Greatest Match(es) of All Time

[Moxie]

On the Rafa fans thread, @The_Grand_Slam posted this: "Also, Wimbledon in very lenient in counting UFEs. People rarely cross the 50+ UFE mark. I begrudge Nadals win, but mostly hate this being called the greatest match of all time more than anything.There was choking and poor play from both players to call it that."

I thought perhaps it was time to revive the conversation in its own thread, since we debate the 2008 Wimbledon so much across lots of threads. TheGrandSlam mentions the notion of his criteria, so my questions are: what are your greatest matches of all time, and what criteria do you think they need to meet to rate making the list, such as: Does it have to be a final? Does it have to be best of 5? Does dramatic context matter, such as more at stake?

I'll put up some matches in a poll to get the conversation started, but I invite people to add matches they think qualify. You may select multiple matches.

 

[Moxie]

I get that picking one GOAT match is a bit of a media thing. And I also understand why the general pronouncement that it is the 2008 Wimbledon final is insult-to-injury for Federer fans. I will start by addressing that match, and @The_Grand_Slam here. Firstly, if we go back to when we watched that match live, and I'm sure most of us here did, it's hard not to say that it was a thrilling match, before we knew who would win, which we didn't until the last second. There was a lot of great tennis played, and high drama. To TGS's point of "too much choking and poor play," I have to disagree. You cite Roger's UFE count. He had 89W/52UFE, Nadal 60W/27UFE in that match. Compare the final prior: Roger 65W/34UFE, Rafa 50W/24UFE. That's a lot more winners from Roger in the 2008. You say that people rarely cross the 50+ mark in UFEs, but in the Rome 2006 final, Roger had 82 UFEs to Rafa's 56, and that's considered to be a very fine final. In the Safin SF at the AO, Roger had 48 UFEs, to Safin's 55. Also considered a great match, so I don't think the UFE count means a lot here. I will agree with those that say the BP conversion was killer for Roger in the 2008. That still doesn't mean he played poorly...Nadal is top drawer at saving BPs.

I was long of the opinion that the Borg-McEnroe Wimby final was the one, but the first set went 1-6. For me, the 2008 jumped over it.

 

[britbox]

2008 Wimbledon for me. Not necessarily the greatest in quality, although I think there was plenty enough in it, but the drama and suspense was insane. I thought the AO 2017 final wasn't too far behind. Safin/Fed AO Semi was also a pretty damn good match. Borg/Mac is another up there for moi.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

In order to be called one of the greatest matches, the first and foremost important criteria is that both players should be playing well (i.e, to their full potential) for the most part of the match. Going by that criteria, 2008 Wimbledon is definitely not the greatest match as Fed did not play up to his potential for the first 2 sets.

But, If drama, suspense and what is at stake are the only criteria (not as per me), I would agree that 2008 Wimby is the greatest match.

 

[Moxie]

One thing that I think makes it tough is if we're expecting both players to be full-on the whole match. That rarely happens. There tend to be changes in momentum. Look at the first set of Borg-McEnroe, and that has been long held up as the standard. I wonder if a point-to-point best match might not be a 3-setter, and a lesser one (non-final,) if the only criterion is both players keeping up the highest level they were capable of for the whole match. That wouldn't make it for me, as I think it does have to be a match with a lot at stake. I'd be interested if anyone has pegged a match that good, though.

 

[DarthFed]

It is mostly about stakes, drama, and memorable moments. I do think that It has to be a best of 5 grand slam match SF or later that reaches a 5th set. Short of that it would be hard to elevate a match too much. Look at this year USO QF Nadal-Thiem. IMO it was higher quality than Djokovic-Nadal but one was the real final and one was just a QF. Therefore the Wimbledon semi was the greater match.

I do think 2008 was the greatest match of all time. The quality is badly overstated mostly by Nadal fans. It was a blowout for nearly 2.5 sets and then Roger played adequate tennis (not ever superlative for a prolonged stretch IMO). I think when Nadal was in his prime on clay you got the sense that the only way he loses is if he has a bad day at the office. Roger on grass was not quite to that degree but still a similar story.

As for greatest quality match that is high on the list it is probably Fed-Safin 2005 AO. In fact, close your eyes and pretend it is Nadal or Djokovic in place of Safin, make it a final instead of SF, also add a couple rain delays...any doubt we'd say that match is greater than Wimbledon 08? That's why stakes and drama matter so much.

 

[El Dude]

I don't see an option for a certain fourth round 2009 Roland Garros match.

 

[Moxie]

I don't see an option for a certain fourth round 2009 Roland Garros match.

You can add it, if you can make a case for it. I'd put it on the short list for "greatest upsets of all time," but I'm not sure it rises to the level of GOAT matches.

 

[Moxie]

It is mostly about stakes, drama, and memorable moments. I do think that It has to be a best of 5 grand slam match SF or later that reaches a 5th set. Short of that it would be hard to elevate a match too much. Look at this year USO QF Nadal-Thiem. IMO it was higher quality than Djokovic-Nadal but one was the real final and one was just a QF. Therefore the Wimbledon semi was the greater match.

I do think 2008 was the greatest match of all time. The quality is badly overstated mostly by Nadal fans. It was a blowout for nearly 2.5 sets and then Roger played adequate tennis (not ever superlative for a prolonged stretch IMO). I think when Nadal was in his prime on clay you got the sense that the only way he loses is if he has a bad day at the office. Roger on grass was not quite to that degree but still a similar story.

As for greatest quality match that is high on the list it is probably Fed-Safin 2005 AO. In fact, close your eyes and pretend it is Nadal or Djokovic in place of Safin, make it a final instead of SF, also add a couple rain delays...any doubt we'd say that match is greater than Wimbledon 08? That's why stakes and drama matter so much.

I have to say I'm a bit shocked that you cop to the 2008 W final as the greatest. And that you grade on stakes, drama and memorable moments, given how much you complain about that match. As to the AO SF with Safin, I don't think you have to replace him. In fact, you'd reduce it to replace him, IMO. Given that Safin was such a meathead, one of the thrills and surprises of that match was that he held his head together. One of the reasons that sportswriters give for downgrading it is that it wasn't a final, though it probably was the de facto final. But one thing that's wrong with your switching it for the Wimbledon '08 is that the stakes weren't nearly the same. Everyone knew that that Wimbledon final was all-chips on the table, even before the tournament started. Even Borg-McEnroe didn't have the same drama for who wins the world.

 

[DarthFed]

I have to say I'm a bit shocked that you cop to the 2008 W final as the greatest. And that you grade on stakes, drama and memorable moments, given how much you complain about that match. As to the AO SF with Safin, I don't think you have to replace him. In fact, you'd reduce it to replace him, IMO. Given that Safin was such a meathead, one of the thrills and surprises of that match was that he held his head together. One of the reasons that sportswriters give for downgrading it is that it wasn't a final, though it probably was the de facto final. But one thing that's wrong with your switching it for the Wimbledon '08 is that the stakes weren't nearly the same. Everyone knew that that Wimbledon final was all-chips on the table, even before the tournament started. Even Borg-McEnroe didn't have the same drama for who wins the world.

I've mentioned it many times that I think it's the greatest match I've seen. Doesn't mean I think Roger was at a decent level nor did he have to be for it to be great. But yes it is the stakes and drama that push it above others that were higher quality such as AO 05 or even Wimbledon 2014.

My point about AO 2005 is that it'd be considered a greater match if you had an ATG in place of Safin. There is no question that that is part of the criteria for greatest match. The stakes at AO 05 simply weren't as high because Roger was clearly the dominant player before and after that match. Everyone knew it wasn't going to change much for him or even Safin for that matter.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

One thing that I think makes it tough is if we're expecting both players to be full-on the whole match. That rarely happens. There tend to be changes in momentum. Look at the first set of Borg-McEnroe, and that has been long held up as the standard. I wonder if a point-to-point best match might not be a 3-setter, and a lesser one (non-final,) if the only criterion is both players keeping up the highest level they were capable of for the whole match. That wouldn't make it for me, as I think it does have to be a match with a lot at stake. I'd be interested if anyone has pegged a match that good, though.

If both players were playing at a very great level, then may be a point would not end at all. That is not what I was asking. Obviously one player should be playing better than the other player (in that point, in that game or in that set) for him to win. The real question is whether the other player is playing at least a B game compared to that player's usual standards. If not, than it cannot be a contender for the greatest match.

I agree with DF, in order to be significant it should perhaps be a second week GS match that goes to five sets.

 

[Moxie]

I've mentioned it many times that I think it's the greatest match I've seen. Doesn't mean I think Roger was at a decent level nor did he have to be for it to be great. But yes it is the stakes and drama that push it above others that were higher quality such as AO 05 or even Wimbledon 2014.

My point about AO 2005 is that it'd be considered a greater match if you had an ATG in place of Safin. There is no question that that is part of the criteria for greatest match. The stakes at AO 05 simply weren't as high because Roger was clearly the dominant player before and after that match. Everyone knew it wasn't going to change much for him or even Safin for that matter.

Perhaps my memory is going, but I thought you were resisting the notion that it was the greatest match for a long time. I sort of get your point about changing out Safin, but that's perhaps because we live in an era of 3 ATGs. But Safin was a pretty great player, and if that match had been a final, I think it would have made everyone's short list. It was 2005, not 2012-14, and it was a helluva match.

 

[Moxie]

If both players were playing at a very great level, then may be a point would not end at all. That is not what I was asking. Obviously one player should be playing better than the other player (in that point, in that game or in that set) for him to win. The real question is whether the other player is playing at least a B game compared to that player's usual standards. If not, than it cannot be a contender for the greatest match.

I agree with DF, in order to be significant it should perhaps be a second week GS match that goes to five sets.

I think we agree that both players have to be playing at a decent level to their best. Seems like everyone, so far, thinks Bo5, and at a GS. I don't even think just 2nd week. Even SFs fall a bit short, it seems.

 

[The_Grand_Slam]

Good thread,
Currently browsing on my phone,I'll write my response as soon as I get near my desktop

 

[Ricardo]

You sexists, of all the matches you can’t have a woman’s match making the list?

 

[britbox]

You sexists, of all the matches you can’t have a woman’s match making the list?

We need an asterix... *apart from BJK v Bobby Riggs.

 

[isabelle]

Masters 2005 final ? a great match from both part

 

[Nadalfan2013]

The greatest match of all time is by far the 2008 WIMBLEDON FINAL NADAL DEF. FEDERER it was absolutely amazing!!!

 

[Moxie]

You sexists, of all the matches you can’t have a woman’s match making the list?

This is the ATP forum. I would do a different one for the WTA forum.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

The great thing about matches involving Nadal is that besides their stunning level of play, they are also very eye candy due to his unlimited physical beauty. It's like 2 birds with 1 stone!