I think we so underestimate the quality of this because Federer doesn't dramatise his shots by grunting and Murray, too, is fairly quiet. Federer's footwork here is unbelievably fast, his game extraordinarily fluid and his decision making crisp as anything. He makes it look as though he intended the point to end that way all along.
Hi! I have been following your comments on a few videos now. You're quite insightful generally. I'm curious, what do you think of Roger's 2019 Wimbledon loss?
@@adnanshahriar4435honestly pathetic. Djokovic couldnt break serve to save his life and federer still couldnt bring it out. Didnt want to hit the backhand on the first mp and poor approach on the second
Funny, after 2013 and the racquet change I thought he was jumping the shark and going to retire. It must've been a good confidence booster to win this match. Then he went on to beat Novak in Dubai right after and eventually make the Wimby final. Never really got his 90 forehand back, but he improved his return game and evolved to stay competitive.
I still remember this match, the turning point of his twilight career after his disappointing 2013. He beat Del Potro in WTF 2013 and that was a glimpse of what to come in 2014. But it is this QF match in AO against one of the big 4 that gave him belief and confidence (see his facial expression when he won). That was the moment I believe he is officially back. Now I am waiting for him to get the 18th slam.
+hililala321 I think people got the impression more with the Tsonga match how he dismantled him. Lets be realistic Murray was working his way back from surgery here not saying he would have won but considering Nadal thrashed him semi final he clearly was not back
+Josh Jones Nadal played nearly his best in that match and Federer used a horrible strategy. If Nadal had played like that in the final, he would've beaten Wawrinka.
Can’t remember when is the last time I saw the highlights match video this good quality from any channel! Seeing the ball very clearly in every shot, and w/great commentators. Absolute awesome video/works. Thank you for posting. I’m appreciated. For many reasons, I miss Federer.
well murray doesn't have very good mental. he only didn't get pissed off this match for once because he knew he was gonna lose. but him not complaining actually made him come back some. so he should try that more often you would think. but eh, Federer is way better anyway so who cares
@@user-mf5ue6rc5n weak player and 20 Grand Slams. Federer with just a bit better mental would have beaten Djokovic and Nadal in the most of their clashes because he has the best technique and natural talent.
@@robakooo96 Yep. If you aggregate the stats throughout Federer and Djokovic's meetings, Federer leads in points and sets won... it quite literally comes down to mental strength in the decisive moments.
Blocked him? He played semi in AO, final at Wimbledon and got to the final of WTF even tho he didn't play. Was a great season for him. Maybe you talk about 2013.
Charlie Tong That makes no sense. Why would them being a Fedtard make them hate Murray? Fedtards love Del Potro, so why would Murray be any different. I'll tell you why we don't like Murray. His presence on court is annoying. He's always complaining about everything. Federer can be grumpy, but Murray is way way worse. When off the court Murray is a great guy, but on court I just can't get myself to like him. Then there's the fact that he's British. Tennis is a very British sports and that led to him being pushed alongside the three greats (Federer, Nadal and Djokovic.) Murray is not nearly as good as these guys. These three are the best in history, while Murray wouldn't even make the top 20. yet they're still trying to get him out there as one of the "big four."
Hey, Fed fan here too. Because whenever Murray reaches his personal milestone, out come excuses and degradation from a certain group within the fan base. For example, some complain that he only beat Fed in Olympics because Fed was more tired, even though Murray spent more time on court because he also had to play doubles. Or how he only got to Number 1 because everyone else was injured, even though Fed won RG because he didn't have to beat Nadal who was also injured. Maybe asking you to like him is impossible, but does it hurt to give the guy some respect? If you thought I was only generalizing that only Fed fans insult Murray because other groups also mock him, then I apologize for that and edited my previous comment. First of all, you seem to have a misconception. The Big 4 term was coined by the American press in 2008, when Djokovic still only had 1 slam at the time, refuting your implication that the British press is responsible for the "hype" Murray gets. The term refers to their overall consistency, not their total slam count. Within their era, they've been the most consistently dominant players in terms of ranking and reaching deep into most tournaments. No one ever said Murray was one of the goats; all people have said is that he's the fourth most consistent and best player in this playing period. And on a site note, Murray would actually be in the top 20, not outside. Besides slam total, less than 20 players in the game have ended the year number 1, and his overall masters titles and win percentage put him around Agassi's and Sampras's range.
Charlie Tong I do agree on the note that Murray's 2012 olympics win over Roger wasn't because Roger was tired. Roger didn't have his best match that day, but it was mainly due to Murray playing out of his skin. However, Fed winning Roland Garros and Murray being number one in the world are completely different issues. The Fedal rivalry is explicably one sided, which is the sole reason why it took Roger so long to get a RG title. (Fed has always been a good clay courter, contrary to popular belief.) Murray's number one ranking, was in fact due to a lack of proper challenge. Federer and Nadal were both out, and Nole has been just a shell of what he used to be since RG 2016. It's no coincidence that Murray only became number one in the world *after* Djokovic deflated. Being number one in the world is still an amazing achievement, but his ranking being a result of the field weakening is no myth. Are you sure about the term big four first being publicly used by American press in 2008? A year or two ago I did some research on how this term came to be, and then I learnt about the British press' influence. Then again, I don't have any valid sources on that anymore and can't seem to find any, so I'll assume you're right. My bad then. It makes a lot of sense though. Murray first started challenging the big guys during the American hardcourt swing in 2008, hence the American press catching on. That invalidates my last point, but still leaves the original point standing. *We don't dislike Murray, because we're Fed fans, or fans of any other player for that matter. We dislike Murray, because we dislike Murray.*
Certainly, Fed is a really good court player despite the relative lack of titles. I guess what I was trying to say was both players have certainly been aided by external circumstances, with you implying Murray more so than Fed. I can see that: Fed only had to worry about Nadal while Murray, who even though was still ranked higher than Fedal in 2016, suddenly didn't need to worry about Fedal playing or a consistently in form Novak dominating. As to whether how much things would have changed, we will never know because it's all in the past. And it doesn't matter at this point, because you and I aren't even arguing about that matter at all. Again, if one of my statements wasn't clear, I agree. Nothing wrong with disliking him; just hope that the dislike doesn't go too far to the point of devaluing his achievements.
It's very interesting to me that, after seeing a coupple of videos of andy against guys like roger and novak that in the first point of the match, andy always hits the ball amazing and wins with an amazing winner, after very good shots. Why doesn't he play like that all the match?
From late 2012-2013 Andy plays like this. Every point was contested. Its just not sustainable for more than 1 year. He lack the killer shot to shorten the point.
Am I the only one who thinks Andy Murray hasn't got depth in his forehand. There's just no fluidity. He just can't hit sharp shots down the line. His control and technique is amazing though.
Murray did extremely well considering his physique, as excellent as it was in general, was not ideal for tennis, and he's has done great in spite of that. Nothing at all to regret.
Wow its already 5 years Federer was then 32 and Murray 26 hard the believe that it is 5 years of this match both were relative young back and physically strong then and now both are getting older and physically declining althougt Federer at age 37 is not so bad for his age but Murray at age 31 is almost done.
+Bigcrusher55 played at that speed and I honestly dont see a double bounce..the umpire would have probably seen it if it was, it was right in front of the chair..
Always thought this was a brave effort from Federer. He had the impossible draw - in-form Murray in the QF, in-form Nadal in the SF, then Wawrinka in the final. There's almost 0% chance he can win the AO, but he still fought with everything he had. Great win against Andy, then got shut down by Nadal. Roger still shows a lot of heart in these big matches even as he isn't a clear-cut favorite anymore as he gets older. Technically this was an upset - 6th seed beating the 4rth. Great match and victory.
Murray's record against Fed and the rest of the big 3 toward the back half of his career was so weird. Didn't he lose like his last 9 matches against Federer despite being 6 years younger? *checks* hrm last 5 anyways, but bad for someone who was once 6-2 against Fed. Then he went 5-12
This video proves Murray just had irregular timing in 2014, he brought out the best he had to save the third set. Great match, at the end how much Rod Laver enjoys watching high quality tennis.
Federer et djoko c'est Zidane et Messi. Messi est peut être plus efficace ,mais ce que fait Zidane est plus inattendu, on sent le cerveau ,la réflexion à la vitesse du son chez Zidane ,puis les inventions ,en plus des gestes d'une rare pureté ,la diversité des dribles chez Zidane , c'est exactement pareil chez fédèrer. J'aime et je supporte djoko à fond ,mais c'est Rogers qui m'a ramené au tennis quand ,je l'ai vu à la télé un soir de 2006 ,et je dis que techniquement , variété des coups, Rogers est meilleur . Même si djoko est plus efficace .
Djoko est au tennis ce que Nietchz est à la littérature, ce que Mozart est à la musique. C est cadencé c est précis c est mélodieux c est parfait une symphonie à lui tout seul. Profitez parce que ça n arrivera plus dans ce siècle de voir quelqu'un d aussi complet aussi fort si longtemps.... Le sens du détail de Djoko même dans une chute... Parti pour poser sa main droite au sol, il se reprend et préfère une rotation avec l'aide de sa main gauche pour ne prendre aucun risque.
i did hear a lot of people hate him because of his attitude. But at the same time....they say he's pretty much the ugliest guy in the top 10. lol.... can't disagree with them there...
Djokovic's can be pretty clunky-looking at times, Gasquet's just looks completely wrong, Tomic's is weird (but there is a certain appeal to it), and Gulbis's is utter shit. Personally, I kind of like Isner's. It almost reminds me of James Blake's (when he's moving forward, that is).
Vesciroth God, I've forgotten how much I miss Blake. Great player, just lacking in some areas. But yeah, Gasquet's is weird because he insists on hitting with a flat Eastern grip. It looks ridiculous, and it's unpredictable to boot.
Unfortunately I don't have time to watch every match highlights... Anyone want to post the time of their favorite shot/some of the best rallies? a highlight of the highlights, if you will :). Thanks!
Bryant Luu It was clearly a double bounce, that's why Murray was looking back at the umpire. Can't believe the umpire didn't pick that up. You can see it bounce a second time before Federer picks it up
DaProHobbit Really? I keep watching the slow motion replay and I can't see the 2nd bounce at all, Looks like he just picks it up with the edge of his racket.
It's very close, but you can see the ball hit the ground just before, maybe for just one frame. Besides, you can't really pick it up like that with just a mishit flick, it'd need to be travelling upwards before bouncing off the racket to be a successful lob.
