad, he was probably top 15, certainly top 20 in the world by then.

This is a pretty crappy comparison. I think a lot of people didn't realize how close Nadal and Djokovic both were to Federer last year. Both of those guys - Djokovic particularly, as I recall - choked to lose Wimbledon and the U.S. Open. (EDIT: To clarify, Nadal was definitely closer to winning, but it seemed like less of a choke job.)

I remember posting in the '07 U.S. Open thread that it seemed like the world was on the verge of catching up to Federer; between this straight sets spanking and the Tipsarevic match, I think that's looking pretty accurate. I think he'll still win Wimbledon, though Nadal can give him a run for his money there, but I think there's a very good chance that's the only major he wins this year.

You're wrong on pretty much all points. It's true that very few were guaranteeing that he'd be the GOAT and likely win close to 20 majors before he was done, but for anyone who followed tennis, there were strong expectations for him to be a multiple slam winner, top 3 and likely #1 player in his prime. Malivai Washington wrote several times in his espn.com column claiming Federer would win all 4 grand slams and would become Sampras' equal on grass PRIOR to him having ever won anything.

He was far from a virtual nobody in the actual tennis world when he beat Sampras. He was already the #15 seed at only 19 yrs old. Obviously Roddick was marketed much harder in the US during 01 and 02, but Federer was ranked higher the entire time and at all points in their careers except for the brief period after Roddick won the US Open in 03 and before AO 04'.

Djokovic lost to Nadal (retiring in the 3rd set) in the wimbledon semis, when he was physically destroyed at playing marathon matches against Hewitt and Baghdatis on no rest in the previous days after multiple rain delays. There was no choke involved, his body was just done. He did choke pretty hard to Federer in the US Open finals.

I'd bet you nadal doesnt make it to the semis at wimbledon this year

I meant both of them respectively losing to Federer in the finals of those events.

And I agree with your comments on Federer in 2001. I distinctly remember thinking after watching him beat Sampras in that Wimbledon "Hmmm, maybe there's something to the hype."

It's kind of funny for anyone, let alone people who claim to be "huge tennis fans", to make the assertion that this loss in ANY way signified anything except a single, isolated bad match/tourny for Federer.


SOME FACTS:

- He has not been playing his A game for much of the tournament. Though he was not playing BAD, he wasn't hitting the ball as crisply and error-free as usual, and he said so (not to mention his absurd match against Tipso)

- He was sick the week leading up to the tournament. Tennis players have a very regimented schedule, especially leading up to big events. So he was thrown off his schedule, and more importantly...

- He didn't get to play ONE SINGLE TUNE UP EVENT. He was sick for the Kooyong, so he had zero prep.

- The court was also playing much slower/differently than it has in the past, and Federer has mentioned that throughout the tournament it has been bothering him

- Lastly, Djokovic played one of the better matches of his life. Anyone who doesn't realize how great Djoko has been playing the last year is living under a rock, but this match in particular was easily the best he has played in a big match.



The combination of ALL those factors made Federer lose. It is not a harbinger of doom, it does not signify anything except that Djokovic is one of the few players who, when playing his best, has the capability to beat Federer. Unfortunately for Djokovic, when Federer is playing at his best, he is still head and shoulders above the rest


And to the people who are claiming that this is unprecedented, yada yada...Federer lost to Safin in the '03 Aussie Open also...Safin was just like Djoko, had all the talent in the world, but Federer still owned him on the largest stages almost always

So basically all that we learned that if a lot of factors come together, it's possible for Federer to lose to top 3 players in the world that are playing their best...this is not anything new, it just hasn't happened in so long, we all forgot that it could.

Maybe Federer at his best is only better than the rest. Not head and shoulders above Nadal or Djokovic. Hopefully Tsonga is ready to join this second tier.

it's not like federer was some kind of scrub in 2002.

he went into the 2002 us open ranked 13.

http://www.atptennis.com/5/en/player...0&prevtrnnum=0

Yes and I think Federer's early career struggles against Andre and Hewitt are good examples of this.
Djokovic looks very much close to the "complete" package already BUT wouldn't you agree that Djokovic doesn't have nearly the astronomical upside that Federer had?

Dont understand what "enormous upside" means?? Explain...

If you mean the enormouse improvement Federer made between 20 & 21 then we'll have to wait and see as Djoko's still only 20.

Basically I just can't see Djokovic developing the kind of repetoire or arsenal that Federer possess.
In simple words unless he somehow transformed himself into another player I can't see him with the tools he has, the kind of game he has, ever become as good an all around player as Federer.
A Federer with a more complete, a better game than anyone in history.

Now if in the coming years, and it's not unlikely at all, that Federer loses a slight step, that could happen for all sorts of reasons, I could see Djokovic becoming or establishing himself even as the number 1 player in the world.
But to have a realistic chance of dominating like Federer has in the past few years I would think that you would have to be at least as good as he has been and I can't see Djokovic, as good as he is, probably already showing top 5 of all time tennis, becoming that.

while i think it's very likely djokovic will eventually become #1, it's very very unlikely he'll ever dominate the way federer has. i also believe nadal will be #1 [which will happen this year] before djokovic. this should be a very interesting year, federer has a lot to lose and nadal/djokovic have an awful lot to gain. it's going to be fun.

Just came back from the future (December 2008)

Federer goes out in the semis at both AUS Open and Rolland Garros, wins Wimbledon, loses in the final at US Open. Maintains his #1 ranking.

Djokovic wins AUS Open, goes out in the 4th round at Rolland Garros, loses in the final at Wimbledon, and wins the US Open. He finishes the year at #2.

Nadal loses in the semis at AUS, wins Rolland Garros, loses in the quarters at Wimbledon and US Open. He finishes the year #3.

There, just stop fighting, and enjoy the Serbian Domination down under. Thank you.

looool @ how arrogant Djokovic comes across, I'm going to laugh so hard if he loses in the final

tanky you are out of your mind. djokovic played an excellent match but your statement is premature.

i can't see djokovic getting much better

wanna die a quick death? drink a beer everytime you hear a "come on!" in this match.

Nadal and Federer are both arrogant as well. I think in order to achieve that success, you have to be a little bit arrogant.

I don't think you'd be able to complete a beer before the next "come on" is heard. Ivanovic clenches her first so tightly whenever she wins a point, it makes me scared for her circulation.

lol bud collins FTW

everyone has comeonitis

Just chimed in to say I'm sad that it's the end of watching Sharapova's boobies bounce around today




sad... but that's what I noticed over and over tonight




Very nice

Sharapova sounds a lot like Agassi during this speech.

lol, like 3 posts about this match, did anyone watch it?

God those two women announcers are terrible. They need Dick Enberg and Bud Collins to do the whole thing. Collins was awesome the whole tourney.