Why the 2008 Wimbledon final will always be unmatched 

It was insane. 2 of the best shots ever. This one and the one before by Nadal.

It took balls of steel to rip it like that with 5 consecutive Wimbledons on the line.

Forget about between the legs stuff. That bh passing shot down the line, on the run, down match point, is the single greatest shot of all time. And probably the best back to back shots of all time. And I would say a tie with '80 Wimbledon final 4th set tiebreak for best tiebreak of all time.

@@520LUNNYhe already had 5, was trying to make it 6

most clutch shot ever

What are you talking about? There's a lot of violence against the ball ;-)

@Poluxs123 go watch highlights. he did a good job,you try doing a RU-vid video, then you can be a critic.

I agree

15 minutes of rambling and the guy manages to not show a single full ball exchange of the match. It‘s also hard to understand in general because he mumbles.

@@Aemmeroli1997 he can’t show it he would get copyrighted

Absolutely! Even 2019 was as good as this one.

Actually I watched both and both pretty high level matches But wimby 08' is more about the anticipation of Fedal Rivalry & there contrasting playing styles which was evident in the match itself AO 12' was more physical & mentally taxing match as both Novak & Nadal had go over their body limits It's was highly quality tennis but more about Battle of stamina as both Novak & Rafa are baseliners & defence oriented players similar in style in contrast to Roger who's a Aggressive player finishing points quickly The most underrated GS final imo is AO 09' between Roger & Rafa Those first 4 sets were tennis of highest quality probably even better than both 2008 Wimby & 2012 AO But people forget this match bcoz 5th set was completely dominated by Rafa & also bcz of Roger crying in award ceremony If the 5th set was close as 8-6 it would have been the greatest Match of all time for sure😊

​@@sarveshpawar4258How is Rafa defence orientated?

Agree that was part of the thrill . Two kings of different kingdoms until one comes knocking on the other door for invasion.

Why do you think that was the end of Federer's prime? Sure if you just care about grand slams... he didn't win too many after 2008... he was winning more earlier in his career, but his win % and all of his stats got better up until the mid 2010s.

The two GOATS you said ? hahahaahahaahahahaahahahahahah

2008 - federer was only...27 years old... Do you see how grandpa Novak is playing at 36, 37 y.o?

@@letrantrung1 Natural prime is 23-28 for virtually everyone, give or take a few years at most, in all pro sport. The greats stay great longer because they find ways to win and keep form -- Federer was elite until 39, outplaying Rafa and Nole back to back even at 38, while 5-6 yrs older -- but each in their prime was better than after. The illusion they were still as good when older was because the talent dropped off dramatically after the Rafa/Nole/Andy/Stan gen. The Thiem/Dimitrov/Raonic gen gave everyone a career extension, and though the Meddy/Tsitsi/Zverev/Kyrgios gen was somewhat better they still created a "next gen" carve out to prop them up. Allowed Novak to collect half or more of his slams after age 31+, playing deep in many tourneys against the likes of Karatsev, Goffin, Fucsovics, Berrettini, Kyrgios, Musetti, etc, sometimes not even facing top 10 players, on top of the overall weakness of the field.

​@@coulie27Djokovic had it so I easy after 2018

rubbish, 2 points the other way and its the same match, different result

Fact, though. It was a massive changing of the guard -- Federer was the longest-reigning #1 ever, and Nadal the longest-reigning #2 ever. Feder had won FIVE straight Wimbledons, including the last two against Nadal. Nadal winning this match and FINALLY becoming #1 was the Hollywood ending to this chapter of tennis.

@@anewt72690 it wasn't a changing of the guard since Roger went on to win 3 more Wimbledons. Nadal only won one more. On hard courts, Roger was also way better than Nadal, and remained so until 2020

​@@BOZ_11 Way better is a massive exaggeration, considering Nadal won more slams on hard courts than Fed did after this, including beating Fed at the Australian Open less than a year later...

@@diegoochoa3550 11 Vs 6 hardcourt majors. Nearly double. Nearly double = way better. Nadal would have to have his whole career again to match Fed here. Cry more

You think Federer was at a disadvantage because he was 27 and not 22 like Nadal? That's a bit of a stretch.

This guy is clearly biased saying in the description they're the two best players of all time. Novak has the most GSs and that's what everyone used to agreed on for who is the GOAT.

Think about it like this: Fed was there before Nadal, hence, the immovable object. Nadal came later on scene, therefore, the unstoppable force.

That Wimbledon 2008 final showed Federer's fighting ability coming from 2 sets down. He almost nearly won too. I know he has lost many close matches against his 2 biggest rivals. I don't think he's weak, it's just that Nadal and Djokovic was stronger and perhaps more fearless during the tight moments and it has been showed time and time again. It should also be noted that those 2 were also for the most part playing against the player most regarded as the GOAT (at that time), so extra motivation to beat him.

@@kweizi5712 fed was winning because he was in goldilocks era when sampras/agassi were leaving and he got a easy run with some confidence 2003-2009 with his sqaush game..Once djoki and nadal got going fed faded away with his sqaush game

So no Novak... interesting

But one GOAT reigns supreme, and his name is Novak Djoković

@@user-vr1nd3ep3s Fedal fans will be coping for the rest of their lives. Djokovic has the record in nearly every single category that matters.

imo wimby 2014 is the best then wimby 2008, 3rd aussie open final 2017

Agreed. I always think of the 2012 AO as a contender to this match. Was a brutal one.

No it’s either 2008 Wimbledon or the Borg McEnroe 1980

@@yussepig6629 2014 wimby final?

sweet sweet copium

Djokovic’s tennis is so dull in comparison to these two

thank you, that final is waaay under rated the stats winners-ue were insane.

He won 8 times!

teah fed was flat first 2 set but after that he played unbelievable tennis. Last 3 sets were amazing tennis.

closer than Alcaraz - Djokovic at the ATP Finals for sure!

You are wrong. That was his prime because that was the start of his rise to number 1. He beat Federer again in a GS final at the AO in 2009 and sweeping virtually all the tournaments during the clay court seasons.

"Clay specialist" - By '08 he'd appeared in 3 consecutive Wimbledon finals, donkey

You can’t be #1 ranking by playing well on only 1 surface. He was far beyond a clay specialist by this point.

@@kweizi5712 you can't be in the prime and on the rise in the same time. Nadal prime was 2010-2013

@@dzonibravo7867 Duh! He beat Federer at FO2008, W2008 then and followed up with another win at AO2009. That is 3 grand slams in a space of less than a year. If you don't count that as part of his prime then there is something wrong with your logic!

you're salty that the greatest final of all time is Fedal, sans The Serb

@@BOZ_11 1 of 13 break points converted is not remotely high quality. That's for sure. And Nadal was not remotely the grass court player Djokovic was, that's also for sure. It's also sure that Nadal beating Federer at a two to 1 match ratio back then was not really much of a rivalry.

@@huzcer "not much of a rivalry". No other two players ever played three consecutive Wimbledon finals against each other; greatest rivalry of all time. Greatest final of all time. Adios

@@BOZ_11 being beaten at a 2 to 1 ratio is a beating not a rivalry and absolute hilarity to call it the greatest of all time

@@huzcer it's the greatest because Djoko wasn't there. Rafa/Djoko finals are just endless baseline rallies. Not exactly boring but nothing like the Fedal match up.

Nadal vs federer better