Novak Djokovic Beats Roger Federer to Win 2012 ATP World Tour Finals Title
Before Monday's ATP World Tour Finals Championship between Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic, the announcers couldn't even guess who they thought might, possibly, sort of have a chance to win. It turned to be a sign for things to come.
The World No. 1 and No. 2 battled through an epic, back-and-forth match, but in the end, it was Djoker who prevailed with the 7-6 (6), 7-5 victory in impressive fashion.
The first set probably could have served as the entire match itself.
Federer got an early break on Djokovic and looked primed to roll to a victory, but the World No. 1 evened things up just a few games later with a break of his own. As the amazing set, which was filled with spectacular, unbelievable and unforgettable shots and points, rolled on, each player earned another break and we headed for the tiebreak.
In the tiebreak, it was simply more stunning, jaw-breaking, breakneck action. The Swiss saved the set by winning one of the most amazing points you'll see, but Djokovic came storming right back and eventually got two points in a row to grab the early advantage.
It appeared as though Federer was going to tie things up in the second set. He had a break advantage and a double set point, but Djokovic once again proved why he was the No. 1 in the world.
Who will have a better 2013?
The Serb refused to back down and secured two straight points to save the set and eventually get the break he needed. He then won his serve and came right back and got another break to win the match and his sixth individual title of the year.
Oh yeah, and the championship-winning point ended on a lacerating, unbelievable backhand, which appropriately put an end to what turned out to be the magical final we all expected. It took over two hours to complete just two sets.
It's probably pretty safe to say that after this epic way to end the year, most tennis fans will be hoping for more Djokovic-Federer in 2013.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?