Djokovic wins the Aussie open, Rafa runnerup.

Longest game in grand slam history, 5 hours 53 minutes of the most grueling physical battles I ever saw. Incredible match, Rafa looked like he was coming back only to lose a break in the 5th set. Both players were very gracious in their short speeches. They are both great ambassadors to the game.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Longest game in grand slam history, 5 hours 53 minutes of the most grueling physical battles I ever saw. Incredible match, Rafa looked like he was coming back only to lose a break in the 5th set. Both players were very gracious in their short speeches. They are both great ambassadors to the game.

I agree, it was sad that one of them had to lose. I have respect for both of these men

Originally posted by sonhouse
Longest game in grand slam history, 5 hours 53 minutes of the most grueling physical battles I ever saw. Incredible match, Rafa looked like he was coming back only to lose a break in the 5th set. Both players were very gracious in their short speeches. They are both great ambassadors to the game.

Damn, I was hoping for Rafa to finally win one again. He's lost to Djokovic now about 7-8 times in a row.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Longest game in grand slam history, 5 hours 53 minutes of the most grueling physical battles I ever saw. Incredible match, Rafa looked like he was coming back only to lose a break in the 5th set. Both players were very gracious in their short speeches. They are both great ambassadors to the game.

Not even close to the longest match in Grand Slam history. That was Isner-Mahut, Wimbledon, the year before last, and let's hope that we'll never see such a spectacle of boring attrition again. Its final set was longer than Rafa and Djoko's entire match, and frankly, I ran out of steam before Mahut did.
This one was, however, the longest Grand Slam final ever. (Well, in the modern game, at least. And before that doesn't count, because they did things very differently then.) It's also the longest match ever at the Aussie Open.
It was also a much, much better match. Very high-quality play. I will still never really be a fan of either player, but that doesn't mean I can't recognise a good performance when I see it.

Richard

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
Not even close to the longest match in Grand Slam history. That was Isner-Mahut, Wimbledon, the year before last, and let's hope that we'll never see such a spectacle of boring attrition again. Its final set was longer than Rafa and Djoko's entire match, and frankly, I ran out of steam before Mahut did.
This one was, however, the longest Grand Slam [i] ...[text shortened]... yer, but that doesn't mean I can't recognise a good performance when I see it.

Richard

Are you a Roger Federer fan?

Originally posted by tomtom232
Are you a Roger Federer fan?

Very much so, yes. I like his style both on and off the court.

Richard

Originally posted by sonhouse
Longest game in grand slam history, 5 hours 53 minutes of the most grueling physical battles I ever saw. Incredible match, Rafa looked like he was coming back only to lose a break in the 5th set. Both players were very gracious in their short speeches. They are both great ambassadors to the game.

I remember when McEnroe was on court, and people excused his behaviour on the basis that tennis made you exhausted, and that you needed this 'edge' to win.

Though I am not a tennis fan, I am glad that Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and, dare I say it, Murray, have shown that the 'Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser' is the utter b@llocks I always thought it was.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
I remember when McEnroe was on court, and people excused his behaviour on the basis that tennis made you exhausted, and that you needed this 'edge' to win.

Though I am not a tennis fan, I am glad that Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and, dare I say it, Murray, have shown that the 'Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser' is the utter b@llocks I always thought it was.

It isn't utter bollocks it just depends on the person.

Originally posted by tomtom232
It isn't utter bollocks it just depends on the person.

Err......if it depends on the person, then the phrase is utter bollocks, as it suggests that you have to behave in an unsportsmanlike manner to be successful. The phrase isn't "Some people have to behave badly to be successful" (which I agree with you is probably true, more's the pity).

It is the idea that success and bad sportsmanship have to be linked that the current crop of top tennis players disprove. Federer is a good loser, so the phrase is by definition utter bollocks.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Though I am not a tennis fan, I am glad that Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and, dare I say it, Murray, have shown that the 'Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser' is the utter b@llocks I always thought it was.

Murray has grown up, hasn't he? I used to dislike his demeanor, but, even if he still does and probably always will have a touch of Dour Scot in him (and why not? We don't have to - indeed, shouldn't - all be the same), he is now quite capable of behaving well both during and after the game. Well done, that man.

Richard (with apologies for the horrible sentence construction...)