PDA

View Full Version : Nadal is the second best grass court player in the world.


Attila the tennis Bum
07-10-2007, 05:29 AM
And soon to be the first.:p

GOD_BLESS_RAFA
07-10-2007, 05:44 AM
I'd say he still needs to improve a bit (serve for instance)...and try to win in 3 sets ;)

ATXtennisaddict
07-10-2007, 05:51 AM
atilla, we get it. Nadal will be #1 and win all the slams.

Don't need to make so many threads about it.

Attila the tennis Bum
07-10-2007, 06:39 AM
atilla, we get it. Nadal will be #1 and win all the slams.

Don't need to make so many threads about it.

Ok as long as you understand that.;)

chaz_233
07-10-2007, 07:14 AM
there's no such thing as second best.

gshaffer23
07-10-2007, 07:16 AM
there's no such thing as second best.

second is just first loser.... just ask Ricky Bobby

clymb420
07-10-2007, 07:33 AM
It's not 100% certain that Rafa would have gotten past Djokovic if his body would've held up.

"atilla, we get it. Nadal will be #1 and win all the slams."

"Don't need to make so many threads about it. "

It's pretty funny on this board sometimes. I often feel like I waste way too much time posting on this board, and this is only my 68th post since I joined in Nov'05. Some of these folks need to go outside and get a life.

akv89
07-10-2007, 07:36 AM
Nadal's biggest problem on grass court seems to be his consistency. When he is on form, he can take on any player in the ATP tour. However, he has also proven during this grass court season that there are many players ranked lower than him that have a chance of defeating him if he is not at his best.

ACE of Hearts
07-10-2007, 07:45 AM
Of course, should we call it grass after sunday?Maybe red grass?

Attila the tennis Bum
07-10-2007, 08:10 AM
Nadal's biggest problem on grass court seems to be his consistency. When he is on form, he can take on any player in the ATP tour. However, he has also proven during this grass court season that there are many players ranked lower than him that have a chance of defeating him if he is not at his best.

He is pretty consistent. He has played in two finals in three attempts. Thats better than Roddick.

And he almost beat the "greatest" grass court player of all time.

Eviscerator
07-10-2007, 08:15 AM
atilla, we get it. Nadal will be #1 and win all the slams.

Don't need to make so many threads about it.

Trolls http://images.corvetteforum.com/images/smilies/troll.gif cannot help themselves.

Sadly to many of us feed them by responding to their threads/posts to keep them coming back for more.

Attila the tennis Bum
07-10-2007, 09:24 AM
Trolls http://images.corvetteforum.com/images/smilies/troll.gif cannot help themselves.

Sadly to many of us feed them by responding to their threads/posts to keep them coming back for more.

maybe if you gave nadal just an ounce of respect instead of pure hatred you would not see these polls as trollish behavior while on the other hand completely endorsing "butt picking" troll posts.

downthewall
07-10-2007, 09:28 AM
Federer will lose to Nadal in upcoming years on grass.... If Fed is so strong on grass than why was it so difficult for him to win? It was a close match but in my opinion Fed didnt show that he was that much better on grass.

Attila the tennis Bum
07-10-2007, 09:30 AM
there's no such thing as second best.

Then why does everyone say "Federer is the second best clay courter in the world"?

crazylevity
07-10-2007, 09:36 AM
Well Federer has made the finals of practically all the other clay tournaments, losing only to Nadal; he has won clay MS titles, with a win over Nadal at Hamburg, something the entire tour couldn't do for 81 matches.

Do not be mistaken; I think Nadal CAN play on grass and has made intelligent adjustments while still maximizing his strengths. However, the fact that he still gets pushed to 5 sets by journeymen, and the fact that he did not win his Wimby warmup without Fed around does not suggest that he is the second best grasscourter around. He MAY be; I'm just saying that not all the evidence suggests so.

araghava
07-10-2007, 09:37 AM
I think it's more appropriate to say Nadal is the 2nd best player on all surfaces other than clay. Right now tennis surfaces have separated into clay and hardcourt. Wimbledon grass is playing like a medium pace hard court. Any good hardcourt player can easily transition to grass now.

So basically we have Fed as the best hardcourt player and 2nd best clay while Nadal is the best claycourt player and 2nd best harcoourt.

p.s. this raises another interesting point. if 3 of the grandslams were played on clay, we might have nadal with close to 10 grand slams and fed with 3 or 4.

Attila the tennis Bum
07-10-2007, 09:39 AM
I think it's more appropriate to say Nadal is the 2nd best player on all surfaces other than clay. Right now tennis surfaces have separated into clay and hardcourt. Wimbledon grass is playing like a medium pace hard court. Any good hardcourt player can easily transition to grass now.

So basically we have Fed as the best hardcourt player and 2nd best clay while Nadal is the best claycourt player and 2nd best harcoourt.

well lets see what happens at the open this summer...nadal is very hungry.

He has beaten fed twice on hard courts. If he somehow makes it to the final I really believe that Nadal will beat Fed.

Nadal will beat Fed on almost any surface.....even grass.

ACE of Hearts
07-10-2007, 09:43 AM
Nadal wont do much at the U.S Open because the surface hasnt changed.Someone said that wimbledon is playing medium pace?Thats a laugh, this is playing like clay,

TennezSport
07-10-2007, 10:46 AM
I think that Nadal has greatly improved on grass as apposed to last year (the court has helped a little). He has adjusted to the bounce, volleying better and is standing a little closer to the baseline, along with being more aggressive. In doing so, he also made more errors that he usually does, but he can improve that.

Having said that, he was pushed to the edge by Soderling and if Soderling had not blinked, we would not be having this conversation now. Then Rafa was manhandled by Youzsny until Youzsny hurt his back, if he had not had the injury we would not be having this conversation now. With Berdych, I think Rafa played a very smart game by being overly agressive and keeping Berdych off balance. Finally with Djokovic even though he was tired and injured he still took the first set from Rafa easily. He then ran out of gas and also restrained the leg and aggravated the foot injury (Rafa got lucky).

Now as I said before, Rafa has made some major headway to becoming a better grass court player, but there are still other players out there that will give him trouble that Fed manhandles.

TennezSport :cool:

Eviscerator
07-10-2007, 10:55 AM
maybe if you gave nadal just an ounce of respect instead of pure hatred you would not see these polls as trollish behavior while on the other hand completely endorsing "butt picking" troll posts.

I am beginning to think you have no knowledge of what others post or think and just spout off at the mouth. I do not have the time or effort to waste explaining things to you as it has been a failure in the past. However if you took the time to read my other posts you would see that I give Nadal credit on many occasions. Furthermore, your improper use of the word "hate" just goes to show what your posts/threads are typically about (i.e. being a troll http://images.corvetteforum.com/images/smilies/troll.gif )

Rabbit
07-10-2007, 11:01 AM
If he somehow makes it to the final I really believe that Nadal will beat Fed.

Wait.....read this again "if he somehow makes it to the final" So, Nads can't handle the rest of the field? How in the hell does that make him greatest on tour? LMAO


Nadal will beat Fed on almost any surface.....even grass.

Yeah, almost any surface that's red and in Europe. Whoops, there was the Hamburg thing.

How can you completely discount the fact that Federer has made the last 9 Grand Slam finals in a row? Not only that, he's played in 13 of the last 17 Grand Slam finals! Yeah, Nads is a record breaker alright. He's got Federer's number he's beat him...granted, but record wise Nads isn't worthy of carrying Federer's jock. Post something else for once.

fastdunn
07-10-2007, 11:07 AM
AFAIK, US Open courts have been also slowed, just not as drastically as
Wimbledon's. All surfaces are converging to one medium speed.
People have been saying this all these years since 2003.
Where the hell were you guys ?

As what Federer said post-match, Nadal has improved his game on faster courts.
Last year, he has tried to adjust on faster courts by just hitting it
harder. But now he knows how and when to go aggressive.
Nadal will improve vastly his record on this year's hard court seasons.

anointedone
07-10-2007, 11:11 AM
I would like to think if Nadal is doing so well on grass he would do that well on hard courts. However reality probably is hard courts are even alot faster then grass right now. Fastdunn is incorrect on the U.S Open hard courts. They have not been slowed at all are and lightning fast. The Austraian Open hard courts have also been sped up. Wimbledon is probably closer to a clay court now then it is to them.

I think in future years Nadals results on hard courts could improve, but not sure if it will be this year.

fastdunn
07-10-2007, 11:15 AM
Well, compared to when ? AFAIK, they added a bit more sand on the surface
and it is slower than mid-90's.

I believe this was a part of coordinated efforts to slow down the game since
late 90's. They initially slowed down carpets and eventually shorten
the indoor carpet seasons to an almost non factor.
They slowed down all non-clay surfaces and started to use heavier, slightly
bigger balls (which roddick refered as "water melon" balls) to slow down the game even further.
Ironically, clays are quickening making all surfaces kinda converging to
a medium speed (which way slower than before)

This is an era of slow court players (compared to past).
Changes in Wimbledon was drastic and happened quickly between 2001-2003
but the effort has been made on the whole tour since late 90's.
Average height of top 20 players is smaller now and you need strong defense game
to succeed in tour now (compared to strong offense game in 90's).
Nadal is a same type of power baseliner with strong defense
as Federer( in the grand scheme of a thing.).

anointedone
07-10-2007, 11:18 AM
Actually the U.S Open hard courts are faster then ever. It is why Roddick does so well at the U.S Open still with his huge serve. It is why Nadal has never been past the quarters there, and does so well at Wimbledon instead. I think Nadal will eventually do better on hard courts because of his talent and determination. However hard courts are now the fastest surface, much faster then grass. Grass is basically green clay now.

KBalla08
07-10-2007, 11:25 AM
Of course, should we call it grass after sunday?Maybe red grass?

ah that lovely red grass, i want to play on that, thats one of the only surfaces i will never get to play on...

anyway... many have said it, i will say it again, wimbledon needs to switch back to the good ole, REAL grass, that fast stuff, then i would like to see nadal make it past the quarters...

ManOfSteel
07-10-2007, 11:35 AM
It's not 100% certain that Rafa would have gotten past Djokovic if his body would've held up.

"atilla, we get it. Nadal will be #1 and win all the slams."

"Don't need to make so many threads about it. "

It's pretty funny on this board sometimes. I often feel like I waste way too much time posting on this board, and this is only my 68th post since I joined in Nov'05. Some of these folks need to go outside and get a life.

A post every 8 days and you sometimes feel like you post too much? Are you "sometimes" strung out on coke?

Nadal_Freak
07-10-2007, 11:40 AM
Actually the U.S Open hard courts are faster then ever. It is why Roddick does so well at the U.S Open still with his huge serve. It is why Nadal has never been past the quarters there, and does so well at Wimbledon instead. I think Nadal will eventually do better on hard courts because of his talent and determination. However hard courts are now the fastest surface, much faster then grass. Grass is basically green clay now.
Grass is much faster than green clay. The comparisons are ludicrous. Grass is about the same speed as the US Open now. Nadal just moves better on grass than most other players.

ACE of Hearts
07-10-2007, 11:43 AM
Thats a laugh, the U.S Open is much faster then wimbledon, thats how sad the grass has gotten.Wimbledon plays like the FO now.

Nadal_Freak
07-10-2007, 11:48 AM
Thats a laugh, the U.S Open is much faster then wimbledon, thats how sad the grass has gotten.Wimbledon plays like the FO now.
25 aces. I doubt you'll see much more like that at the US Open.

fastdunn
07-10-2007, 11:49 AM
Actually the U.S Open hard courts are faster then ever. It is why Roddick does so well at the U.S Open still with his huge serve. It is why Nadal has never been past the quarters there, and does so well at Wimbledon instead. I think Nadal will eventually do better on hard courts because of his talent and determination. However hard courts are now the fastest surface, much faster then grass. Grass is basically green clay now.

Another thing is that grass is an organic surface with somewhat uncertain
bounce. In a way, you need large margin of errors in ground strokes swing.
(like Borg, Federer, Nadal) unless you deal with it before the ball bounces
(Laver, McEnroe, Sampras, in a way).

Hard courts have truer bounce which helps you time your stroke and go for a
winner. I think Nadal has finally learned how to be aggressive on faster
surfaces. His records on hard courts should improve this year.

ACE of Hearts
07-10-2007, 12:05 PM
It doesnt affect the serve but look at the damn groundstrokes.Its ridiculous how slow the pace is.

InvisibleSoul
07-10-2007, 12:52 PM
Hey Attila... do you consider Bartoli the second best female grass court player in the world?

BounceHitBounceHit
07-10-2007, 12:57 PM
I think that Nadal has greatly improved on grass as apposed to last year (the court has helped a little). He has adjusted to the bounce, volleying better and is standing a little closer to the baseline, along with being more aggressive. In doing so, he also made more errors that he usually does, but he can improve that.

Having said that, he was pushed to the edge by Soderling and if Soderling had not blinked, we would not be having this conversation now. Then Rafa was manhandled by Youzsny until Youzsny hurt his back, if he had not had the injury we would not be having this conversation now. With Berdych, I think Rafa played a very smart game by being overly agressive and keeping Berdych off balance. Finally with Djokovic even though he was tired and injured he still took the first set from Rafa easily. He then ran out of gas and also restrained the leg and aggravated the foot injury (Rafa got lucky).

Now as I said before, Rafa has made some major headway to becoming a better grass court player, but there are still other players out there that will give him trouble that Fed manhandles.

TennezSport :cool:

Well summarized, I think. Rafa is a fine player and a great competitor, but still has plenty to learn to be able to truly challenge Fed for the #1 ranking. ;) CC

Grandslam05
07-10-2007, 04:02 PM
Nadal didn't get to play Roddick, Gasquet or Baghdatis 3 great grass court players. Once we see him defeat them on a regular basis like Federer, then we can say second best on grass. Not yet though...

anointedone
07-10-2007, 04:08 PM
Nadal didn't get to play Roddick, Gasquet or Baghdatis 3 great grass court players. Once we see him defeat them on a regular basis like Federer, then we can say second best on grass. Not yet though...

Nadal whooped Baghdatis in the Wimbledon semis last year.

DraGoNoFfiR3
07-10-2007, 04:15 PM
yea nadal is definately the 2nd best grass courter now, but he wasnt last year.

MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
07-10-2007, 04:39 PM
At the moment Nadal is "2nd best" on grass, but something that everyone is failing to mention.

How much closer Nadal has gotten to Federer on Grass, than Federer still has gotten much closer to him at Roland Garros?

Attila the tennis Bum
07-10-2007, 05:15 PM
At the moment Nadal is "2nd best" on grass, but something that everyone is failing to mention.

How much closer Nadal has gotten to Federer on Grass, than Federer still has gotten much closer to him at Roland Garros?

great point. Gilbert ,pmac , cahill all agree that rafa will win wimby before fed wins the fo.

ManOfSteel
07-11-2007, 12:51 PM
At the moment Nadal is "2nd best" on grass, but something that everyone is failing to mention.

How much closer Nadal has gotten to Federer on Grass, than Federer still has gotten much closer to him at Roland Garros?

Rafa still hasn't beaten him on grass. Roger has beaten him on clay and has had a match point in another match. Sure, it's not RG, but it's better speculation than basing everything off of this last wimbledon final.

ManOfSteel
07-11-2007, 12:53 PM
great point. Gilbert ,pmac , cahill all agree that rafa will win wimby before fed wins the fo.

Neither will happen.

chaz_233
07-11-2007, 12:54 PM
I don't know, it doesn't make much sense either. Fact is, Fed can't be beat on grass and hard court, Nadal can't be beat on clay.

Then why does everyone say "Federer is the second best clay courter in the world"?

babolat15
07-11-2007, 12:55 PM
OP is very true

AgassiFan12
07-11-2007, 01:00 PM
well lets see what happens at the open this summer...nadal is very hungry.

He has beaten fed twice on hard courts. If he somehow makes it to the final I really believe that Nadal will beat Fed.

Nadal will beat Fed on almost any surface.....even grass.


Have any of his wins on hard court against Fed been best of 5 setters? (it is an honest question and I didn't feel like doing the research) While I do give Nadal his due credit for being an incredible talent I think Fed has the advantage in any best of 5 setters not on clay against Nadal.

Attila the tennis Bum
07-31-2007, 03:31 PM
Have any of his wins on hard court against Fed been best of 5 setters? (it is an honest question and I didn't feel like doing the research) While I do give Nadal his due credit for being an incredible talent I think Fed has the advantage in any best of 5 setters not on clay against Nadal.

Give it time...Nadal is only getting better while Fed just gets older.

Bodacious DVT
07-31-2007, 03:44 PM
wow, this is news to me. i was under the impression that i was 2nd best?

htrain
07-31-2007, 03:45 PM
Its sad when players like nadal can get to the finals of wimbledon. Bring back the classic serve and volley that made wimbledon so exciting.

isbisthebest
07-31-2007, 04:56 PM
And he almost beat the "greatest" grass court player of all time.


Federer by no means was at his "greatest" after 2007 Australian Open. Nadal, from the final, played nearly, if not at his best while Federer played some played under his standard. BTW, why don't you mention Nadal nearly got beaten by Soderling And Youzney the nobodies and luckily skipped Dijokovic after the poor guy withdrew from injury?

isbisthebest
07-31-2007, 05:00 PM
p.s. this raises another interesting point. if 3 of the grandslams were played on clay, we might have nadal with close to 10 grand slams and fed with 3 or 4.

What kind of idiotic point are you making there? You're just saying something that will never occur and is meaningless. How bout I just say if Nadal was the only player on the tour he would win all the titles in the world for the next 20 years?

krz
07-31-2007, 05:01 PM
ugh I'm tired of these threads. Just something to think about.

we all know Nadal has Federers number and that he troubles him.

BUT, heres the difference between them. The difference between Federer and the rest of the field is huge with Nadal not as much. The only player Federer has trouble with is Nadal its just how there games match up. With Nadal I can name a bunch of people who give him trouble and hes not exactly a sure lock to win any tournament Federer doesn't enter either.

Hes still the 2nd best tennis player right now but lets not overstate his dominance.

btw, stop trolling we all know u want Nadal unfortunately I don't think he goes that way.

Voltron
07-31-2007, 05:15 PM
Give it time...Nadal is only getting better while Fed just gets older. Good lord, I just reread through this thread, and it made me realize how much of a troll you really are! I mean, seriously, you make a crapload of threads about how awesome Nadal is, and how he's supposedly the best thing to ever happen to tennis. Nadal is good and all, and I respect him after his making the W final, but really, give it a rest.

rett
07-31-2007, 07:12 PM
nadal is the second best on grass.nadal just need to improve his serve. And i think he could win the wimby and us open. why is it when nadal win on grass there always a reason someone was hurt they ran out of gas they werent playing there best. Is it about fitness and fining a way to win when your not playing at your best. i could say nadal lost wimby because of his knee. he still lost .

turn
07-31-2007, 08:58 PM
Give it time...Nadal is only getting better while Fed just gets older.

I may be wrong about this, but isn't Nadal also getting older?

tennis_hand
07-31-2007, 09:26 PM
Just based on the wimbledon results, you can say Nadal is the 2nd best player on grass.

But I think Roddick and Djokovic are equally the best on grass, although their results are not as good as Nadal's these 2 years. I foresee Nadal won't reach final again next year. Bet with me on that.

Eviscerator
07-31-2007, 10:17 PM
NOTICE HOW THIS THREAD WAS DEAD BUT AFTER ALMOST 3 WEEKS ATTILA POSTS A SIMPLE REPLY TO BRING HIS OWN THREAD BACK TO LIFE. :roll:

david22
08-01-2007, 03:46 AM
Nadal whooped Baghdatis in the Wimbledon semis last year.

But he still has yet to face Gasquet who ,apart the fact he just made a Wimbledon 1/2 final,is the youngster who has won the most titles on grass.

anointedone
08-01-2007, 03:58 AM
But he still has yet to face Gasquet who ,apart the fact he just made a Wimbledon 1/2 final,is the youngster who has won the most titles on grass.

Maybe but you dont honestly think Gasquet would beat Nadal if they played at Wimbledon.

caulcano
08-01-2007, 04:09 AM
Good lord, I just reread through this thread, and it made me realize how much of a troll you really are! I mean, seriously, you make a crapload of threads about how awesome Nadal is, and how he's supposedly the best thing to ever happen to tennis. Nadal is good and all, and I respect him after his making the W final, but really, give it a rest.

I know exactly what you mean.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-01-2007, 05:33 AM
Federer by no means was at his "greatest" after 2007 Australian Open. Nadal, from the final, played nearly, if not at his best while Federer played some played under his standard. BTW, why don't you mention Nadal nearly got beaten by Soderling And Youzney the nobodies and luckily skipped Dijokovic after the poor guy withdrew from injury?

I never said that Fed was at his "greatest" after the AO 2007 . What I actually said was that Nadal almost beat the "greatest" grass court player to ever play this sport: Roger Federer.

There is no reason for me to mention Soderling or Youzney because Nadal did in fact beat them. Secondly he almost beat Federer and in fact in my opinion outplayed Federer. The only reason Federer won Wimbledon is because he had the better serve, but Nadal outplayed Federer on grass in every other area.

jaykay
08-01-2007, 05:57 AM
I may be wrong about this, but isn't Nadal also getting older?

HAHAHAHA!!! ---chortle--- Good one, I enjoyed that... Trust scathing sarcasm to hopefully shut up a troll...

jaykay
08-01-2007, 06:00 AM
Good lord, I just reread through this thread, and it made me realize how much of a troll you really are! I mean, seriously, you make a crapload of threads about how awesome Nadal is, and how he's supposedly the best thing to ever happen to tennis. Nadal is good and all, and I respect him after his making the W final, but really, give it a rest.


Amen to that... This guy is a juvenile, Rafa-stalking, Fed-Bashing, unbelievably irritating, super immature troll beyond compare. There, I said it.... I had to get that off my chest. ---phew---

Rataplan
08-01-2007, 06:44 AM
^ Aren't you being a bit too sensitive here. There was no Fed-bashing in this thread, was there?

The best way to get rid of a troll is to ignore him. It takes two to tango and this particular poster you're talking about had more than enough dancing partners.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-01-2007, 07:35 AM
^ Aren't you being a bit too sensitive here. There was no Fed-bashing in this thread, was there?

The best way to get rid of a troll is to ignore him. It takes two to tango and this particular poster you're talking about had more than enough dancing partners.

thats a left handed compliment...but I'll take it because you make a very valid point. It seems that any compliment given to Nadal is automatically translated into "Fed bashing".

I have said nothing bad about Fed in fact quite to the contrary I said Fed may be the greatest grass court player to ever play this sport.

Eviscerator
08-01-2007, 08:14 AM
notice How This Thread Was Dead But After Almost 3 Weeks attila Posts A Simple Reply To Bring His Own Thread Back To Life.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-01-2007, 09:58 AM
notice How This Thread Was Dead But After Almost 3 Weeks attila Posts A Simple Reply To Bring His Own Thread Back To Life.


we didnt quite hear you the first time...can you scream a little louder? Why don't you report me to the old thread police for my terrible offense.

fgzhu88
08-01-2007, 10:43 AM
There is no reason for me to mention Soderling or Youzney because Nadal did in fact beat them. Secondly he almost beat Federer and in fact in my opinion outplayed Federer. The only reason Federer won Wimbledon is because he had the better serve, but Nadal outplayed Federer on grass in every other area.

i'm sorry but to outplay someone is to beat them, and the only exception is if they get an injury. Just accept it:


FED BEAT NADAL FAIR AND SQUARE. just like nadal beat fed in the french FAIR AND SQUARE.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-01-2007, 10:46 AM
i'm sorry but to outplay someone is to beat them, and the only exception is if they get an injury. Just accept it:


FED BEAT NADAL FAIR AND SQUARE. just like nadal beat fed in the french FAIR AND SQUARE.

Did I say anything different? Unlike Fed fans with excuses up the wazoo year after year I agree that Fed beat Nadal fair and square.

However the reason Fed beat Nadal in my opinion is because fed has a better serve.

Rodditha
08-01-2007, 10:57 AM
Or the other reason Fed beat Nadal in my opinion is because Nadal is an *** on grass.

Rataplan
08-01-2007, 11:26 AM
notice How This Thread Was Dead But After Almost 3 Weeks attila Posts A Simple Reply To Bring His Own Thread Back To Life.
As long as you keep replying to it, you help keeping the thread up high on page 1 so your point is....? If nobody replies to his posts, he's only talking to himself and the thread will die pretty quickly so if this thread is still very much alive, it's partly because others have no problem adding to the thread.

It seems that any compliment given to Nadal is automatically translated into "Fed bashing".
Maybe you've been posting a lot about Nadal (I don't follow this forum on a day-to-day basis) but this is a general tennis forum and as long as you're not bashing other players, I don't see the problem with it.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-01-2007, 11:51 AM
Or the other reason Fed beat Nadal in my opinion is because Nadal is an *** on grass.

wow.....now thats Nadal bashing. Funny how no one has an objection to that.

jaykay
08-01-2007, 12:24 PM
thats a left handed compliment...but I'll take it because you make a very valid point. It seems that any compliment given to Nadal is automatically translated into "Fed bashing".

I have said nothing bad about Fed in fact quite to the contrary I said Fed may be the greatest grass court player to ever play this sport.

Now, that is an outright lie.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-01-2007, 12:29 PM
Now, that is an outright lie.

Show me somewhere in this post where I have had something derogatory. In fact you have nothing at all to say other than attacking me.

Think about it.....all I said was that Nadal is the second best grass courter in the world. How can that possibly offend you?

If you disagree fine....then state your reasons in a logical and polite manner and lets debate it. But I dont think that you can do that because you are so full of hatred.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-01-2007, 12:40 PM
Or the other reason Fed beat Nadal in my opinion is because Nadal is an *** on grass.

why arent you guys ****ed at this???? I think we all know the answer.

Tennisplayer92
08-01-2007, 12:40 PM
are you uncle tony? :D well looking at wimby fed can hold his ground as long as he keeps his game up. but if nadal continues to pressure feds game then its game over fed. seeing nadals game he has potential. you guys cant rule out james blake from taking out nadal, blake has an undefeated record against nadal from the matches ive seen. hardcourt season it'll be interesting to see how blake plays against nadal.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-01-2007, 12:50 PM
are you uncle tony? :D well looking at wimby fed can hold his ground as long as he keeps his game up. but if nadal continues to pressure feds game then its game over fed. seeing nadals game he has potential. you guys cant rule out james blake from taking out nadal, blake has an undefeated record against nadal from the matches ive seen. hardcourt season it'll be interesting to see how blake plays against nadal.

Blake has no chance on any surface against Nadal except on hard courts.

But just note I said that Nadal is the second best grass court player in the world...Federer is the first.

david22
08-01-2007, 02:50 PM
Maybe but you dont honestly think Gasquet would beat Nadal if they played at Wimbledon.

If those stupid Wimbledon organisers had postponed his match against Federer a few hours later (or even a day later),i'm convinced that he would have had a chance to beat Federer,let alone Nadal.
Gasquet finished his match against Roddick at 8h00 pm and he had to play Federer the day after at.....12h00 am!
that was insane!

jaykay
08-01-2007, 06:24 PM
Show me somewhere in this post where I have had something derogatory. In fact you have nothing at all to say other than attacking me.

Think about it.....all I said was that Nadal is the second best grass courter in the world. How can that possibly offend you?

If you disagree fine....then state your reasons in a logical and polite manner and lets debate it. But I dont think that you can do that because you are so full of hatred.


No need to act holier than thou, Attila. You may or may not have attacked Fed IN THIS THREAD; this does not conceal the Fed-baiting troll that you are...

I am not at all offended when somebody waxes eloquent about Nadal; he deserves every bit of it. I do get mighty irritated when somebody trolls away to glory dissing the entire tennis playing community (with Federer at the top of the list) with an eerie Rafa-stalker-like obsession that you display. Don't give me the b.s. about logical/polite etc. Most regulars here are aware of the # of unparliamentary/inflammatory posts of yours that required moderator intervention.

I don't hate you. I dislike your attitude and constant flaming. You are the one who incites hate. And that, buddy, is the definition of a troll.

I am outa here.

krz
08-01-2007, 06:36 PM
If we need confirmation that Attila is indeed a troll
someone needs to make a poll.

Roger is Boring
08-01-2007, 07:59 PM
it is only a matter of time before the great rafa surpasess federer the lucky:D
he has come closer to beating fed at wimbedon then fed has ever done to rafa at the french. the true number one player in the world will be crowned soon enuf!
vamos rafael!!!

Eviscerator
08-01-2007, 08:09 PM
As long as you keep replying to it, you help keeping the thread up high on page 1 so your point is....? If nobody replies to his posts, he's only talking to himself and the thread will die pretty quickly so if this thread is still very much alive, it's partly because others have no problem adding to the thread.
.

I understand your point, but he himself brought his own thread back after it had died weeks ago.

So all I am doing is pointing out how pathetic that is.

rafan
08-01-2007, 09:52 PM
I really think Rafa is at his best when he has to play the whole 5 sets - then you can really see what he is made of - he often takes time to warm up and when his opponents think they have just got him in the bag - he starts to take off - and this is what makes him the most exciting player of them all!!

Voltron
08-01-2007, 10:07 PM
I never said that Fed was at his "greatest" after the AO 2007 . What I actually said was that Nadal almost beat the "greatest" grass court player to ever play this sport: Roger Federer.

There is no reason for me to mention Soderling or Youzney because Nadal did in fact beat them. Secondly he almost beat Federer and in fact in my opinion outplayed Federer. The only reason Federer won Wimbledon is because he had the better serve, but Nadal outplayed Federer on grass in every other area.

Did I say anything different? Unlike Fed fans with excuses up the wazoo year after year I agree that Fed beat Nadal fair and square.

However the reason Fed beat Nadal in my opinion is because fed has a better serve. Uhhhh, yeah, you did say something kinda different.

Hot Sauce
08-01-2007, 11:59 PM
I am beginning to think you have no knowledge of what others post or think and just spout off at the mouth. I do not have the time or effort to waste explaining things to you as it has been a failure in the past. However if you took the time to read my other posts you would see that I give Nadal credit on many occasions. Furthermore, your improper use of the word "hate" just goes to show what your posts/threads are typically about (i.e. being a troll http://images.corvetteforum.com/images/smilies/troll.gif )

I agree with you, the OP is just a troll, but aren't you playing right into his game? You shouldn't even have to defend yourself from this trollish behavior.

caulcano
08-02-2007, 04:34 AM
it is only a matter of time before the great rafa surpasess federer the lucky:D
he has come closer to beating fed at wimbedon then fed has ever done to rafa at the french. the true number one player in the world will be crowned soon enuf!
vamos rafael!!!

Firstly, Nadal is not 'great' yet.
Secondly, I wouldn't call winning 11 GS lucky.
Thirdly, yes Nadal came closer to beating Federer at Wimb, than Federer has ever done to Nadal at the FO.
Fourthly, the true #1 is #1, so he is already crowded and has been for years.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-02-2007, 04:36 AM
I agree with you, the OP is just a troll, but aren't you playing right into his game? You shouldn't even have to defend yourself from this trollish behavior.

amazing that a simple innocent statement like "Nadal is the second best grass court player in the world" can garner such hatred.

Rather than simply denating the issue Fed fans attack out of pure unadulterated hatred.

Do you realize that none of you have offered one intelligent statement. Do you think somone other than Fed is a better grass courter than Nadal is right now? If you do then say so otherwise you should stay quiet.

Simply saying something nice about Rafa does not make one a troll or maybe on this Fed fan bulletin board it does. All one has to do here at TW is give Nadal a compliment and like clockwork Fed fans gang up worse than the cops did on Rodney King.

caulcano
08-02-2007, 04:48 AM
amazing that a simple innocent statement like "Nadal is the second best grass court player in the world" can garner such hatred.

Rather than simply denating the issue Fed fans attack out of pure unadulterated hatred.

Do you realize that none of you have offered one intelligent statement. Do you think somone other than Fed is a better grass courter than Nadal is right now? If you do then say so otherwise you should stay quiet.

Simply saying something nice about Rafa does not make one a troll or maybe on this Fed fan bulletin board it does. All one has to do here at TW is give Nadal a compliment and like clockwork Fed fans gang up worse than the cops did on Rodney King.

Maybe it's your "And soon to be the first" statement. It just stinks of trolling because you're just 'asking' for a response. Which you got.

ninman
08-02-2007, 05:17 AM
Why do people have to keep making threads like this, can't we just watch tennis and enjoy it and see what happens. I personally hate Nadal's attitude and style of play. His wearing down his opponents rather than his actual ability, in coming years when he slows down then we'll see how good he really is.

Also his "I must win at all costs" attitude gets on my nerves. There is nothing wrong with wanting to win, having desire and hunger and also believing in yourself, but Nadal's takes it to a new level where he's willing to do anything to win a match.

The only reason I started watching tennis was because of Federer. I love the elegance that he has, his style and his class, and his also his attributes as a person. I just really love watching him play, and I love also watching him win, I hope that he stays as the number one player in the world for a long time. I believe he deserves to be No.1 much more than Nadal. The only reason that Nadal is No.2 is because of his clay stuff.

I just wish that we had two great players like Agassi and Sampras in the game, because you could like and admire both. I find that I hate Nadal and I hate the way people keep going on and on about him and I can't understand why anybody would like him. Anyway who cares who the No.2 is, all that matters is who is No.1 and right now on grass and hardcourts and hopefully soon clay that is Federer.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-02-2007, 05:35 AM
Maybe it's your "And soon to be the first" statement. It just stinks of trolling because you're just 'asking' for a response. Which you got.


Well that is my opinion. I really do believe that Nadal will beat Federer at Wimbledon over the next few years. And if he does not Fed will be retiring in a few years anyway.

Now back to my point....who do you think is the second grass court player in the world right now? Sounds like you all agree because no one has a counter-point.

ninman
08-02-2007, 05:45 AM
Well that is my opinion. I really do believe that Nadal will beat Federer at Wimbledon over the next few years. And if he does not Fed will be retiring in a few years anyway.

Now back to my point....who do you think is the second grass court player in the world right now? Sounds like you all agree because no one has a counter-point.

I would go with Djokovic or Roddick. Roddick's record on grass over the last 3 years is MUCH better than Nadal's, owing to the fact that he's won Queen's twice and a beaten finalist last year. The other thing is that Youzhny nearly defeated Nadal but I think he had an injury or something which is why he ended up losing. If I had to pick somebody though I would say Roddick.

Rataplan
08-02-2007, 05:47 AM
Why do people have to keep making threads like this, can't we just watch tennis and enjoy it and see what happens.
Because not everybody enjoys tennis for the same reasons!

You mainly watch tennis because of Federer judging by your posts. Great. Good for you. There are quite a few players I wish I could have seen in action when they were peaking but I will be able to say that I have watched Federer.
I happen to like Nadal as well and I love watching him play but there are plenty of players I like to watch. The player who got me to watch tennis was a player who peaked in the 80s.

You don't like to watch Nadal perhaps but what does this have to do with a general tennis forum anyway? If you mainly want to talk about Federer and you get on the case of a poster who talks too much about Nadal in a positive way, perhaps the Federer fansite is more your thing?

Attila the tennis Bum
08-02-2007, 05:53 AM
I would go with Djokovic or Roddick. Roddick's record on grass over the last 3 years is MUCH better than Nadal's, owing to the fact that he's won Queen's twice and a beaten finalist last year. The other thing is that Youzhny nearly defeated Nadal but I think he had an injury or something which is why he ended up losing. If I had to pick somebody though I would say Roddick.

Thank you. Finally an intelligent comment. And a logical one.

Roddick is an awesome grass court player and I do see your point of view.

In general he probably is a better grass court player than Nadal; however this year I think Nadal may be better. In prior years I would have to go with Roddick as well.

ninman
08-02-2007, 05:56 AM
Because not everybody enjoys tennis for the same reasons!

You mainly watch tennis because of Federer judging by your posts. Great. Good for you. There are quite a few players I wish I could have seen in action when they were peaking but I will be able to say that I have watched Federer.
I happen to like Nadal as well and I love watching him play but there are plenty of players I like to watch. The player who got me to watch tennis was a player who peaked in the 80s.

You don't like to watch Nadal perhaps but what does this have to do with a general tennis forum anyway? If you mainly want to talk about Federer and you get on the case of a poster who talks too much about Nadal in a positive way, perhaps the Federer fansite is more your thing?

I actually enjoy tennis for a lot reasons, but you're right it's mostly down to Federer. However it bugs me that a player who is good on one surface only, gets hyped up so much. Maybe people just want a change at the top of the rankings, but I honestly, genuinely hope that it isn't Nadal.

Nadal believes in nothing except winning at all costs, and I don't believe he is a good ambassador for tennis. I'm hoping to see some other young, talented all round player like Djokovic topple Federer, someone who is truly worthy to carry the mantle.

Rataplan
08-02-2007, 06:01 AM
However it bugs me that a player who is good on one surface only,
Come on. If you're really honest about it and if you're really a tennis fan, you can admit that this is an exaggeration.


Nadal wants to win but I hope that you can recognize that he's actually a fair player. Federer said the same thing about him being a fair player sometime in the spring.
So does Federer and if you've ever listened to Djokovic talk, so does Novak. Top players want to win and make no mistake about it, Roger can be very ruthless if he has set his eyes on a victory. That's what professional sports people do!

ninman
08-02-2007, 06:04 AM
Come on. If you're really honest about it and if you're really a tennis fan, you can admit that this is an exaggeration.

Not at all, Nadal's record on Hard courts is no better than a lot of other players like Roddick, Djokovic, Blake, and others I can't remember them all now. He's an average Hard courter at best, and a lucky grass courter at best.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-02-2007, 06:06 AM
However it bugs me that a player who is good on one surface only, gets hyped up so much.


How do you get to the finals of wimbledon two years in a row and almost beat the greatest grass court player that has ver played the game if you are only good on one surface.

Nadal has done better on grass against Federer than anyone. Still think that he is only good on one surface???

Nadal is the second best grass court player in the world this year......you need to give credit where credit is due...even if you hate the man.

(who by the way is a perfect gentleman and only has the nicest things to say about Fed).

Attila the tennis Bum
08-02-2007, 06:08 AM
He's an average Hard courter at best, and a lucky grass courter at best.


OMG...yeah Nadal was lucky stretching Federer to five sets. Did you see all the lucky shots that Nadal hit over those many hours......boy your hatred has really blinded you.

You cannot even see that Nadal is truly the second best grass court player on the tour right now.

ninman
08-02-2007, 06:13 AM
How do you get to the finals of wimbledon two years in a row and almost beat the greatest grass court player that has ver played the game if you are only good on one surface.

Nadal has done better on grass against Federer than anyone. Still think that he is only good on one surface???

Nadal is the second best grass court player in the world this year......you need to give credit where credit is due...even if you hate the man.

(who by the way is a perfect gentleman and only has the nicest things to say about Fed).

Perfect gentleman don't cheat, and Federer was no where near his best when he played Nadal this year. Also he extremely closed to being downed by both Soderling and Youzhny and like last year was very lucky to make the finals, where he had a gift of a draw last year. In fact last year he was 2 points away from going out in the 2nd round. He's a good player, but there are a lot of better players than him on the grass and that's a fact. A little luck carried him through this year and he didn't almost beat Federer at all, Federer almost LOST there's a big difference. Also Federer is not the greatest grass court player ever, not yet anyway, just like Nadal is not the greatest clay courter ever.

If Federer is the greatest grass courter ever then he is the greatest hard courter ever as well, owing to the fact that he holds the record for the longest unbeaten run on hard courts (56 matches), and he has won every single major hard court event (unless Paris counts, but he hasn't played there for 4 years) and holds record equaling winning streaks at both the US open and the AUS open (3 and 2 in a row respectively), and he holds them both simultaneously.

Rodditha
08-02-2007, 06:14 AM
Nadal was lucky to reach two consecutive Wimbledon finals. This year the conditions helped him alot and last year his draw was ****. Roddick has way better results than Nadal on grass that's why Nadal isn't n°2 on grass. For Nadal to be n°2 on grass he must at least win a tournament on grass wich he hasen't done yet.

ninman
08-02-2007, 06:14 AM
OMG...yeah Nadal was lucky stretching Federer to five sets. Did you see all the lucky shots that Nadal hit over those many hours......boy your hatred has really blinded you.

You cannot even see that Nadal is truly the second best grass court player on the tour right now.

Nadal played well, but Federer played badly. And just so you know of the 13 hawk eye challenges made during that match 8 went AGAINST Federer, does that count as lucky? And yes Nadal does get a lot of lucky shots in.

ninman
08-02-2007, 06:16 AM
Nadal was lucky to reach two consecutive Wimbledon finals. This year the conditions helped him alot and last year his draw was ****. Roddick has way better results than Nadal on grass that's why Nadal isn't n°2 on grass. For Nadal to be n°2 on grass he must at least win a tournament on grass wich he hasen't done yet.

Exactly Roddick has 4 Queen's titles, Nadal has 0 Grass titles. In fact Nadal hasn't even been to the final of Queen's yet, or any other grass tourny for that matter. In fact of Nadal's 22 titles I believe that 16 or more are on Clay.

Rataplan
08-02-2007, 06:20 AM
Not at all, Nadal's record on Hard courts is no better than a lot of other players like Roddick, Djokovic, Blake, and others I can't remember them all now. He's an average Hard courter at best, and a lucky grass courter at best.
lol
You're missing the point. Are you doing that on purpose or are you really such a Federer fanboy?

You wrote: "that a player who is good on one surface only"
Whether he has a better or worse record on hard courts than Roddick, Djokovic and Blake is beside the point. That could be the topic of another conversation I'm not willing to go into with you.

However, it's ridiculous to state that he's good on one surface only. Please, take a break and think about this before you reply.

ninman
08-02-2007, 06:24 AM
lol
You're missing the point. Are you doing that on purpose or are you really such a Federer fanboy?

You wrote: "that a player who is good on one surface only"
Whether he has a better or worse record on hard courts than Roddick, Djokovic and Blake is beside the point. That could be the topic of another conversation I'm not willing to go into with you.

However, it's ridiculous to state that he's good on one surface only. Please, take a break and think about this before you reply.

Ok let's look at some stats, Nadal has 22 ATP titles to his name 16 are on clay the rest are on hard courts. He has yet to get past the quarters of either AO or the USO. I personally think the grass season is too short to really count, but he hasn't won a single title on grass yet.

So if 16/22 titles on clay doesn't suggest a one surface player I don't know what does.

Rodditha
08-02-2007, 06:26 AM
Nadal knows how to beat players only on clay, he is a one surface player. On another surface than clay he is vulnurable.

Rataplan
08-02-2007, 06:27 AM
So if 16/22 titles on clay doesn't suggest a one surface player I don't know what does.
That means that he's by far the best on clay but you still can't say that he's only good on clay.
Not if you want to be taken seriously anyway.

Sorry but you will have to do better than that.

Rodditha
08-02-2007, 06:31 AM
That means that he's by far the best on clay but you still can't say that he's only good on clay.

Sorry but you will have to do better than that.
You are a Nadal groupie, Nadal is being demolished on other surface than clay, you don't even need stats to confirm that, we see it all the time. He is a one surface player, why you don't want to admit it ? It's a fact.

ninman
08-02-2007, 06:32 AM
That means that he's by far the best on clay but you still can't say that he's only good on clay.
Not if you want to be taken seriously anyway.

Sorry but you will have to do better than that.

It's all about titles, and currently he has only I think 2 MS titles on Hard courts, compared to Federer's 9, and no GS titles on Hard courts compared to Federer's 6. It doesn't matter if he's consistently in semi's or quarters, the fact is he doesn't WIN the tournaments.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-02-2007, 06:48 AM
It's all about titles, and currently he has only I think 2 MS titles on Hard courts, compared to Federer's 9, and no GS titles on Hard courts compared to Federer's 6. It doesn't matter if he's consistently in semi's or quarters, the fact is he doesn't WIN the tournaments.

so what does that have to do with Nadal being the second best grass court player on the tour?

ninman
08-02-2007, 06:52 AM
so what does that have to do with Nadal being the second best grass court player on the tour?

Except he's not, because he has yet to win a title on grass. But seriously who cares who's second best anyway? It's like the press don't care that Federer is "second best" on clay, they only care who is best and that is Nadal. No one can deny Federer is the best on grass, he hasn't lost on grass for 5 years, everyone else is 2nd best, and on their day others may have been in the final against the feds not Nadal. At the end of the day there is no difference between 2, 3, 4 or 5.

Federer said himself when someone asked if Djokovic should be 3 in the world and he said "what's the difference between 2, 3, 4 and 5?" The only thing that really counts is who No.1.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-02-2007, 06:56 AM
It's like the press don't care that Federer is "second best" on clay, they only care who is best and that is Nadal. No one can deny Federer is the best on grass, he hasn't lost on grass for 5 years, everyone else is 2nd best, and on their day others may have been in the final against the feds not Nadal. At the end of the day there is no difference between 2, 3, 4 or 5.

Federer said himself when someone asked if Djokovic should be 3 in the world and he said "what's the difference between 2, 3, 4 and 5?" The only thing that really counts is who No.1.


actually the press does care and thats exactly where I got the idea for this post. All of the press always goes around saying that Fed is the second best clay courter on the tour.

So why doesn't Nadal get his due by being called the second best grass courter on the tour?

And as far as the #1 or #2 spot I guess then you are saying that no one should care about Boris Becker either. Did you know that in his entire hall of fame career he has never been the #1 player at years end???

ninman
08-02-2007, 06:57 AM
actually does care and thats exactly where I got the idea for this post. All of the press always goes around saying that Fed is the second best clay courter on the tour.

So why doesn't Nadal get his due by being called the second best grass courter on the tour?

And as far as the #1 or #2 spot I guess then you are saying that no one should care about Boris Becker either. Did you know that in his entire hall of fame career he has never been the #1 player at years end???

Because he's NOT the second best grass courter on tour. If a few of the players from Fed's half of the draw had been in Nadals then I doubt that he'd have been in the final.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-02-2007, 07:26 AM
Because he's NOT the second best grass courter on tour. If a few of the players from Fed's half of the draw had been in Nadals then I doubt that he'd have been in the final.

really who? How many more players does Nadal have to beat?

ninman
08-02-2007, 07:35 AM
really who? How many more players does Nadal have to beat?

How about Mahut and Blake?

ninman
08-02-2007, 07:35 AM
Roddick and Gasquet?

scineram
08-02-2007, 07:41 AM
Blake is a non-factor outside of hard courts.

ninman
08-02-2007, 07:43 AM
Blake is a non-factor outside of hard courts.

I think the next big player will Djokovic personally. I think he'll be No.1 before Nadal.

scineram
08-02-2007, 08:06 AM
I agree on Choker.

J-man
08-02-2007, 08:11 AM
Blake is a non-factor outside of hard courts.Blake is a non-factor outside the USopen period. It's to bad because he is a good player (which is almost an oxymoron).

As of right now Nadal has shown for the past 2 years that he is the second best grass court player in the world. He's gotten to the final and even pushed almighty Federer to 5 and fended off Soderling a very tough player on any surface. It will be intersting to see how his Wimbledon career pans out now that he has had all this sucess there.

ninman
08-02-2007, 08:13 AM
Blake is a non-factor outside the USopen period. It's to bad because he is a good player (which is almost an oxymoron).

As of right now Nadal has shown for the past 2 years that he is the second best grass court player in the world. He's gotten to the final and even pushed almighty Federer to 5 and fended off Soderling a very tough player on any surface. It will be intersting to see how his Wimbledon career pans out now that he has had all this sucess there.

In my opinion you don't have success until you win a tournament. He's done well and I expect he'll win it, but it's not really success because the Runner-Up is just the best loser. Before you say it that goes for Feds at the FO too.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-02-2007, 08:50 AM
In my opinion you don't have success until you win a tournament. He's done well and I expect he'll win it, but it's not really success because the Runner-Up is just the best loser. Before you say it that goes for Feds at the FO too.

Can you give credit to Nadal for anything? So according to you he just got lucky at Wimbledon and he cannot play on any surface other than clay.

Wow you really do hate Nadal.

Federer_pilon
08-02-2007, 09:11 AM
It's all about titles, and currently he has only I think 2 MS titles on Hard courts, compared to Federer's 9, and no GS titles on Hard courts compared to Federer's 6. It doesn't matter if he's consistently in semi's or quarters, the fact is he doesn't WIN the tournaments.

He has 3. You say he has won titles on hard before and then you say "he doesn't WIN the tournaments". lol are u contradicting yourself? -.-

Rodditha
08-02-2007, 09:18 AM
[quote=Attila the tennis Bum;1634074]Can you give credit to Nadal for anything? So according to you he just got lucky at Wimbledon and he cannot play on any surface other than clay.

Wow you really do hate Nadal.[/quote/]
Telling the truth dosen't mean we hate him.

stav_babolat
08-02-2007, 11:41 AM
he almost lost to soderling for god sake!!

War, Safin!
08-02-2007, 12:07 PM
1 - Queens is the only proper, true grass-court tournament left.
2 - Nadal got exposed in that.
3 - He's not a grass-court player.

End of.

htrain
08-02-2007, 02:54 PM
Nadal is a disgrace to grass court tennis...he plays from 10 feet behind the baseline with his western forehand, its a joke to see someone be able to play like that and get to the finals.

Rodditha
08-02-2007, 02:57 PM
That's gonna be his last appearance in Wimbledon finals.

dukemunson
08-02-2007, 03:35 PM
actually the press does care and thats exactly where I got the idea for this post. All of the press always goes around saying that Fed is the second best clay courter on the tour.

So why doesn't Nadal get his due by being called the second best grass courter on the tour?

And as far as the #1 or #2 spot I guess then you are saying that no one should care about Boris Becker either. Did you know that in his entire hall of fame career he has never been the #1 player at years end???

Whats your deal with Becker...he was a great player but never the best in any given year. You don't have to hit #1 to make the hall of fame...being the second, third and fourth best player for a long time is pretty damn impressive (obviously).

rett
08-02-2007, 04:54 PM
yes i do think nadal is second best on gass this year. the way some you talk he should be 80 in world and barely making a living playing tennis. Now weather you like nadal as a player or not he can play some very good tennis and not just on clay. and why do people say he won just on clay like that surface doesnt count as much as faster surfaces. Is the faster surface consider better than clay.

Rataplan
08-02-2007, 10:54 PM
..he plays from 10 feet behind the baseline
Just a bit of advice: it helps to actually watch a match when you want to analyse a player.


You're either trolling or you didn't see Nadal play in Wimbledon because that's not true, my friend.

tricky
08-02-2007, 11:16 PM
FWIW, I think Nadal is a better volleyer than almost all the Americans in the top 50. And he certainly approached the net more than Federer did the past 2 Wimbledon tourneys.

The point being, Nadal doesn't impose his style of play on grass as he does on clay. It's baseline-based sure, but so is the majority of the field. He plays much more aggressive angles; he cuts off the net; this kind of grass makes his BH, especially his running BH, a fearsome crosscourt weapon. He mostly sought to go forward instead of parking out way behind the baseline.

A lot of people feel that Nadal's style mocks the grass court tradition. But I would argue that, given the foundation of his style, he has done a better job observing the conventional wisdom of winning at Wimbledon than most of his peers.

Ripster
08-02-2007, 11:18 PM
1 - Queens is the only proper, true grass-court tournament left.

ummm....what?

2 - Nadal got exposed in that.

None of Nadal's weaknesses (which are few) were exposed in the final, he played beautifully.

3 - He's not a grass-court player.

His game in theory doesn't suit grass, but he's clearly displayed that he can make adjustments to succeed on the grass.

caulcano
08-03-2007, 02:45 AM
Nadal is a disgrace to grass court tennis...he plays from 10 feet behind the baseline with his western forehand, its a joke to see someone be able to play like that and get to the finals.

Don't blame the player, blame the organisers.

ninman
08-03-2007, 03:11 AM
Exactly, one of these days they'll be talking about Grass being slower than Clay! I mean Grass slower than Hard courts is already a joke.

federerfanatic
08-03-2007, 08:23 AM
And he certainly approached the net more than Federer did the past 2 Wimbledon tourneys.

Nonsense. Federer came in twice as much as Nadal in this years Wimbledon final, and much more often in last years too. I dont know what stat you are looking at, but if it is all the net approaches for the Championships, the only possible way Nadal would be in front is because he played so much more then Federer who had pretty easy matches all along, unlike 5 setters, and straight setters with tiebreaks like Nadal.

War, Safin!
08-03-2007, 08:37 AM
Originally Posted by War, Safin!
1 - Queens is the only proper, true grass-court tournament left.
ummm....what?

Originally Posted by War, Safin!
2 - Nadal got exposed in that.
None of Nadal's weaknesses (which are few) were exposed in the final, he played beautifully.

Originally Posted by War, Safin!
3 - He's not a grass-court player.
His game in theory doesn't suit grass, but he's clearly displayed that he can make adjustments to succeed on the grass.

1 - Quuen's pretty much plays like Wimbledon did back in the 90s....no matter anyone says, it's quicker and bounces lower than Wimbledon 2007.
That makes it #1 for grasscourts on the ATP, in my opinion.

2 - I'm referring to Queens again. Nadal got straight-setted in the Qtrs.

3 - On slow, high-bouncing rye-grass, yes.
This doesn't make his transition from slow, high-bouncing clay very special at all.

Nadal_Freak
08-03-2007, 08:52 AM
1 - Quuen's pretty much plays like Wimbledon did back in the 90s....no matter anyone says, it's quicker and bounces lower than Wimbledon 2007.
That makes it #1 for grasscourts on the ATP, in my opinion.

2 - I'm referring to Queens again. Nadal got straight-setted in the Qtrs.

3 - On slow, high-bouncing rye-grass, yes.
This doesn't make his transition from slow, high-bouncing clay very special at all.
Could it possibly also be that Nadal wasn't as prepared for Queens as he was for Wimbledon? Nadal was too busy winning the French Open to get the proper preparation for Queens.

stormholloway
08-03-2007, 09:27 AM
That's gonna be his last appearance in Wimbledon finals.

You're going to eat those words.

I think it's ridiculous the lack of credit that is given to Nadal. Before Wimbledon, I said he would make the final. Others said he only made the finals because of a weak draw. He's played more Wimbledon finals than Federer had at that age.

He almost beat perhaps the greatest grass court player of all time and still nobody gives him credit.

Are people actually referencing Queen's Club in this argument? That's completely irrelevant. Federer was too tired to even attempt to play Halle. Nadal probably shouldn't have, but when it counted, at Wimbledon, Nadal stepped up. Nobody doubts that Federer is the second best on clay yet they can't admit that Nadal is second on grass. Considering there's hardly any time to practice on it, and that Nadal has very little experience on it compared to the likes of Roddick, Nadal managed to come within inches of dethroning the 4 time champion.

You people need to get over yourselves.

anointedone
08-03-2007, 09:39 AM
You're going to eat those words.

I think it's ridiculous the lack of credit that is given to Nadal. Before Wimbledon, I said he would make the final. Others said he only made the finals because of a weak draw. He's played more Wimbledon finals than Federer had at that age.

He almost beat perhaps the greatest grass court player of all time and still nobody gives him credit.

Are people actually referencing Queen's Club in this argument? That's completely irrelevant. Federer was too tired to even attempt to play Halle. Nadal probably shouldn't have, but when it counted, at Wimbledon, Nadal stepped up. Nobody doubts that Federer is the second best on clay yet they can't admit that Nadal is second on grass. Considering there's hardly any time to practice on it, and that Nadal has very little experience on it compared to the likes of Roddick, Nadal managed to come within inches of dethroning the 4 time champion.

You people need to get over yourselves.

1. Federer is not the greatest grass court player of all time. 1 of Laver or Sampras definitely is at this point.

2. People who commented on his "weak draw" last year still had a point, since it was a weak draw last year that he had. That isnt his fault, but I see where some might be coming from. Many of those now give him credit this year since he did it a second time with a much stronger draw, so his performance this year should confirm his abilities on grass.

War, Safin!
08-03-2007, 04:10 PM
Could it possibly also be that Nadal wasn't as prepared for Queens as he was for Wimbledon? Nadal was too busy winning the French Open to get the proper preparation for Queens.
No it couldn't.



Your move.

fresnel
08-03-2007, 08:29 PM
1) Nadal had nothing to lose, no one was expecting him to win the match and he could swing away.
2) Federer for most of the match didnt bring his A game, he was understandably tense because:
a. His undisputed no 1 ranking was on the line
b. going for the record 5th wimbledon
c. coming off a loss in Paris

You'll notice he only upped his level in the 5th set and then basically ran away with the match. In fact one columnist stated the only reason the match wasn't a great match was because it lacked suspense in the end.

Nadal_Freak
08-03-2007, 09:12 PM
No it couldn't.



Your move.
Figures you would put such a emphasis on a warmup tournament. A tournament that would hurt Nadal if he got to the final as he has played tennis too much already going into Wimbledon.

Zaragoza
08-04-2007, 05:10 AM
he almost lost to soderling for god sake!!

He almost beat Soderling in straight sets ;)

wyutani
08-04-2007, 05:15 AM
He almost beat Soderling in straight sets ;)

almost...lozlll=

Zaragoza
08-04-2007, 05:33 AM
1 - Queens is the only proper, true grass-court tournament left.
2 - Nadal got exposed in that.
3 - He's not a grass-court player.

End of.

1- Because you say so. Wimbledon is the only big tournament on grass. Queens is a warm up tournament where players that lose in the early rounds of the French usually have success.
2-Nadal played inmediately after winning the French (no rest and no time to practice on grass) unlike the rest of the field in Queens. Who did win the French Open and a grass tournament the week after that?
3-So Federer is not a grass court player because he didnīt win Queens? Is Roddick the best grass player? LOL.
4-I like how some people pick Queens over Wimbledon to analyse Nadalīs performance on grass. Itīs ridiculous and funny at the same time.
Nadal is 2nd best on grass, by far. You can ask Roger too.

NadalandFedererfan
08-04-2007, 01:41 PM
2-Nadal played inmediately after winning the French (no rest and no time to practice on grass) unlike the rest of the field in Queens. Who did win the French Open and a grass tournament the week after that?

While he did not win the French and do it, Federer played the final match of the French Open (losing to Nadal of course) in 2006 and did win Halle. However that in itself was an incredibly difficult feat, he went to 3 sets in 4 of his matches, some people who would never normaly take a set from him on grass. Halle is also a bit weaker field then Queens. So yes it is extremely difficult, and not too fair to expect.

welcome2petrkordaland
08-04-2007, 01:51 PM
unbelievable trolling in this thread.

mrsrogerfederer
08-04-2007, 01:54 PM
unbelievable trolling in this thread.

true dat. xgdgsgsg

Rodditha
08-04-2007, 02:49 PM
You're going to eat those words.

I think it's ridiculous the lack of credit that is given to Nadal. Before Wimbledon, I said he would make the final. Others said he only made the finals because of a weak draw. He's played more Wimbledon finals than Federer had at that age.

He almost beat perhaps the greatest grass court player of all time and still nobody gives him credit.

Are people actually referencing Queen's Club in this argument? That's completely irrelevant. Federer was too tired to even attempt to play Halle. Nadal probably shouldn't have, but when it counted, at Wimbledon, Nadal stepped up. Nobody doubts that Federer is the second best on clay yet they can't admit that Nadal is second on grass. Considering there's hardly any time to practice on it, and that Nadal has very little experience on it compared to the likes of Roddick, Nadal managed to come within inches of dethroning the 4 time champion.

You people need to get over yourselves.

Why not admit that Nadal was lucky this year also last year and that he isn't number 2 on grass. It's the facts. Why give him credit ? Can someone say why does Nadal deserves credits for poor results on grass. I will maybe give him credits when he will win a grass tournament.
Nadal didn't almost beat Federer at Wimbledon, Federer almost lost that match, big difference.

htrain
08-04-2007, 04:52 PM
Federer was playing horrendous grass court tennis for him and nadal was playing the best he could play and federer still beat him. Oh yeah and fed killed nadal and won in hamburg so dont pretend that nadals queens loss doesnt matter. However i do respect nadal because he works as hard as federer on and off court and his game is a good model for kids.

welcome2petrkordaland
08-04-2007, 05:51 PM
Htrain & Roddhitha, u are hopeless trolls. But thanks, u give me a snicker w/ each ATP tennis "analysis."

Rodditha
08-04-2007, 05:58 PM
I can't believe it's a Rookie saying that, your place isn't there you should go in the junior league.
For your personnal culture you should know that evryone don't have the same opinion like you and you should learn how to accept them without judging or being offensive. If you want to make friends you should put what i said into practice.

welcome2petrkordaland
08-04-2007, 06:07 PM
I can't believe it's a Rookie saying that, your place isn't there you should go in the junior league.
For your personnal culture you should know that evryone don't have the same opinion like you and you should learn how to accept them without judging or being offensive. If you want to make friends you should put what i said into practice.

LOL :) exactly.

again, much thanks for the snicker. keep 'em comin', troll.

netman
08-04-2007, 07:34 PM
I'm too lazy to read this thread, so I may be repeating the obvious.

Wimbledon has slowed down their grass to the point its slower than hard courts. All you had to do was look at all the untouched grass in front of the net and down the T. Nadal is a great baseline player with awesome stamina. Wimbledon is now a bad imitation of the French Open. Gee, think Nadal will do well at Wimbledon? Duh.

Lets see how he does during the U.S. Open build up and the real U.S. Open. Personally I think he has the will power, determination and skills to become an all court terror. But the proof is in the results.

-k-

Rataplan
08-05-2007, 02:48 AM
Wimbledon is now a bad imitation of the French Open.
That the Wimbledon surface has slowed down and changed a bit over the years is one thing but to say that Wimbledon is like a bad imitation of the French Open is taking it too far. No offence but I hope that you can see that when you stop and think about it for a moment.

If only because the clay is totally different to move on and because of that, the timing for the shots is differently just to give one example. You can't slide on grass and that's something that changes things.
The French Open clay still requires you to move differently than the Wimbledon grass for example.You need to make quite a few adjustements from clay to grass.

Just notice the difference where Nadal stood to return serve. He stood a good distance behind the baseline in Paris but he stood very near to the baseline in Wimbledon. Why would he change it that much if Wimbledon played like Roland Garros?

seestern
08-05-2007, 03:57 AM
I can't believe it's a Rookie saying that, your place isn't there you should go in the junior league.
For your personnal culture you should know that evryone don't have the same opinion like you and you should learn how to accept them without judging or being offensive. If you want to make friends you should put what i said into practice.

I would suggest a poll for the greatest spammer to become "semi pro". Rodditha for sure dominates all the rest.:-D

jackson vile
08-05-2007, 08:02 AM
Why not admit that Nadal was lucky this year also last year and that he isn't number 2 on grass. It's the facts. Why give him credit ? Can someone say why does Nadal deserves credits for poor results on grass. I will maybe give him credits when he will win a grass tournament.
Nadal didn't almost beat Federer at Wimbledon, Federer almost lost that match, big difference.

de·lu·sion;
A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence, especially as a symptom of mental illness

Exile
08-05-2007, 12:50 PM
He is pretty consistent. He has played in two finals in three attempts. Thats better than Roddick.

And he almost beat the "greatest" grass court player of all time.

Rod Laver?

netman
08-05-2007, 01:41 PM
That the Wimbledon surface has slowed down and changed a bit over the years is one thing but to say that Wimbledon is like a bad imitation of the French Open is taking it too far. No offence but I hope that you can see that when you stop and think about it for a moment.

If only because the clay is totally different to move on and because of that, the timing for the shots is differently just to give one example. You can't slide on grass and that's something that changes things.
The French Open clay still requires you to move differently than the Wimbledon grass for example.You need to make quite a few adjustements from clay to grass.

Just notice the difference where Nadal stood to return serve. He stood a good distance behind the baseline in Paris but he stood very near to the baseline in Wimbledon. Why would he change it that much if Wimbledon played like Roland Garros?

Its hyperbole. Point being the Wimbledon grass has had its uniqueness stripped away in the effort to make it more appealing to all the clay court specialists who use to stay away. No its not the same as clay, but its now been slowed to the point its just another surface that works better for baseline bashing than serve and volley.

BTW, I think Nadal has the potential to be very, very good volleyer. His athleticism combined with the progress he is making in understanding how to construct all kinds of points, not just massive topspin groundie rallies, bodes well for seeing him at the net more and more.

-k-

harleywilson
08-06-2007, 07:01 AM
I'll put my $.02 in here. Let me preface by saying I'm not a Nadal fan. Mostly because I'm sick of hearing him annointed by all as the next best thing to Federer. I was very impressed by his play in the final. He seemed to be aggressive and was taking opportunities to visit the net. I'd say it bodes very well for his future chances at Wimbledon. I won't make any statements like he'll never win because he very well could. But to say that he is the second best on grass is a serious stretch. I think Roddick's still better. I think if Nadal does end up winning any major besides the French it could be Wimbledon. The courts at the U.S. Open are definately faster and I've heard that the new surface at the AO will be somewhat faster than before (although I could be mistaken) It will be strange if the order of speed goes French, Wimby, AO, U.S. Open for a guy who remembered matches like Stich v. Edberg

Attila the tennis Bum
08-06-2007, 04:36 PM
I'm too lazy to read this thread, so I may be repeating the obvious.

Wimbledon has slowed down their grass to the point its slower than hard courts. All you had to do was look at all the untouched grass in front of the net and down the T. Nadal is a great baseline player with awesome stamina. Wimbledon is now a bad imitation of the French Open. Gee, think Nadal will do well at Wimbledon? Duh.

Lets see how he does during the U.S. Open build up and the real U.S. Open. Personally I think he has the will power, determination and skills to become an all court terror. But the proof is in the results.

-k-


Ok...but so what? It still makes him the second best grass court player on the tour. In the last two years no one other than Roger has had better results.

GOD_BLESS_RAFA
08-06-2007, 11:30 PM
Some people think a player who does well on fast surfaces are worthy of praises, credits than the one who does well on slow ones...
:(
ok Nadal is one of the best players on slow surfaces, it can be grass or clay or whatever, so what?

ninman
08-07-2007, 04:53 AM
Seriously, who cares who is second best? Does anyone know who the "second best" is on hard courts? I mean grass and clay together make up less than half of the tour, in fact probably only around 30%, shouldn't be more concerned about who the second best on hard courts is?

The other thing is that the only major event left that's grass court is Wimbledon, there are no MS grass court events and the grass court season lasts all of two tournaments, so I think it's pointless even asking the question who is the second best on grass. There is so little of it on tour that it's hardly even worth discussing. I think a more fruitful discussion would be talking about who the second best on hard courts is.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-07-2007, 07:35 AM
Seriously, who cares who is second best? Does anyone know who the "second best" is on hard courts? .

Obviously you do because you have written so many posts you are clearly upset.

Secondly the media is always saying that "Federer is the second best clay courter in the world". How come its ok for Roger to ger credit but not Nadal?

Big Fed
08-07-2007, 06:04 PM
Before wimbly i thought it was roddick but after his perforemance i gotta give it to Rafa. But the monkey is not gonna be the #1 grass player for awile.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-08-2007, 08:08 AM
Before wimbly i thought it was roddick but after his perforemance i gotta give it to Rafa. But the monkey is not gonna be the #1 grass player for awile.

Well you never know...he may catch up to the "Nancy" boy.

feyya
08-08-2007, 08:12 AM
And soon to be the first.:p

yeah right

Attila the tennis Bum
08-08-2007, 09:03 AM
yeah right

You kind sir are not fit to display the babolat logo.

Attila the tennis Bum
08-09-2007, 08:34 AM
Nadal was lucky to reach two consecutive Wimbledon finals. This year the conditions helped him alot and last year his draw was ****. Roddick has way better results than Nadal on grass that's why Nadal isn't n°2 on grass. For Nadal to be n°2 on grass he must at least win a tournament on grass wich he hasen't done yet.

Exactly how many matches do you think Nadal won by pure luck for in two years at Wimbledon?