There's a lot of truth in what you write. I agree with the fact that this AO was one of the most boring grand slams I have ever watched, and I would say that had Federer defeated RN.
As for the other players not stepping up against AM, ND, an RN, I think it's fundamentally due to the paradigm shift that's occurred in tennis. I had this discussion with RickyRoger last year. I cannot believe and would not have believed it 20 years ago if someone had told me that the first serve isn't as important as it used to be and that first strike tennis is almost at a disadvantage now.
ND, AM, and RN play the %s better than anyone else in the history of the game. They can win without a first serve and when they do get in a first serve, it's a bonus. Compare this to players such as Sampras, Becker, Federer, etc. If they're having an off night getting first serves in, they're vulnerable. There's a chance of an upset if that's the case. Federer has avoided those early upsets because, unlike first strike players of the past, he plays tremendous defense and can neutralize big games. AM, ND, and RN play tremendous defense, neutralize big games (especially AM and ND) wear you down, and force you to hit big and serve big throughout a match. You can defeat them if you do so THROUGHOUT a match, but it's very, very difficult to do so with today's balls and courts.. Big hitters know this and when they falter just a bit, they know that they've lost a lot of momentum and they never get it back. They know what an uphill grind it will be against those guys. This is why you see AM, ND, and RN at the ends of tournaments every time and it's not going to change anytime soon.
從來沒人比ND、AM和RN會打安全球，沒一發他們也可以贏球，有一發就當賺到。比起其他球員如Sampras, Becker, Federer，如果他們突然某場比賽找不到一發就麻煩了，還有可能因此輸球。Federer能避免這些爆冷是因為與其他過往大砲不同，他的防守極佳，能抵銷掉對手的攻擊。AM、ND和RN球風極度防守，不僅把對手攻擊抵銷（特別是AM與ND），還讓你在底線累個半死，逼你整場比賽催出最快的一發、打出最誇張的致勝球。你能整場比賽都這樣打當然能打敗他們，但因為時下的場地速度與用球，能做到也是非常困難的事。攻擊型球員當然也知道如此，所以只要他們一抖就知道自己要輸掉氣勢而且很難再扳平，跟這些球員打就像在爬坡。這就是為什麼AM、ND與RN每次都能打到最後，而且這現象短期內也不會改變。