I'm kind of late wrapping up the men's final at the Open here, but it went pretty much how 99.9 percent of the population thought: Another Roger Federer triumph.
A funny thing about my experience with the final: I left to go to the gym when Djokovic had those three set points in the first set. I was just going there to ride the exercise bike and I figured I'd be able to watch a lot of the match there. So I get there about midway through the second set and as I was looking at the scoreline, I kept reading it like Novak had won the first set. It wasn't until the second-set tiebreak that I realized Federer had won the first! Duh! Always look at the score carefully and don't assume anything, particularly when Federer's involved!
About that point: I can't recall seeing Federer facing the tests he did from the third round on, basically. Dropping those sets to John Isner and Feliciano Lopez, then being in REAL tight spots against Andy Roddick, Nikolay Davydenko and Djokovic. You hope guys take it to heart they pushed the guy and figure maybe they're closing the gap. But unfortunately, and I hate to be the bubble burster, but guys, you're still miles away from him. R-Fed just wiped out any precarious situation he was in and then rolled--against some of the best hard courters in the game today.
Just a few months ago, I remember it coming up about what would happen if the guy actually got taken out of his comfort zone at a Slam and the match got tight. Would he have the wherewithal to come through after not being tested for a few years? I think it's safe to say he answered that at Wimbledon in the finals and only confirmed it in New York.